More photos » by Lynne Sladky - AP

Browse more photos »

Lookout Landing did a series of these "point of contention" articles earlier in the offseason, and I thought it would be a good way to flesh out some issues I had been thinking about. 

Jeff Francoeur won a gold glove in just his third season, at age 23, and has probably the best throwing arm in baseball. Yet, mostly due to the newfound popularity of MGL's UZR stat, Francoeur's defensive reputation among fans has suffered. Looking at his UZR numbers at fangraphs, it's understandable why: his Range component has gradually declined, while his best year, 2007, features an Arm rating so high it can easily be written off as an outlier. Thus, many have concluded that Francoeur is declining as a fielder, and his best years were kind of fluky to begin with. For a super-athletic 25-year-old, however, such a decline is pretty unbelievable. Consider some different, but similar measures:

*Didn't qualify for leaderboards in 2005

**The 1-100 equivalent of Tango's new 1-5 rankings

This table shows his UZR, his John Dewan runs saved, based on the equally popular plus/minus and featured in the annual "Fielding Bible," and Tango's fan scouting reports. In parentheses is his rank relative to the rest of the league. In general, the three measures agree, up until 2009, which is of course the most important year for projecting future performance. Looking at his Dewan's runs saved, however, the narrative often applied to his UZR doesn't really work. The Dewan numbers, mostly because they rank him +8 in 2009, make 2008 look like an outlier, not the beginning of a decline. 

UZR and the Field Bible numbers are, by MGL's own admission, calculated in much of the same way. The main difference, as I understand it, is Dewan measures the ball's position relative to x-y coordinates, while MGL uses "bins" or small divisions of the playing field. So what accounts for the discrepancy here? In a single season, fielding statistics can fluctuate greatly; the rule of thumb is one season of fielding numbers is the equivalent of one-third season of hitting data in terms of significance and predictive ability. Often I called Frenchy's very poor UZR numbers with the Mets as "noise." Yes, it was a measure of how he had performed, but it was probably skewed by a few bad plays not indicative of his talent. Still, while Dewan's numbers tend to be higher than UZR, 14 is quite a disparity. 

While further splitting up the data after talking about the unreliability of these stats in small samples may seem odd, here's how the two metrics compare in terms of range and arm:

Here, the aforementioned UZR decline is evident, while the plus/minus numbers seemingly only fluctuate a bit, year-to-year.

Also, here, the Fielding Bible data complicates idea that his 2007 throwing performance was a fluke. Talking to Mark yesterday about the numbers, he speculated that one system might be uniquely better at handling arm ratings, which would account for some of the difference. Just looking at this data, without any basis in the methodology, we might speculate that Dewan's system handles arms better. But that's just idle speculation really. 

One last point of interest that Mark also brought up in the Jason Bay discussion, is speed scores, which are available in some form on fangraphs. Francoeur's speed score declined from his rookie season: 4.2, 3.8, 2.8, 2.8, until reaching 4.3 in 2009. This would seemingly support the idea that Jeff is in no way "slowing down."

The real take-away here, I think, is that it's dangerous to assign narratives to statistical trends prematurely. Jeff Francoeur has the track-record of a great defensive outfielder, and we can probably assume he'll be at least a good one going forward. And it's no small question, for with Francoeur's offensive game, the difference between being a -5 and 10 run rightfielder is the difference between fringe-player and solid starter. 

More photos » by Fred Thornhill - AP

2 months ago: A young fan in the crowd holds up a sign as Toronto Blue Jays starting pitcher Roy Halladay leaves the field after throwing a complete game shutout to defeat the Seattle Mariners in their AL baseball game in Toronto, Sept. 25, 2009. Halladay made what may have been his final start in Toronto as a member of the Blue Jays. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press,Fred Thornhill)

Browse more photos »

If early reports from Jon Heyman are to be believed, the Phillies have sent Cliff Lee to the Mariners and received Roy Halladay from the Blue Jays, potentially losing a prospect or two in the process. The Mets are going to get murdered by the ravenous Bill Madden-led New York press for sitting idly by while the Phillies acquire arguably the games' best pitcher. Some Mets fans are going to wave the white flag.

In reality, this move is pretty lateral for the Phillies. They traded a 6-WAR pitcher for a 7-WAR pitcher, with the net-gain likely to be even less than 10 runs. While this move may prove to be a better long-term decision, if they can get Halladay extended, in 2010 it isn't checkmate for the N.L. East. Interestingly, the Mets likely overreaction counter-move might end up being a bigger splash in terms of pure talent added to the 2010 squad. Knowing the Mets, that could be at the cost of a potentially debilitating contract. Luckily, though, the most obvious target to overpay, John Lackey, is freshly off the market. Lackey is a nice pitcher, no doubt, but I worried that the Mets would be over-investing in a pitcher will tangible signs of decline and without improving the defense needed behind him. 

Many of you expressed a desire for the Mets to let the Phillies get Halladay, so the Mets could graduate a younger more affordable team of prospects in 2011-2012. Those prospects are no sure things, however, and with David and Jose becoming progressively more expensive, and Johan and K-Rod's backloaded contracts, the Mets may be wise to view these next two years as their window.  I'm not saying that trading a bunch of prospects in a hasty reaction-move is right or smart, but it's certainly tempting, and may be in store whether you want it or not. Whatever happens, things certainly got more interesting. 

Per Ken Rosenthal, John Lackey is close to an A.J. Burnett-type deal with the Red Sox. I know the "Mets need pitching, John Lackey=best pitcher crowd" is going to be upset, but the Mets really didn't need another declining pitcher taking up a huge chunk of the budget.

This probably also seems like a big development on the Jason Bay front, but only sort of. It was already widely reported that Bay and the Red Sox weren't going to work out a deal, and that the Mariners are the Mets main competition. If the plan for the Mets truly was Bay or Lackey, however, expect them to warm up to the idea of a fifth year soon. More, interestingly, I think, is the impact of the Matt Holliday market. If the Red Sox opt for Mike Cameron now, who signs Holliday? The Angels? 

More photos » by Gregory Smith - AP

Browse more photos »

Kelly Johnson--Since Mike Fontenot got a contract, Kelly Johnson is my new guy. He's got all the makings of a good bench-guy: left-handed and defensively versatile. As a secondbaseman, Johnson has the bat for the position, but a suspect glove, basically what you might expect from the Daniel Murphy 2B project that never was, and not my dream replacement for Castillo. Still, given his nice combination of discipline and power, "platooning" him with Castillo and using him to spell Francoeur versus the occasional righty would be effective. If the Mets sign KJ, I predict he takes Castillo's job no latter than June. 

Matt Capps--Capps will never live up to the closer billing he inherited in Pittsburgh, but he has consistently posted xFIPs ~4.00 since making it to the majors. An inconsistent fastball lead to Capps getting tagged for a lot of homers last year, but I guarantee, with a more liberal budget, the Pirates held onto this guy. The Mets have some holes to fill in their pen, and they could do (and probably will do) a lot worse than Capps. 

Jack Cust--I'm torn. If a team gets Jack Cust to accept a bench role, there won't be a better lefty pinch-hitter in the majors. That said, Cust will probably look for a DH job elsewhere, and the last-in-UZR Mets might want to look for another type of fourth "outfielder." 

Ryan Garko--Mets fans are already clamoring for Ryan Garko as the perfect platoon-mate for Daniel Murphy. He has a .885 OPSvL and a reasonable 1.17 platoon ratio, so the ability to hit lefties is real. Garko, however, has no other attractive talents. He can't field, play anything but first, hit righties, or run. Keeping him on the bench just to relieve Murphy against lefties isn't a very productive use of a roster spot, especially since Manuel will end up pinch-hitting him against righties too often. If anyone wants to convince me Garko is more deserving of a roster spot than Nick Evans, who hits lefties nearly as well, with the added ability to play outfield and emergency catcher, good luck.

As an aside, I'm still perturbed at how easily Mets fans accept this Daniel Murphy-platoon garbage as a good plan at firstbase. What if the Bears are who we thought they were, and Daniel Murphy reprises his role as the worst offensive firstbaseman in the league? What if Ike Davis isn't the super-star of the future? As fans, we often don't realize just how possible these outcomes are. Here's a novel idea I threw out earlier: go get a real firstbaseman. Anyone? No? All I'm saying is, if the Phillies acquire Roy Halladay, I think the only reasonable--no, patriotic--thing to do is trade the farm for Adrian Gonzalez. 

Garret Atkins--Although a incentive-laden deal would be tempting, I still have trouble finding where Atkins would fit on the bench. He's basically Ryan Garko with more upside, but also considerably larger and more likely downside. 

Ryan Langerhans--The Mariners replaced Endy Chavez with Ryan Langerhans and the Mariners are smart, so let's do that too. Good BB% and decent power make for a league-average hitter with tremendous defensive ability. 

Request any I skipped, and I might add them. 

Not to complain about a minor-league deal, but:

Dessens, who turns 39 next month, would get a split contract if added to the 40-man roster that would pay $700,000 in the majors and $90,000 in the minors.

...

He can earn $150,000 in bonuses under Friday’s deal: $30,000 each for 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 relief appearances.

So, Dessens could potentially earn $850,000 if makes the team out of Spring Training. Just to reinforce what kind of improvements we should expect from Elmer, at age 40, on his 5.33 FIP 2009 season:

via www.fangraphs.com

Just a minor thing, but a nice illustration of how a poorly run organization spends at the fringes. In summary: if the Mets suffer an injury in their already thin bullpen, they will pay Elmer Dessens roughly Adam Everett's salary with the Tigers to make the team worse.

More photos » by Kathy Willens - AP

Browse more photos »

With so many rumors and nothing actually happening for the Mets at the Winter Meetings, I decided to start a running post of all players the Mets have been linked to, with updates as to their current status. These links are only meant to represent the team's position, not external actors or opinions.Of course the Mets will be linked in some form to most every free agent, so I tried to give some indication where it seemed there was more than just nominal interest. Consider this thread an update on the Winter Meetings thread and post any links you want me to add in the comments. 

Continue reading this post »