Managing Lineup Efficiency

After hinting at it for over a year, Jerry Manuel has recently elected to place Jose Reyes 3rd in the batting order. Interestingly enough, I agree with the concept of moving Jose out of the lead-off spot, but not for the same reason Jerry does.

Jerry claims that moving Jose to the 3rd spot will "lengthen" the lineup and also give Jason Bay more fastballs to hit. Let's assume that Jerry actually feels this way (there is a good chance Jerry is doing this for other reasons but this is merely the reason he is giving the media).

Masquerading Mets

Personally, I think Jose Reyes is an RBI guy trapped in a lead-off man's body. Reyes has an absurd amount of natural speed, but in every other way he thinks and behaves more like a middle-of-the-lineup hitter.

Most pure lead-off hitters and table setters think more like Luis Castilllo. They see themselves are guys who are trying to get on base first, with everything else secondary. Even the legendary Rickey Henderson that had the power to almost hit 30 homeruns a few times knew that his bread and butter was getting on base. Henderson (and Castillo) would always work counts to the extreme, fouling off pitches defensively. These guys consider a walk better than a single (with no one on base) simply because it gets under the pitchers skin and forces him to throw an extra pitch or two. Jose initially did not have this instinct and preferred to hit his way on base. Over the last few years Jose has learned to take more pitches and draw more walks (to his credit), but it is against the grain. This is much like how David Wright - a pure gap-to-gap hitter - has been trying to become more of a dead-pull hitter.

Jose is a pretty poor bunter considering his wheels, and even as a base stealer he is sometimes timid and afraid to be picked off. More pronounced base stealers (Coleman, Henderson and others) were much better at the art of stealing bases despite being no faster than Reyes on the bases.

When players try to do what is not natural to them, they often lose sight of what makes them special. Jose's gifts are not so much in his ability to lead-off, but his ability to run like the wind and hit with some power. You want a guy with his legs in front of the sluggers, but you also want his ability to drive the ball to the wall (or over it 15 times per year in a normal park) behind others who get on base and run well.

On the flip side, Luis Castillo is clearly a table-setter (and little else). He is an excellent bunter, a very crafty baserunner, and a master of working counts, drawing walks, and hitting the ball to where the defense is not. If you could summarize what a lead-off hitter should try to do (barring extra-base hits of course), Castillo is the blue-print. Where Castillo struggles is in that he has a freakishly low amount of power, even for a lead-off hitter.

David Wright is another story. He is naturally gifted doubles hitter with very good opposite field power. Wright can drive the ball anywhere, and before he got the notion in his head that he had to be a 30+ HR guy, he used to be quite accomplished at taking any kind of pitch and going with it. He used to drive fastballs away to opposite field and pull the breaking pitches. These days, he is struggling to be a pull-hitting power hitter, and the downside is that he is really struggling with the breaking pitches away. As a guess hitter now, he is going to be susceptible to that.

The Manager

As the manager of the 2010 Mets, there are probably a lot of things I would do differently. For starters, I would have Castillo leading off. Now, before anyone goes nuts reading this, take into consideration that I am not a fan of Castillo's bat (or defense) and probably would have made a move this off-season to replace him with a guy like Orlando Hudson, who has similar OBP numbers and a lot more pop. But given what I am working with, I would bat Castillo first. With Cora on the bench, I would offset this by frequently pinch hitting for Castillo in the second half of games when the situation presented itself. Example: Castillo get the first two at-bats of a game. The third time he comes up there are runners on 1st and 2nd. I pinch hit with a guy like Tatis/Carter and then roll Cora out there for defense later.

My #2 hitter would be Reyes. As a #2 hitter, I think I accomplish 3 goals:

1. I give him the chance to advance the runner(s) that could get on in front of him
2. He is still part of the table-setting equation, and acts as leadoff when my leadoff fails
3. I am giving one of my better hitters more chances to get an extra AB per game

After Reyes would come David Wright. He has been slumping recently, but he is clearly the best "hitter" on the team when you consider the total package (he has never hit below .302 in a full season). He also tends to lead the team in OBP, and has really matured as a base stealer and base runner. Wright's OBP and speed are too valuable to relegate to the middle third of the order, and he is another guy I want having more chances to get an extra AB per game.

My #4 hitter would be Carlos Beltran (if he were healthy), for many of the same reasons as I want Wright #3. Beltran always has a very good OBP and runs extremely well. This would give me 4 straight batters who get on base and run very well, and Reyes/Wright/Beltran are arguably my best hitters and I want them up more often than one-dimensional hitters.

Next comes Jason Bay, who also has a great OBP and runs better than most think.

#6 is easily Ike Davis, who splits up your right-handed hitters nicely but more importantly has good plate discipline in addition to his RBI potential.

#7 is Frenchy, and #8 is your catcher (who eventually I would like to see as Thole), so:

1. Castillo (PH for later in games situationally)

2. Reyes

3. Wright

4. Beltran

5. Bay

6. Davis

7. Francoeur

8. Catcher

Now, with Beltran injured, you have to make an adjustment. My adjustment is that I will slide Bay, Davis and Frenchy forward and slot the switch hitting Pagan (who can drive in runs and get on base) in front of my catcher. Pagan in front of Barajas, for example, might get Barajas better pitches to hit, so:

1. Castillo (PH for later in games situationally)

2. Reyes

3. Wright

4. Bay

5. Davis

6. Francoeur

7. Pagan

8. Catcher

Finally, I would like to call up Chris Carter as a pinch hitter to replace Catalonotto, and possibly even Fernando Martinez as a 4th outfielder that would split playing time with Pagan and also spell Frenchy/Bay from time to time against RHP.

Daniel Murphy and Second Base

For over a year, Mets fans have been complaining that Daniel Murphy lacks the offensive prowess to be a Major League first baseman. Fewer homegrown players have gone from hero to goat in as short a period of time as Murphy has.

A year ago at this time, Murphy was coming off of a rookie season where he hit .313 and posted an .871 OPS. He was working counts, hitting doubles and generally making Mets fans giddy. He played all 32 of his games in 2008 in left field. At the time, Mets fans weren't sure he could make it as an outfielder, but they knew they liked the player.

Fast forward a few months and a lot changed: Murphy is now playing first base for an injured Carlos Delgado and struggling with the bat. Pitchers have adjusted to his opposite field approach and they are now busting him in regularly; he is failing to adjust. He finishes the season on a strong note after making an adjustment, but his .741 OPS leaves a bit to be desired for a first baseman on a large market team.

Position aside, Murphy's sophomore season wasn't all that bad. He hit 12 homeruns in the spacious Citi Field (probably 15-17 HR anywhere else) and almost 40 doubles, showing that he has some life in his bat. Thing is, in an attempt to prove to the Mets and fans that he can be a first baseman, he went away from his bread and butter. He started swinging for the fences, and taking fewer pitches. His walk rate dropped (along with his OBP) and much to his chagrin, so does did his slugging percentage. He was trying to be a 30 HR guy, mainly because that's what the Mets needed badly. He's not a 30 HR guy and needs to return to what made him a prospect in the first place: Gap to gap hitting and a good eye.

Daniel Murphy was always a third baseman as a prospect (although the fielding percentage there was not fantastic). There is little talk of this because between the mediocre defense and David "The Franchise" Wright winning Gold Glove awards for his play there, why bother? I mean, that's as bad as being a SS prospect in the Yankee system.

As a 3B prospect, Murphy's numbers aren't all that bad (especially when you consider the park he plays in and the lack of offensive support he had in 2009). His .741 OPS would have put him ahead of Peralta, Feliz, Inge, Kouzmanoff, LaRoche, Teahen, and Headley among regular MLB 3B. If you imagine that he can post an .800 OPS, that would put him in the bottom of the upper tier of MLB 3B, along with guys like Scott Rolen, Casey Blake, Micheal Young, Miguel Tejada and others. He doesn't project to be an All-Star 3B, but with a good OBP and XBH power, he could pass as one for a number of teams.

Now, imagine his offensive potential as a second baseman. Last year, only 9 major leaguers with enough ABs to qualify for the batting title posted an .800 OPS, and most of them were barely over .800. Of those who did post solid OPS, many of them are questionable defensively: Robinson Cano, Dan Uggla, Aaron Hill (-2.5 UZR). Many of the better fielding second baseman posted OPS in the range of .657 (Eckstein) to .758 (Adam Kennedy).

So, if you believe in Sabermetrics at all, and the study of WAR and UZR, then even if Daniel Murphy is almost as bad as Dan Uggla at 2B, he can still be an effective and productive player there. In fact, more productive than Luis Castillo in my opinion, with nothing but upside. If Murphy can actually do a halfway decent job over there, then all the more value, especially at his current pay rate.

With Jose Reyes at SS, David Wright at 3B and Ike Davis at 1B, can the Mets get away with one offensive-minded 2B that doesn't have superior range? I think they could, and I think what he would do to make the lineup stronger would be worth the risk.

Now is the time to find out. When he comes off the DL, roll him out there at Buffalo. See how he does. Give him time to work at the position. What do you have to lose?

In a worst case scenario, you can eventually give up on the idea of him as an every day 2B and work him as a utility guy (1B, 3B, 2B, OF). He becomes the left-handed version of Fernando Tatis, and probably takes Catalanotto's place on the roster. Tatis and Murphy would give you two very versatile utility guys off the bench, and one of the better benches in the league.

Give Fernando Tatis Some Love

Every year I read post after post about people saying that we should get rid of Fernando Tatis, and quite frankly, I do not understand why.

Certainly a good chunk of the animosity is from a lack of education among Mets fans. Tatis has posted numbers in each of the last two seasons that are well above the level of replacement player and much better than what most teams will get from their utility guys. In addition, most of the bench players that will hit the way Tatis hits play fewer positions in the field and/or do not run nearly as well as Tatis does.

We're talking about a guy who continues to post an OPS over .800 (some of our starters can't even do that), kills left-handed pitching, and can play a fair 3B, 1B, LF and RF. He can even play some 2B in a bind.

Another important fact: He responds in the clutch. With runners on base, Fernando is good at getting the bat on the ball and putting it in play hard somewhere. This season already he's 2-for-4 in huge 2-out RISP situations. He's hitting over .400 with runners on base, and he's hitting his best when the game is close and late.

Finally, those with a well-trained eye would notice that he has an ideal approach at the plate in regards to hitting fastballs and off-speed pitches. Tatis often drives the fastball to right-center, and pulls the off-speed stuff. He's an above average off-speed pitch hitter, which is a nice thing to have in a guy who is going to start on certain days and who is your first pinch hitter in a key spot against a left-handed reliever.

The proverbial cherry on top is the fact that he hustles like a madman on the bases, running hard at all times, and he has a decent disposition. He's thankful to be with the team and glad he can help. No sour grapes with this man, who has already been down and out (of baseball) once in his career. He almost sees things the way a fan does ... in that he is happy to have such a wonderful job.

His only real downside, which is quite common to all right-handed power bats, is that he rolls over on pitches at times, making him susceptible to double plays. Last year he had an inordinate amount of them over the first half of the season. He grounded into 11 double plays in the first half of last year, but only twice in the entire second half. His second half was fantastic, in fact, because he hit .317 with an .844 OPS.

So the next time you feel like bashing Fernando or screaming for his departure ... ask yourself why. Is your vision clouded by unrealistic expectations (do you expect you utility players to post All-Star offensive numbers)? Are you unable to see past the fluke-like string of double plays he hit into in the first half of 2009? Or are you just guilty of wanting to see new faces - change for the sake of change - because the Mets starters haven't gotten the job done for the past few seasons? Don't blame the utility guy because the Mets can't find a first baseman and they continue to fall back on Tatis as a platoon player there. Let's show Fernando some love ... especially as he continues to exceed the normal productivity of a utility player at this level.

Series 1 Observations

A list of random observations from the first series of the season:

I need to see more of Angel Pagan and less of Gary Matthews. I appreciate the fact that Matthews is trying hard to prove himself, and I also realize he is a fair Major League baseball player (probably a nice 4th outfielder because he can play any OF position and switch hits) that has above average speed, but at this stage, Pagan is a bit better at everything. He has superior bat speed, runs very well, and has better range and a much better arm. Pagan can bat 1st or 2nd (and would be a better option there than Cora or Castillo) as well as anywhere in the bottom 3rd. More Pagan, less Matthews.

Mike Jacobs is a fascinating player in the sense that he is a traditional one-dimensional slugger. Every time the guy is up I feel like there is a decent chance that he is going to put one into the concession stands in the upper deck behind the Pepsi Porch. On the other hand, more often than not, the guy is going to whiff badly. It's feast or famine ... but I have to admit, there is more excitement when he is at the dish than there is when a guy like Fernando Tatis bats ... even though statistically, Tatis is the more productive hitter. Did you see that foul homerun Jacobs hit that cleared the entire Promenade? Sheesh ...

When Alex Cora and Luis Castillo are manning the middle infield, it feels like any ground ball not hit right at them is a base hit. I saw ground balls that stopped for refreshments on their way to the outfield make it by those guys this series. On the other hand, if they get to it they will certainly catch it. Their throws, pivots and cutoffs are pretty much spot on (which is what you would expect from veteran middle infielders). In conclusion, I think they look better than they actually are in terms of production, because they are smooth and fluid - but they are making a lot of make-able plays look like base hits as a result of their slower first step and lack of range.

The offense really misses Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran. I realize this is about as enlightening as saying the sky is blue ... but I am referring more to the holes in our current lineup than what they are bringing to the table. The Mets desperately need table setters, and desperately need a big left-handed stick in the middle of the order. Right-handed threats are well covered between David Wright and Jason Bay (and you have some decent right-handed slugging options in the lower third with guys like Rod Barajas and Jeff Francoeur).

What the Hell was Francoeur thinking on that fly ball down the right field line that he gave up on last night (the one that dropped in for a ground rule double)?

I like Rod Barajas more than I thought I would. I like how he has a simple approach at the plate, right along the lines of John Daly's "Grip It and Rip It" approach to golf. Barajas doesn't get cheated, and while that all or nothing mentality from a clean-up hitter isn't ideal, it works for a catcher that will usually bat 7th or 8th. He's been sound defensively as well.

Jon Niese is a breath of fresh air. Not so much in that he's a dominant pitcher, but he's young and has upside. You can root for his improvement, and his demeanour is so different than that of Pelfrey, Maine and Perez, all of which seem defensive, scared, and waiting for the other shoe to drop. Niese is nervous, of course, but you can tell he has confidence in his abilities and he just needs to learn how to pitch at this level. He knows it, we know it, and the opposition know it. Pelfrey, Maine and Perez all doubt their own abilities at this point. You can see it every time they pitch. They pitch afraid, they come unglued quickly, and they pitch like they feel any year can be their last. I know this feeling because I feel this way sometimes in my own career - that any day upper management is going to realize that I am overpaid, sporadically effective, and not as hungry as I was when I was younger.

Jason Bay is the goods. A true pro, a threat with the bat, better on the bases and in left field than I thought he was, and a guy I do not worry about getting hurt or having problems with the media. Well done Mets.

Mets Ticket Plans: Never a Great Fit

As your middle-class Mets fan, I continue to be frustrated by Mets ticket plan options. Last year I was a 15-game plan holder. The year before, it was a six pack. Before that, I had tried Saturday and Sunday plans (which to this point were still my favorite).

As much as I would love to be a full season ticket holder, I can't even justify the time (let along the price). Coming from Connecticut, it takes me anywhere from 1-2 hours to get to the game and I simply cannot miss that much time from my work or personal life to make 20 games (let alone a full season). The perfect number for me is somewhere between 5 and 10 games, maybe 12 in a really excellent season.

So the Mets offer a six-pack. Sounds great right? Not really, you can only buy these 6-packs for terrible seats. When I go to a game, since it's such a trip to get there, I want to sit in decent seats. I don't need to be down on the playing field slapping five with the players, but I don't really enjoy sitting in the top half of the outfield promenade either.

How about the 15-game plans? Well, they offer slightly better seats, but still nothing great. My 15 game plan last year had me 3 rows from the back of the stadium, which was just too far out for my tastes. Put it this way, if I am enjoying the view more on my HD television at home, it's not worth the trip. I'll sit up there for a playoff game, but not a game against the Padres in August. The novelty of the new stadium wore off for me about a month in.

I just got an e-mail today where the Mets are now offering the 15-game plans for better seating in the Caesar's club. The seats are better, although still in the outfield corners, but at $1500 per seat I just cannot justify the cost. $100 per seat, per game, is actually OK with me, but only if the seats are solid and at that rate I am more like a six-pack than a 15-pack if you know what I mean.

So in a sense, although I am paid quite well for this area of the country, the Mets have once again priced me out of their plans, either through poor seating choices or through gross amounts (pun intended). They are forcing me to buy my tickets individually ... and using Stubhub, I can probably get better seats at the same or less money anyway.

So what is my motivation? Playoff tickets? That's a sham as well. From what I remember, when you have a partial plan, you get a ticket for one game, and they literally put you in the last row of the stadium in a corner somewhere.

Let's do the math out, for fun.

15 game plan scenario:

• $1500 x 2 (who buys one ticket?) for $3000
• You get 15 games, maybe half of which you wanted, the other half are filler
• Your seats are fair, but not good
• You get the right to BUY one playoff game ticket, which let's say is another $300
• Maybe you sell a few games of tickets for about $300, and give a few games away free
• You are locked in, in advance, with no real discount

Total: $3,300, you end up going to about 8 games or so, have to work to sell the rest

Individual plan:

• Let's say we buy tickets to 8 games, at $125 per ticket, for $2,000.
• We get good seats
• We get tickets to 8 games we want to see, no filler games
• You buy playoff tickets on Stubhub, and you pay $400 a piece for them. You get fair seats
• Flexibility ... if I lose my job, I can stop buying tickets or opt out of the playoff ticket

Total: $2,800

So, for the better seats, the flexibility, being able to choose your specific dates and games, better playoff seats, less money out of pocket in advance, and fewer headaches, why would I renew again?

The Mets Plan

Since midway through the 2009 season, I have been hearing more and more people refer to the Mets and their lack of "a plan". I want to attempt to debunk what I feel is a myth; I do feel the Mets have a plan, whether or not it looks that way at times.

Do the Mets need to have a specific plan?

One can argue that large market teams don't really need to have an overall plan or strategy. What works in baseball is not that secretive. You want players in their primes, and you want to lock them into contracts before they get to their peaks so that you have players that are worth more than they make. You want to have a strong and well stocked farm system, and you want players who can hit, hit for power, play defense well, and run well. You also want plenty of quality starting pitching and bullpen arms. You want pitchers who have healthy arms, low ERA's, and low walk totals with higher strikeout rates. Sprinkle in some veteran leadership here or there to help the youngsters along, and there you have it - your plan in a nutshell.

The thing is, almost all teams have this same plan.

If you are a small market team, or a team in financial trouble, you need a more specific plan. Perhaps you trade off talent earlier because you need to keep your budget down. If you have a unique home field situation, you may want to cater to it. If you are the Yankees, you want players who can perform under pressure and handle the media. If you are the Rockies, you want ground ball pitchers, and so on and so forth.

The Mets do have one of the larger ballparks, but not so much so that they need to bring in special players to deal with it. Jason Bay is a perfect example, showing you that the Mets do not plan to only go with outfielders that have premium range.

Here are my primary reasons why I feel that the Mets do not appear to have a plan (to some):

• The team performed poorly in 2009. This simply reduces fan optimism. Had the Mets won the division last year with the exact same team (with no one getting injured as they did), the fans would all be voting that the team had a plan, and a good one. The media would be writing about how well the Mets were positioned for the future, instead of how they lack a plan.
• The team is lacking Major League ready prospects. Sure, we have a bunch of kids that look ready to help in the 2011-2013 years, but how many are ready right now? If the Mets had a few prospects ready to fill in at key positions (specifically pitching, 2B and 1B), fans would perceive the Mets to have a better "plan" in place. Of course, the lack of prospects in these positions is a sign of bad drafting, not a sign of no plan. The plan was to draft well, it didn't happen.
• The free agent market was weak, lacking the kind of players the Mets wanted to acquire (healthy, under 32, reasonably priced and well-rounded). Bay and Holliday were the closest thing to the mark that was out there. Holliday fit the bill, but Bay was a better deal financially with less risk. The Mets got him. Kudos. Outside of that, you had John Lackey, who the Mets liked, but had concerns about his health long term and the length of contract.
• Public relations is a mess. Let's face it, PR hasn't exactly gone well for the Mets recently. In fact, I don't really remember when it has gone well for them. They have always been the beloved loser franchise, the team in the shadow of the Yankees, and a team that is a bullseye for the media. On top of that, we hear all sorts of craziness about who is actually in charge. My guess is that Omar and Jeff are running the show in some capacity, and the two work closely enough that they can make a decision when they need to.
• The Mets say one thing, and do another. For whatever reason, the Mets have really preached pitching, speed and defense for the last two seasons in regards to Citi Field and who they want to acquire. Their transactions do not echo this sentiment. This is all part of the point above (PR problems). My guess is that we have a combination of misdiagnosed marketing (the team feels that is what fans want to hear) and also a lack of quality pitching, speed and defense on the free agent market. Sure, Lackey was out there, but what if Lackey had zero desire to go to the Mets to begin with? The Mets need to zip the lip (as Craig Carton would say) on what they are looking for, and instead go back to what Omar used to say: We're trying to acquire the best talent we can. They you can justify anything, from a slugger like Bay to a defensive whiz.

So, without further ado ... I present to you the Top Secret plan of the New York Mets:

• Sell tickets, merchandise, concessions and ads ... in other words, make profit. This is priority #1, and everything else below rolls up to this.
• Put a competitive team on the field every season. Obviously 2009 was a disaster for that part of the plan, driven almost exclusively by a massive number of injuries.
• Acquire plus talent, at the right price. We hear about pitching, defense and speed, but the true Mets plan is to acquire premium talent, at a good price. Jason Bay is known for neither his defense nor his speed, but he is a talent, and the Mets nabbed him. They also traded for ace Johan Santana when they needed to. They have time and time again acquired top talent every year: Pedro, Beltran, Delgado, Wagner, K-Rod, Santana, and now Bay. That is the pattern.
• Retain prospects. Right now, the Mets are being more conservative with their farm system in an attempt to re-stock it at the higher levels. We have seen plenty of evidence of this.
• Ensure employees in the organization (from top to bottom) can handle the NY media professionally. We have seen examples of this as well, with a more recent one being the departure of Lastings Milledge. Part of the Mets marketing plan has always been "family friendly", and this is part of that. They want pros, and maybe even role models. This is also why Minaya is suddenly doing fewer pressers.
• Have a strong international presence, leveraging large market team resources and cultural diversity to the team's advantage, giving the team an unfair advantage in the international market. We have also seen a lot of evidence of this.
• Do not pay over slot value in the Amateur draft. Like it or not, this is clearly a part of the Mets "plan".
• AAA depth. This is emphasized now following 2009 - it obviously wasn't a large part of the plan last year. This is why the Mets now have 4 catching options (Coste, Santos, Blanco and Thole), and about 80 guys who can play first base. They do lack middle infield options, however - another reason they overpaid Alex Cora.
• Veteran leadership. Again, like it or not, the Mets plan entails signing guys who are leaders in the clubhouse. Cora is a perfect example of that. He really brings little to the table statistically, but the Mets paid him handsomely for everything else he brings to the table.

So yes, I do believe they have a very intricate plan, and I think the evidence is there and has been there. I know it makes a sexy story to claim they don't have a plan, but I feel that a failure to execute well should not be confused with lacking a plan.

Strong up the Middle?

Jerry Manuel made an excellent point yesterday about the value of interior defense, and most people will tell you that defense "up the middle" is more crucial than the exterior positions. "Up the Middle" includes 4 positions: Catcher, SS, 2B and CF.

Amazingly, we have a void in almost all of those positions. Carlos Beltran is a great CF, but will miss quite some time to start the year. Is Gary Matthews Jr. a strong defensive CF? Not even close. How about Angel Pagan? Probably not.

Luis Castillo, who is an experienced 2B, is no longer a good one. His range is sorely lacking and he does nothing exceptionally well defensively. His wheels have always been his only plus and with those gone so is his game. His UZR/150 has been in decline for years now, and he posted a career worst -12.0 last year.

At catcher, we have Henry Blanco, who has soft hands and a strong arm, but he doesn't strike me as an incredibly mobile catcher. He's also going to be 38 this year and that wont help him defensively. Visions of Jake Taylor (from the movie Major League) icing his knees come to mind. I'm picturing that most excellent sequence where Jake Taylor and Lou Brown exchange words about Jake's physical condition, but with Blanco and Manuel taking their place:

Jerry Manuel: Hey, Henry. Hows the knees holding up?

Henry Blanco: Great! Never been better.

Jerry Manuel: Mobility's good? No problem getting off the throw to second?

Henry Blanco: No problemo.

Jerry Manuel: I need a catcher, Henry. Someone who can lead this team on the field. But I want the absolute truth, here, are you one-hundred percent?

Henry Blanco: Yeah, would I bullshit you about something like that?

Jerry Manuel: You better ... if you wanna make this team.

Omir Santos has some limitations defensively as well, ranging from a mediocre (at best) arm to poor pitch selection management (according to the Mets front office). Our other options are Chris Coste (a utility player that catches) and Josh Thole (a position player that just recently converted to catcher). I'm not stricken with confidence in out catching defense, although I do feel we have enough options to avoid defensive embarrassment at the position.

And then there is Jose Reyes. People love to praise Jose as a talented shortstop, but Reyes is no where near as good defensively as most fans think ... and when you factor in his amazing speed and very strong arm, he's actually a disappointment defensively because despite being quicker, faster and stronger than most shortstops, his actual performance is average.

His one plus year defensively as a shortstop was in 2007, when he had a 7.5 UZR. In pretty much all of the other seasons, he has been around average, and last year he was actually bad, a -1.9 UZR (which would have been on pace for a -9.4 UZR had he played an entire season that way). I'll assume that was a sample size issue, but no matter how you shake it, unless he reverts to his 2007 form, he's nothing special with the glove.

To give you an idea of what better fielding shortstops give you as far as UZR, look at the leaders. Jack Wilson had an UZR/150 of 20.4. Adam Everett was a 13.6. Cesar Izturis was a 14.1. Even Derek Jeter, who had been a negative UZR for almost all of his career, had a breakout season last year and posted a solid 8.4 ... which is better than any year Jose Reyes has had in the field. Jose generally comes in around the top of the bottom 3rd of regulars defensively.

So it's safe to say that between Jose's averageness, no real strong (and young) defensive catcher, a well below average 2B and weak defense in CF (at least untul Beltran returns), that this team is pretty weak "up the middle".

To make matters worse (and add fuel to the fire) consider that we have Daniel Murphy playing first base (out of position, converted, and young) and Jason Bay - an outfielder known for his bat not his glove/range - in left field. Franceour is a fair right fielder, and David Wright had a horrible year defensively last year (-13.2 UZR/150) despite a few solid years before that.

Conclusion: It's safe to say that this team as currently constructed, supposedly built around pitching and defense, is somewhere between bad and average defensively.