2011 Player Review: Angel Pagan

John Delcos of Newyorkmetsreport.com and Joe DeCaro of Metsmerizedonline.com will be doing more and more projects together with the goal of merging two successful blogs in the hope of giving our readers everything they’ll need in covering the Mets. Continuing our review of the 2011 Mets, today we take a look at Angel Pagan.


THE SKINNY: You look at this guy and wonder why he’s not better with his physical tools. Pagan appeared to have a breakout year in 2010 when he hit .290 with 11 homers, 69 RBI and 32 steals. In 101 less at-bats last season Pagan hit four fewer homers with 13 less RBI. Not only were his numbers off, but he regressed in his defense and decisions on the bases. This is not a fundamentally sound player.

REASONS TO KEEP HIM: The Mets are thin in the outfield, don’t have many options on the minor league level and don’t figure to get any help in the free-agent or trade markets. … Should Jose Reyes leave, the Mets don’t have any leadoff options.

REASONS TO LET HIM GO: He could get up to $5 million in arbitration, which is a lot considering his production. … After last summer, it appears 2010 was a fluke. … Is there any reason to believe he’ll be better?

JOHN’S TAKE: The word is the Mets will tender Pagan so this might all be a moot point. I would still rather them take the gamble with Grady Sizemore, or if nothing else, see what somebody else can do. The Mets aren’t loaded with outfield options, but if Pagan produces as he did last year, he’s not offering much.

For a team wanting to get better defensively and fundamentally, Pagan doesn’t bring much to the table. Defensively, he doesn’t judge balls well and has a below average arm. In 2010 it appeared he was ready to take over centerfield, but I don’t see that anymore. For all his speed, his .322 on-base percentage is poor and his strikeouts-walks ratio is roughly 2-to-1. Let him go and move on.

JOE’S TAKE: The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde or so it would seem where Angel Pagan is concerned. A year ago fans were clamoring for Pagan to replace Carlos Beltran in center field for his defensive exploits and some even mentioned him in the same breath as David Wright for his offensive showing in 2010. Gulp.

Pagan was a big letdown in 2011. He got off to an atrocious start at the plate to start the season batting .159 in April before hitting the DL with an oblique injury and missing nearly a month. His bat looked great when he returned, but that was offset by big declines on defense and base-running.

Pagan is proving himself to be wildly inconsistent and that’s usually the sign of a platoon player or even worse – a fourth outfielder. Is it smart for this front office to pay $5 million for such a player when the utilities at Citi Field are in danger of being turned off? Probably not, but they will anyway. It’s not like they have any better options.

One year at the helm and the new Mets caretakers now have less center field depth than last November. That means they will have to keep Pagan, but that doesn’t mean you have to like it. These are strange times in Flushing.

7 thoughts on “2011 Player Review: Angel Pagan

  1. Two players in one day. Yippee!

    It would be nice if both authors can comment on the blog.

    This is the reason the cubs let him go. He has tools, but he also has issues. Kinda like the other player you reviewed earlier.

    With Angel is is about $$. I do not much care if he stays or goes. He has played well at times and has been crap others. He is a middling player at a middling price. We can get a replacement if he leaves. We have part time players to play CF here. Pridie and Nuewenhuis can play center and are much cheaper. Won’t have the same bat and not as versatile in the lineup, but you can roll the money into pitching..

  2. John,

    I like this idea in the offseason. It makes you wonder why you did not do this before.

    40 players takes you to the new year in which case we start talking about the signings or not and then its spring!

  3. This also makes good fodder for the web crawlers. I expect others to pick up on this and link to the site to comment on whether they agree or not.

  4. dave (1-4): I wish I had done this before. I wish I had done a lot of things before. But, you live and learn. I study other blogs and see things I would like to do. This is one of them. But, I don’t want to imitate, but improve. Other bloggers do this, but I haven’t seen the point-counter point like this. I hope this generates more traffic. I do appreciate your continued loyalty. Best, JD.

  5. I think this is an excellent idea John. I agree with Dave. This gives everyone a chance to talk about each player and their opinions of what they think of each player. I like to see what other Mets fans are thinking on how the roster should be built and how the organization should operate going forward.

    That being said. Tender both Pagan and Pelfrey. If Pelfrey or Pagan are having even a decent season they will have decent trade value to get something in return.

  6. To follow up on Glen here I think the Mets should build a pitching staff. We have 4 or 5 guys in the minors that will take several years before knocking on the door. Let them pitch. Let them learn. Stretch them out so they can go 7. This way we do not burn the pen like we have for the past 5 years.

    We need a closer. We have none. There are several available this year and one should be had relatively cheaply.

    Next is OF. We have none. Bay plays a good LF and Pagan is ok. Duda is unknown. We need a major upgrade as they are terrible. Pagan is league avg at the plate. Versatile but average. Duda is unknown with major upside and Bay should be a bench player.