Jan 09

New Parameters For Hall Of Fame Voting?

The outcome of today’s Hall of Fame voting could have far reaching ramifications as to future induction parameters.

I voted for both Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell, both with good but not overwhelming numbers. My criteria was not only a long productive career, but that both performed of PEDs in that they were never formally accused, named in the Mitchell Report or failed a test. It was a testament to doing it cleanly. In that regard, I also saluted Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff and Edgar Martinez.

These guys, and Jack Morris, approached most of these numbers the right way. Although he fell short because of injury, Mattingly had several dominating years before he was cut down by injury. Sandy Koufax is another who had a mixed career, mediocre followed by great numbers before an injury cut him down. Mattingly’s career was in reverse, with the numbers spiraling down in the end.

As far as Martinez is concerned, he’s being penalized by an anti-DH bias. Designated hitter is an established position and he was the best. He shouldn’t be discriminated against based on his position.

You know my feelings towards the rest.

Numbers have always played a big part in the voting process, with three historically providing an automatic ticket to the Hall of Fame, those being 3,000 hits, 500 home runs and 300 victories. Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds touched those numbers, but could be left out. Voters in future years could tweak those numbers, but I am not sure how they will go. Will they raise the bar or enforce them even more with a continued anti-steroid bias?

I will choose the latter. I’ll continue to respect the numbers and vote against those who used PEDs until there is a change in the acknowledgement process. I believe the Hall of Fame is a baseball history museum, and history isn’t always clean. Would you have a Twentieth History Museum and not mention Hitler, Stalin or Charles Manson? Of course not. History is also damning.

In that regard, if the Hall of Fame were to acknowledge on their plaques the linkage to steroids and the baseball record books would have an asterisk next to their names and statistics, I could see changing my vote. But to let them in under the present acknowledgement process wouldn’t be right.

It is a lame argument to claim they didn’t break any baseball rules, but they did break the law. Using steroids without a doctor’s prescription is against the law. How else to you explain Clemens getting injections in his hotel room?

Until that changes, I can’t justify voting for those who cheated, and in future ballots that will include Manny Ramirez, Alex Rodriguez and David Ortiz.

 

Jan 08

I Voted For Piazza

I can’t remember when I’ve anticipated the Hall of Fame results like I do this year. I would be stunned if the noted cheaters on the ballot – Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa – get in, but honestly I am surprised to read how many writers included them.

Some say they voted on production, yet omitted baseball’s greatest hitting catcher in Mike Piazza. I do not understand this thinking.

I did not vote for Bonds, Clemens or Sosa, but I did vote for Piazza. The evidence against Bonds, Clemens and Sosa is evident, as it is against Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro.

That is not the case with Piazza, who never failed a drug test, did not appear on the Mitchell Report, and was never accused by a colleague on the record. There has been innuendo against Piazza from a several writers citing acne on his back. This is circumstantial evidence, and shaky at best.

If Piazza does not get in, and it is later discovered he cheated, then I will change my vote in the future. But, there currently is none, and I cast my ballot for him without hesitation.

Jan 07

Mets Should Say NO To Pavano

I keep hearing rumblings the Mets are interested in Carl Pavano, who made $8.5 million last year with Minnesota at age 36.

Why?

While the pressures pitching for the Yankees are different than they are the Mets – the expectations in the Bronx are always greater – this is not a move they should be making.

I wouldn’t want Pavano in the Mets’ rotation if he were willing to pitch for the major league minimum.

Pavano’s New York track record was mostly a long line of injuries – including not reporting being in an auto accident – and coming up small in big moments. At the time, his nickname was “The American Idle,’’ for all the time spent on the disabled list.

As much as I want the Mets to make a move to show they have a pulse, let alone the desire to prove they want to be competitive, Pavano is notoriously thin skinned and not a good fit for New York. It was tough enough for him with the Marlins and Twins, so I wouldn’t expect much in Flushing.

After all, after 14 major league seasons, he is 108-107 with a 4.39 ERA, so why should this year be different? How much of a pay cut he would be willing to take, I don’t know, but can’t they get a win-one, lose-one pitcher for half the price? I would think so.

Covering Pavano in the Yankees clubhouse was frustrating. He was short-fused, testy and without humor, and this was with a winning franchise. I can’t imagine him being a day at the beach in Queens with a losing franchise.

I listed several pitchers still on the market yesterday, with several being a better fit than Pavano.

I also keep hearing the Mets have money to spend, but there aren’t many signs showing that inclination. If it is the same media sources doing the shouting, one has to wonder the motivation. Is it real news or somebody doing a PR favor for ownership? It wouldn’t be a stretch for it to be the latter.

That being said, if the Mets genuinely have dollars, they would be better spent on the mound on a fifth starter than in the outfield. Should the Mets land a legitimate starter, it could help in two categories in that he could take some of the load off the bullpen.

Conversely, unless they acquire a stud bat – and they don’t have the money for that – a middle-tier outfielder won’t improve the Mets significantly.

Jan 06

Free Agent Market Came And Went For Mets

There were several free agents, if the Mets had the willingness and/or ability to pay, that could have improved them to the point where it could be a competitive summer.

And, I’m not talking about big-ticket players Josh Hamilton, Nick Swisher, B.J. Upton, Zack Greinke, Anibal Sanchez, Edwin Jackson and Rafael Soriano. The Mets were never going to be players for them, anyhow.

The Mets were beaten out by some notorious small market or small spending teams such as Pittsburgh (Jason Grilli, Russell Martin and Francisco Liriano), Tampa Bay (James Loney and Joel Peralta), Minnesota (Kevin Correia and Mike Pelfrey), Cleveland (Swisher and Mark Reynolds), Baltimore (McLouth), Arizona (Brandon McCarthy and Cody Ross), Kansas City (Jeremy Guthrie).

I’d include Oakland, but Bartolo Colon? Really?

However, Michael Bourn, Matt Capps, Jonny Gomes, Dan Haren, Nate Schierholtz, Nate McLouth and John Lannan could have given life to the Mets. And, none from this latter group who were signed received a package of greater than $13 million.

Perhaps, two or three – a pitcher and outfielder – could have impacted the dynamics and attitude of the roster and given the Mets something to build on during spring training.

Much of who is left are broken down (Grady Sizemore), older (Kevin Millwood), potentially too expensive (Carl Pavano or ex-Mets (Xavier Nady, Francisco Rodriguez, Ronny Cedeno, Jon Rauch, Endy Chavez and Kelly Shoppach).

Others, such as Brad Penny, Shaun Marcum or Derek Lowe won’t make enough of a difference.

There’s always next winter for extravagant spending.

 

Jan 05

Mets Who Could Be On The Block In July

It’s not even spring training, so what better time to fast forward to July and project what Mets could be dealt at the deadline?

JOHAN SANTANA: Assuming he’s healthy and producing, and the Mets not in the playoff hunt, who can’t see the Mets trying to get out from whatever they can of what is left of his contract? If Santana is on his game, a contender should be interesting.

CHRIS YOUNG: Should the Mets sign him as their fifth starter and the season bogs down, if he shows anything in the first half, some contender is sure to be willing to give up a middle prospect for a veteran who’ll make a half-dozen starts. If the Mets aren’t going anywhere, what’s the point of keeping Young around?

FRANK FRANCISCO: Let’s face it, the Mets aren’t bringing him back for 2014. So, deal him for a prospect and give the closer job to Bobby Parnell. Parnell is too young and has too much upside to deal him how. If the Mets aren’t doing anything this year, I’d be game for trading Francisco now and seeing what Parnell can do.

DANIEL MURPHY: If there’s an AL team that needs a DH or a bat off the bench, then Murphy could be ideal.

It is easy to see why Jon Niese or Ike Davis would be attractive – price and production – but those reasons are why the Mets would want to keep them. David Wright isn’t going anywhere, and players such as Lucas Duda and Kirk Nieuwenhuis haven’t built enough of a resume.