Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The last three years haven’t been very kind to Mets’ owner Fred Wilpon, so what’s one more bad day?

Fred Wilpon has seen better days, but the firestorm following recently published comments was not one of them.

In a recent profile in The New Yorker, Wilpon’s rise and (at least temporary) fall as a self-made millionaire were chronicled in impressive detail by staff writer Jeffrey Toobin. However, what gained most notoriety were a handful of unflattering remarks that Wilpon made about his own team and several of its players. Although it is a shame that the enlightening profile was overshadowed by a few off-the-cuff remarks, the reality is, if not for his position as owner of the Mets, there likely would not have been a profile in the first place.

In addition to lamenting the overall poor play of his team, Wilpon also had pointed criticisms about several star players. “He won’t get it,” was Wilpon’s assessment of Jose Reyes’ chances at signing a Carl Crawford-like contract, while David Wright was described as “a really good kid; a very good player; not a superstar”. Not exactly the high praise you’d expect from an organization about its homegrown talent.

Perhaps the greatest criticism, however, was reserved for Carlos Beltran, who also happens to be most Mets’ fans favorite whipping boy. After miming Beltran’s flinching strikeout that ended the 2006 NLCS in response to a question about the Mets being cursed, Wilpon went on to call himself a “schmuck” for signing the centerfielder “based on that one series” (a reference to Beltran’s playoff performance in 2004).

The resultant firestorm stemming from the comments was predictable, if not ironic. Anyone who listens to sports talk or reads the tabloids in New York has likely heard all of Wilpon’s statements repeated countless times. Of course, the people spouting them aren’t the owners of the team.

Instead of debating whether Wilpon should have been so forthright, or even whether his assessments were correct (I happen to think he was wrong on all three: Reyes will get Crawford money; Wright is a superstar; and the Beltran signing wasn’t a bad one), I am more intrigued by the suggestion that the Mets are cursed, particularly as it pertains to free agents.  After all, Wilpon’s sentiments seem to be shared by the entire fan base, which frequently laments the team’s perceived misfortune in free agency.

So, just how poorly have the Mets done in free agency? In order to address that question, let’s first take a look at the Mets major signings since the advent of free agency in 1976. With a few noted exceptions, this list only contains prominent players who signed as a domestic free agent and had previously spent a year or less with the team. In other words, players re-signing after a longer tenure (e.g., Oliver Perez) or before filing for free agency (e.g., Mike Piazza and John Franco) are excluded. Continue Reading »

The Yankees and Mets just completed the most recent edition of the Subway Series, but if past events had transpired differently, train travel wouldn’t have been needed to host the rivalry.

Bill Shea throws out the first pitch on Opening Day 1964, christening the stadium that bared his name.

When the Dodgers and Giants left town after the 1957 season, there was an immediate push to return National League baseball to New York City. Although the Yankees had emerged as the dominant team in town, the senior circuit’s roots in the Big Apple were long and deep. So, even while the Bronx Bombers battled the Milwaukee Braves in the World Series, Mayor Robert Wagner commissioned a task force to find an immediate replacement for its two departing teams. In a sense, it was the city’s way of telling the Dodgers and Giants to not let the door hit them on their way out west.

Mayor Wagner’s Special Committee on Major League Baseball, which included four prominent members of the city’s business community, was charged simply with getting a National League team by any means necessary. Chaired by a well-connected lawyer named William A. Shea, the committee’s first course of action was to explore the possibility of poaching an existing team. In order to entice potential candidates, Shea and Wagner revealed plans to build a state-of-the-art ballpark on a city-owned plot of land in Flushing, Queens (ironically, it was the city’s insistence that Walter O’Malley use this site for his proposed new ballpark that forced the Dodgers to leave town in the first place). Meanwhile, the committee lobbied hard to have the territorial rules governing relocation amended so the Yankees couldn’t veto the arrival of a new neighbor. With the groundwork laid, attempts were then made to convince the Cubs, Reds, Phillies and Pirates to relocate to New York, but despite Shea’s best efforts, there were no takers.

When the relocation efforts stalled, Shea shifted the committee’s attention toward winning an expansion franchise. However, despite professing support for a new team in New York, Commissioner Ford Frick and the existing owners in the National League continued to drag their feet on the issue. So, Shea decided to take matters into his own hands. If organized baseball wouldn’t readmit New York, Shea reasoned, then the city might as well spearhead the creation of a brand new major league.

Shea’s brainchild was the Continental League. On July 27, 1959, the ambitious attorney revealed plans for a new circuit with founding franchises in New York, Houston, Minneapolis, Denver and Toronto, all cities that felt neglected by the current baseball structure. Because only New York had an existing major league team, Shea expected his Continental League to play alongside the NL and AL, not compete against it. Perhaps he was being naïve, or maybe he thought the threat of a lawsuit would force the hands of the existing 16 owners, but Shea fully expected his new venture to gain full acceptance and recognition as a third league that would eventually compete in the World Series.

We anticipate the cooperation of organized baseball, but we are all in this to stay and we are not going to back out no matter what happens.” – William A. Shea, quoted by UPI, July 27, 1959

Continue Reading »

When Francisco Rodriguez slammed the door on the Yankees in last night’s Subway Series opener, the Mets’ players on the field and fans in the stands celebrated joyously. The executives in the front office, however, probably weren’t as jubilant.

A Bronx-bound Krod could save the Mets a lot of money.

Thanks to a lucrative option in Rodriguez’ contract, every Mets’ game that concludes with Krod on the mound brings the team closer to a financial disaster. That’s why even a win against the hated Yankees comes with at least a tinge of regret from those who write the checks.

According to the option, if Rodriguez finishes 100 games over 2010 and 2011, a guaranteed salary of $17.5 million automatically vests for 2012. Because the closer polished off 46 games last year, the economic time bomb will be triggered when he finishes his 54th game this season. Last night was the 18th time the embattled closer was the last man standing for the Mets, meaning there are 36 games left to go. Tick, tick, tick.

Regardless of how well he is pitching, you can bet Sandy Alderson & Co. are not relishing the idea of a $17.5 million closer in 2012. One solution would be to place pressure on Terry Collins to limit Rodriguez’ use, but that would not only lead to a public relations nightmare, but also another expensive lawsuit. So, unless Rodriguez develops an injury, there really is no way for the Mets to avoid triggering the costly option. Or is there?

Krod currently has a limited 10-team no trade clause, so if the Mets could ship him to one of the other 19 teams, they’d be able to wash their hands of the option. Unfortunately for Alderson, teams probably won’t be lining up to add Rodriguez and his expensive 2012 poison pill. However, what if the Mets could find a team that wouldn’t need to use Krod as the closer, yet still being willing and able to pay him handsomely to serve as a setup man? The answer to that question is currently sitting right across the field.

Would Soriano and the Yankees be better off if the reliever was traded to Flushing?

Although the offense is by far the Yankees’ greatest concern at the moment (just ask Soriano; he’d be the first to tell you), the performance of Rafael Soriano has probably been a close second. The signing of the former Rays’ closer caused a rift within the organization when everyone expected he would pitch well setting up for Mariano Rivera, so you can imagine the dissension now that things haven’t gone according to plan. Because it seems unlikely that Soriano would exercise the opt out in his contract, the Yankees are staring at two more years of the grumpy reliever at a cost of $25 million. In many ways, the Soriano contract has become the Yankees’ very own ticking time bomb.

The Yankees and Mets are not frequent trading partners, but in this case, it seems as if each team has the answer to the other’s problem. Assuming the Yankees are not on Krod’s no-trade list, why not simply swap Soriano for Rodriguez?

At face value, the idea probably seems a little silly, but consider the financial ramifications. The cornerstone of the idea is a trade to the Yankees would effectively end any chance of Rodriguez reaching the 2012 option guarantee, thereby converting a $17.5 million salary into a $2.5 million buyout. The next step would then become determing how best to divide the savings.

Sharing the Savings: Financial Breakdown of a Proposed Deal

 Current Mets Yankees
  Francisco Rodriguez Rafael Soriano
2011 $8,625,000 $7,500,000
2012 $17,500,000 $11,000,000
2013 $0 $14,000,000
Total $26,125,000 $32,500,000
     
 Proposed Mets Yankees
  Rafael Soriano Francisco Rodriguez
2011 $7,500,000 $8,625,000
2012 $11,000,000 $2,500,000
2013 $14,000,000 $0
Sub Total $32,500,000 $11,125,000
Cash $13,875,000 -$13,875,000
Total $18,625,000 $25,000,000
     
Net Benefit $7,500,000 $7,500,000

Note: 2011 figures are pro-rated salaries. The 2012 amount for Rodriguez in the proposed structure is a $2.5 million buyout.
Source: mlbcontracts.blogspot.com

Continue Reading »

Jason Giambi used three titanic blasts into the right field stands at Citizen’s Bank Ballpark to turn back the clock for at least one game. In addition to the three homers, which doubled his season’s hit total, Giambi also knocked in seven runs, becoming one of a select few to accomplish each feat over the age of 40.

Giambi watches second of three HRs leave the ballpark (Photo: AP)

By joining the list of 40-somethings who have homered three times in one game, Giambi entered rarified territory shared only by Hall of Famers Reggie Jackson, Stan Musial and Babe Ruth. At one time, Giambi also seemed destined for Cooperstown, but the combination of a late career breakdown and the stain of performance enhancing drugs has all but ensured that he won’t be joining those others in the Plaque Gallery.

Like the Bambino, the “Giambino” had never before belted three homers in a game. Also like the Babe, Giambi’s accomplishment came amid what seems to be the waning days of his career. When Reggie belted his third trio of long balls, he was still a regular with one year left in the tank, but he too was on steady path toward retirement. Musial, however, was still going strong when he went deep three times against the Mets on July 8, 1962.

Three HR Games at 40

Player Age Date Tm Opp PA R H HR RBI
Stan Musial 41.229 7/8/1962 STL NYM 5 3 3 3 4
Jason Giambi 40.131 5/19/2011 COL PHI 5 3 3 3 7
Reggie Jackson 40.123 9/18/1986 CAL KCR 6 4 3 3 7
Babe Ruth 40.108 5/25/1935 BSN PIT 4 3 4 3 6

Source: Baseball-reerence.com

Seven RBI Games at 40

Player Age Date Tm Opp PA R H HR RBI
Stan Musial 40.214 6/23/1961 STL SFG 5 2 2 2 7
Jason Giambi 40.131 5/19/2011 COL PHI 5 3 3 3 7
Reggie Jackson 40.123 9/18/1986 CAL KCR 6 4 3 3 7

Source: Baseball-reerence.com

When Musial victimized the hapless Mets, he was not only months from turning 42, but also in the midst of yet another MVP-caliber season. Entering the game, Stan the Man was hitting .325/.395/.476, leaving some to wonder if he’d ever slow down. “I don’t want to give that boy any ideas,” Mets’ manager Casey Stengel observed, “but the way he’s hitting he can hang around in this business two or three more years easily”.

Continue Reading »

As early as last June, the entity that owns the parking garages around Yankee Stadium was facing significant economic distress. Despite raising rates (off inflated prices in 2009), the Bronx Parking Development Company reported dwindling revenues for the 2010 season. As a result, it was forced to use its debt reserve to make interest payments on the $237 million worth of tax-free bonds that were floated by the city to build the now mostly vacant structures.

Declining parking occupancy at Yankee Stadium garages has put the management company on the verge of default.

Since that initial report, Bronx Parking Development has continued to experience financial difficulty, so once again, the company decided to raise its prices. This time, the rates jumped to a whopping $35 for self-parking and $48 for valet, an increase of about 50% and 33%, respectively. Now, two months into the new season, comes word that occupancy at Stadium-area parking garages has plummeted all the way to 31%, a sharp decline from the already low rate of 60% in 2010.

Fittingly, the company’s decision to raise self-parking rates by 50% resulted in a corresponding 50% decline in occupancy. Apparently, the executives at Bronx Parking Development have never taken an economics course. Or, maybe they were just absent the day supply and demand was covered?

What the powers-that-be at Bronx Parking Development don’t seem to realize is the price for parking is very elastic. With cheaper car lots and free street spots located within walking distance as well as improved public transportation infrastructure, consumers don’t have to pay through the nose for parking. Add in the increasing cost of tolls and gas, and an inflated parking price becomes only the last on a growing list of incentives encouraging Yankees’ fans to leave their cars at home.

Continue Reading »

(In addition to appearing at The Captain’s Blog, this post is also being syndicated at TheYankeeAnalysts.)

At this point in the season, Mark Teixeira is usually starting to emerge from his April doldrums. This year, however, the Yankees’ first baseman got off to a hot start. As a result, Teixeira’s current OPS+ of 141 ranks above his career rate and on par with some of his best seasons.

Although he has been one of the Yankees’ best offensive performers, one part of Teixeira’s game has been a little concerning. Despite establishing himself as a well-rounded hitter before joining the Yankees, Teixeira has gradually turned into a more one-dimensional slugger, particularly when batting from the left side.

As evidenced by the chart below, Teixeira has evolved from an all-field approach into a much more pull conscious batter. Although the percentage of balls hit to center and the opposite way have fluctuated during this period, the overall trend toward pulling the ball has persisted since 2007. Also evident from the chart is a potential relationship between the first baseman’s production and where he hits the ball. Over the years, it seems as if Teixeira’s output has increased in accordance with his use of all parts of the ballpark, particularly the opposite field.

Using All Fields: Where Mark Teixeira Hits the Ball (% of batted balls)


Note: Off field = Opposite + Center.
Source: fangraphs.com and baseball-reference.com (OPS+)

Although it’s clear that Teixeira has been pulling the ball more overall, has the same trend emerged from both sides of the plate? By isolating Teixeira’s directional splits based on handedness, we can better answer that question.

Mark Teixeira’s “Spray Chart” as LHB, RHB (% of batted balls from each side)

Source: fangraphs.com

Continue Reading »

The Captain’s Blog has once again received a leaked video tape, this time of a secret meeting between an undisclosed baseball team and an unidentified former star player. According to the video, the player was summoned to address several higher-ups in the organization, at which point he was informed of his future role with the team. Below is the leaked portion of that meeting, although all involved parties have since declared they are on the same page.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »