Busy Mets Land Wagner

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 12:13 am

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/ ... p&c_id=nym

NEW YORK -- Buttressed by a bold, five-day power play unmatched in the history of the franchise, the Mets on Monday appear to be the strongest team in the National League East and a significantly stronger entry in the New York baseball market. By agreeing to contract terms with Billy Wagner, the prize in the current free agent market, less than four days after they acquired Carlos Delgado in a trade, the Mets seem ready to compete with any team in their league, on their schedule and in their city.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » November 29, 2005, 1:23 am

Who cares? Its still the Mets

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » November 29, 2005, 1:41 am

I seem to remember the Mets being in the World Series more recently than the Braves. They're making some quality moves this off-season that could land them back there pretty soon.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 3:50 am

If the Mets can land a solid catcher, it would be pretty sweet if they brought Jeff Keppinger up to play 2nd. I hated to see Cammy go though... not sold on this Nady guy playing right.

Last year, the Mets starters were pretty damn good as a whole. Gaining a closer of Wagner's caliber is HUGE. Now, they just need to fill a couple spots in the pen and fill the 2nd and catcher voids. If the rotation can match last year's work, coupled with some more offense, it may work out.

I was happy with + .500 this last season. I guess the bar just rose more... we will see. I am not calling a division title quite yet, but I am happy that they picked up some quality guys.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 3:52 am

Trek wrote:Who cares? Its still the Mets

That comment would have been more realistic in 1962.

You are a Yankees fan?

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 29, 2005, 9:54 am

You do have a good shot at the wild card this year. The only thing that might keep you from it is the sad pathetic divisions that are the NL Central and NL West. Those shitstains have such bad teams in them that a team like Houston will always have an edge by getting to play Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and the Pirates 18 times each year.

They really need to go back to a balanced schedule to make things fair for getting a wild card. Does anyone really think Houston would have won it over Philly if the Phils did not have to play the unbalanced schedule against the NL Beast while Houston played such incredibly inferior teams?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 29, 2005, 12:33 pm

Mets have made some big moves, no doubt. Those are 2 quality signings.

If the Braves fail to resign Furcal, and can't land a closer either, you would definitely then be able to say the Mets are the favorites to win the East.

But being the favorite doesn't mean much. The good news is at least the Marlins are re-entering their shitty period where they develope talent for another couple of years before becoming a beast again.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 1:26 pm

Correct. Favorites means squat considering there are 162 games. It takes quite a bit to win when it counts--especially playing division rivals and down the stretch. I am happy with what Minata and the Mets have done this offseason, but you really never know.

I thought Furcal was about to sign with the Cubs? Either way, it seems like the Braves find a way to win--don't know how they do it, but they do it every year. I guess we will find out how much of an effect Mazzone had.

Balanced schedules... well, I agree, that would be the best way. However, I doubt it will happen--MLB is not exactly about parity, eh? Speeking of balance, how about cutting intraleague games in half with teams playing their normal 'local rivals' 3 games each instead of 6 and alternating home games?

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » November 29, 2005, 2:02 pm

Canelek wrote:Correct. Favorites means squat considering there are 162 games. It takes quite a bit to win when it counts--especially playing division rivals and down the stretch. I am happy with what Minata and the Mets have done this offseason, but you really never know.

One word: injuries. They can ruin anyone's best laid out plan on paper.

Balanced schedules... well, I agree, that would be the best way. However, I doubt it will happen--MLB is not exactly about parity, eh? Speeking of balance, how about cutting intraleague games in half with teams playing their normal 'local rivals' 3 games each instead of 6 and alternating home games?

I'm assuming you're referring to how the Mets have to play the Yanks every year?

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » November 29, 2005, 2:41 pm

MLB had a balanced schedule and at the request of the teams, fans and players (and history) decided to do away with it. The NBA doesn't have one for the same reason, these guys are not playing 16-20 games a year, they play 162. Balanced would mean I get to see the Pirates an extra time each year instead of... the dodgers (giants fan), unbalanced was the way to go.

That being said, if the mets don't win the east this year they should be lined up and shot

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 2:58 pm

Not so much Mets-Yanks, Chid. They have been really good series the last couple years. I am just not a big fan of intra-league is all. Cutting it in half would be cool.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 29, 2005, 6:46 pm

balanced v. unbalanced means this:

the Braves play all of their intradivision rivals (about) 18 times each. they play the teams in the NL West (about) 6 games each, and i think the same for the NL Central.

So it doesnt take a math wizard to realize, if on average, the NL East is a shitload stronger than the NL West (and it is), then a team that plays an NL East schedule has a tremendously more difficult schedule than a team that plays an NL West schedule.

A balanced schedule has each team playing every other team something like 9 or 12 times. everybody has the same schedule basically.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 29, 2005, 7:08 pm

righto Voro! And seeing as how every team in the NL East was .500 or better......it means it is a hell of a lot harder to get that wild card spot if you play in that division

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 29, 2005, 9:30 pm

Totally. the NL east was a dogfight most of the season with each team playing hard within the division. Anyone have a record split for intra-division games? I think it was rather close for the most part.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » November 30, 2005, 1:18 am

Vetiria wrote:I seem to remember the Mets being in the World Series more recently than the Braves.

And this has what to do with anything at all? They are still the Mets

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » November 30, 2005, 1:22 am

Granted, there were some bad seasons recently from 2002-2004, but they can't be considered laughable--that is the NL West.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » November 30, 2005, 9:40 am

HAH! The NL West was the most competetive, they were so good the winner could barely reach 500 due to how tough it is there

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » November 30, 2005, 2:15 pm

Power shifts from west to east, and back again, some years one division pays, others the next. Had the Phils not sucked ass the final few weeks of the season, then the NL east would have had the wildcard. The Phils choked, simple as that.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » December 4, 2005, 3:28 pm

They are saying LoDuca might goto the Mets, all jokes aside I do like LoDuca he plays hard even tho that does'nt always equate to good.