Blogging Mets

During the bottom of the fifth inning of Monday’s Mets-Marlins game, the broadcast crew discussed NBA center Jason Collins’s decision to come out as gay. Gary Cohen and Kevin Burkhardt did almost all of the talking; Keith Hernandez did almost none, which I found quite curious.

Burkhardt brought up the subject during one of his reports, saying he spoke with three Mets players who were all supportive, pointing out that Robert Carson and Ike Davis have gay relatives. Cohen talked about how the changing culture could make it easier to come out.

Keith Hernandez, however, made just one cursory comment, and that was all. The main question about gay athletes coming out is how they would be treated in the clubhouse, and Hernandez was really the only one who could have offered insight into that (Ron Darling was off tonight). However, Hernandez chose to remain noticeably mum.

It’s likely that Keith Hernandez had a gay teammate somewhere along the line; it certainly was not his place to out him, but he could have given a statement about how that teammate was treated, and how things might be different today. If Hernandez didn’t feel comfortable talking about his own experiences, he could have discussed the general clubhouse culture.

Who knows what Hernandez was thinking — perhaps he has a differing opinion. If that’s the case, he was probably smart to keep his mouth shut. Hernandez often talks without thinking and gets himself in trouble; this is not a topic where he wants to get himself in the middle of a controversy.

The silence of Keith Hernandez said something. We’re just not sure what it said.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. Oswald shot Kennedy. Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. Marisa Tomei did indeed with an Oscar. But I find it quite curious that on the same day — an off day for the Mets, no less — two newspaper columnists wrote articles about the possibility of the Mets making a major acquisition in the outfield, mentioning some of the same players. It seems the Mets PR team is doing its job.

Let’s start with Ken Davidoff’s column in the New York Post. He writes that the Mets could make a deal this season to strengthen their outfield whether they are in contention or not. He points to the Mets trading for Keith Hernandez when they were losing in 1983. Davidoff has mentioned on several occasions that he thinks Sandy Alderson’s blueprint is similar to Frank Cashen’s. Good work, Jay Horowitz.

Anyway, Davidoff mentions Giancarlo Stanton, Andre Ethier, Carlos Gonzalez, Alfonso Soriano and others as possible targets. His column comes off as strictly his own speculation; he does not mention any team sources or propose specific trades.

This is in sharp contrast to Andy Martino’s column in the Daily News. He talks about the specific idea of sending Zack Wheeler and Travis d’Arnaud to Miami for Stanton. He mentions team sources and possible preliminary talks. Like Davidoff, he also mentions Ethier, Soriano and Gonzalez.

Now, this does not mean the Mets planted the story, knowing full well the writers would be desperate for stories on an off day. There have been many occasions that I wrote something, only to see that Mets Blog or ESPNNewYork.com had written something very similar. It does happen, but in this case it seems far too specific to be a coincidence.

In any case, let’s examine the possibilities. I would trade Wheeler and d’Arnaud for Stanton in a second. At 23, Stanton is already one of the best players in baseball, and I think he will soon emerge as the best. As good as Bryce Harper and Mike Trout are, I would take Stanton over either of them.

Wheeler and d’Arnaud are great prospects, but they are just that — prospects. Stanton has already proven that he is a superstar. You trade promise for proven talent any day of the week.

The problem is that I don’t think Wheeler and d’Arnaud would get it done. Miami knows what it has in Stanton; it would require a tremendous haul to pry him loose. The Mets would have to include the likes of Matt Harvey and Noah Syndergaard. In that case, I might not do it. Trading three-fifths of your projected starting rotation for anyone is probably not a good idea. Still, though, I might be tempted — Stanton is just that good.

I would not make the same deal for the 27 year old Gonzalez. He is very good and I would love to see him in the Mets outfield, but not for their top prospects. It’s too much to risk for a guy who might turn out to be a product of Coors Field.

As far as Ethier, he is also good but is already 31; any trade for him would have to be for lesser prospects.

Of these players, Ethier is the one most likely to be traded. The Dodgers have a crowded outfield and super prospect Yasiel Puig ready to go. I really don’t think Stanton is going anywhere.

One thing is certain — the Mets need outfielders, so some kind of acquisition will eventually be made. Then again, we said that this winter, and all we got were doomed-from-the-start flirtations with Justin Upton and Michael Bourn, leaving us with an outfield of guys with funny names and dubious talent like Duda, Cowgill and Nieuwenhuis.

I very rarely read Phil Mushnick’s column in the New York Post; he always takes strange, and in my opinion, wrong stances on virtually every issue. But every now and then there is a headline that entices me and I click on it. I usually regret it.

Friday, though, he pointed out that the Mets seem to think their leader in wins last season was Jonathon Niese with 13. What about that guy who won 20 games and won the Cy Young Award? R.A. Something? Nope, Jonathon Niese.

The front page of the Mets official website has a section with team leaders from 2012. R.A. Dickey has been erased from those lists, so Niese lead the way in wins, strikeouts and ERA. Of course, Dickey led the team in those categories.

This is such a bush league move by the Mets. I could kind of, sort of see it if Dickey left the team under difficult circumstances; if he forced a trade or bad mouthed the team or was just a jerk — the Mets would want to excise all mention of him. But that was not the case. R.A. Dickey was happy to stay with the Mets, but the Mets wanted to go in a different direction. Of course they have that right.

But they do not have the right to rewrite history. R.A. Dickey was on the Mets in 2012 and led the team in every pitching category; why not just acknowledge it?

Are they afraid fans will be angry with the Mets for trading him and won’t show up to Citi Field, thus costing the team money? That is the only rational reason, and it’s not very rational at all.

It’s just another example of the Mets handling a situation extremely poorly. It really is getting harder and harder to be a Mets fan.

UPDATE:

The Mets have solved the problem by replacing “2012 Leaders” with “2013 Spring Leaders.” But my screenshot will live forever.

There is a report Saturday that Bobby Valentine could have a role on Mets broadcasts this season. If so, at least part of the season will be fun to watch.

Bobby Valentine returning to the Mets family?

The Daily News reports that the folks at SNY have reached out to Valentine about whether he would be interested in working on Mets pre-game shows. The story says it would only be for about 20 games, the important ones like the Subway Series, and, uh, any other important games the Mets  might somehow play in 2013.

The Mets are part owners of SNY, which means that if network officials have already approached Valentine, then the Wilpons have signed off on it. That is a bit of a surprise because Valentine is not one to pull his punches, even when it comes to biting the hand that feeds him.

Perhaps the Wilpons know how popular Valentine still is with Mets fans, and he knows it could lead to higher ratings, which would mean more money in the Wilpons’s empty pockets.

Valentine managed the Mets from 1996-2002, leading them to the 2000 World Series. He could not get another major league job until finally landing with the Red Sox last year, but was fired after one disastrous, last place season.

Terry Collins must be thrilled with this possible development. How soon will the cries for Bobby Valentine to replace Collins in the dugout  be heard if the team gets off to a lousy start, with Valentine second-guessing the manager’s sometimes questionable strategies?

You may have noticed I recently added a logo on the sidebar (which is also below) for the Internet Baseball Writers Association of America (IBWAA for short). Just what is this organization?

Well, a fine fellow named Howard Cole started it in 2009 “to serve as a digital alternative to the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA)” according to the IBWAA website. The IBWAA welcomes all Internet baseball writers, as opposed to the BBWAA which requires writers to work for 10 years for a major print publication. Also, the BBWAA charges thousands of dollars in membership fees while the IBWAA charges a mere $20 for a lifetime membership.

The IBWAA got a lot of publicity earlier this month when the BBWAA failed to induct any players into the Hall of Fame. A vote of IBWAA members elected Mike Piazza —  a reason for Mets fans to favor the Internet folks over the other guys.

Big name baseball writers from such websites as ESPN and Yahoo! Sports are members.

I joined up and I immediately noticed the lack of an identifying logo for the group. Howard sent me the pitcher silhouette (Sandy Koufax) he had been using and I developed the concept for the logo (I say modestly). I went on Fiverr.com and found a professional designer to come up with the final product. Not bad for five bucks, eh?!

Hopefully you will be seeing the logo on other member sites, and hopefully you will be hearing more about the IBWAA in the future.

It’s been a hell of an off season for New York Post baseball writer Ken Davidoff. First he writes a sleazy column bashing R.A. Dickey that had to come directly from the Mets front office. Then he said he didn’t vote for Mike Piazza for the Hall of Fame; not because of the unsubstantiated steroid whispers, but because Piazza just wasn’t good enough. Now he admits he might have made a mistake.

Too late, pal. Your Hall of Fame voting should be rescinded.

In a column on Tuesday, Davidoff said he may have erred by going strictly by WAR to rank the Hall of Fame candidates. Piazza finished 14th in those rankings, and since he was allowed only 10 votes, Piazza was not included. It should be noted that Davidoff voted for such inferior players as Kenny Lofton, Edgar Martinez and Tim Raines because they ranked higher on WAR.

But now Davidoff writes:

After speaking with several people I respect about this…yeah, I very, very likely screwed up… catchers obviously deserve unique consideration because of their supply and demand, and because the grind of the gig means they don’t play as much as guys at other positions and therefore generally don’t quite climb as high in WAR.

Davidoff fell into the trap into which many writers and fans have fallen — praying at the alter of WAR and not realizing it is a very flawed system. WAR is made up of dozens of statistics and is continually being tweaked. Therefore, a player who had a good WAR one year may end up having a bad WAR that year after the latest changes to the calculation.

Anyway, back to Davidoff. Shouldn’t he have done his research before he cast his Hall of Fame ballot? It’s not very difficult — I learned of the problems with WAR with a simple Internet search. One can only assume Davidoff has heard of the Internet and has access to it.

Davidoff has proven that he does not deserve the honor of having a Hall of Fame ballot (whether he deserves a baseball column in a major newspaper is an issue for another day). An apology after the fact does not make up for his incompetence.

Either Ken Davidoff of the New York Post hates the Mets or he is a moron. Or both. First he writes a sleazy column aboutR.A. Dickey, now he doesn’t vote for Mike Piazza for the Hall of Fame.

How can Mike Piazza not be Hall of Fame-worthy?

The “no” vote doesn’t even have anything to do with suspicions that Piazza used PEDs, Davidoff writes. That would actually make some sense (although it wouldn’t be fair because there is absolutely no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, that Piazza juiced). No, Davidoff just thinks 10 other players on the ballot are more worthy.

Davidoff revealed on his blog Wednesday that he voted for the following players:

Jeff Bagwell
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Kenny Lofton
Edgar Martinez
Tim Raines
Curt Schilling
Alan Trammell
Larry Walker

Clearly steroid suspicions do not prevent Davidoff from voting for a player. He did not vote for Sammy Sosa because he corked his bat; proof that he was a cheater. But he says he might vote for him in the future. He didn’t vote for Rafael Palmeiro because he failed a drug test. Yet he voted for him last year. He changed his “yes” vote on Mark McGwire to “no” because of “gridlock on this ballot.” Davidoff is just all over the place.

Anyway, back to Mike Piazza. Davidoff ranked all of the players on the ballot based on WAR and JAWS (whatever that is. I think it’s a version of WAR). Under this ranking Piazza finished 14th.

14th.

Which means using these asinine formulas, Kenny Lofton, Edgar Martinez, Tim Raines, Alan Trammell and Larry Walker were better players than Mike Piazza. After seeing this, Davidoff trusted the numbers and didn’t vote for Piazza, even though he admits to being “captivated” by watching Piazza play.

I’m sure even those players would say Piazza was better than they were. None of them will even sniff Cooperstown; Mike Piazza will have a plaque there.

Now, I’m not saying that everyone has to vote for Mike Piazza. But if you’re going to cast votes for clearly lesser players, it is just nonsensical to leave Piazza off.

Ken Davidoff is a moron.

I’ve been watching the ESPN documentaries “30 for 30″ on Netflix lately. Some of them are very good — “Without Bias,” about the death of Len Bias, for example. Some of them are not so good — “Silly Little Game,” a great story about the birth of Rotisserie Baseball that was extremely poorly told.

Last night I watched “Fernando Nation,” about Fernandomania that swept the nation in 1981 when Fernando Valenzuela came up with the Dodgers. This was of particular interest to me because I attended the game at Shea Stadium that he won 1-0 to run his record to 7-0 with an impossible 0.29 ERA. It was a very exciting game.

In any case, in the film they talked a bit about Dodger history back in Brooklyn. They referred to Ebbets Field, so they showed the requisite shot of the famous rotunda (this a screenshot from the movie):

Ebbets Field.

Then they went to a few old-time Dodgers shots, and then, while still referring to Ebbets, they showed this:

Not Ebbets Field.

I was shocked. This was an angle of Ebbets Field that I had never seen. I rewound it and paused it, and I said to myself, “That’s not Ebbets Field.” I checked my favorite ballpark website and indeed I was right; it was Shibe Park, also known as Connie Mack Stadium, in Philadelphia.

How could such a mistake happen? Perhaps the director, Cruz Angeles, is not much of a sports fan and wouldn’t know Ebbets Field from Strawberry Fields. Then why is he making a “30 for 30″ sports documentary?

But even if the director, the editor or the film archivist could not tell the difference, you’d think one of the ESPN suits who surely watched the documentary before it went to air would have noticed. Apparently not.

Maybe you think I am being nitpicky; after all, it was just one quick shot in an hour-long film. I say no — this is inexcusable, especially considering it involved a stadium that is as iconic as Ebbets Field.

Like many readers, I am a big fan of those report cards in which a letter grade is given for each player. I do a full season report card after every season. Many news outlets also do mid-season grading, which the Daily News did on Friday. Andy Martino handed out the grades, and it made me wonder if Martino has even watched a Mets game this season. I don’t think I’ve ever read a worse assessment.

First off, he gave Ike Davis and Daniel Murphy the same grade — C. How can a player hitting .201, who was hitting below the Mendoza line for most of the season, get the same grade as someone hitting .295? Martino writes that a “deep slump” reduced Murphy’s grade. But what about Davis’s even deeper slump? He said he graded Davis “on a curve” because he missed most of last year and has Valley Fever. Nonsense.

He gave Andres Torres an “incomplete” because he missed time with injuries. Yes, he did miss the first month of the season, but he has played 59 games. Josh Thole has missed time with an injury and played in 56 games and he got a grade. Just a cop out by Martino, who for some reason wanted to “save Torres from a very low grade.”

Somehow Martino forgot that a fellow named Kirk Nieuwenhuis has played for the Mets the entire season. He did not get a grade at all, yet Scott Hairston did and Nieuwenhuis has played in more games than Hairston.

Frank Francisco gets a B? Martino called his 4.97 ERA “somewhat deceptive.” No, that is his record. That’s like saying “if you take away his bad games, he’s been good.” Obviously, Francisco has had some good outings, but overall he’s been very shaky and deserves a far lower grade.

Really just an awful, baffling article by Andy Martino.

I know this is off the topic of the Mets and baseball, but it is sports related and it bugs the hell out of me, so please cut me some slack. Why does NBC insist in showing sports on tape delay?

Sucks

I noticed on ESPN.com this morning that Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic were battling in the second set of the French Open semi-finals, so I ran to the television. I turned on NBC and saw a report on Justin Bieber on “The “Today Show.” Seriously. Tennis doesn’t start until 11am.

Now in the East I’m sure you are seeing it live, but not out here in sunny Los Angeles. No, it is very important that we see the last nine hours of “The Today Show.”

This is the same network that for decades has shown almost all of the Olympics on tape delay. NBC has announced it will air the London games live, but look how long it took it to make an obvious decision.

In the days before the Internet (yes kids, there were days before the Internet), it was somewhat acceptable to air events on tape delay because you really had to work to find the result (who remembers Sportsphone?!). But nowadays it is nearly impossible to avoid finding out how a major event ended.

If NBC does not want to show sports live to the entire country, it should just get out of the sports business. Simple as that.