Blogging Mets

So I was in Las Vegas the weekend before last (just a short four-hour drive from sunny Los Angeles, although I did hit a bit of snow in the mountains on the way back!) and I wandered into the sports book at the hip, fancy Cosmopolitan where I was somehow staying. Everybody was watching March Madness, but I was busy checking the betting odds for the upcoming baseball season. And I almost put  my money where my mouth was. Almost.

I knew I was going to write the post predicting the Mets winning 84 games, so I was going to bet on that. The over/under was 71 games, but the odds were pretty much even-money, so there was really no value there.

Then I checked the line on winning the World Series — 75-1. Certainly there was value there, but really, what are the odds of the Mets winning the World Series (75-1, apparently)? As much as I hope and pray the Mets can pull out such a miracle, I just don’t see it happening, so I passed.

But then I found an intriguing bet — 40-1 odds of the Mets winning the NL East. As I wrote in that earlier post, if all goes perfectly I think the Mets have a chance to surprise. And the East, which many call the strongest division in baseball, has some flaws. The Phillies have that great pitching, but their offense could struggle. The Nationals are young and can go either way. The Braves are coming off an epic collapse that could extend into 2012. And I am just not sold on the new-look Marlins.

So the Mets could sneak in, and at 40-1, that’s pretty good value for a $10 bet. I was close to placing the bet but ultimately I decided not to. I just didn’t want to jinx it (not that me placing a little bet could wreck a team’s season). As a fan, I want my team to win, not to profit from it.

If the Mets do somehow pull out a division win, I will not regret not placing the bet. A playoff berth alone is worth more than $400 to me and most Mets fans.

It’s a simple question really: if you were a betting man (or woman, I suppose), how many games do you think the Mets will win in 2012?

Yes. And yes.

But there is a huge, tremendous caveat to my admittedly ambitious, over optimistic projection — absolutely nothing can go wrong. And I mean nothing;  no injuries to any of the starters that cause them to miss extended time, no continued Jason Bay slump, Johan Santana must make 30 starts (okay, 28).  If any of these things happen, the Mets likely drop to last place.

If you look closely at the Mets, all the potential is there for a surprisingly strong season. A lineup that has Daniel Murphy, David Wright, Ike Davis, Jason Bay and Lucas Duda hitting two-through-six is pretty formidable — unless Murphy, Wright or Davis gets hurt, Bay continues to be baffled or Duda goes back to being passive at the plate. If any one of these things happens, a big hole is created in the lineup that cannot be overcome.

The starting rotation of Santana, R.A. Dickey, Jonathon Niese, Dillon Gee and he who shall not be named can also be tough — Santana looks healthy this spring and Niese is showing signs that he is ready to take a giant leap forward into being a dominant starter. But it all goes out the window if Santana cannot complete his comeback or Niese or Gee cannot continue to take steps forward.

The revamped bullpen looks good on paper but it must translate that onto the field. If not…

As far as the bench, well, that is why absolutely nothing can go wrong. There is very little depth on that bench so if a starter goes down, his replacement will be far, far inferior; enough to doom the entire season.

I see the Mets winning 84 games and finishing third in the NL East. They will contend for the 2nd Wild Card all season long but ultimately fall just a bit short. If this happens I don’t think any of us will be disappointed with the season.

If, however, a starter goes down — any starter — the Mets drop to 89 losses and last place in the division.

Here’s how I see the East shaping up:

The Phillies win easily. They will struggle at the plate, what with Ryan Howard missing the start of the season and Chase Utley missing significant time with knee problems. But their pitching will allow them to cruise to the division title.

The Nationals are for real, finishing second. The solid pitching will overcome Jayson Werth’s continued troubles, but Bryce Harper will come up and set the world on fire. Incidentally, the Nats say they plan to limit Stephen Strasburg to 160 innings this season, and would likely hold him out of the playoffs if he reaches his limit and the team reaches the playoffs. That is nonsense — imagine the outcry from Nats fans, who finally reach the playoffs and then are told their ace will watch it from the bench. Enough with the babying of pitchers. And where did they come up with the random 160 innings number, anyway?

The Mets are third, God-willing.

The Braves finish fourth. They have a relatively weak lineup and the hangover from the 2011 collapse will linger all season long. Just like the Mets in 2008, no one paid for the 2007 collapse so it will not go away. At least the Red Sox fired Terry Francona for their collapse — someone paid, so it is time to move on. Not so for the Braves.

And the Marlins are dead last. I know they spent a whole lot of money, but I am not sold on this team (and this is not Jose Reyes-related sour grapes). The Marlins always seem to be a dysfunctional team with porous defense and a poor bullpen. Reyes and Heath Bell will respectively improve those areas, but not enough, and new manager Ozzie Guillen will just up the dysfunction level. The excitement from the new ballpark will quickly fade as the team’s losses mount, and it will be a long season down in Miami.

Oh, and my surprise team of the year is the San Diego Padres. They made out like bandits in the Matt Latos deal and had a very good off-season overall (Carlos Quentin, Huston Street). Just like the Mets, they will finish above .500 and contend for the Wild Card and possibly the NL West.

I know all of this goes against the conventional wisdom from the so-called experts, but contrarians are right some of the time, aren’t they? Let’s just wait until October and see what happens.

Mike Puma of the New York Post (via Mets Blog) has an intriguing idea — release Mike Pelfrey right now. He writes on something called Sulia.com:

Asked a Mets official about the possbility of the team dumping Mike Pelfrey, who has a non-guaranteed contract and would be owed only a fraction of $5.68 million if cut in camp. It doesn’t seem there have been discussions about dumping him, but just say the team is also well aware of the fact he’s got a non-guaranteed deal.

I didn’t realized this was even a possibility, but now that I know, I will lie awake in bed every night praying that the Mets do it. Pelfrey never should have never tendered in the first place and his spring performance thus far (9.2 innings, 18 runs, 20 hits) proves it.

The only problem is that the Mets made their off-season plans with Pelfrey included, and just like the rest of the team, there is very little depth in the starting rotation (great job, Sandy). But there is a way.

With all of the off days early in April, the Mets probably won’t need a fifth starter anyway for a couple of weeks. They can leave Miguel Batista on the roster just in case another starter is needed.

In the meantime, Matt Harvey makes a few starts in the minors. If he does well, they can bring him up and insert him in the rotation by the end of April. If he is struggling, use Batista. Or Chris Schwinden. Or sign Roy Oswalt. Or see if Jerry Koosman is still in shape. Anyone but Pelfrey.

There are no negatives here. It rids the Mets of Pelfrey’s struggles and could jump-start the career of a highly touted prospect.

Do it, Sandy. Do it now.

Phil Naessens was kind enough to invite me back on his podcast Monday night, and we discussed all things Mets, including Johan Santana’s encouraging comeback from injury, David Wright’s discouraging injury, and my prediction for the surprise team of the 2012 season. Hint: it’s not the Mets.

Check it out here:

http://phillipnaessens.mlblogs.com/2012/03/20/new-york-mets-baseball-with-mr-mark-berman/

The Wilpons have settled their lawsuit with the trustee of the Bernie Madoff victims on Monday, the day the trial was set to begin. The deal calls for them to pay $162 million. But in the end, they may not have to pay a dime.

“I am very, very pleased for ourselves and our families. This was really a team effort,” Wilpon said as he left the courthouse (left, with co-defendant Saul Katz).

The judge had previously ruled that the Mets would have to pay at least $83.3 million in “fictitious profits” from the Madoff scam. Irving Picard was trying to get $386 million, so this settlement seems fair.

“I think this has all the hallmarks of a good settlement in the sense that nobody came alway absolutely happy with how it came out,” said Picard attorney David Sheehan. “But on balance, taking into account all the various factors in the case, this is a very fair and reasonable outcome.”

Here’s why this was a great stroke of luck for the Wilpons: The agreement says they don’t have to pay for three more years, so they have plenty of time to get their financial house in order. Plus, they are claiming they are victims of the scam and are seeking $178 million in restitution. So not only might they not have to pay the $162 million, they could come away with as much as $14 million in their pockets. That could pay for a couple of starting pitchers!

This is good news for the Mets. Now at least the team can move forward with some idea of what their financial picture looks like. It doesn’t mean the Mets are going to go out and spend big money; I think the $90 million payroll is here to stay for some time.

And so are the Wilpons. This is a manageable figure for them so they will not be forced to sell the team, much to the chagrin of many Mets fans.

Every week we seem to get a new reason why Jose Reyes left the Mets. A couple of weeks ago Reyes claimed he would have stayed in Flushing for less money. Then last week Marlins president David Samson refuted that, saying Reyes was going to the highest bidder. Thursday Reyes countered that by saying he went to the Marlins because they had the best chance to win.

“Before I signed here, I saw what they were trying to do. That’s why I decided to come here to Miami. Because of the opportunity to win,” he said according to Mets Blog. “I haven’t won anything yet. We went to the playoffs once in New York; I want to win a World Series and I think on this team I have that opportunity.”

All of this is nonsense and bluster. There is only one reason Reyes is no longer on the Mets — they team had no interest in resigning him. If they did, they would have had least made an offer, despite Sandy Alderson’s contention that Reyes knew or should have known what the Mets would offer. Hmm, that sounds just like Irving Picard’s contention about the Mets and Madoff.

If the Mets really wanted him, the would have said something like, “We want you, but we will only guarantee you four years at $15 million per year” or whatever they wanted to spend, then let Reyes decide if he wants to stay where he is comfortable or take the money and run. That’s exactly what the Cardinals did with Albert Pujols. The Cards played their hand and they lost. The Mets didn’t even ante-up.

The fact is the Mets didn’t want to spend any money on big contracts, and that’s why Jose Reyes took his talents to South Beach. It’s as simple as that.

Mike Pelfrey was the starting pitcher for the Mets today, and once again, he failed. Get used to seeing that sentence because you will see it roughly 30 times during the season. That Pelfrey is still wearing a Mets uniform is another example that Sandy Alderson is not a particularly good general manager.

Pelfrey lasted four and a third innings against the Cardinals, allowing four runs on six hits — two of which were home runs. This mirrors his first spring training start last week against the Marlins — four runs, six hits, but in two and two-thirds of an inning.

“I felt like I was a lot better from last week,” Pelfrey inexplicably told Mets Blog. “I wasn’t very good last week, so, I don’t know how much that says. But I was better today, so after the next start I’ll try to get better again.”

Pelfrey apparently has a loose definition of the word “better.”

We shouldn’t even be hearing the name “Pelfrey” this spring or reading these dumb quotes; he should have been non-tendered after his truly awful 2011 season, which featured such gaudy numbers as a 7-13 record to go along with a sparkling 4.74 ERA. Yes, he is an “innings eater,” perhaps the stupidest phrase in all of baseball. If the quality of the innings is poor, do you really want him eating them?

Instead Alderson decided to keep Pelfrey and pay him $5.675 million of the Wilpon’s dwindling cash supply. The Mets were watching every penny this off-season and decided to pay Pelfrey a relative king’s ransom when they could have picked any pitcher off of the scrap heap for a million bucks and get the same results.

This is why I question Alderson’s competence. With very little money to spend he used it on Pelfrey, the bullpen (where he jumped the gun and overpaid when he could have waited and gotten better talent for less money) and mediocre bench retreads. Alderson was billed as this genius baseball man. So far there is scant evidence to back that up.

He does deserve credit for turning Carlos Beltran into the promising Zack Wheeler and for getting anything for Angel Pagan (hey, maybe Alderson should only deal with the Giants!). But other than that, he has done absolutely nothing to make this team better.

He got his much discussed salary “flexibility” this off-season when $50 million came off the payroll, and while the Wilpons’ financial situation forced Alderson not to use most of it, the money he was allowed to spend was not spent wisely. That is on him, not ownership. He needs to be judged by the performance of this team, because whether he and the media want to admit it, this is indeed Alderson’s team. Yes, he inherited most of the players, but he had the opportunity to reshape this team, and he decided to basically stand pat. So no more free passes for this “genius.”

The Mets lack of depth has already reared its ugly head — Tim Byrdak, the Mets lone lefty in the bullpen, needs knee surgery and will be out for six weeks.

Byrdak will undergo surgery Tuesday morning in New York to repair torn meniscus cartilage in his left knee (perhaps they can do some work on that mustache as well).

“It was something, working out in the off-season, there was a little discomfort,” Byrdak said. “I actually felt it when I went to sit on the couch one day. I went to put my foot underneath me and I said I really didn’t feel right. But there was no injury, no pop, no sudden movement that tweaked it. It’s been something kind of nagging around. I was pitching with it this whole time. It’s still kind of there. I sought treatment for it and it wasn’t really responding to the treatment.”

So who will replace Byrdak as the Mets lefty specialist? Not an easy question to answer. The situation is so bad that the Mets are considering signing C.J. Nitkowski, the St. John’s product who hasn’t pitched in the big leagues since 2005.

Other candidates are equally enticing — veterans Garrett Olsen and Chuck James, and prospects Robert Carson and Josh Edgin, who was just moved to the major league camp following Byrdak’s diagnosis.

And then there is Daniel Herrera. The little screwball pitcher (he throws a screwball, he’s not a screwball himself) looked pretty good late in 2011 after coming over in the K-Rod deal. But the Mets are not high on him — they released him during the off-season, only to clear waivers and resign with the team.

Much like the Republican presidential field, this could be a choice of the lesser of several evils. More than anything, it exposes just how vulnerable the Mets are to injuries to any of their players.

Well, this can’t be a good sign — the Mets have sent David Wright to New York for treatment on his injured rib cage. Excellent, because you know what kind of great medical care Mets players get there.

Sandy Alderson said Wright will get an “ultrasound-guided cortisone” shot during his mini-vacation to the city.

Wright has yet to play in an exhibition game and the Mets said he won’t do so until next weekend at the earliest. That was before they booked Wright’s flight, so who knows now?

Wright is one of three Mets players (Scott Hairston and Kirk Nieuwenhuis) who have suffered from rib/oblique injuries this spring.

“You better believe it’s troubling,” Terry Collins said. “And we have no answers. They’re in a lot of camps. (Marlins manager) Ozzie (Guillen) tells me they’ve got it in their camp… This didn’t happen 20 years ago.”

Did we even have obliques 20 years ago? Now everybody seems to be injuring them, and if the past is any indication (Jason Bay, Angel Pagan), it takes about a month to recover from them.

The Mets can’t afford to lose Wright for any length of time once the season starts. The Mets depth, if you can call it that, at all positions is very shallow, so any starter who goes down will leave a big hole in an already-suspect lineup.