The Market For Joel Pineiro

57 Comments + Add Comment

• Shamik December 31, 2009 at 8:35 am

  Forget him, he’s not reliable and there should be better pitchers out there next year and if Maine, Pelf, Perez don’t improve, the rotation’s a wash anyway.
  • METS62FAN December 31, 2009 at 9:14 am

    Shamik, that’s risky; but unfortunately true. I certainly pray they get Molina & he can actually convert much of the 3 enigma’s promised potential into actual production. We’ve all witnessed all 3 have dominating games against top opponents, yes, even “Ollie”. I remember one where he dominated Atl making both Jonses look inept. Afterward, Andruw commented it was the most uncomfortable ABs he could recall(TBS broadcast). Both Maine & Ollie have turned in 15W seasons, Pelf’s zenith was his 13Ws 2 yrs ago.
    I do not belive Pineiro, away from Duncan, will suffer from amnesia & he may be worth a gamble. It seems obvious, the Mets to our chagrin decided they could not possibly fill all their needs off the top shelf; but decided 2 of 4 (lf,1b,c,sp)wasn’t bad with pitching being the most expensive & volotile waiting for the mkt to compress & depress. I do know the bloggers & pudits criticized Omar for acquiring Duanner Sanchez, Xavier Nady & Ryan Church as well as others. In all cases condidering cost, Omar came up better than anticipated, I believe Alou,Castillo & Ollie not withstanding earns Omar the benefit of the doubt as it seems his preferred non-Lackey sp has remained Piniero from the start. All in all, I continue to belive Sheets is a non-option as he’s suffered from elbow,shoulder & back issues for years with only the elbow having been adressed & his refusal to audition thus far while demanding 12M per after missing all of ’09.
    • Shamik December 31, 2009 at 11:01 am

      He certainly may be able to reproduce what he did in years past, but what if he can’t? Do we really need another albatross like that around our necks? There are better options out there, and I think they should be explored before turning to Pineiro. If we did get him however, I would not be disappointed
• michael December 31, 2009 at 8:53 am

  I tired of hearing about Dave Duncan as an excuse for not signing Piniero. There is not a Met fan alive that would not want Chris Carpenter and there is no more Dave Duncan acolyte than he. You can make the case that Piniero had better years pre Duncan than Carpenter.
  • Bob L December 31, 2009 at 9:15 am

    Heartily disagree on Pineiro. He’ll be a disaster as a Met. Ollie, the sequel. Guy gives up a ton more hits than IP, had a 5.15 era ‘with’ STLin 2008, was a disater with Seattle. We want him because he looks like Cy Young against us. C’mon! Plus, the moola he’s asking for is ridiculous and also ‘Ollie-esque’!
    No, i’m thinking more now that we need innings eaters, like Garland in the F/A mkt; or Arroyo via a trade; or a potential #2 stud like Zambrano in a trade. But a hearty ‘no’ from me on Pineiro.
• theonlymaskman December 31, 2009 at 9:29 am

  In my opinion, if they’re fixating on Pineiro they should keep any contract within the bounds of what they gave to Ollie, that is, no more than $36 mil over 3 yrs. And yes, I agree with Bob L that the similarity is scary. However, I think that Pineiro has a better work ethic than Ollie and althought risky, it has the potential to work. But, I would rather go for a trade of a better condidate for #2. I think Pineiro only qualifies as a #3 in reality. JMO.
• Bob L December 31, 2009 at 9:42 am

  Pitchers that give up a ton more hits than IP turn me off. i understand sinker ballers do that by the nature of their skill-sets; but think about it, it puts a lot more pressure on our ‘D’. And we do have Q-marks at several key positions: Castillo; Murphy; Bay; even Wright.
  Zambrano would be great; a clear #2, but he’d come at a price. We’d likely lose Pelfrey in that trade (and hopefully Castillo!). And we’d still need 1 more additional starter for depth in the rotation. Garland is ideal for a 3 – 4 guy, but i hear TX is leading for him. Or Arroyo would be solid, if we couldn’t get Zambrano.
  But Pineiro is too inconsistent and the money he is seeking is insane.
  • Tomterif December 31, 2009 at 12:31 pm

    Bob L, totally agree with you that a bad hits to innnings pitched ratio is a big turnoff. Look, the Mets probably for the last few years is lack of depth at the top of the rotation. We haven’t had a real number two starter for years, let alone a number one until we got Johan. Three to five starters are a dime a dozen and we’ve already got those guys. We need a solid number two not a number three or four posing as a two. We need a Koosman, a Darling, a Cone to back up Johan now. What we need is Zambrano, a healthy Sheets or someone of that caliber if we’re serious about getting to the playoffs again.
    • Bob L December 31, 2009 at 12:56 pm

      You make good points. Zambrano would be simply ideal. And Sheets as well, bracing of course on the health issue with him. But he’s out there, i say he’s definitely worth the risk on an incentive-based deal. And i highly doubt he’ll get 12mm/yr money GTD from anybody. Ton of upside.
• Satish Ram December 31, 2009 at 9:58 am

  Piniero…No.
  I really don’t want this guy. He’s asking too much, anyway. I’d rather trade and pay Arroyo or give the money to Bedard and Lowry.
• jorsulak December 31, 2009 at 10:03 am

  3 to 4 years @ $15 mil per? That is way beyond insane. Some of these players are soon going to have to face reality. Peniero is no more than a #3 guy. He has one solid season & thinks he’s Cy Young.
  Personally, I would’ve rather have had Wolf & he got roughly $10 mil per for 3 years. Marquis got $7.5 per for 2 years. So I’m thinking, offer Peniero 2yrs, $18-$20 not per, but whole. I don’t think he’s worth more than that.
• Joe D December 31, 2009 at 10:22 am

  I actually liked the thought of Pineiro back in early November. However, now I cringe whenever I hear Pineiro’s name tied to the Mets. I’ve been convinced thanks to some good posts on him by my co-writers and also by many of the comments from our readers.

  Last year everything that could go right for Pineiro, did.

  He benefitted from a great pitching coach, a solid bullpen, top 3 in the league run support, and the motivation of free agent riches.

  He has bust written all over him and could make the Oliver Perez signing look like a bargain.
• METS62FAN December 31, 2009 at 10:27 am

  Joe, your post re. your fear of Piniero has yet to hit; but regasrding his costliness, I don’t believe Omar waited this long to pay retail.
  • Joe D December 31, 2009 at 10:32 am

    He seems to be holding firm on his desire for a 3 year deal for $30 million, and he’s not a sure thing to repeat his 2009 season which was his career best and still not all that glamorous.
• METS62FAN December 31, 2009 at 10:34 am

  Mask, I too would prefer the trade route; but they’d likely need to insist on cash along with Zambrano because his current deal is frought with expense. COTS lists details as:
  08:$15M, 09:$17.75M, 10:$17.875M, 11:$17.875M, 12:$18M, 13:$19.25M vesting player option

  full no-trade clause
  award bonus: $75,000 for All Star selection

  Zambrano receives 2013 player option if he is first or second in 2011 Cy Young vote or if he finishes in top 4 in 2012 Cy Young vote and is healthy at end of 2012
  This ultimatly may be too rich for Jeff’s blood esp since he passed on surer Lackey
  Talk about your backend loading…
  • theonlymaskman December 31, 2009 at 6:57 pm

    I agree those are pretty big numbers and probably too rich a meal for JW. The Z rumor may be just that, nohing more than just words without substance. Neverhteless, the Mets need to add pitching. Omar needs to work really hard to pull off a deal that works. Otherwise we settle for another go around with Pelf as the #2. Then we look for improvement over Maine and Ollie. Washburn might fit in as the #3 if we can’t turn up a #2.
    • METS62FAN January 1, 2010 at 12:39 pm

      Mask, It’s being reported the Cubs would’ve taken Igawa from NYY in a Zambrano deal. most likely the high contract influenced “the Intern” to peer Spouth toward Atlanta’s Vazquez. It wouldn’t be unreasonable to think they’d be more inclined to kick in cash for a better ret’n like Castillo+F-Mart+Holt or somesuch
      I tend to feel Maine may be a better #2 option out of our existing assets than Pelf albeit Maine’s gotta get over his fear of reinjury.
      • Anthony January 1, 2010 at 1:15 pm

        Who’s your source about the Cubs willing to take Igawa? Right now 3 questions have to be answered before a trade can be done. 1. Do the mets have the pieces the cubs want to make a deal? 2. Would Big Z waive his no trade to go to the Mets? Lastly, and most importanly will Fred and Jeff Wilpon allow another 18 million dollars to be added to this year’s payroll because we already know they will not go over the luxury tax.
• kevin December 31, 2009 at 11:16 am

  Joel Pineiro isn’t a great option, but he just might be the healthiest and best option left. The fact is we should have gone after Randy Wolf who is far more consistent and better too. I’d even say Marquis qould have been a better way to go.
• Chicho December 31, 2009 at 1:04 pm

  I would rather have the Mets stay with the pitchers they have instead of signing Pinerio. I don’t know why anyone will give Pinerio 3 years if the year before he had a 5.15 ERA and in 06 his ERA was 6.36. I won’t be shocked if Pelfrey, Maine and Niese pitch better than Pinerio this year.
  • Bob L December 31, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    If we expect to ‘contend’ in 2010, we cannot believe that going into the year with our current rotation will allow us that luxury. i totally agree on nixing Pineiro, but we MUST add quality and depth to the rotation. Unfortunately, i think our ‘long shot’ chances of getting Zambrano just got ‘longer’ with the Cubs/Byrd news.
    At this point, in the F/A mkt, the 2 best options, in my view, are Sheets and Garland. Arroyo, maybe Correia via trades.
    • Chicho December 31, 2009 at 2:12 pm

      I agree we need one or two pitchers but Pinerio should not be a pitcher that we should consider. I like the pitchers we have better than Pinerio.

      I don’t know about Garland when I watch him it seems like he is not a very good pitcher. I know he gives you innings and all that but is he any better than what we have?

      I would only want Arroyo if it helps us get Phillips. I feel the same way about Arroyo I don’t know if he is any better than what we have.

      I think what we should do is sign both Bedard and Sheets. If we sign them I would view them as one pitcher. Because they will both most likely get hurt for half the year and if they both get 15 starts it would be like adding a #2 pitcher.
      • METS62FAN January 1, 2010 at 11:58 am

        Chich, yr post re. Pelf& Niese hasn’t hit yet; but I’d have to say by my obserations there isn’t a significant enough sample to know what iese will ultimatly bring to the table. Pelfrey, in my opinion is all screwed up by changing his approach; Peterson f’d him up by doing his program, designed to make avg. pitcher’s better & tend to make effective power pitchers mediocre. Rick’s program starts with an assumption that the pitcher will most often give up ‘contact’ & his best result would be controlling that contact(grounders) this works exceptionally well unless the pitcher’s strength is non-contact. for instance a Barry Zito, Mark Mulder,Tim Hudson who typically do not maintain 95+ velocity are going to get hit; if they control that contact into groundballs & weak off-field shots, they’ll be more successful; a Doc Gooden would absolutly deteriorate by allowing more contact that he would normally, controlled or otherwise. Pelfrey in college was a ‘big hoss’ that relied upon power to extricate himself from trouble. Peterson emphasized reduction in power offerings & increased sinkers inducing gb. both Maine & Pelf relied heavily on the K as opposed to the gb pre-peterson. both have struggled with the mental battle between his teachings & their natural tensencies whilst in a jam. Therefore more bb due to trying to force the unnatual. Warthen, on the other hand espouses to “LOVE A HIGH HARD ONE”. Pelf’s mistake in transitioning back was to virtually discard the Perterson sinker in favor of his old trusted straight heater resulting in more Ks as well as HRs. Pelf, more than anyone needed a catcher to insist upon the sinker on occasions forcing Pelf to meld the approaches rather than choose between them. Maine’s difficulties usually came from his natural ‘RISER’ peterson always preached the ‘STRING’ at the knees; but ask yourself what the result will be when a naturally rising fastball is thrown to the knees? u got it, WHEELHOUSE!,BABY” Maine was injured during the backend of ’08 & most of ’09 benefitting little from any contact with Warthen. John showed much promise with the WARTHEN EFFECT, WALKING NONE IN HIS LAST START OF ’09.
        I also believe much of the team’s disatisfaction with Schneider’s gamecalling revolved around his deferential demeanor to pitcher’s chosen situational approach. I expect no such passivity from Molina. Too often Pelf chose heat over sink facing a Howard or Utley in a tight, late spot.
        Jon Heyman’s repoerted Cubs are motivated to move Zambrano. there are reports they would have accepted Igawa from NYY; but I believe the Cash issue may have been reason NYY turned to Vazquez. Zambrano’s acquisition likely too costly for NYM as is per COTS:
        5 years/$91.5M (2008-12), plus 2013 vesting option

        signed extension with Cubs 8/17/07
        $5M signing bonus
        08:$15M, 09:$17.75M, 10:$17.875M, 11:$17.875M, 12:$18M, 13:$19.25M vesting player option

        full no-trade clause
        award bonus: $75,000 for All Star selection

        Zambrano receives 2013 player option if he is first or second in 2011 Cy Young vote or if he finishes in top 4 in 2012 Cy Young vote and is healthy at end of 2012

        I BELIEVE THE CuBS MAY BE MORE EASILY PERSUADED TO KICK IN $ WITH A MORE VALUED RETURN (CASTILLO+F-MART+A GOOD PITCHING PROSPECT)
        • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 12:22 pm

          Good analysis, Mets62 of Pelfrey/Maine vis Peterson/Warthen! Let’s hope they turn it around. Meanwhile, we still need an innings clogger or an #2 type. With Cubs signing Byrd, reduces their need for Pagan, who i thought they liked. i hope we can get Zambrano…probably means Pelfrey goes as part of the package…which would be fine i think. Z turns 29 in June, still young.
          The Cubs would’ve taken Igawa from NYY?! Maybe Ollie?!!
• sarge December 31, 2009 at 5:17 pm

  1-Piniero for 1 year with a vesting option if he meets certain numbers and stays healthy, no way is he a $15 million/yr pitcher, only in his mind.
  2-Sheets still has not pitched to show if he can last more than 10 pitches.
  Incentive laden deal for him, no $12 million, yeah right Ben!
  3-Bring in Garland and Davis or Washburn or Bedard with a base salary with incentives.
  4-I would be more than happy with either Arroyo or Harang thou prefer Arroyo.
  I believe that of Pelf, Maine, Ollie and Niese plus Nieve that at least two of these will step up and if not let Niese or Nieve battle them all for all the spots plus if we bring in Garland and/or another starter thru FA then the abundance of starters will allow competition and depth for Mets.
• Bob L December 31, 2009 at 5:40 pm

  Chicho, Arroyo and Garland are both better than Maine, Perez, Pelfrey in terms of win ‘consistency’ in recent years. Arroyo has averaged over 13 wins in past 5 years; Garland (although skewed by 2 great 18 win years) 14 in that time. Perez 9 wins over 3 years; Maine 10 over 3; and Pelfrey 11.5 over 2 years.
  Arroyo, in particular, would give us consistent production and innings. i support a Sheets/Bedard combo, but remember those guys would not go more than 5 – 6 IP on average, and drain our bullpen by July.
  • Bob L December 31, 2009 at 5:52 pm

    Arroyo 12.8 wins over 6 years, double-digits in 5 of past 6years; Garland 13.3 wins over EIGHT years; double-digit wins in all 8 years.
    • Chicho December 31, 2009 at 10:30 pm

      I agree that Arryo and Garland are more consistent but are they going to make the Mets any better? Maine and Perez won less games because of injuries.

      I think if Sheets and Bedard are healthy they will give you more than 5 or 6 innings.
      • METS62FAN January 1, 2010 at 10:01 am

        Chich, you’d need to use an 18pt font on that “if” regarding health of Sheets/Bedard in order to put it in proper perspective. I still believe our #2 SP will not come out of F/A; but a deal perhaps Meche from KC or Zambrano from Cubs. I know nothing; but I’ve a gut feeling Omar was somewhat productive during the myriad of meetings he had during both the GM & Winter Meetings. If it is the “Z-Man” it would likely necessitate Chicago kicking in $ as Zambrano’s deal was heavily backloaded.
      • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 10:09 am

        injuries are part of the game and part of an assessment factor on a player’s consistency and FACT is Arroyo and Garland both blow away our guys on that basis over a lot of years. And ‘yes’, i think either Arroyo or Garland would make us better because of their hetere-to-date capability to log 200+ IP year-in and year-out and compile wins in dble-digit ranges over those years. Yeah, they’d make us better.
        And i love the upside of both Sheets and Bedard, but it’s unrealistic to expect either guy to log in a bunch of innings in the 1st year back from a series of years of injuries. We’d be mighty lucky if they do that.
        But, yeah, given the upside of those guys, i’d take a shot…but be very wary of the drain they’d likely inflict on our bullpen.
        A very long-winded way of saying Arroyo and/or Garland are safer plays that also make us better.
        • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 11:06 am

          Bob, why can’t pelfrey boounce back and pitch 200 innings this year? and why can’t Niese trun into a reliable starter. I won’t be surprised if Niese and Pelfrey have better years than Arroyo and Garland. In 08 Pelfrey pitched better than Arroyo and Garland

          Perez can also bounce back and have a good year. I don’t know why everyone is saying he is going to be awful. He was pitching hurt this year and he should be back healthy this year. In 07 and 08 he pitched better than Arryo and Garland. Perez outpitched Arroyo and Garland 2 of the past three years. and this year Perez did awful becuase of injury.

          so if you look at it that way they don’t make us any better.

          Mets 62, I want the Mets to get Zambrano but I don’t know if they will trade him.
  • METS62FAN January 1, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    Bob, I’m not convinced Sheets is capable of 100 IP effectively; if he was why on Earth would he refuse to throw a side audition session? If he could prove his health, he would’ve automatically become the #2 choice behind Lackey in this weak mkt. It’s what we haven’t seen that scares me the most re. BIG BEN. could it be the clock has stopped keeping good time?lol
    • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 12:10 pm

      i agree Mets62, Sheets carries mucho health risks. No way he gets close to 12mm/yr from anybody. But if he does ‘showcase’ for teams and he seems healthy, he’s worth a shot, because of the huge upside. But again, it’s very likely he’ll be on strict ‘pitch’ counts, so i do think he be a drain on the bullpen in 2010….which is why i think we need either an Ace like Zambrano (highly doubt we cwn get him), or Meche, whom i think might be pliable from KC. But they signed Brian Anderson, so i don’t know how much they still want/need Pagan.
• Bob L January 1, 2010 at 11:30 am

  C’mon…you picked the 2 worst years of Arroyo’s career, but ignore fact that he’s pitched 200+ innings in past 5 years; and has won 77 games past 6 years vs 50 for Perez. C’mon.
  • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 2:17 pm

    Fine I will use this year for Arroyo. Arroyo 15-13 3.84 ERA 220 innings. Pelfrey in 08 13-11 3.72 ERA 200 innings. Perez in 08 10-7 4.22 ERA 194 innings. Arroyo is not much better. Again I won’t be surprised if Pelfrey,Perez and Niese pitch better than Arroyo.

    Wins don’t tell you everyting. Steve Trachsel won 15 games for the Mets in 06 does that make him a good pitcher?

    You also make it seem like Pelfrey or Perez don’t pitch many innings. Pelfrey still pitched 184 innings even in a bad year. I wouldn’t call that draining the bullpen. In 08 Perez pitched 194 innings.

    Sheets could pitch alot innings this year as well. I don’t think that coming off surgery will hurt him at all in fact it might even help him. Carpenter was coming of surgery last year and look at the year he had. he would have reached 200 innings if wasn’t for a freak injury.
• Bob L January 1, 2010 at 2:35 pm

  Pelfrey’s got ‘behind the ear’ issues; those are a ‘process’ to get rid of, if they ever do. Maybe, another year of Warthen’s ‘blow-it-by-them + his sinker in a good mix might do it. i dunno.
  If Arroyo can give us 12 – 13 wins in 2010 and log 200+ innings, ‘that’ is indeed a good year.
  It’s the combo of IP and wins that does it for me…200+ innings/yr takes the strain off the bullpen. Our bullpen has struggled (a nice word) last few years and one reason has been over-use.
  In fact, that’s why Parnell opted out of winter ball; he was drained.
  i like Sheets too. We should take a shot, but aside from 2008, he hasn’t been close to 200IP+ since 2004. i’d brace for a good 5 – 6 IP, which i’d take in a heartbeat, but too many of those guys drain the pen (Maine, Pelfrey, Perez).
  • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 5:10 pm

    Pelfrey pitched 200 innings in 08 and he pitched 184 innings last year how is he draining the bullpen? Perez is expected to make a full recovery so he should give you 170-190 innings going by 07 and 08.

    The bullpen was overused last year because we had an awful pitching staff at the end of the year. In 08 the bullpen wasn’t overused it was awful. and in 06 and 07 it was overused because we had a terrible pitching staff.

    To me Arroyo doesn’t make any sense unless he can help us get Phillips. He is a back of the rotation starter we already have too many of them so why get another one? The pitchers we have may even be better than Arroyo. I will take my chances with Niese,Nieve,Pelfrey,Maine and Perez instead of getting Arroyo.
  • METS62FAN January 2, 2010 at 4:57 pm

    Bob, I believe the truest statement u’ve said is “I dunno” not criticizing; but a feeling we all have incl NYM franchise. one other thing that’s certain is they weren’t happy with the catching situation last yr, both coaching & actual as the total decimation of that area shows. Another certainty is the veritable youth of the rotation behind Santana:
    Pelfrey 25/26
    Perez 28/29
    Maine 28/29
    Niese 23/24
    Nieve 27/28

    i certainly think it’s worth a shot at improvement that a strong established catcher, Molina, can bring with his vast experience at leading young pitchers to success in both LAA & SF. Those young pitchers have also had to struggle with dealing with tumultuous change in both field mngt & pc philosophy. Not an insignificant consideration. pitchers who can hump it up at 95+ are not falling off trees in the backyard.
    • Bob L January 2, 2010 at 7:00 pm

      i dunno what pieces it takes to get another starter(s) via the trade route, but i do know that it would be highly risky to go into the season not having added any starter(s) to the rotation. i say this because EACH and EVERY ARM in the rotation has big Q-Marks attached to it. By the odds, we cannot and should not expect that Johan AND Pelfrey AND Maine AND Perez AND Niese can ALL rebound AND have great seasons. Hence, i believe that we MUST be proactive and add to the rotation. If we do, at the least, we’ll have depth and perhaps some trade pieces for future necessary acquisitions.Pitching is typically a KEY and RARE commodity at the mid-season trading deadline.
      Wouldn’t it be nice, for once, to have pieces to trade?
• Bob L January 1, 2010 at 5:24 pm

  i can’t count the times he either blew up in the 1st/2nd inning last year ot struggled through 5 – 6 innings; Maine’s a disaster for the bullpen (they probably dread the days he pitches); and Ollie is an enigma.
  Arroyo has produced 77 wins, or 12.8 wins/yr over past 6 years…more than most pitchers in the game over that time frame.
  And you give me ‘what ifs’…fuhgeddaboudit. You’re draining me like your desired rotation would drain our bullpen in 2010!
  • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    Critical to innings pitched are wins…Arroyo would give us both…as a #3 guy; we still need a #2. We must add quality and depth to this rotation. You cannot expect every one of our Q-marks to rebound in 2010. i think that’d be foolish.
  • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 5:42 pm

    I agree that Maine doesn’t pitch many innings but Pelfrey does. He pitched 200 innings in 08 and 184 in 09. Perez is an enigma but he was hurt last year and in 07 and 08 he pitched alot better than Arroyo.

    What do you mean by I’m giving you what ifs? The facts are Arroyo is a back of the rotation starter what ever way you look at it. He will pitch 200 innings and give you an ERA around 4. We already have pitchers who can do that.

    I don’t look at wins when it comes to pitchers because it is a stat that they can’t always control.
    • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 5:49 pm

      I’m not saying all of our pitchers will bounce back but I think that there is a very good chance that one or two of them will be a very good starter. They are all talented and some are still very young.

      Every rotation has question marks how many teams have great fourth and fifth starters?
    • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 6:19 pm

      we don’t have pitchers otehr than Johan that give us innings AND wins on a consistent basis. The ‘what-ifs’ are expecting Perez and Maine to return to form AND Pelfrey to recall what made him a stud prospect. My point is to expect that is to expect the improbable to happen. Whereas, you cannot deny that Arroyo (and Marquis who ‘got away) give their teams innings AND wins.
      And Chich, we have no ‘reliable’ pitcher beyond Santana in the rotation. How can you deny that?
      • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 7:20 pm

        I not saying we have reliable starters but what I’m saying is that between Maine,Perez,Niese,Nieve,and Pelfrey one or two of them will have a big year. The problem I have with Arroyo is that I don’t know if he is any better than what we have. I know he pitches more innings I know he has more wins in his career but I think the pitchers that we have could do better than him.

        Why can’t we expect Pelfrey to return to form? Yes he had a bad year but that doesn’t mean he will do bad this year. As far as I know he is still the same pitcher. He is still young and still has great talent.

        I have never liked the idea of leaving the rotation as it is and I still don’t like it. but what I’m saying is that Arroyo,Marquis and Pinerio are not any better than what we have. Maybe they are little better but not by much. If those pitchers were the Mets only choices I would leave the rotation as it is. I would want them to get a number 2 starter but that seems unlikely. Arroyo in my oppinion is just an innings eater. I don’t think the Mets need an innings eater. They need a number 2 and signing both Sheets and Bedard could give them a number 2 while Arroyo would just give you innings.
        • Bob L January 1, 2010 at 8:25 pm

          Arroyo would give us innings and wins. We keep going ’round and ’round on this. i think it highly improbable that more than 1 of Pelfrey, Maine, Perez can rebound this year and produce a solid year. The odds are mighty long against us that can happen, because of the nature of the ailments of all 3 guys. Perez is e=working out this winter; great, butthe guy is just a puzzle and actually on the lazy side (and chocked full of 36mm macaroons); Maine may be ‘done’ as a pitcher because of his injuries and his inability to get out of the 1st inning or far behind the 5th inning; Pelfrey has great raw talent, but a scout said he ‘looked lost on the mound at the end of last year. He of all of them MUST have solid IF defense behind him.
          Can you say, at this point, that we have solid IF defense? It’s a very very tentative ‘maybe’ on that score. Castillo made 11 errors and only 71 DP’s last year; that is atrocious. Hopefully Reyes is healthy; hopefully Murphy improves at 1B. Hopefully Wright cuts down on errant throws.
          i view Arroyo as necessary insurance, as a #3, to give us IP and stability down the rotation. i agree we still need a #2. i hope that’s Z. But to expect Pelfrey to be our #2 this year defies the odds of probability.
        • Chicho January 1, 2010 at 11:05 pm

          I don’t think we will ever agree on this. I think since we have 5 starters who are talented we should give them a chance and see what they have this year. Unless we can get a legit number two like Zambrano Or someone like sheets/Bedard because they are great pitchers and they will be had cheaply.
        • theonlymaskman January 2, 2010 at 12:06 am

          Chicho, The current rotation just does not have what it takes to be competitive in the division. A minimum of one addition, and preferably 2, is required. We simply cannot stand pat if we want to be over .500 this season. We can get by with 1 addition if Nieve turns out to be on his game, but I have no confidence at all that we can get by depending on Maine, Perez, and Niese. With luck, Pelfrey will be better and will be fine as the #3, but who is the #2? The rotation cannot continue in its current state.
        • Chicho January 2, 2010 at 11:59 am

          I agree but thats not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is I would rather keep the rotation we have instead of signing Pinerio or Garland. I think we need antoher pitcher but Pinerio,Garland and Arroyo are not going to make our rotation any better.
      • METS62FAN January 2, 2010 at 4:39 pm

        So, Bob, are u saying we should trade four starting pitchers u believe worthless & get what in return? You seem to be proposing they sign 4 F/A to back Johan. Can I remind u of How many years it took to build the rotations that won in ’69 & ’86? Forget what the NYY did. Our ownership has holes in those perceived deep pockets. While I believe there is a diversification of Core industries behind the ownership of both NYY & Bosox. Sterling Enterprises is our Ownership’s Core. The Real Esatate Industry(real strong at present. no?)FRED WILPON,SOL KATZ,JEFF WILPON= STERLING ENTERPRISES. Too inbred.
        • Bob L January 2, 2010 at 6:50 pm

          No, Mets62, i am just saying that we need to get 2 more starters either through F/A and/or trades to gives us depth, because we cannot go into the season with so many Q-marks in the rotation.
• METS62FAN January 2, 2010 at 8:55 am

  Mask, your last post was unreplyable; but I disagree & believe the Phillies pitching is overly hyped since I do not believe a rotation of
  HALLADAY
  HAMELS
  BLANTON
  HAPP
  MOYER
  supported by a bullpen consisteng of:
  LIDGE
  MADSON
  DURBIN
  ESCALONA
  ZzAGURSKI
  NAYLOR
  CARPENTER
  Is as formidable as the Chicken Little crowd will have us believe. While Halladay is certainly formidable, I would consider a mastchup Vs. Santana a definite “PUSH” if only judging on pitching prowess & not lineup consideration & geography of play.
  To me, Hamels is the most overhyped, over glorified SP in the entire NL. While I take nothing away from his superlative ’08 season, the mediocrity of his ’09 (10-11 on a league champion with considerable suport)campaign certainly belies his consideration as a 1A type pitcher
  “Once more the frailty of the Phl rotation is further weakened by a less than illustrous bullpen.
  • theonlymaskman January 2, 2010 at 9:31 am

    62, Unfortunately, I must disagree with your conclusion. Your criticism of the Phillies rotation comes essentially from a down year from Hamels. However, we have down years and more from Pelfrey, Maine, and Perez. At the least, Pelfrey’s downturn is as significant to the Mets as Hamels’ is to the Phillies. You can make a case of Halladay and Santana being equally capable (although Santana IS reurning from surgery). You can toss Hamels and Pelfrey as essentially equal as well. But there the comparison ends. Blanton does not have the shoulder weakness concerns of Maine (along with with his innings and pitch count limitations) and is clearly the better pitcher. Happ is an upcoming young player who gets the job done as compeared to Ollie who seems to never to be able to get the job done any longer. Finally, Moyer is a tireless horse that is more than adequate in the #5 slot as opposed to the Mets #5 which is yet to be determined. On top of all that, you write off the Phillies pen all too easily. Although Lidge has been suspect last year on a down year, so has KROD. Madson and Durbin are fine relievers. Who are our complimentary guys? The Mets setup man is in Limbo. Parnell needs a lot of work to get where he needs to be. Stokes is good but erratic. Eternal Pedro is the best of the lot, but that’s just one guy that we can count on as generally reliable. In conclusion, I believe the 2 pens to be tossups and the Phillies rotation to be markedly better than the Mets. If we are to compete, Omar needs to do something about the rotation (of course with Jeffie’s blessing, HA Ha on that). JMHO.
• METS62FAN January 2, 2010 at 10:27 am

  Mask, your last post hasn’t shown yet; but i’ll agree your points make a debate on the rotational matchup between phl & nym debatable & a matter of opinion. as such u make my point, there isn’t a clear cut favorite between the 2 and circumstacially the baseball gods will u;ltimatly determine the more effective. There are too many that dismiss our 2-3-4-5 as suspect; but i consider two factors to be in their ultimate favor in changing direction from past 1) injury returns not from major(shoulder,elbow soft tissue issues) and for the first time having a full spring & season workingf with Warthen to potentially disentangle the confusion Peterson wrought. 2) age:
  Pelfrey 25/26
  Perez 28/29
  Maine 28/29
  Niese 23/24
  Nieve 27/28
  I won’t argue against acquiring a better than “innings eater” caliber sp; but I certainly believe the pitch to controlled contact method hindered most of these guys & we’re in the midst of a tedious transition to Warthen’s, “I love the high hard one” philosophy. considering Pelf,Oliie,John are all capable of sustaining 95+ puts them in an elite class with an ability that can’t be taught, it’s always been a matter of mechanics & approach & not raw ability which is promising. Altering the philosophical beliefs espoused by a staff is not a simple, easy, quick fix. it takes time & patience. it’s obvious that Maine & Perez have had the least availability/exposure to Warthen due to circumstances of injury & WBC. I believe with his first full spring in front of his first full seasion with the entire rotation Warthen will prove out to be a positive influence that finally gets our youngish pitchers to use their natural talent ratrher than alter it.
  NB. Santana’s surgery(bone chips) is same as one preceding his CY Young season!
• METS62FAN January 3, 2010 at 10:50 am

  Response to Bob L’s unreplyable comment Re. Need for tradeable pitching depth.
  Bob, like most, I almost missed the very subtle signings of 2 such low risk gambles for a ‘depth’ level only, Dickey & Escobar were both SP signed for pen work; but could ultimatly compete for a rotational slot in ST. Albeit, not a noticable, innings-eating inking; but certainly a rudimentary potential on the scope of a Figueroa addition. Who knows? with the suprising initial high cost of Wolves, etc. I believe something unreported is certainly in the works, otherwise, we let a Marquis pass for no apparent reason. I would have to think the countless early hours Omar spent beating bushes will eventually prove out before ST. a Meche? or somesuch is not beyond possibility or probability, it’s within a character that pulled off many stealth deals over past 4 yrs, Benson trade for Julio& Maine, Julio deal for ‘Duque, Canmmy deal for Nady+.Milledge deal for Schneider,Church, Church deal for Francouer. search all the rumor sites u want as I usually do & none of these ever appear prior to announcement who we’ll acqiuire is unknown & unfathomable as the nature of a stealth deal; but I’m confident one will occur or at least is in the works.
  • Bob L January 3, 2010 at 11:04 am

    You make good points, Mets62, but ‘time’ is getting short and ‘supply’ has dwindled on the F/A market. i hope you are right and a ‘stealth’ deal for a Meche or Arroyo, or a Z, or Correia is ‘in the works’.
• Joel Pineiro Signs with the Los Angeles Angels « Cheap Seat Chronicles January 20, 2010 at 9:43 pm

  [...] his market never really developed and it seemed for weeks that he was destined to land in either New York with the Mets or on the other side of Los Angeles with the [...]