Comments on: Hold Your Horses, Emaus Doesn’t Have The Job Yet

By: Metstheory22

Metstheory22 — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:00:16 +0000

So in other words Iz,
They can hold unto him all year long or not. They can’t send him down to minors. They can offer him back, trade for his rights or trade him to another team.

By: METS62FAN

METS62FAN — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:08:23 +0000

Bayonne, Murph’s on the bench or he’s gone off waivers as he has no options left just like Misch,Hernandez,Evans & Emaus it’s stick or likely gone. My money’s on Utility,bench designation for this reliasble LH bat(Murph). This entire article is a day off as I believe Emaus put all doubts aside yesterday, both defensively & offensively, tough DP praised by TC, cut off a run early pegged the ball to Thole, then recovered to cover 2B to nearly get the advancing runner. 4 for 4 with HR + excellent defensive refexes is ALL he needed to do to disprove this sorta conjrcture.

By: Metstheory22

Metstheory22 — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:31:28 +0000

Where is it that I say they can send him down to minors.
I said return him to team.
If chosen in the Rule 5 draft, a player must be kept on the selecting team’s 25-man major league roster for the entire season after the draft—he may not be optioned or designated to the minors. The selecting team may, at any time, waive the Rule 5 draftee. If a Rule 5 draftee clears waivers by not signing with a new MLB team, he must be offered back to the original team, effectively canceling the Rule 5 draft choice. Once a Rule 5 draftee spends an entire season on his new team’s 25-man roster, his status reverts to normal and he may be optioned or designated for assignment.

To prevent the abuse of the Rule 5 draft, the rule also states that the draftee must be active for at least 90 days. This keeps teams from drafting players, then placing them on the disabled list for the majority of the season. For example, if a Rule 5 draftee was only active for 67 days in his first season with his new club, he must be active for an additional 23 games in his second season to satisfy the Rule 5 requirements.

Any player chosen in the Rule 5 draft may be traded to any team while under the Rule 5 restrictions, but the restrictions transfer to the new team. If the new team does not want to keep the player on its 25-man roster for the season, he must be offered back to the team of which he was a member when chosen in the draft.
Teams can return player ANYTIME during the year.

By: t agee

t agee — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:55:03 +0000

Nobody’s right all the time. We all “misremember” once in a while. At least you man up and not squirm away. Others could take a lesson from you. Usually we get the old “Yes, I was a tiny tiny bit wrong on this little miniscule thing but you were wrong on EVERYTHING else.”

No one gets it right all time, no big deal. Appreciate the grown up attitude though.

By: Des

Des — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:37:15 +0000

Metsr1, thanks for providing the input which apparently has eluded all the Google searches I’ve done. So it’s time to get back to the positive feelings and for all Mets fans to root home a competitive team, maybe even a winner. Let’s see if we can improve on a 79-83 season and the 18GB.

Cheers.

By: Metsr1

Metsr1 — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:26:37 +0000

Des. If there is one thing about me that I can honestly say is that, when I’m wrong, I’ll tell you. I repsonded to this question in a past blog, but I guess you didn’t see it. I was in Florida two weeks ago visiting my parents (didn’t catch a game sadly). My parents aren’t tech savy and don’t own a PC. I had to listen to the WFAN on my smart phone. One of the replacement host over the weekend (still don’t know which one) began to speak about what Reyes said about Murphy’s positioning. It was a quick statement replying to a caller. I ran with it. Only after I mentioned it here and you got me, I did some research. Found an article that said that Murphy driffted too close to Wright on a relay of a gapper. My sense is that the FAN host read that and butchched it with the caller. Silly me, I ran with that brief statement. Anyway, there it is. I screwed the pooch and fessed up. That’s my style. Hopefully that answers your question. You called me out and I was indeed wrong.

By: Pete

Pete — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 02:53:18 +0000

Emaus will be the Mets Opening day 2B man.

By: Des

Des — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 02:51:45 +0000

Frankly I don’t know what you’re talking about. Calm down and be a bit more dispassionate. You still seem to be in ‘beat up Murphy’ mode. This whole episode reminds me more than a bit of Mets2012 doing a number on David Wright.

Finally, where did you hear of the Reyes-Murphy story? I googled it and couldn’t find anything.

By: Even Flow

Even Flow — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:17:17 +0000

Back under the bridge you go.

By: t agee

t agee — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:54:39 +0000

Who said they “decided” not to open with the best guy. Did you see Tejada hit last year? I love defense as much or more than anyone but you simply cannot get so little offensively out of one spot, let alone two or three and have any chance whatsoever to win any games.

.185 BA against RHP shows he has a lot to prove. Let him prove it, THEN bring him up.

Tejada clearly was not the best candidate to start at 2B in 2011.

By: JerryM

JerryM — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:07:46 +0000

I agree with Francis and I think that it was said that Murphy would get some playing time at 2nd base. They will let him give Emaus time off. He is to cover all 3 infield bases.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:59:09 +0000

That’s fair. I’m not as convinced as you seem to be that one of these players is so obviously better than the other that he must be the one to go north immediately and in that context I’d rather the organization keep the greatest number of players available as potential solutions to the problem. That is accomplished by bringing Emaus north and optioning Turner to AAA in my opinion.

By: iz

iz — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 21:54:34 +0000

INCORRECTO…. The have to offer him back any time during the season if they want to send him down. If your theory was correct every team would hold their rule 5 dudes until game 2 and send them down. Now why don’t they do that….?????

By: iz

iz — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 21:51:01 +0000

Its still the same ole story…ZZZZZZZZ.. you still haven’t changed your name mr no doz replacement. BOREING….OLD…WORN OUT…REDUNDANT…..PATHETIC…… Feel bad for the real agee. his name is being humiliated by mr no doz replacement.

By: Metstheory22

Metstheory22 — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:04:23 +0000

Unlike last year where veterans were starting at 1st, 2nd and CF, we have young guys playing. They might need some time to settle down. Whoever plays 2nd needs to get 40 plus games to settle down. Mets can take their time with Brad Emaus to see if he is the answer. They do not have to return him once season starts. He might get 100 plus at bats before they decide what to do with him. They still have Turner in minors getting daily at bats and who knows who becomes available during season.

By: darth minaya

darth minaya — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:47:05 +0000

Reese Havens is missing the most important tool: the ability to stay healthy.

He cannot be counted to be part of the future plans until he shows he can play a full season.

By: darth minaya

darth minaya — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:36:01 +0000

Emaus put up a .874 OPS across two levels last year. That’s pretty damned great for a second baseman.

Now, there are a couple of things to keep in mind with that:

1) He played last year at age 24. That is not young for either the Eastern League or PCL. Age relative-to-league matters.

2) He slugged .495 at AAA Las Vegas. That is fantastic for a middle infielder. However, PCL/desert air factor in.

My point is that he’s not having as bad a spring as the numbers would suggest, and unless he is a complete sieve with the glove (haven’t seen enough of him to know), then he’s worth a shot for 20 games/100 at-bats at the start of the year to see what you have. If he’s completely overmatched, then offer him back to Toronto, or try to work out a deal to keep him in the system.

By: t agee

t agee — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:59:25 +0000

The year he was drafted he had 100 AB’s in Brooklyn. The following year he had 400 in the FSL (A+) and hit .247. 2010 was 65 in A+ and 75 in AA.

Overall his BA looks real good and his OB and SLG look great but again 650 AB’s have left him behind his draft class which ordinarily wouldn’t be considered ready until at least this year (except by us)

His D is not, and may never be above average but at 24 should be more than adequate especially if he hits like he has in A+ and AA the way he did last year in about 25% of a full season.

If Reece gets the full year at AA that he needs then whatever we go through with at 2B up here is worthwhile.

If only we had thought that way back in 2007-2008 off season and waited for the right guy rather than just whoever was available.

By: any

any — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:54:09 +0000

He had surgery to shave down his rib tip (what supposedly led to the ongoing oblique issue) about 6 weeks before ST. So,, he was taking it easy due to that, so no, not included in the competition.

Given that he missed the last 1/2 of 2010, I would assume they would not consider him starting with the Mets in any case.

Now, going down for the Wright/Davis promotion plan, that is what I think can happen.

By: Mr North Jersey

Mr North Jersey — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:31:56 +0000

“It is discouraging that the one and only position battle we had at Mets camp this year, was a more a case of the least suckiest player gets the job, rather than the best man wins.”

I can understand such a statement when you are looking at Emaus, Murphy, Hernandez and Hu as choices for 2b. I still feel that the simple process of getting past Castillo is a step in the right direction. In my opinion the names you see are not meant to be long term solutions at 2b.

With Castillo gone the auditions for who will be the 2b will begin hopefully if Tejada is as good as some speculate or for that matter Havens then they soon may be playing 2b for the Mets. Who knows maybe as soon as June.