30
2012
MMO Roundtable: Andres Torres To Unseat Kirk Nieuwenhuis In Center Field
An article by 
The best thing about a Mets fan site as diversified as ours, is a fair representation and good cross-section of fan sentiment on many of the hot topics we cover extensively at MMO. Today, we tackle the ongoing debate between the hot-hitting, slick fielding rookie Kirk Nieuwenhuis versus journeyman Andres Torres who is healthy again and returns to the Mets lineup tonight against Houston.
Should Andres Torres replace Kirk Nieuwenhuis in centerfield?
Joe D. – I haven’t seen such dazzling defensive plays in centerfield like this since Carlos Beltran last played center field for us before his knee surgery. Check that because Beltran was so graceful and gifted his plays never looked as jaw dropping as Kirk’s does. But this kid excites me and as long as he keeps hitting and fielding like he has, there’s no way he should be removed from his current role on the team. His enthusiasm and gritty play has become contagious. What team in their right mind would even consider changing anything right now in center field? Leave it to the Mets to give precedence to a journeyman outfielder who was thrown into a trade a night before he was going to be non-tendered by the Giants. If the Mets were running the show back in the day, Wally Pipp would have replaced Lou Gehrig upon his return from the DL.
Tyler M. – No. Kirk so far has played extremely well, and he’ll be the long-term centerfielder for the New York Mets. If they want to have Torres in the lineup, while Bay is gone he should play left field. Kirk shouldn’t be kicked out of centerfield in this situation.
Brandon B. - Kirk Nieuwenhis has been a godsend for the Mets. Nobody expected Kirk to play the game the way he has. He’s been hitting the ball very well and he has had his moments defensively. However, when you have situations come up like this, its going to be tough no matter what. I feel that Kirk deserves to remain in CF. The guy is a step above Torres in center-field overall. He has the ability to hit for power, and he is a step above Torres defensively.
Gregg H. – Torres-Nieuwenhuis is a real interesting situation. Torres should be given a chance to play, but in his absence Nieuwenhuis did a real good job. For the time being I’d slide Captain Kirk to left field and see what Torres has to offer. A fourth outfielder will also help foster a little competition.
Jim M. – Why does the organization feel that it needs to be loyal to Andres Torres? He’s done nothing so far and Kirk has been great, offensively and defensively. Leave Kirk in center. Actually though, I’m OK with having Torres leadoff and bat Kirk maybe seventh.
XtreemIcon – My call would be to play Torres in LF, but I don’t have much of an issue giving Torres the leadoff spot for now. I don’t think Nieuwenhuis cares a whole lot where he hits, nor will he let it affect him. I’d give Torres a short leash, though.
Jessep – Andres Torres to bounce Kirk Nieuwenhuis out of center field and lead-off spot? Is it the right call? Not sure. I think you gotta give Torres a shot here. If he’s a better defensive CF than Kirk, then putting Kirk in LF just makes the overall defense better. Give him a chance, but have a short leash.
Joe S. – Neither players are prototypical lead off hitters although Kirk does seem to have better discipline. Too much concern is placed on where a hitter hits. Kirk needs at bats, period. As to positions, Kirk needs to stay in center.
Dan V. – It’s tough. Torres is still a gold glove caliber Center Fielder, so I could be alright with the defensive move, but the lead-off spot I’m not so sure. Nieuwenhuis will help at the bottom of the order, especially with Ike still not hitting. Terry needs to have a quick trigger finger should Torres struggle at the top. We can not afford to have an easy out in the lead-off spot.
About the Author: Joe DeCaro
I'm a lifelong Mets fan who loves writing and talking about the Amazins' 24/7. From the Miracle in 1969 to the magic of 1986, and even the near misses in '73 and '00, I've experienced it all - the highs and the lows. I started Mets Merized Online in 2005 to feed my addiction. Follow me on Twitter @metsmerized.
97 Comments + Add Comment
NL East Standings
| Team | W | L | Pct. | GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braves | 42 | 30 | .583 | - |
| Phillies | 35 | 37 | .486 | 7.0 |
| Nationals | 34 | 36 | .486 | 7.0 |
| Mets | 27 | 40 | .403 | 12.5 |
| Marlins | 22 | 48 | .314 | 19.0 |
Last updated: 06/19/2013
Recent Comments
- Judge Holden: on Dillon Gee Has Pitched Himself Back Into The Rotation, But So Has Hefner: He keeps his spot in the rotation...
- ImaginaryFigment: on Wilmer Flores: It’s Time For Another MLB Debut: Because Lagares unlike Valdespin is not under...
- Met Maniac: on Last Night We Saw A Big Chunk Of “The Plan”: Actually Alex was here with me and...
- Connor O'Brien: on Last Night We Saw A Big Chunk Of “The Plan”: Sabermetrics people are just as much baseball...
- Corporal Klegg: on Last Night We Saw A Big Chunk Of “The Plan”: Alex will be here long after you're...
Latest From Mets Minors
Check Out These Great MLB Links!
Photographs From Gordon Donovan
Fans Follow Us On Twitter!
1333 Fans Like Us On Facebook!
2341 Fans Read Our Feed!
1702 Fans Subscribe via Daily Email!
Historically, you have to go with Torres in CF. As well as Kirk has played, it’s only been a few weeks. Torres has been one of the best defensive CFs in baseball for the last few years. To me him plain CF and Kirk in LF isn’t an issue. It improves team defense and adds more speed and range to the OF.
The leadoff spot in the order is the problematic piece of Torres’ return. Historically, Torres is not a premium leadoff hitter. It’s not like we’re getting Rickey Henderson in his prime leading off. To me, Torres is comfortable in CF, it makes sense to start him there. But a guy returning from the DL, should have to “earn” the leadoff spot. It makes much more sense hitting Torres later especially in light of how great Kirk and Tejada have looked hitting 1-2.
Andres torres is a PO-s.. Leave the kid in.. He’s got what it takes.. Use that bum to be a Defensive replacement and pinch runner.. If, and only If kirk struggles and bay continues to be jason bay you put torres in.. Other than that this guy has done nothing to merit a position in a major league starting position.. this ain’t SF..
I actually agree that Torres is at best a 4th OF and you don’t mess with Kirk just to bring him back. Let Kirk play CF, Torres can play LF and you can have your 5 man rotation giving Duda and Kirk some time off now and then but the bulk of the ones missing games should be Torres, Hairston and Baxter.
‘…the bulk of the ones missing games should be Torres, Hairston and Baxter.’
This. What better year than this to see what we’ve got in these kids coming up?
Captain Kirk is the MAN, leave him in center field.
This is such crap if Collins goes through with this. At first I thought he was just saying it out of some respect to Torres, but now that he’s actually pulling Kirk out of CF it’s absolutely crazy. Batting Torres and his .298 OBP is crazy too. I take back every nice thing I said about Collins if this leads to disaster.
I agree as I said batting Torres leadoff and moving Kirk down to the bottom of the order and giving him less time is something it may take a while for me to get over in terms of Collins.
I fully expect Torres to injure himself again soon, which will render this discussion mute.
This.
Kirk is a pretty good CF. How much CF defense do you need. If it was SS I would say maybe a little more D would be worth it. But these guys are catching fly balls. I just do not think Torres adds much of anything to the lineup. He is not an on base guy and he is not much of a hitter. I suspected that the Pagan trade was really just a dump-this-idiot trade whose prime target was Ramirez for relief. But maybe they think Torres is a valuable piece.
as I said on my Facebook site (metsfanforum) :
The height of stupidity. Maybe it’s just me, but (the future CF) Kirk Nieuwenhuis has been one of the Mets best hitters thus far. So he is going to move to LF to accommodate (the past CF) Andres Torres who hit .221 last year….and then he will SIT to get Scott Hairston in the game?
Not to mention his spectacular catches patrolling CF?
If this makes sense to anyone, please explain it to me!
Terry said after the game last night that he’d like to talk to Torres first but as of then, he was going with Torres in CF, moving Kirk to LF.
I’d actually like to leave Kirk in CF but not sure this is such a big deal right now. Kirk has looked more than competent in CF, which is better than I thought reading some of the scouting reports. If Torres is indeed a plus CF defender and as athletic as Kirk has looked in CF, I’m hoping a move to LF for the time being won’t be all that detrimental.
Regarding the order of the lineup, not sure I like Torres batting lead off. He was only going to bat lead off come start of the season by default, more or less. I’d just assume leave Kirk lead off for now.
The smartest thing the Mets can do is move Torres to left AND have him at the bottom of the lineup. Why would you move the spark plug of your team anywhere else, whether it be in the lineup or in the outfield? Makes absolutely no sense. Torres is NOT a POS. He has something to bring to the table: speed & defense. I’d take him over Hairston in LF for the time being and when Bay returns, have Bay & Torres platoon. The FIRST mistake Torres make in CF, EVERYBODY here will be ragging on the Mets, Collins, and Torres.
This is going to sound sacrilegious here but I have no memory of Carlos Beltran making diving catches like Kirk has, even before surgery. Graceful yes, some really difficult catches yes, but diving catches like that? No.
I think much of that is that Beltran had incredible knowledge of the game and knew exactly which hits he could get to and which ones he couldn’t. His positioning was the best in the game. So in other words Beltran didn’t dive for a lot of balls because he didn’t have to.
That being said, I love what I am seeing from Kirk and no way he should be moved.
I agree that Beltran rarely made that kind of play, but he was so good, that he usually didn’t have to. But, i am sure he made diving stabs on occasion too.
There were a few – not many – for the reasons you all have stated. Beltran was more famous for robbing the HR going over the wall.
Thing with sliding to try and make the catch is you have to know the game situation. If that ball gets by you – especially in the late innings – and it gives the other team the lead, there might not be any coming back from that. Have to know when to pick your spots. Kirk is known for his hard nose play and so far, I’m loving it.
That was a tremendous catch yesterday. I thought for sure there was no way anyone was getting to it.
The thing about that is as Kirk gets more experienced and I know this is down the road but if he does become the Mets CFer and learns the hitters he’ll STILL be making diving catches because even though experience tells him where to set up it’s all relative.
Now he’s making diving catches randomly but once he gets a better idea of the hitters he’ll still be making diving catches anyway and stealing what normally would be hits away from these guys.
So the ability to dive is – the ability to dive whether you’re experienced or not or whether you know the hitter or not.
Dykstra used to make catches like that in CF
I made the Kirk and Lenny comparison before but everyone seems hesitant I guess because of what Lenny did when he left the Mets.
True, I just wonder if Beltran also understood the risk reward associated with diving? Perhaps a younger Beltran dove more but due to the increased likelihood of injury as well as what happens when you don’t get the ball if diving decreased? I remember the Beltran dive in Houston for sure.
Bayonne you don’t remember that catch in Philly late September 2010, the same game where he hit 2 HR’s one from each side of the plate. He rarely dove head long, most oof his dives were sliding catches coming in on a ball. That day in Philly though he ran to the left center gap and made a head long, incredible catch. Then he sat out the last 5 games with a sore knee, lol.
not at all, but i do remember the famous Houston catch where he ran up the hill in CF
Game saving catch in that 17 inning game in 2007. He also had the game winning hit in that game. Great play.
Batting torres leadoff seems to make no sense. the current options have been doing fine. How about sticking torres at the bottom of th eorder (where he deserves to be) to see if he can even do anything at this level?
And the CF debate could resolve itself quickly, depending on how well his legs hold up. no guarantee they do.
If bay comes back, then the real decisions come into play.
and no matter what, as Jessep said, torres needs to be on a short leash.
they also owe him nothing. he is a 4th OF type, and I honestly feel he was brought in to be a placeholder until someone from the minors was ready (meaning, couldn’t bank on Kirk before the start of ST). But, he has been overtaken (after holding the place for a whopping day!)
Yeah, move Torres to the 9 spot. LOL. Ghost of Tony.
Ghost of Tony”
You are so disrespectful… Funny you mock tony, the manager who has won everywhere he’s been…
LOL, how is that being disrespectful? You goof ball. I am saying that batting a guy in the 9th spot is a Tony La Russa idea and if we did it then it would be the ghost of Tony. You don’t even know if I like La Russa or not.
Let’s see// He took a shot a moneyball for being crap, so most likely… You don’t like larussa
I have no idea what La Russa’s views on moneyball were and personally don’t care. When the Mets start following the A’s model and actually use moneyball principles then I might be more concerned. For now they haven’t followed them at all.
2nd, as for my opinion on La Russa? Much like Chipper. I respect the guy for what he did while with the Cards and the A’s. I do think that at times he over managed and was always seeking to be the smartest guy in the room by going against the grain sometimes maybe too often. The idea that batting a guy 9th is controversial for sure. It has merits as well as detractors. Your starting staff better be decent to warrant getting more AB’s than the #9 hitter over the course of the season. I guess I could see doing it at times though. Maybe you hit Dickey in the 8 spot but Pelfrey you hit in the 10 spot?
Alex, Ron Washington too
Both World Series managers took shots at moneyball last year and LaRussa downplayed OBP too. Those guys know a little something about the game
“Since La Russa took control of the Cardinals in 1996, overall, his teams have collected the highest on base percentage in the National League other than the Rockies who played the majority of the games being considered in a pre-humidor Coors Field in Colorado.”
What La Russa said is that the concentration on OBP can be dangerous if you view it only as taking a bunch of walks. “think that it’s all about getting on base by drawing walks.”
Obviously La Russa valued guys who did not make outs and understood that hunting the best pitch will have great affect on the offense. Hudgens and other people in charge of the Mets are not trying to force a bunch of walks. If you take time to read what they are saying, they want the Mets to be hunters and get into hitters counts. Not throw the bat away.
” the fact is that the guys that have the best on-base percentage are really dangerous hitters whenever they get a pitch in the strike zone,” La Russa said.
Why actually read the full context of quotes when sound bites and text message versions fit their agenda so much better?
yeah let’s just twist aroud what LaRussa actually said – what the trsgoon is doing is the same thing you’re complaining about
LaRussa is NOT saying that people are misconstruing OBP for just wanting to walk:
http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/10/tony-la-russa-critical-of-conc.html
when he said the most dangerous hitters are guys who get to hit a pitch in the strike zone he’s just saying they’re good hitters….NOT as a result of OBP..good hitters create the OBP
It’s your buddy, the trs loser that gets a hard on and starts wagging his tongue each time i respond anywhere NEAR him
MR>>>>>>> IRRELEVANT strikes again. Should I be offended when the past comes back to haunt me?
trsgoon LMFAOL!!!!!!!!!!!
Sniff, snifff, think I will just go back to my dessert. It’s yummy.
“ST. LOUIS — When Game 6 of the World Series was rained out, Manager Tony La Russa went to see the movie “Moneyball.” His impressions? “Good acting,” he said, eliciting laughter from reporters Thursday afternoon. “I’m serious.”
“Of course, La Russa, a former Oakland A’s manager and a baseball traditionalist, did not stop there. He criticized the accuracy of the plot — that the 2002 A’s won 103 games and the American League Western Division title largely because of sabermetrics.”
It bothered La Russa that the movie brushed over the contributions of the league’s most valuable player, Miguel Tejada; the Cy Young Award winner, Barry Zito; and standout hitters like Eric Chavez — all of whom the A’s developed through traditional means — while emphasizing a newfound reliance on on-base percentage and the switch of Scott Hatteberg to first base from catcher.
“I was offended because of what the book represented,” La Russa said. “I knew a few of those guys as scouts. It strains the credibility a little bit.
“They won 20 in a row, qualified for the playoffs, go two up on the Yankees, and there wasn’t anything in the movie except a brief about Miguel and Eric, the three starters, Billy Koch. It was about a couple of trades and turning Scott into a first baseman.”
In his criticism, La Russa confused the 2001 division series, in which the A’s blew a two-games-to-none lead to the Yankees, with that of 2002, which the A’s lost in five games to the Minnesota Twins.
“That club was carried by those guys that were signed and developed the old-fashioned way,” La Russa said. “That part wasn’t enjoyable, because it’s a nice story, but is not accurate enough.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/sports/baseball/la-russa-disagrees-with-emphasis-of-moneyball.html
The movie and the book both had their inaccuracies with each other as well as what happen in real life. I choose to take Ron’s account in that while the success was due to the other players playing well that wasn’t exactly what the movie/book was about and I don’t think it ever tried to be. Honestly I watched it long after it came out and thought it was entertaining but I certainly wouldn’t think that any baseball team is actually following what the movie portrayed. Not the A’s and especially not the Mets.
Vinny, by now you know that always the CORE salute you… But with these sabergooners in here you can’t present facts or reality.. They criticize us when we use part of a quote etc,yet they do the same all the time… Job well done in finding this, i remember mike francesca talking about how larussa was SH**** on moneyball for the crappy job they did on the movie…
“yeah let’s just twist aroud what LaRussa actually said”
I would but I don’t want to move in on your gig.
“I liked the movie, and I’m a big fan of Billy Beane. He gave me an opportunity to become a Major League coach, and he trusted me with his young talent. I think I got this opportunity to manage because he gave me a rousing review to the Texas Rangers, and [general manager] Jon Daniels and [former Rangers owner Tom] Hicks loved what I brought to the table and gave me an opportunity to manage a big league club. … The things that you accomplish in life, it always comes from other people extending themselves to help you.”
LaRussa is the guy who used pitch counts and splits religiously, right?
The guy best known for discarding “the traditional ways”?
Just checking.
didn’t he invent the 9th inning closer concept too?
Yes, he took one of the greatest pitchers of all time and rendered his abilities almost moot by only using Eckersley in the 9th inning.
Granted, I like why he did it (to shake things up and see if it did indeed give him a greater advantage), but if you look at its overall effect on baseball, it has actually hurt teams in the long run.
but if you look at its overall effect on baseball, it has actually hurt teams in the long run”
And the ASININE comments continue… Amazing…
I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s hurt them in the long-run. Teams wouldn’t have switched to closers and specialty players if they didn’t want to. No more than everyone would have switched to batting the pitcher 8th.
Late inning leads are getting blown at an increasing rate over the last 20 years.
I think there are some good pitchers out there closing. My question has always been “why are we saving them for the 9th”? If you have a 1 run lead in the 7th and the other team’s middle of the order is coming up, wouldn’t that be a good spot for the “closer”? Assuming he is your best reliever of course.
I really like how LaRussa didn’t stay married to tradition simply because “that is how we always did it”, but almost no one has ever stopped and said “is this really working”? I think reliever specialization is one of those that needs a serious going over.
Couldn’t agree more. Sometimes you need your best reliever in the 7th or 8th. That’s the way the closers role was handled pre-Eckersly and they would often finish out the game, IE, Sutter, Gossage, Reardon, Fingers, etc… Late inning leads since have been blown at alarming rates since those days.
Torres from all reports is a good centerfielder as well. Who is better Kirk or Torres where I am concerned remains to be seen because I simply haven’t seen much of Torres in CF but even though if given the choice I’d rather have Kirk in CF I feel having them both in the outfield is still better than having just 1 with Hairston in LF.
The thing I keep reminding myself of is this decision is temporary until Jason Bay returns. By that time or even before that Torres will have shown if he indeed should be the starting CF or not.
If there is 1 concern in all this I have which as far as I can tell I have yet to see anyone mention is given Kirk’s style of play which is with a reckless abandon for his body. Every time he goes into foul territory near a wall all I will be concerned with is that he doesn’t go crashing into it.
That’s an excellent point!! In center, Kirk will be the general and fielders will yield to him and only has to worry about CF wall. In Left, he will have to yield to Torres and be careful of running into the walls just off foul line.
While a good Torres might be a better lead off hitter, Kirk has the mojo going, why move him down where he may take the mind set of just turning over the line up vs generating runs. How do you think he’d do as a #3 hitter? Specifically against righties? He hits to all fields, pretty good with the bat and can run in front of the big bangers.
If Andres Torres is coming back from a Hammy injury, it might be better off sliding him to LF and keep Kirk in center. I like Kirk, his fielding is good and his hitting has been more than fine so far.
A lot of you are looking at this wrong. People assume that CF is the hardest OF position to play and the corner positions are easy. That is wrong. CF is an easier position to play…let me explain.
1st off, your positioning in CF gives you a clear and straight on view of the batter and you can get a much better read on the ball of the bat because of this.
2nd. The most difficult part of playing the OF is the tailing of the ball. Usually the fly balls to right tails to the fielders left and the balls hit to left tail to the fielders right. This tail can be very drastic…I’ve seen balls hit to the right/center gap and tail off to land 30ft off the right field line. (expect I’ve seen left handed hitters whose balls tail to the fielders right no matter what field they hit too)
So basically when you are playing the corner OF position, when a ball is hit, your first reaction tells you to run to the gap, but you actually are running away from where the ball is going to land. If you are playing CF, the ball is usually going to tail in the direction you are running (and you’ll get less tail on balls hit to CF anyways) so even if you first misread the tailing of the ball, you’re already going in the right direction so it’s much easier to recover.
Why do you think so many great CF’ers don’t want to move from CF and why a lot of times you see them struggle in their first season playing the corners?
The only thing you really need to have to play a good CF is good athleticism. CF is much bigger than the other positions and you have be be moving after the ball on almost every play to the OF. You need to be fast and you need to do a lot of running and you need a strong arm.
So with those points out of the way. I say that Kick is the better choice to stay in CF because of his lack of experience playing the corners and Torres experience in LF. Plus, because Torres is coming off another leg injury, I’d rather have him playing the least demanding (running wise) of all three of the OF positions.
As far as spot in the order, I don’t think it matters to Kirk…he profiles to be able to hit in any spot in the line up. Dude just plays, nuff said.
Considering we have been putting valdespin out there in LF recently I don’t see what all the hubbub is about…
Torres won’t really be replacing Kirk he will be replacing Valdespin and Hairston!
At least until bay gets back!
The issue is when Torres is the one taking CF experience from Kirk as well as hitting ahead of him in the lineup.
that presmes that Kirks first and best destiny is in CF.
But consider this…
Torres is a temp as the leadoff hitter too.
Where are you going to put that Leadoff hitter when you get him and where is Speed an asset both in leadoff and in the field?
Tejada isn’t going to give way to anyone. Maybe Murphy does at some point but that means he gets traded and we lose his bat…
Wright is still unknown but if he is still here he’s at 3rd. Ike sure isn’t going to be replaced for a leadoff guy
So which positions are left?
CF and LF once Bay is done with…
And of the two LF seems like a natural spot for Kirk and CF the natural spot for a leadoff hitter with speed.
So how much CF time Torres takes away is not important to the long term really.
I could see eventually Duda in LF and Kirk in RF but for now I see no reason to move him from CF.
Now your REALLY looking to upset the apple cart aren’t you? LOL
Move TWO guys into positions they aren’t used to accomodate Torres?
They have to fish or cut bait with Bay ntil then there is no clear solution.
Get rid of Bay and then you can move Lucas to LF, Kirk to RF and go with that until you find a long term CF.
I’m not sure but who has the better arm between Kirk and Duda?
That might be the deciding factor as you want the better arm in RF.
Kirk already has speed over Duda which does seem to suggest he might be better in RF as well.
Yeah that is why I said “eventually”.
I have no issue rejiggering who plays what just not mid season when one is just a rookie and the other is in his first full season for all intents and purposes.
Baseball is as much mental as it is physical and its not good to give them too mch too soon.
Duda if I’m not Mistaken actually has played SOME LF before when he came up in Sept the year Bay went through a wall. Truth is they should have put Duda in LF and messed with Bay because really what could it have hurt in regards to Bay?
Andy McCullough in the Star Ledger made a good point about the situation:
“Torres is the more accomplished fielder. From 2009 to 2011, he ranked seventh among center fielders in Ultimate Zone Rating, an advanced metric that attempts to quantify how many runs a defender saves. During that time period, Torres saved 19.4 runs while with San Francisco. Heading into the season, scouts questioned Nieuwenhuis’ ability to handle center field full-time. But he’s performed a series of high-wire catches since becoming the team’s regular there the second game of the season.”
Torres deserves his place back in CF. However, I’m not so sure he deserves to hit at the top of the order. If he does he should have a short leash.
How much of that time was Torres a full-time player even? Come on, Torres doesn’t “deserve” anything. Also, Torres in LF could actually help teach Kirk how to play CF and perhaps you don’t end up with Kirk either crashing into a wall or Torres.
UZR isn’t great. It still requires subjective input and 6 years worth of playing time to be considered accurate.
I would say that it also takes normal playing time for at least 3 years as well.
Just trying to show another side to the argument since everyone was defending Kirk. I love Kirk and think he should probably stay, however it doesn’t look like that may be the case. And yes this is all subjective input, and I guess the people most qualified to make that decision would be the Mets brass. Whichever way they decide I would support, but I would prefer Kirk in CF as well.
Hey, if we always went with the belief that the Mets brass is the most qualified to make decisions what would anyone around here complain about?
For some odd reason I sense a need by Collins and the front office to be loyal to Torres who has all of one day of service time with the Mets. If only such devoutness was bestowed on those more deserving like David Wright and K-New.
Honestly, I have no idea what the thinking is. I guess we shall wait and see what happens.
If only such devoutness was bestowed on those more deserving like David Wright and K-New”
Ummmmm..What?????
Dana nah na dana na…… Core Power. Here I come to save tha day!!!
Is K-new a new nickname? I’m not sure if I’m ok with that lol it sounds odd.
My take on this is that we have real competition now between Kirk and Torres. The Mets have been grooming Kirk, but couldn’t know how well he would perform in bringing him up at the beginning of the season. Everybody here likes to caution one another about making judgments based on small samples, right?
Now, let me state categorically that I love Kirk and hope very much he will make himself worthy of being the Mets franchise OFer, but despite everything we’ve seen, we have no way of knowing if he has all the goods to sustain himself for an entire MLB season as a rook.
Torres means nothing to me, but we were sold on the idea that he is a brilliant defensive guy, who hit really well during the Giants championship season, but sucked at the plate last year.
We saw him play Op Day: he got caught off of first and seemed to blunder on the play in the OF when he injured himself. On this basis, he sucked. Is this the total worth of the man as a player? I think not.
It won’t hurt Kirk to learn LF while he’s here. As long as he and Torres communicate, a big chunk of OF will have some pretty good defensive coverage while Duda can continue his Mr. Magoo antics, “tracking” balls in right.
In a matter of weeks, it will become apparent who contributes to the team and who drags us down. God forbid we have an embarrassment of riches in the OF!
Personally, I don’t want Torres playing center, but I do see the move as logical.
As for leadoff hitter, etc., I doubt it matters to Kirk. I say let him hit third, and figure out who gets the two-hole–Murph or Tejada. Who gets two, the other guy gets seven-hole.
Torres was brought here for a reason, and we have to see if he can contribute. Still early enough in the season that some tinkering is not madness.
But do you really think it is possible to push a guy who is already performing?
Sure there is competition which works well to puch players in football to elevate themselves to get more plays but not so mch for baseball where the key is consistency and getting the most Abs.
You can’t improve your production sitting on the bench, can’t learn your position better from there either.
As I look at it Kirk has won the job until he stops performing. Torres can win back his job by outperforming him. but in a world where both are equal you have to give the Nod to Kirk who stands to contribute more for longer in this team’s future than Torres does.
Use Torres as a pinch hitter for a struggling Bay when we need to get a guy on base late in the game. Then he can act as a defensive replacement in CF or LF whatever they decide is best.
Do it in conjnction with a double switch of the pitcher so we have Torres and Whoever stays leading off at the top of the lineup.
Provided Kirk keeps making the rotine plays there really is no reason to say Torres is a better defender. Doesn’t really matter because the few times Torres might catch a ball that Kirk didn’t is offset by the hits and rns Kirk scored compared to Torres!
To me the only tough decision is where would they like to see Kirk play in the long run. CF or LF. My guess is they will pick LF as they will want a speed guy at CF and Leadoff once Torres is gone.
To me it’s all about what they do with Bay not Torres/Kirk.
He’s the gy we need to find a way to sit so we can get both on the field!
You can produce numbers to “prove” torres deserves (should) to go back to CF (UZR or what not).
But there are absolutley no stats that justify putting him in the leadoff spot!
instead of the numbers (which are not impressive to begin with) why break up the dynamic of Kirk and Tejada as 1&2 hitters. Even though i don’t like the idea of Kirk leading off the team is playing well this way so leave it alone. When Torres comes back put him down in the lineup if you’re gonna play him.
If the team slumps THEN you can experiment with the lineup but not know
I agree, Mr. Irrelevant.
Regarding the Kirk and Ruben comment here…
Terry said the other day to the media: ‘looking forward to getting Torres back here. And I promised I’d get Murph out of that 3 hole’.
Thought that comment was rather odd as it implied Murphy either couldn’t handle or didn’t belong in the 3 spot.
So with Torres coming back and hitting lead off, I’m assuming now Murphy goes back to the 2 hole as well?
Honestly, I have no idea what this line-up will be looking like tonight.
Hmmm? That will be interesting.
How about vs Righties:
Torres (LF)
Murphy
Kirk
Wright
Duda
Davis
Tejada
Thole
How about vs Lefties:
Torres (LF)
Murphy
Wright
Duda
Davis
Tejada
Kirk
Thole
Actually, not sure of the last one… we do have way too many lefties. We do need Bay. Would be ideal if we had more switch hitters… trade Murph for better switch hitting 2B
make that, we need a strong RH bat that can hit like Bay is supposed to hit…
‘We need Bay’.
Never thought I’d be reading that.
This reminds me of when they moved Reyes to 2nd Base so that Kaz Matsui could play shortstop.
How did that all work out?
I agree, Is Torres the long term solution there or is he holding spot for who? Maybe they project Kirk as a corner anyway, maybe Nimmo is their solution.
I say the big moment will not be tonight but when Bay returns.
Will Kirk be sent back to AAA, cause he can’t sit now during his good playing plus you have Torres who Terry has no idea what the return will be from him batting leadoff.
That will be the major move that will, I believe, affect the fan base even more so I hope that SA, Terry and FO are thinking ahead cause this could lead to taking a talent, Cap. Kirk, who has shown so far that he belongs.
We shall wait and see!
Makes sense to me S69.
I just can’t see Kirk going down when Bay comes back (assuming, of course, Torres is still ambulatory at that point!)
More likely, they juggle the 3 of them, essentially making it a 3 man platoon for 2 positions.
Good thing that they will have plenty of time to see how things are going before worrying about bay.
One thing we don’t know is what the team is thinking about the medium-term (say, starting next year?) plans for CF. I am sure that Torres though is not in them.
But, if they are hoping for a real GG potential speedster CF, and think they have one on the horizon, then Kirk is likely going to a corner anyway (and in that situation, fine by me).
Den Dekker I guess would be the only possible in house guy (the other CFs probably are less likely to stick than Kirk), but is this hot start for real? Can he possibly develop enough to be ready offensively (supposedly the glove is already good to go) by next year?
another lefty though. In that case, they are going to need a good looking RH OF to pair up with them (not a pure bench guy, more like another starting quality player), in some kind of rotation to mitigate the LHSP factor. And of course, I am assuming it ain’t Bay! But if he is here, in a pure platoon situation, it could work.
Especially if you are breaking in a rookie, there would be enough opportunities to get a RH bat a start, either for the LF or CF.
this team though really needs another RH every day guy. Piazza circa 1999 would be fine!
we have to know that at some point the Pitchers will make an adjstment on Kirk that will send him slumping and he will have to make an adjustment back to hit again.
So yes there is going to be at least at some point a time where we wionder if he is for real or not and the answer will depend on how well and quickly he adjusts!
Why in the world would the Mets take Nieuenhuis out of CF? He’s hitting great, and is playing great defense.
It’s not like Torres is an accomplished major league starer either – He’s had only one good season in his entire career. The majority of his career he has been awful. Why would you replace a young player who’s playing great baseball with a 34YR old, who’s only had one good year in his entire career?
in his defense, Torres only had that one big year with the bat, but he is highly regarded as a CF. And he isn’t replacing Kirk, just scooching him off to the side a bit.
He doesn’t hit enough to justify starting him everyday…. Especially when you have a young guy like Nieuwenhuis, who’s playing great on both offense and defense.
Torres is OK as a backup, but not as a starter.
if he is only taking ABs from hairston and baxter, while supplying top notch D, then it is OK.
BREAKING: Kirk to lead off tonight, Torres to hit 7th in front of Thole. Baxter’s hot bat in RF instead of Duda against the LHP. Kirk in LF and Torres CF.
a reasonable, and logical, compromise.
I don’t really see the big hubbub in where to play two solid defensive players. Just play. I’d defer to not messing with Kirk right now, gut honestly, it’s not a big deal at all.
guys move around more in the minors.
and remember, Kirk is probably so glad to be in the majors, he would play anywhere to stay in the lineup and on the team. Hell, if they told him to catch, he would probably do it.