Mets Sign Ronny Cedeno and the Michael Kay Scale of Idiocy Shatters

All Star Game, Ballparks, CBA, Cy Young Award, Draft, Fantasy/Roto, Free Agents, Games, Hall Of Fame, History, Hot Stove, Management, Media, MiLB, MLB Trade Deadline, MLB Waiver Trades, MVP, Paul Lebowitz's 2011 Baseball Guide, PEDs, Players, Playoffs, Prospects, Spring Training, Stats, Trade Rumors, World Series

How many teams have a backup infielder that could be considered “good”?

I’m not talking about a super-utility type who plays semi-regularly and could play every day in one particular spot if needed.

Mark DeRosa of a few years ago fits into that category; Tony Phillips of years ago (under Sandy Alderson with the Athletics) was one; Mike Aviles of the Red Sox qualifies now.

But the Mets sign Ronny Cedeno as a backup middle infielder and the universe is being sucked into a black hole of Madoff-like proportions.

This Mets bashing is self-indulgent, random and is mistakenly equating the financial issues to player moves. They’re separate entities.

Is Cedeno a “good” player?

No.

He’s a backup middle-infielder and defensive replacement for Daniel Murphy at second base.

The Yankees and their fans are openly pining for the return of Eric Chavez to be the backup third baseman, yet Chavez wasn’t much more productive at the plate than Cedeno was in 2011.

Is it because one is a former All Star and recognizable name? Is it because he’s considered handsome?

Chavez played in 58 games; he batted .263 with a .320 on base percentage and .363 slugging percentage. In 175 plate appearances, he had 10 extra base hits and 2 homers. The Yankees paid $1.5 million for that and his scheduled trip to the disabled list.

The fans want him back.

Why?

He did nothing for them in 2011. Nothing.

Teams that are considered “powerhouses” for 2012 have the following backup middle infielders:

Phillies: Wilson Valdez

Yankees: Eduardo Nunez

Red Sox: Aviles

Rangers: Michael Young

Angels: Maicer Izturis

Brewers: Cesar Izturis

Young is DHing and playing some first base and is an All Star caliber player. Maicer Izturis can play every day if necessary as well. The others are players you can find cheaply and on someone’s Triple A roster; or in Mexico; or the Independent Leagues.

The Braves don’t even know who their starting shortstop is and have done absolutely nothing this winter. (Nor have the Yankees, come to think of it.)

But is the Mets decision to sign Cedeno worthy of the laughter and linking to finances as if they’re scanning the crowds for someone who’ll look good in a uniform and can stand at shortstop so they’re not fielding eight players?

Of course the financial woes are contributing to the lack of spending, but to say that because the team is in financial disarray that it’s going to extend to the field with the players they already have is an attempt to find reasons to castigate the franchise. Because the signing of Cedeno and the decision to hire a perceived “bankruptcy specialist” CRG Partners were so closely aligned in time, there’s an “obvious” connection between the two.

Except it’s only obvious if it’s made obvious.

It’s a logical fallacy.

Does Michael Kay really believe that the Mets are going to lose 110 games?

Even on the Michael Kay Scale of Idiocy, it’s stretching it. But not far enough to say it’s impossible that he does believe it.

Statistically and practically, it’s almost impossible for a team to lose that many games no matter which players they’re putting on the field; and with the Mets, they have talent on the roster. If they were in the Central Divisions of both the American and National Leagues, they could hang around contention.

They’re not.

They’re in the National League East.

But 110 losses? The Astros of 2011 were one of the worst teams I’ve ever seen and they won 56 games. The 2012 Mets are worse than the 2011 Astros?

If the Mets have a terrible year or a better-than-expected year, it won’t have anything to do with Ronny Cedeno; his signing has nothing to do with finances either. So why, other than an agenda, is it being treated as such?

I’m going to be adding a Fantasy Baseball page this season. If you can write and know Fantasy, contact me at the top of the page. I’m still looking to accumulate candidates. It’s unpaid, but people will read your stuff.

//

Advertisements

Viewer Mail 7.1.2011

Draft, Free Agents, Games, Management, Media, Players

Jeff at Red State Blue State writes RE Logan Morrison, Jack McKeon, the Twitter, Jim Leyland and Don Kelly:

The feeling I get is that baseball folks still want to keep the behind-the-scenes stuff very secret. From Trader Jack’s viewpoint, it makes sense… I wouldn’t like it if people were doing things I didn’t understand too.

***

I tuned in right as Kelly was warming up and I thought, “gee, maybe I’ve had one too many beers tonight cuz that looks like Don Kelly on the mound.”

Turns out Leyland probably had me by a beer or three.

R.A. Dickey expresses himself about team issues in an eloquent and non-team-threatening way and no one has a problem with it, but he’s a veteran leader in the clubhouse. Morrison is forgetting that he’s still essentially a rookie. They’re telling him to shut up, so….shut….up!!!!

Leyland was probably craving a cigarette. That’s the only thing I can think of.

Jason C at 98 on the Black writes RE the Dodgers and Dan Evans:

I was always surprised Dan Evans never got a shot to be a GM again. The fatal flaw of his Dodger teams was that the lineup was AWFUL. In the middle of the steroid era he failed to build even an average Major League offense.

He did get calls for interviews after he left the Dodgers and Mariners, but he’d moved onto the agent side of things. He sounded interested in another GM job at first, but his new calling appears to be making him happy. I can’t fault him for staying with a less-stressful, more secure and enjoyable vocation.

The Dodgers offense in 2002 was middle of the pack—7th in runs scored; in 2003, they were functioning with Alex Cora and Cesar Izturis in the everyday lineup which is never a boon to scoring runs. The biggest culprit to the decline was Shawn Green. Green hit 42 homers in 2002 and dropped to 19 in 2003; his power dive was….*suspicious*.

We’d have to check and see what was available between 2001 and 2003 before coming to a final conclusion on Evans’s handling of the offense.

//