Play That Funky Music

The Mets followed up on their acquisitions of Frankie Rodriguez and JJ Putz by selecting another pair of relievers, Darren O’Day and Rocky Cherry, in the Rule 5 Draft Thursday. And tonight came word that they’d sent beaten-up lefty Scott Schoeneweis to Arizona for another longshot relief prospect, Connor Robertson.

O’Day is a 26-year-old right-handed sidearmer out of the Angels organization, an undrafted free agent, who gets by on his whacky delivery. Like Steven Register last year, and Mitch Wylie the year before, Omar if nothing else seems to recognize there are fringe arms out there with the potential to be contributors in a bullpen, and if he weren’t out there handing out three-and four-year contracts to every veteran in sight, one of these guys might one day stick with the Mets. For selfish purposes lets hope it’s (Wild) Cherry, who’s had limited big-league success with the Cubs and Orioles, and several injury problems, but throws hard and has a big-league name that will make him hard to hate.

Schoeneweis, swapped along with a portion of his salary to the Diamondbacks today for Robertson, had a poor 2007 but seems to have been sacrificed mainly to fulfill Jeff Wilpon’s promise of “addition of subtraction” for bloodthirsty fans. No, I’m not arguing Schoeneweis was necessarily worth keeping, or even that Robertson — another longshot bullpenner with limited big-league success but good minor league strikeout figures — doesn’t belong; just that, I’d be very surprised if we don’t go out and get another lefthander anyway.

The Show was the first and only player to wear No. 60 in team history. O’Day wore No. 53 last season. If this is becoming the new digit for sidearmers (Chad Bradford requests it wherever he goes), Jerry Manuel may want a change.Robertson wore 41 last year. Whoops.

Soon the Mets will have acquired all wearers of the No. 57 jersey. Cherry wore 57 with the O’s last year.

What in the Name of Ross Gload…

The Mets are expected within the hour to announce their part in a three-team, multiplayer swap meet that will make former Mariners JJ Putz, Sean Green and Jeremy Reed Mets.

If I have this scored right, Aaron Heilman, Endy Chavez and prospect Mike Carp are en route to Seattle and Joe Smith is off to Cleveland, which is collecting various other jetsam from Emerald City. The prize in this deal is Putz, who presumably takes over Heilman’s role in the 8th inning and hopefully doesn’t inherit his demeanor: You know he’s every bit the closer Francisco Rodriguez is. Green is tall right-handed reliever, who’s death on righties, clobbered by lefties and a ground-ball machine a la the departed Bazooka Joe; and Reed, like Chavez when he arrived back in New York, is a faltering one-time leadoff prospect with a noodle bat but good defensive skills.

So with the roles aligned, seems it’s only a matter of having parted with Carp. ( Edited to add, also Jason Vargas and about 50 more low-level prospects too I see now, not sure where they’re off to).

As for the impact on jersey numbers, 48, 35 and 10 are set free. Putz wears No. 20, which is available if coach Howard Johnson gives the OK (he will); Green wore54 (he’ll be dressed in something lower, let’s say 35) and Reed wore 8(uncomfortably unissued now for 8 years). Put Reed in 10, Johnson in 54 and we’ll have ourselves a multiplayer uni-swap as well.

Thanks to all the contributors who kept up to date round the clock on the Rodriguez Jersey Watch — he’s apparently gone with 75 as suspected. A Met first.

Let the Debate Begin

75Well, that was pretty swift and anticlimatic, if the reports coming in late this afternoon are true: The Mets have a new closer, Francisco Rodriguez, and their first Uni Controversy of the 2008-09 Offseason.

Rodriguez, as you probably all know, favors the same No. 57 on the back of Johan Santana (and, even more famously before him, Jason Roach). And if the purveyors of Met logo-gear hope to make a few sales in what’s turning out to be The Year Without a Christmas, a swift resolution is in order, so let the speculation begin.

The guess here is that Rodriguez winds up in No. 75. His demonstrative body language tells me he’s the kind of guy who likes attention and who wouldn’t easily find comfort in the standard-issue relief gear of say, No. 49 or No. 38, to mention a few of the seemingly available digits (as if the Mets really need another guy to add to their reputation as borderline poor sports and the bane of the opposition). No, this is a guy who’ll demand more, and the Mets will be willing to give. I mean, they let Ricardo Rincon have his 73 last season. Seventy-five is a nice switch on the traditional for Rodriguez, but it will come down to him ultimately. If he wants 97, I think he’ll have that too.

What Happens in Vegas?

So I’d be very surprised if the Mets don’t come out of Las Vegas this week having captured Francisco Rodriguez (please, don’t call him K-Rod) and insisting we’ll be all the better for it.

Is that all you got?But let us not forget that going into the new season with a reliable closer only puts the Mets on the exact same footing they were the last three seasons, and none of them ended quite like we wanted. And none of those years began with ownership pledging an idiotic credo of “addition by subtraction,” which plays great on WFAN but seems naive and foolish at best in practice. And, inasmuch as paying top dollar for the top reliever indicates the Mets intend to “go for it” once again in 2009, my concerns — beyond what number Rodriguez might wear since No. 57 is occupied by Johan Santana — are only beginning.

There’s the need for reliable starting pitching. I’m optimistic about Pelfrey’s progress and think he can make more of it next year but until he demonstrates he can get people out via the strikeout I’m not entirely comfortable. I like Maine if he’s healthy, but who knows. I’m all for giving Niese and Jason Vargas (who also needs a new a number) a shot at the end, but I’d sure like out chances with a known quantity mixed in along with them, and preferably someone with a potential to be very good some nights if not all. Hey… How about Oliver Perez?

And can we get serious about the bench? If Jerry Hairston Jr. is out there and you intend on winning the division, you can’t prefer Marlon Anderson to him. Reports have the Mets kicking the tires on Twins scrubeenie Nick Punto, that’s a little more encouraging.

And not to sound like a complete pessimist, but I’m concerned that the everyday lineup needs plenty of improvement. I was never much of an advocate for Luis Castillo  but is there anyone in that lineup you see improving significantly except for him? That is going to take some creativity to address.

So while we wish Omar luck in his pursuits out West this week let’s remember that gathering in an ace closer is only the start, and probably, the easiest card he’s got to play. It’s all that other stuff — bench, offense, rotation — that will win the day.

The Real McGraw?

MBTN reader Steve P writes:

Quick question….noticed that Mitchell & Ness created a 1965 Tug McGraw replica jersey with number 56 on the back … I checked with your site and noticed that McGraw never wore that number. While I guess it is possible that M&N created a replica spring training jersey (they’ve done that with St. Patrick’s Day jerseys), it seems odd for them to do so (they could have produced a McGraw with the more familiar 45 and still included the World’s Fair patch).  Any idea what M&N was thinking?

Sorry, wrong numberAs I told Steve, I’m not entirely sure but would guess they’d made a simple mistake. I seem to recall a photo of Tug appearing in 56 make its way into circulation through a yearbook or baseball card from that era, and it was not at all unusual for those shots to be taken during spring training. Further research led me to a discussion forum here where for what it’s worth, a writer says they checked with Mitchell & Ness who confirmed their replica is based on a spring training model. You’d think for $275 bucks you’d get the real thing but jerseys ain’t my cup of meat.

Just what McGraw was doing in any number in 1965 has always been a little more intriguing a mystery. After all he was only 20 years old then, and wouldn’t stick in the majors to stay until 1969. The answer has to do with the way baseball’s rules treated first-year players at the time: In an effort to put an artificial drag on bonuses, those players not promoted to the big-league club after their first year were subject to a special draft.

With the Mets still early in the talent-assembly game they took no chances. McGraw was among five 1964 signees who cracked the team in 1965. Ron Swoboda, 21; Kevin Collins, 19; Danny Napoleon, 23; and Jim Bethke, 18, were the others. McGraw, whose developing screwball brought him surprising early success, would return to the development pipeline — and wait out military service requirements and injuries — before arriving for good. And though he was always in No. 45, the Mets reissued the No. 45 jersey twice during the periods following McGraw’s debut: In 1966 for Darryl Sutherland and in 1968 for Bill Connors.

* * *

Good read in Sunday’s Daily News catching up with Jon Matlack, the hard-throwing, hard-luck lefty of the 1970s. I remember Matlack as a master of broken bats who threw hard inside stuff, didn’t walk many, and could ring up the whiffs: It’s a mystery he wasn’t more successful.

 

Highly Offensive

Nobody asked, but were it up to me I’d try to make a deal with Mark Teixeira, trade Carlos Delgado to Toronto for pitching/bullpen/bench help, and somehow make Brian Schneider a backup catcher. Improving the offense is important. If Tex costs too much buy the cheaper of Fuentes or Rodriguez, or take your chances with the guys you get in trades. Somebody’s going to pitch in the ninth inning.

Despite all you hear of Omar’s rep as whacky wheeler-dealer, he’s probably going to play it considerably safer. Blowing his wad for the closer first is one of those moves that won’t get criticized considering how impovrished everyone thinks the bullpen is,and will excuse him for doing much more. Just saying, it’s probably not the cleverest thing he could do.

Citibank’s on the brink of collapse? How appropriate!

Going Shopping

I have no idea what will happen this offseason but I’ll tell you this. I’m sitting here hoping the Mets just don’t throw the most money at the guy with the most saves, which is what they did the last time and look where it got them: Feeling pressure to throw the most money at the guy with the most saves, and still on the hook for $10 million, and still looking for a championship. You’re just asking for it.

So I’m thinking, if you’re going to go after a guy with closing experience, it may as well be Brian Fuentes, who lacks the Sex Appeal of K-Rod but just might get it done cheaper and wouldn’t be such a name brand diva that you couldn’t slide him into a set-up role if things go bad. And you know they might. Meantime while it’d be nice if they brought in a few good arms as well I hope what they’re really learning is that when building a bullpen, like building a bench, begins with turning the earth and fresh seeds every year.

Besides we already have a No. 57.

 

For the rotation they should just go sign Oliver Perez again.

 

I wish I had a better handle on how they’re going to help the offense but without knowing what they might expect from Church and Castillo, not to mention Daniel Murphy, next year, my guess is as good as yours. I’d be awfully tempted though to see if I couldn’t solve a few problems at onceby dangling Delgado in a trade.Yeah, and I’d look into getting a better hitter behind the dish and not Castro, whose been unable to answer the bell at crucial times far too often.

My apologies for the infrequent updates: I briefly lost use of the home computer and haven’t had a lot to report on. You may have seeen the Mets hired Luis Alicea to be their new first-base coach. He coached the Red Sox wearing No. 16 last year but I’d expect to see him — along withRazor Shines — take numbers in the low 50s.

Deal Me Up Another Future From Some Brand New Deck of Cards

Word got out today that the Mets and Jerry Manuel are to make some changes to the coaching staff next season. Base coaches Ken Oberkfell and Luis Aguayo will be offered new positions within the organization after joining the Mets concurrent with the Willie Randolph firing this past June.

Aguayo’s replacement at third base will be none other than Razor Shines, a personal favorite of Jerry Manuel and of anyone who collects cool baseball names. Shines served to positive reviews under Manuel in Chicago — they were once both fringe infielders in the Expos’ organization — and appears to have a pretty good reputation. He wore No. 18 in Chicago.

The Mets also announced that Guy Conti would be reassigned and Met lifer Randy Niemann would return to the staff as bullpen coach.This would mark Niemann’s third stint with the major league staff — he served the same role under under Bobby Valentine and Art Howe, racking up three uni numbers (45, 48, 52) along the way. You might also not remember him as perhaps the least distinguished of the 1986 Mets– a lanky lefthanded reliever whose spotty Met career resulted in having worn Nos. 46 and 40 over parts of two seasons. That makes 5 unis so far, the overall record is in sight.

The Mets also said Thursday that hitting coach Howard Johnson; pitching coach Dan Warthen, and father-and-son staffers Sandy Alomar Sr. and Jr., would return to their roles with the Mets in 2009.

Blue Days, Black Nights

Turns out you can’t trust everything you read on the Internet. Who knew?

The below item about rumors of a uniform change was shot down this week by a source in the know. Not only are the Mets not ditching road greys for charcoal greys, but the black will continue to be an (unwelcome) element in caps, drop shadows and jerseys. The only changes, our source assured us, will be a sleeve patchadvertising Citibank honoring CitiField, and the removal of the black road NEW YORK jerseys from the lineup, allowing the team to suit up in the same black Mets jerseys at home or on the road.

(The photo here, snapped by the talented David Whitham, catches your host digesting the Mets’ inability to get the winning run home from third base with no outs in what became my final visit to Shea Stadium last month. We really oughta dispense with the moroseness now, and ditching the black — all of us — seems a fine way to start. I’m going to go set that hat on fire).

Very disappointing knowing that changes could be coming to the Mets ensemble had been an open secret since 2006, when Paul Lukas’s spirited but ultimately doomed Ditch The Blackcampaign got some publicity but no results.

The New York Times in 2006:

Mr. [Dave] Howard [Mets executive VP] said that the Mets’ uniforms would remain the same through 2007 but that the team might revisit the issue for the opening of the club’s new ballpark in 2009. Still, he said, “if you look around the building, you’re seeing a lot of the black, so it’s clear fans vote most effectively with their pocketbook.”

Old Problems, New Unis?

I can’t say a four-year contract for Omar Minaya and a Jeff Wilpon promise of “addition by subtraction” were the first things I was hoping to hear from the Mets this offseason.

As detailed in prior posts I’m not exactly sure what Omar has done to deserve the reward, beyond overwhelming certain free agents and their would-be suitors. His trade record, particularly since the shrewd acquisition of John Maine, hasn’t been particularly shining, and his restraint in consecutive deadlines, while admirable in some respects, also preceded matching second-place finishes.

To his credit, Omar appears to have made pursuit of interim manager Jerry Manuel among his top priorities. Manuel did a magnificent job turning around a sonambulent team this year and seemed to have charmed the press and the brass. Interestingly, chatter has begun over whether to bring back Bobby Valentine, who’d certainly be an acceptable alternative from where I sit.

(Edit — I see now where Jerry has agreed to a 2-year deal. Hoorah. In the Mets world, 2 years = 1 year, setting them up to return to Bobby Vee if things don’t work out next year. All good).

Wondering just what the 2009 team will look like might be tricky considering rumors of uniform changes have arisen again. Dave from Michigan passed along chatter from Chris Creamer’s Sports Logo website saying the Mets as expected are phasing out black (hooray!) in favor of blue but have the biggest changes in mind for their road uniform, said to be completely re-imagined in a charcoal gray (uh, OK?) with Mets in script (boo!). The message continues:

Interestingly there is absolutely no black on this uniform whatsoever – and I was told that the blue/orange/white color combination jumps off this uniform with incredible success. Blue/Orange/White piping will also be on the ends of the sleeves, down the front of the jersey, and down the pant legs as well.

OK, something else to look forward to, maybe.