I just ran into a smart dude and good Mets fan who told me he thought the team should pursue Jon Garland, and definitely not Ben Sheets. He said they needed more certainty in the rotation, given how shaky things were after Johan Santana, and that Sheets did nothing to shore anything up.
That’s hard to argue with, but I did. Here’s why:
Jon Garland is just OK. He’s one of the most reliable bets in the Major Leagues to pitch 200 innings, and that’s definitely worth something. But they won’t be 200 great innings, or even 200 very good innings. They’ll just be 200 innings.
I think Garland would be a great guy to have around if the Mets knew they were going to get healthy seasons out of Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes and a productive one out of David Wright. Garland is the type of pitcher who can win games for a good offense, but probably not the type of pitcher who can win games on his own.
Ben Sheets, when he’s right, is precisely that type of pitcher. Sheets is coming off elbow surgery and hasn’t pitched since 2008 and so represents a pretty sizable risk. But he pitched like an ace in 2008 and the potential reward is much larger than anything Garland could offer.
Garland is the safer move, sure. But the Mets, as currently constructed, shouldn’t be making the safer move. With the Phillies, Braves and, to a lesser extent, the Marlins all poised to contend in the NL East in 2010, the Mets’ best shot at a playoff run is to take big bets on upside and hope they pay off.
Sure, it’d be nice if that weren’t the case, and the Mets had a roster full of sure things and just needed a steady back-of-the-rotation innings-eater like Garland to complete the package.
But the Mets, instead, have question marks basically everywhere.
Plus, as I’ve written before, they could probably scrap together something similar to the 200 decent Major League innings Garland would provide from a combination of Nelson Figueroa, Fernando Nieve and Jon Niese. One minor benefit to 2009 was that it forced the Mets to accumulate some much-needed depth.
What they likely won’t get from that group, though, is the type of dominance Sheets might provide. And they wouldn’t get that from Garland, either.
Obviously money is a big factor, and rumors earlier this offseason said Garland wanted to stay on the West Coast and Sheets wanted to go to Texas, so this could be an entirely pointless blog post. Plus if Sheets wants an Oliver Perez contract, then, well, screw it.
That’s all I’ve got.
Tedquarters 
I think you’re underrating an offense that has been consistently at the top of the league (barring the injuries). Sure, if Beltran’s out beyond May, which right now isn’t what’s projected at all, maybe it’s a little fuzzier. But even so Reyes Castillo Wright Bay Francoeur Murphy Thole will score some runs. Lots of runs in fact. Sure, things can go wrong and Francoeur can revert and Reyes can be injured again. But in that case they’re not winning anyway.
You’re underrating Garland a bit too. Yeah, he probably won’t win any games on his own, but he won’t likely lose them either. I doubt Nieve/Niese/Figueroa will do that. Maybe they could cobble together a decent set of games, but they definitely are going to go out there and lose games.
Perez, Maine, and Pelfrey. They’re going to have to get better to be successful, but any of them are capable of pitching to a win on any given start. Even in bad years. So you get that domination factor you’d want out of Sheets anyway.
If you have a chance to win almost every Garland and Santana start, it’s only going to take decent-good years out of those three to be competitive.
Well said, Ted. Great post (even if it is deemed futile by, let’s say, Sunday).
And I believe it’s “sure thing” after much wasted research on the subject during the past 10 minutes.
I don’t know. I think you’re selling Jon Garland short. 108 ERA+ over 1041 innings in the last five seasons. If those aren’t “very good” innings, they’re definitely more than just innings. We’re not talking about Jeff Suppan here.
That combination of above-averageness and durability is hard to find. There are only 12 other pitchers who have done as well over the last five seasons. And, Garland’s only entering his age 30 season. He’s not just innings fodder, he’s an above-average starter who could slot in nicely, especially in a ballpark that should be friendly to pitchers who don’t strike out many.
I like Sheets, but he’s just too much of a risk, especially since there’s no guarantee that, even healthy, he’ll be at the same level he was a couple of years ago.
Brendon makes a good point. You’re dismissing what you’re going to get from Wright and Reyes (and Beltran less so) based on an injury or off 2009, but Sheets hasn’t put up the numbers in years that you’re expecting from him.
Our luck, Garland would need surgery a month into the season.
Why not both then use Maine to pick up a catcher or move him and Castillo to get a 2nd base upgrade. i don’t think it’s one or the other.
Also you have to factor that the team all along has acknowledged they needed a Lackey type guy behind Santana and the only pitcher available on the market that can give you that is in fact Ben Sheets.
This seems like a no brainer to me especially given that Garland doesn’t want to come east. Sheets may want to play in Texas but he realizes he needs to get in for a year or two show everyone he’s the guy everyone hopes he is so he can land that big last contract for three or four years before retiring. You can’t do that as effectively for any team except the Mets. If he has decent representation they’d be telling him the same. Play a season or two in NY then go where you want.
Nonetheless. Good work. Reasonable minds can differ.
Remember how Deion Sanders played for the Falcons and the Braves at the same time? You think we could get Rex Ryan to coach the Mets and the Jets?
Nice persepctive on this. I like many people see the sure innings guy like Garland as a positive but you are right, the Mets need a guy like a healthy Ben Sheets to have a real shot at doing anything this year anyway. So taking a chance on him makes alot of sense.
Um…why not get BOTH?
You’re selling Garland short. He’s, as others who posted contend, more than just a simple innings eater. He’s an above average pitcher who also eats innings. Not many of those are on the market. He’s the safe bet, but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad bet. He’s a good bet. The Mets need an above average innings eater.
Sheets? Sure. If he’s on, he’s dominant. We don’t know if he will be on, however, because he’s been away for a while. That said, he’s high reward. So sign him.
I also wouldn’t mind seeing the Mets going after Wang. Now, I know some Mets fans out there “don’t like him” but I place that on the “Yankee factor”. The idea of “low strikeouts” being an issue is silly, as:
A) Wang was actually increasing the number of strikeouts pre-injury as he started using his pretty damned good slider more and
B) the idea that a shaky defense will be a liability for a groundball pitcher is less an issue for the Mets infield than it was for the Yankees infield. Jeter has less range than Reyes, A-Rod and Wright just about break even in D, and Delgado was a MUCH better 1B than Giambi was (who was the Yanks 1B when Wang was a two time 19 game winner). The only hole is Castillo, and Cano, outside of the ’07 season, wasn’t all that great either in his D. The Mets infield is BETTER overall than the Yanks infield of the time Wang was going good.
So, IMHO, Garland, Sheets, and Wang. Sign all three. Deal Maine. Maybe package him together with Castillo and get some insurance for the pen or a young ML player or two.
I’ve been on Garlands band wagon since he was with the whitesox. The horrible situation the mets are in right now they need both. Garland won’t get hurt before sheets and other than Johan, no one knows what head case one, two, and three will bring. Upside no one has mentioned Niese, Nieve who I’m sure will be back in the mix for 2010