On Davis for Fielder

Matt Cerrone brought up the Ike Davis-for-Prince Fielder debate that I touched on nearly a month ago, and now debate over whether the Mets should make that deal (should it even become available to them) is spreading through the blogosphere.

Here’s your answer: No.

That’s not because Davis is currently a better player than Fielder or because I believe Davis will certainly be a better player than Fielder soon. Fielder is one of the league’s best hitters, and the Mets should be thrilled if Davis ever puts up an offensive season as good as the one Fielder posted in a down year in 2010.

Davis can boast superior defense and a body that appears better suited to long-term success, which mitigates the difference between the two players at least a little. But Fielder now has four years’ worth of evidence to show he is a great offensive player and is still only 26, so he’s a reasonably safe bet to continue being one of the league’s better power hitters into the latter part of this decade. Davis, coming off one season of just below league-average production for a first baseman, offers no such assurance.

It comes down to money.

Fielder is entering his final year of arbitration, meaning any team that acquires him will likely work to sign him to a contract extension at market rate, like the Mets did when they got Johan Santana.

I have no idea what it will cost to extend Fielder’s contract, but it won’t be cheap. Ryan Howard will earn $25 million a season from 2012-16. Mark Teixeira will get $22.5 until 2016. Miguel Cabrera — $19 mil and change through 2015.

Even if Fielder doesn’t command quite as much as his fellow young, slugging first basemen, he’ll inevitably require a hefty chunk of the acquiring team’s payroll for the multiple years.

Davis, meanwhile, won’t even be eligible for arbitration until after the 2012 season. If he continues improving, the Mets could look to buy out his arbitration years — a deal that would still likely be favorable to the team and well, well below what it would require to extend Fielder. Keeping Davis instead of trading for and extending Fielder would probably save the Mets at least $10 million a season in payroll into the second half of the decade, money that could be allocated toward free-agent signings that could more than make up the difference between the two players.

Throw in that Davis is, as mentioned, a much better defensive player and quite likely to improve, since he came to Flushing in 2010 with only 42 plate appearances above Double-A ball, and trading him for Fielder doesn’t even seem like a topic worth debating.

The final sticking point is that there remains some reasonable chance that Fielder and Adrian Gonzalez hit the open market next winter. Since the Mets’ chances of contention in 2011 appear long anyway, it seems crazy to dispatch one of their most valuable cogs in a trade now when they may be able to find an upgrade for only money next offseason, dangling Davis as trade bait then or forcing his once-discussed move to right field.

Patrick Flood on Sandy Alderson

A former lawyer and marine, he quietly might have been the most important baseball executive of the last twenty-five years. Front offices using sabermetrics? He introduced Billy Beane to Bill James’ work. Building a championship team simply by out-spending everyone else? Alderson might be indirectly responsible for the Yankees. Ever see umpires huddling up to discuss a call? Alderson encouraged them to do that when he worked for the commissioner’s office. Questec, the system MLB uses to grade an umpire’s strike zone, was also brought in by Alderson. His current job is cleaning up corruption in the Dominican Republic’s amateur player system, because Sandy Alderson is a man who Gets Things Done. In the future, there will be hoverboards; there will also be several interesting books written about Alderson’s influence over the game of baseball. He is an agent of change.

Patrick Flood, PatrickFloodBlog.com.

Flood makes a pretty convincing case for Alderson, who appears to be the fan favorite, the media favorite, and, at this point, the odds-on favorite to get the job.

Don’t count out a late push from Jimmy McMillan, though.

A-Rod once again unclutch

Through the first five games of this series, the Texas Rangers have succeeded for the most part in stifling Mr. Rodriguez, the Yankees third baseman. He has just three hits in 17 at-bats for a .176 batting average and hasn’t hit a home run.

Mr. Rodriguez, who earlier this year became the youngest player to reach the 600-home run mark, was supposed to have buried the notion that he wilted amid the pressure of October baseball. He batted .365 with six home runs in 15 postseason games last year, and Yankees manager Joe Girardi said Thursday that this season has been easier for Mr. Rodriguez because he hasn’t had to answer similar questions about his playoff performance.

Mike Sielski, Wall Street Journal.

The excerpted portion isn’t really a fair representation of Sielski’s piece, since it later examines the way the Rangers are approaching A-Rod and considers the possibility that he’s just not getting too much to hit.

But it’s completely baffling to me that A-Rod’s performance just last postseason didn’t seem to teach anyone anything about the nature of that stigma. Rodriguez now has a .927 career postseason OPS and a .958 career regular-season OPS.

I’m sorry this story sucks: Sample size. Sample size. Sample size. Even great players, the best of their generation, endure rough 17 or 28 at-bat stretches sometimes. When they are isolated and magnified by a short playoff series, we fixate on them and assume that they are somehow meaningful.

Also — allow an only tangentially related rant — Mike Lupica’s column on the same subject is epically Lupica-esque. Allen Barra produced this monumental and must-read bit of trolling earlier this week, exposing Lupica’s tendency to belabor the obvious, and it helped me grasp exactly why I find Lupica’s stuff so frustrating to read. In this particular piece he uses nearly 1,000 words to say, essentially, “A-Rod should hit a home run tonight.”

Frenchy Tracker update

Pretty poor job by the New York papers last night. Jeff Francoeur not only had a hit, but his trademark cannon-arm fired a costly error in the Yanks’ second-inning rally.

And yet we’re only treated to one Frenchy sider, courtesy of the Daily News. That puts the tally at eight, and it’s starting to look good for anyone who had the under on 20.

Shocked to read not a single recap of Francoeur’s stay in New York, with his old apartment and favorite restaurants and everything. Maybe those are forthcoming, or maybe — heaven forbid — the papers are actually going to focus on all the exciting real baseball stuff.

And if you’re the type of person who cares about these things — and I bet you are — Francoeur now has a grand total of 10 ALCS at-bats and two hits to only eight articles. This man needs a bigger stage.

Darren O’Day’s brief, weird stint in Flushing

In an early Frenchy Tracker update, I mentioned that no reporter I knew of had yet caught up with Darren O’Day to discuss his “brief, weird stint in Flushing.” Adam Rubin finally did and totally destroyed it. Really great read, detailing O’Day’s friendship with the late Nick Adenhart, how he wound up in Texas, and, of course, a little bit about the Mets’ roster mismanagement.

Off to the Pourhouse

Not a lot of action here today, for which I apologize. Got busy trying to wrap things up so I could cut out a little early to go watch baseball with Toby. Anyway, couldn’t come up with anything better to fill up this post than this old Nooner from “The Pourhouse” set (green screen, whatever) back in April, 2009. Hit or miss, as always, but I’m still proud of the Santana joke that starts at 2:00.

A good question

Here’s my question: Do we really need right/left field umpires in the postseason?

I’m sure it’s confirmation bias or whatever, but I can’t think of a single instance when I’ve thought, “God, I’m glad we have that guy down the line.” But I can think of about 5 instances in which they’ve made blatantly terrible calls that were obvious to the naked eye (Maier, Phil Cuzzi last year, Berkman’s homer last night, etc).

What is the point?

– Ryan, comments section.

Good question. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to learn that the presence outfield umpires for the playoffs and All-Star Game are some sort of make-good for a crappy travel schedule in the umpire’s union contract with Major League Baseball or something, because they really don’t seem to serve much productive purpose out there.

I believe it was Ron Darling on last night’s broadcast who pointed out that the right-field umpire actually had a worse perspective for Berkman’s non-homer than the umps at first and home, since he had to spin later to follow the ball’s flight and so had a tougher time seeing the ball tail foul.

And truth is, if no umpire at any level ever works the right- and left-field lines until he gets to the Major League postseason or All-Star Games, no one charged with the task is going at it with much practice. Sure, it doesn’t seem like a massively different skill set than some of the ones involved in umping the corner bases, but, you know, new angle, new perspective, different thing.

I kind of like the novelty of it, in the same way I like celebratory bunting on Opening Day, but it does seem a bit pointless. Especially if they’re not going to get calls right with any frequency.

What we think of when we think of Yankee fans

I think the major reason I no longer harbor any particular distaste toward the Yankees — besides a general preference for underdogs — is that I’m no longer in high school and so no longer need to regularly interact with people like this guy:

The Yankee fans I deal with now tend to be people more like Alex Belth, a guy reasonable enough to recognize that he is lucky to root for a team with the resources to contend every year, who does so without the obnoxious sense of entitlement too frequently demonstrated by people like the fellow seen here.

I know plenty of Yankee fans like that and I suspect they might actually make up more of the actual fanbase than we assume; we merely associate Yankee fandom with people like this guy because of confirmation bias, and because they express their allegiance in a much more vocal and detestable fashion than the Yankee fans smart enough to realize that not everyone gets to root for a perpetual winner.

That GIF (taken from Scratchbomb) is mesmerizing. I could watch this guy for hours.