Monday, February 11, 2013

My issue isn't Bourn it's the approach to the OF

Michael Bourn has signed with the Indians, it's of no consolation that the Mets were very close to signing him.  I do get how important draft picks are to a team rebuilding, especially as high as the 11th pick but I'm left wondering why our entire off-season came down to this.  In fact my issue with the front office is less to do with missing on Bourn over the 11th pick but more about the over all approach to the outfield this off-season.

You can't enter the off-season bashing your own outfield and then return that outfield in tact.  If there is even a remote chance that this could have happened the message should have been "we like our young players and want to see how they develop", all the while seeing what you can find, not saying "What Outfield".

I know Sandy was joking but having such a cavalier way of discussing the outfield leads me to believe that they had every intention of addressing the outfield, therefore; you can only come to one conclusion that they misplayed the off-season.  There were serviceable outfielders who would have been upgrades over the current roster who signed for reasonable deals; Ryan Ludwick, Matt Diaz, Jonny Gomes, and Scott Hairston  to name a few.

Even some of the players where it was borderline if they were up grades would have at least created competition for spots, such as Rick Ankiel, Ben Francisco and Austin Kearns.

I do like the Cowgill, Byrd and Brown signings, my point is if your going to go with that level of player then you should have brought in as many as you could find, throw it against the wall and see what sticks.

Right now the Mets have a small group of unproven and potentially mediocre outfielders who have very little risk of not making the team.  If the outfield competition is Duda, Baxter, Kirk, Cowgill, Brown and Byrd that means only one gets cut.  Unless he's awful, Byrd gets veteran status while Brown gets sent down basically.

Of course the Mets are trying to create some false competition by trying their bench infielders in the outfield but how is Lutz, Turner or Valdespin an upgrade over an actual outfielder.

Again how did the entire off-season approach to the outfield come down to one player on Feb. 11th who had a top draft pick attached to him in the first place, it leads me to believe the approach was flawed.