New Mailbag; More on the New Stadium

Mets beat reporter Marty Noble answers questions from fans, including a couple of thought-provoking response concerning Carlos Beltran and how fast to push a promising prospect. I also revisit whether it is "fair" to use Baseball Revenue Sharing dollars to finance a stadium.

Mets.com: Marty's got a brand new bag
Marty Noble has a new Mailbag on Mets.com.

When asked if he thought Carlos Beltran could bat .300 with 100 RBIs and 25-30 HR, Noble answered:

Beltran has had two .300 seasons and has a .282 career average, so a .300 season, while clearly possible, doesn't seem likely. Driving in 100 runs or more runs seems more likely. He has had five seasons of at least 100 RBIs.

But in each case, the RBIs were a by-product of a home run total of at least 22. In those five seasons, Beltran averaged 28 home runs. He hit 16 last season -- and only six in 295 at-bats at Shea Stadium. His home park doesn't give up home runs too often, so I don't anticipate him reaching 25 home runs.

He batted .298 -- 32 points higher than his overall average -- in 151 at-bats with runners in scoring position. The other Mets batted .247 in those situations. So he did respond in opportune and challenging moments.

The problem was that he batted third almost exclusively and the Nos. 1 and 2 spots in the Mets' batting order had the lowest composite on-base percentage in the National League.

I wonder if you broke down that .298 AVG with RISP over the season if it didn't decline significantly as the year went on. It just seemed as if whenever Beltran had an important AB later in the year he produced a bad strikeout or -- what became almost a trademark for him -- a weak roller to second base.

I have no doubt that Beltran was hampered by the players that hit in front of him, but I can't let him off the hook as Marty did. Beltran was trying to pull everything as the year went on, and left many runners stranded.

Having said that, I agree with Noble that Beltran isn't likely to be a .300 hitter, but I wouldn't consider 25 HR unreachable for him at Shea, since most of his ABs there will be as a left-handed batter. The important thing is that he uses the gaps and his speed to good effect. 20 HR would be fine, combined with plenty of doubles.

There was also a good response to a question of whether Benson's departure will hasten number one pick Mike Pelfrey's ascension to the main club:

With Benson and Seo gone, a greater need for starting pitching and, therefore, a greater opportunity will exist. But ideally, the only the factor that will prompt a quick ascent to the big leagues by Pelfrey is Pelfrey's development.

That said, almost every highly-regarded prospect in Mets history has moved to the big leagues more quickly than the club initially predicted. Neil Allen, Darryl Strawberry and Bill Pulsipher were rushed to the Majors because of on-the-field need. Lee Mazzilli was put on the fast track at least partially because the club needed to improve its image at a time when it would eschew free agency.

Gregg Jefferies was rushed -- to his lasting detriment -- for no apparent reason other than baseball greed. The 1988 Mets had no need for him, and his early promotion only added to his problems -- some of them self-produced -- being accepted by teammates.

At the same time, Dwight Gooden, Jason Isringhausen, Jose Reyes and David Wright reached the big leagues at relatively young ages and prospered almost immediately.

I agree with Marty on Gregg Jefferies. I've often wonder if another year or so to grow up mentally in the minors could have helped Gooden and Strawberry make better choices later on. As for Reyes, I think another year out of the spotlight, working on some weaknesses could have benefited him immensely.

Baseball Prospectus: Stadium Financing
I took some exception last week to Neil deMause's views on financing for both the Mets and Yankees' stadiums. So did someone that he criticized in the article. Andrew Zimbalist questions some of Mr. deMause's math in defending himself, and does a pretty good job of discrediting many of deMause's statements. Unfortunately, you have to be a Baseball Prospectus subscriber to read more than the beginning of the article.

My point here, one that I made in two previous entries, Should Mets fans feel guilty about the new stadium? and Major League Franchises Need to Be in Major League Cities, is that this idea of deMause -- MLB allowing teams like the Mets and Yankees to deduct stadium expenses from revenue sharing is tantamount to stealing money from other teams -- is a load of crap.

Yes, there is some actual public subsidy of the Mets and Yankees' new stadiums in infrastructure and tax breaks. Yes, people that are not baseball fans contribute to this in the same way that baseball fans do. Well, guess what? The theatre and the arts receive public money, from those that actively enjoy them and those that don't.

Mr. Zimbalist shows that deMause considered the savings in revenue sharing a public subsidy of the stadium, which was certainly some interesting intellectual gymnastics on deMause's part if not out-and-out intellectual dishonesty. This rule was enacted to allow stadiums to be built using as little public money as possible. For me personally, I can't get past finding fault with using revenue generated locally from Mets fans to build a stadium that is a significant benefit to Mets fans.