The Mets' fallback position: Ted Lilly?


Joel Sherman cites a source today telling him that, in the event the Mets aren’t able to land Cliff Lee, they’d be interested in Ted Lilly as a fallback position, more so than either Fausto Carmona or Roy Oswalt, each of whom have been rumored to have caught the Mets’ interest.

Setting aside the absurdity of lumping Carmona and Oswalt together in the fallback category (note: Roy Oswalt is still an excellent pitcher; Fausto Carmona is not), Lilly would be a nice pickup for anyone. His strikeout rate is down a bit this year, but he’s still been effective. His 2-6 record is deceptive inasmuch as he hasn’t gotten a lot of run support.  He’s expensive, but he’s in his last year under contract.  That all washes out to a nice addition for a team that isn’t totally strapped, in my view.

The question is whether the Cubs would truly be willing to part with him.  With Zambrano now apparently out of the rotation for good someone has to pitch for Chicago. And they’re simply not the kind of team that ever truly waves the white flag and sells off players, no matter how dire things get.

The upshot: I think the Cubs would probably ask too much for Lilly for the Mets’ liking, and given that, while nice, he’s not a difference maker the way Cliff Lee would be, I have a hard time seeing the Mets and Cubs matching up on such a deal.  

The A’s are considering rising sea levels in planning their future ballpark

Oakland Athletics
Leave a comment

The Oakland Athletics ballpark saga has dragged on for years and years and years. They’ve considered San Jose, Fremont and at least three locations in Oakland as potential new ballpark sites. The whole process has lasted almost as long as the Braves and Rangers played in their old parks before building new ones.

In the past several months the Athletics’ “stay in Oakland” plan has gained momentum. At one point the club thought it had an agreement to build a new place near Peralta/Laney College in downtown Oakland. There have been hiccups with that, so two other sites — Howard Terminal, favored by city officials — and the current Oakland Coliseum site have remained in play. There are pros and cons to each of these sites, as we have discussed in the past.

One consideration not mentioned before was mentioned by team president David Kaval yesterday: sea level rise due to climate change. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Kaval mentioned twice that the Howard Terminal site would have to take into account sea-level rise and transportation concerns — and he said there have been conversations with the city and county and the Joint Powers Authority about developing the Coliseum site.

The Howard Terminal/Jack London Square area of Oakland has been identified as susceptible to dramatically increased flooding as a result of projected sea level rise due to climate change. On the other side of the bay both the San Francisco Giants and Golden State Warriors have had to consider sea level rise in their stadium/arena development plans. Now it’s the Athletics’ turn.

Sports teams are not alone in this. Multiple governmental organizations, utilities and private businesses have already made contingency plans, or are at least discussing contingency plans, to deal with this reality. Indeed, beyond the Bay Area, private businesses, public companies, insurance companies and even the U.S. military are increasingly citing climate change and sea level rise in various reports and disclosures of future risks and challenges. Even the Trump Organization has cited it as a risk . . . for its golf courses.

Fifteen of Major League Baseball’s 30 teams play in coastal areas and another five of them play near the Great Lakes. While some of our politicians don’t seem terribly concerned about it all, people and organizations who will have skin the game 10, 20 and 50 years from now, like the Oakland Athletics, are taking it into account.