The Alex Cora Signing

It is easy to like the signing of Alex Cora, especially if you have any dealings with Alex Cora.

The hard part is reconciling it with the needs of the 2010 Mets.

But by signing Alex Cora to a one-year, $2 million contract for 2010, the Mets are showing willful indifference to the offensive, defensive and financial implications of the move.

Cora registered a -7.8 UZR/150 mark as a shortstop last season, along with a -9.3 UZR/150 as a second baseman. Anyone watching his limited range isn’t a bit surprised by this. It is easy to see where he got his good defensive reputation- he has terrific hands, good instincts, and was probably terrific at one point. That point, unfortunately, is in the past, and this contract only covers the future.

For taking that defensive hit, the Mets are adding a bench player who had an OPS in 2009 of… .630. He’s projected to put up a .637 by Bill James in 2010.

But so what? He’s the backup shortstop and second baseman, right?

Well, yes, but that $2 million isn’t being spent by the Yankees and their limitless resources. Keep this in mind: the 2009 Mets had to choose between Randy Wolf and Oliver Perez. Why? Well, once Perez was signed, they couldn’t afford Wolf’s one-year, $5 million deal. Or put another way, they’d already spent $2.25 million on Tim Redding, $2 million on Cora, $925K on Jeremy Reed and $600K on Cory Sullivan. All four are entirely replaceable players. Wolf, in the rotation, wouldn’t have been.

On Twitter, several of the pro-Cora voices seemed to fall back on the idea that this move wouldn’t preclude the Mets from making other moves. The problem is, there’s no evidence to support that idea- and the move itself actually keeps the Mets from fielding a backup middle infielder who is an above-average fielder, above-average hitter, or whose salary at least doesn’t keep them from adding other options where spending more than the league minimum is worth doing.



(nybaseballdigest.com)