Last night over at his LoHud blog, John Delcos poses the question: Is Mike Piazza best Met position player ever?

Lets face it, theres only two legitimate players to consider in a Best Mets Position Player Debate: Mike and Keith.

Mike, an eight year Met, the best hitting catcher ever. Some of his time here included the teams less than steller years, but he excelled. Just shy of hitting .300 for his stint here, 220 homeruns, 655 RBIs. He often led the team in homeruns, runs, and probably at one point or another led in most every offensive category. Eighteen mulithomer games, eleven games where he notched at least four hits. Well liked by the fans, he received a standing ovation in his first visit back after leaving the team.  He always played hard, he feuded with the Rocket, his main weakness was he never was much of a defensive catcher.

Then there's Keith. While Mike might be the best offensive catcher, Keith is generally regarded as the best defensive first basemen of the era. Eleven golden gloves, seven while a Met. The first captain of the Mets, and one of only three to date. His batting average is comparable, .297 with the Mets to Mikes .296, he had 10 games of his own that involved four hits but his power numbers are lower. Though keep in mind, the 80s were not a homerun era like the late 90s were. More importantly, Keith taught the Mets how to win. One of the veterans on the 80s team, he provided the leadership in the clubhouse that helped give fire to the 86 and 88 teams. An argument can (and should) be made that he too deserves to be in the hall, if for anything else based on his long stretch in which he dominated defensively. He will not be eligible for consideration again till 2011.

Both were great players. Both leaders. But overall, Keith was the best. While lacking Piazza's power, he still had the potent mix of agressive defense and excellent hitting, that when combined with the personality he used to lead the Mets to victory makes him the greatest all time Met position player.