By MIKE PUMALast Updated: 3:05 AM, November 20, 2012Posted: 1:58 AM, November 20, 2012 David Wright is taking his time ordering new business cards that include a Mets logo.
According to an industry source with knowledge of the discussions, Wright is a “50-50” proposition at best to sign a long-term extension with the Mets this offseason, as the two sides continue to negotiate a deal that would potentially allow the All-Star third baseman to finish his career in Queens.
The source said Wright is less than thrilled with the length of contract and amount of guaranteed money the Mets have offered. It could set up a game of chicken between Mets brass and Wright’s agents, Sam and Seth Levinson, heading to the winter meetings, which begin in two weeks in Nashville, Tenn.
The team’s general manager, Sandy Alderson, last week indicated he would be seeking clarity on the status of Wright and R.A. Dickey between Thanksgiving and the winter meetings as the Mets try to determine whether to lock up or potentially trade their stars.
The Mets and Dickey have discussed a two-year extension — among various other scenarios, according to a source — but it remains unclear if a new deal with the NL Cy Young award winner would eliminate the possibility he is traded this offseason.
A team official said he was “not sure” if a contract extension for Dickey would guarantee the knuckleballer isn’t traded this winter. The Mets have glaring holes in the outfield and at catcher and could look to deal the 38-year-old Dickey to fill those needs.
But in the aftermath of the Marlins unloading several stars, including Jose Reyes, to the Blue Jays — a deal that was finalized yesterday — the thought within the industry is Dickey might consider seeking some form of no-trade protection in negotiations with the Mets.
Wright, who turns 30 next month, is believed to be seeking a deal of at least seven years and $125 million that would give him the largest contract for a position player in franchise history.
Wright’s agents also could push for the Mets to tear up the $16 million option they recently exercised on the third baseman for 2013 and add a small amount — say $500,000 (making Wright’s new salary $16.5 million) — and allowing the sides to frame a new deal as including next season and pushing it beyond the $137.5 million contract Johan Santana received before the 2008 season.
But the two sides remain at a stalemate.
“Part of it is [COO] Jeff Wilpon tries to win every negotiation, he doesn’t go for the middle ground,” said a person familiar with the club’s negotiating tactics.
Wright has said he will not negotiate with the Mets beyond spring training, putting him in position to hit the open market next offseason if a new deal can’t be struck.
yeah, 50/50....way out on that limb.
Funny, everything to this point stated an extension was highly likely. Thats what no news will do to the spin cycle.
However, did anyone, including DW think the Mets were going to back the Brinks truck up? The contract will be no more than "fair".
DW must realize the (Mets) days of overpaying are over. How bout a hometown discount DW??
i agree...although not sure how sincere he is.
unlike RA, who is basically in tears when talking about remaining with the team.
6 years 110 mil IMO is backing up the brinks truck.lol I think wright is sincere when he says he wants to stay. And yes like anyone he wants the most he can get. But with the original reports of what the 2 offers were they seem pretty close. 15 mil over 7 years is peanuts in this nutty world.(MLB)
Given the money sutation the Mets are in, if the offer is 6 years at 110M they are backing up the brinks truck. When it comes to spending money the Wilpons have a right to be in it. Unfortunately the Wilpons won't let any GM have total control. That's the biggest problem with this organization. the money they can be in on, but let Sandy make the player decisions and have a big hand in contract structure. There's more to a contract than just money. I can see Alderson balking at 7 years guaranteed. He doesn't like big money, long term, back loaded contracts. As you know what usually happens is that the player's production goes down as the money goes up.
That's not the point. Why aren't you looking at it that way from the owners perspective?
It boggles my mind that people almost always take the organization's side, in any sport, when it comes to contract negotiations. Owners make a ton of money off their teams, why shouldn't the players get their piece of the pie?
And why is only the player obligated to give up money for loyalty? You think if Wright was in a bad spot and did some terrible things like the Wilpons have and was cash poor, that the Wilpons would come out and say, hey you know what? We'll give you more money on this contract since you're struggling right now. Why is this only a one way street?
---"Owners make a ton of money off their teams, why shouldn't the players get their piece of the pie?"---
Because they arent the owners...they are the employees
This is the way it works in every industry in america....why should BB players be any different