---"Multiple teams remain involved in talks for R.A. Dickey, but it's still possible the Mets will extend the knuckleballer instead of trading him. The reigning National League Cy Young winner appears to seek two years and $26MM in addition to his $5MM salary for 2013. Here are the latest rumors about contract talks for Dickey and potential trades..."
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/12/ra-dickey-rumors-friday.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter#2gH2gg72gBBv6Wxp.99

If that is true I don't think the Mets will have any problem extending him if trade talks fall through.

You wouldn't think so. 3 years, $31 million is extremely fair.

Certainly when guys like Dan Haren are getting $13M, RA is definitely worth a 3 year/$31M deal. Way more than fair.

If you lock him up, then you can build some gameday promotions around him, use him in advertising to move tickets and try to move some merch as well. All those things have value to the organization.

I keep seeing 2/$29 million, but the Daily News has the the 2/$26. Unfortunately it also says this:

"Despite all of those discussions, the Mets are far from ruling out keeping Dickey on a contract extension. The winter meetings ended with the sides far apart on the dollar value of a two-year deal, and the Mets’ current offer was well below Dickey’s initial asking price of approximately two years, $26 million, plus the preexisting $5 million club option.

The Mets will not meet that price, according to sources."

The Mets are just stalling while they take trade offers, they know how important an extension is for Dickey so they have all the negotiating power. Push comes to shove they will extend Dickey.

exactly the mets would be stupid to sign RA before the Grienke signs...because Grienke signing could make whoever loses out on him desperate...and a desperate team might be willing to overpay.

Dickey is on the roster for 2013 regardless so there is no rush for the Mets FO to sign him to an extension until they exhaust all trade possibilities.

All trade possibilities wont rear there head until Grienke signs. Once he does the Mets will be able to astablish Dickey's value on whether they can get enough in a trade for him or they want to resign him.

MAKE UP UR MIND GRIENKE!

>>>"exactly the mets would be stupid to sign RA before the Grienke signs...because Grienke signing could make whoever loses out on him desperate...and a desperate team might be willing to overpay.
Dickey is on the roster for 2013 regardless so there is no rush for the Mets FO to sign him to an extension until they exhaust all trade possibilities.
All trade possibilities wont rear there head until Grienke signs. Once he does the Mets will be able to astablish Dickey's value on whether they can get enough in a trade for him or they want to resign him."<<<

Exactly. Well said. I think the is the Mets mindset at this point. But I don't think Sandy will wait forever. When he was asked by Mike Francessa the other day, he said he felt like Dickey's situation could be, or at least should be, resolved with in the next 10 days one way or the other. Sandy will wait this out as long as he can, but if Grienke goes too long, they may not wait that long.

That's more than fair if its true. I'd lock it up right now.

That's exactly what they should offer.

IMO the only way to improve the team now is via trade. If RA remains on the team, all we have is last years team, which is not good enough. RA will go, but to the highest bidder.

RA,s trade value will never be higher but his value to the Mets in marketing terms is pretty high too . I just don't see teams willing to give up enough to offset his value to the team .
If the contracts demands are as quoted <WTF sign the guy . That is cheap .

As Bowden and Duquette keep saying on MLB on XM , " he isn't Roy Halladay " he won't get that much in a deal .

Jays line up the best with what the Mets needs are but I don't see Anthopulous moving his top prospects .

fair contract in my opinion

I think the thing is that the Mets want to trade him to fill multiple holes and extending him is actually 2nd to that.

"I think the thing is that the Mets want to trade him to fill multiple holes and extending him is actually 2nd to that"

IF they can get the offer they want.

If the Mets actually do go into the season with him unsigned or traded, something is VERY wrong...

But would you rather see them fill one hole with a top tier caliber player or fill two holes with below average guys?

right...IF they get what they want he gets traded, if not they will just extend him. When the worst case scenario is keeping a CY award winner, I guess it's tough to get THAT annoyed either way.

are you talking in terms of prospects? Like Myers OR Arencibia/Gose?