• Welcome Guest
New York Mets

Welcome to the New York Mets.
Before posting, please review our Message Board Guidelines

    • Roster and Payroll
  • To:All
  • 12/10/12
  • murphstates

I was just looking at the current roster and doing some quick back of the envelope calculations and here is what I came up with.

Rotation (as of today): Santana, Dickey, Niese, Gee and Harvey. Total cost $39 million, of which $30 million is Santana including his buy out.

Bullpen: Francisco, Parnell, Mejia, Edgin and any one or two of Carson, Ramirez, Hefner, McHugh and Familia. Total cost is $9 million including the estimated arbitration raise for Parnell.

Catcher: Recker, Thole. Total cost $1.5 million including Thole's arbitration raise.

Infield: Davis, Murphy, Tejada, Wright and Turner: Total cost $15 million including Davis and Murphy's arbitration raises and deducting for Wright's deferred salary.

Outfield: Baxter, Duda, Kirk and Valdespin. Total cost $2 million.

That's $66.5 million for 20 players or if they add another one of the young guys to the pen $67 million for 21 players.

Add the $6 million being paid to Bay this year and it's $73 million.

It's been stated repeatedly that, at worst, payroll will be the same as last season and on a number of occasions it was said payroll could increase to the $100 million range.

With 21 roster spots occupied, no big name free agents being brought in and the only trades under discussion reducing payroll even further, what four players are going to account for the additional $21.5 million it would take to match last year's payroll?

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • JackNicholson
This is what I am thinking. We are not active in free agency at all, and our payroll is now $73 million. Did we decide to just keep it low or are we going to spend up to the $100 million? What was the point in Wright deferring his contract if we aren't going to do anything??
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • DFAB
probably no one...and the "reason" why payroll wasn't increased to what it was SAID to be will most likely be because "we didn't feel there were any players worth the contracts they got and didn't want to overpay anyone"
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • DFAB
Bay AND Wright deferring money...Ludwick would have been nice....
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • JackNicholson
Ehh, I wasn't a fan of Ludwick being signed. But I gotta believe we had to be looking for someone to sign, or else we would have kept Wright at his $15 million this year.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • murphstates
Good question.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • edmet
they should make a run at bourn, 4 yrs x $13m. possibly a 5th yr option for the same price with a $2 or $3m buyout. they can also defer $3m from 2013 pay. as your numbers show, they can clearly afford that. if they get outbid, fine. but if they cant get a leodoff hitter in trade, why not try for bourne. he could help add 20 rbi each to wright and ike ledgers. his D would help the pitchers immensly, especially with duda and perhaps olt in the corners.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • DFAB
Lucwick would have been a very solid pickup....would have provided a much need RH power bat.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • murphstates

That's what I'm thinking. Here's the other thing, take $36.5 million off for 2014 for Santana and Francisco's expiring contracts. Even adjusting for Wright, assuming we will have to pay $7.5 million to Bay, raises and another round of arbitration it should still be around $55 million.

Does anyone honestly believe we will take on $45 million in additional salary in 2014?

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • nvmets10
Well, Ross remains out there but with the Phillies, Yankees, and Mariners also interested, I don't know how realistic a possibility he is. Beyond him, I truly can't find anyone worth pursuing. Hamilton, Bourn and Swisher are of course out of our price range. The guys I thought would be more likely are all now gone - Cabrera, Ludwick, Reynolds.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • murphstates
They should, but it certainly doesn't appear they will.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • DFAB
I think we will be hearing "we felt that there weren't any players worth overpaying" a lot....
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • MetsyCNY
Obviously the Wilpons are still hurting despite the Madoff situation somewhat settled. Citi alone, pays the Mets 20 Mil a year for naming rights. Throw in the all the tv money, ESPN, FOX, DIRECTV, SNY, WPIX, MLB etc. and the baseball operation is bringing in over $70 Mil before a ticket or concession and parking are sold. It's an absolute shame what little they are actually putting back into the team compared to where ever else the money is going. I bet it's not even going into their pockets, but rather to paying off all the debt and attorney fees they piled up over the last 5 years. What a sin , and what's worse they destroyed the Brand as well.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • edmet
besides seattle, who else is in on bourn? pagan got aav of $10m, victorino of $13m. we should make a run at bourn with that $13m aav in mind. all they can do is say no. keep in mind if we trade dickey, that could be another $4.5m off the books. we need a leodoff hitter, and a good D outfielder. bourn fits.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/10/12
  • murphstates
I know, that's what prompted me to undertake this exercise. I can't even figure out how they would spend the money based on what's left on the market. Barring a trade that brings on salary or a completely unexpected signing of one of the remaining big ticket FAs where is the money going to go? They could sign four Cody Ross's and still have money left over.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/11/12
  • nvmets10
Well the Phillies were talking to him as well but I'm not sure if acquiring Revere changed that. It'd be great if we could go after him but I just don't think there's any real chance they'd even consider the possibility. Same with a Hamilton and even Swisher. I don't get the feeling that they have any intention of spending big money on any one player sadly.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/11/12
  • wrghtknght
Nah. And this period of stagnancy will continue until the WIlpons' back account improves. They'll see to that.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/11/12
  • metsfanforlife

Thanks for telling it like it is. You state a sad story.

LETS GO METS!!!

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/11/12
  • thebobymon
The 4 names are safely tucked away in Jeff's back pocket.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/11/12
  • thebobymon

Recoup ones losses.

And bring down the spending to a level that is indicative of the income they have now, not the income they had during the Madoff heyday.

It all makes perfect sense.

  • Reply to this Message
Powered by Mzinga