dickey,flores,duda,meiija,havens,edgins and thole for jason kubal and upton and reliever . add names, subtract names.as far as a catcher after trading thole,resign shoppach,itd be about the same.

eh,nevermind.sounds better as a thought than it looks when written.

lol, too many ppl here pulling straws. We do not need to trade RA or Niese. We can improve as money comes off the books in 2014, and big time.... with an ace!!

we have 25m available to spend right now (assuming the multiple reports of the 100m salary are true and they aren't lying)....so until we spend THAT, I'm not convinced that they will spend the money coming off the books next year....I'll believe it when I SEE it...

The Mets really should spend most of that to keep RA, and then find a couple of cheap bats for the bench. The pen is pretty well set for 2013. It is what is is, for the time being. We may not make a run at all this year, but, if the FO is patient, and smart, we can look forward to 2014 to compete. Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing?

Spend most of it on RA and find a couple of cheap bats for the bench? I'm sorry but that isn't exactly a recipe for success. We need at LEAST one IMPACT bat either in the OF or at C. Options seem to be dwindling fast and I wouldn't be surprised if we went into the season with a sub 80m payroll with "flexibility at the deadline."

Also, the FO CAN make moves that help now AND later. It seems that yet again, whatever is COST EFFECTIVE is what we will see. Bourn would be a GREAT addition to the team and make us amazingly better....and we actually COULD afford him!!! That's what is so amazing! Assuming of course that the wilpons are actually telling the TRUTH this time about the payroll (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL).

"The Mets really should spend most of that to keep RA, "

Dickey is already signed for this year. What he gets has nothing to do with us getting to 100M

Yes I know,
It's unconscionable to allow Dickey to to remain on this team for 5 mil. It would undermine the Mets relationship with RA, it's bad PR, sends a bad message to the clubhouse, and future FA signings.

This isn't our year. I've already accepted that. Yep, we could go in at 80K with flex at the deadline, but why? The Mets really must absolutely build on pitching. It's essential we keep RA. I Like Bourn, and would be excited going into 2013. As a team, we have the option of adding position players for 2014, the best option as I see it.

You say this:

This isn't our year.

And then say this:

It's essential we keep RA.

Seems a little contradicting to me. If we are "building for the future" wouldn't trading Dickey for top prospects HELP that? If Dickey can bring back the right package, you HAVE to do it. If not, then you extend him.

Not a contradiction, not really, sorry if it seems so.

We need to continue building and it starts with the pitching staff. Wheeler and harvey are just about there, but still not a guarantee. At least one of these guys is going to be good! (I hope both)
Looking ahead to the deadline (perhaps trading Johan) to improve defense at 2B, and further ahead to 2014 to fill out the roster. A lot of money comes off the books.

I am predicting that at least one of our outfielders Den Dekker, Duda, Nieuwenhuis, Baxter, will have an outstanding year, which is reasonable to assume. So we go into 2014 with less need than we have now.

I am for retaining RA, and continue building in other areas. We have time for that. Rome wasn't built in a day, but we can do it in a year.

For any Met OF to have an outstanding year is not reasonable at all. That includes free agents that come and forget to hit such as Bay Burnitz Cedeno Bonilla in the past. they have historically had horrible production from the OF for the last 4 seasons and even longer many can argue.

hahah well, we'd best not trade RA for any outfielders, then lol! Just hang on to the rope! We're Mets fans, and we know that any outfielder as a Met, is doomed! We should sign only 3rd basemen to play the corners, and Valdespin in center!

you can't count on dickey to be what he was this year 2-3 years down the road....yes hes a knuckleballer....but no knuckleballer in history has ever thrown as high a pct of fastballs or tossed the knuckler as hard as dickey....thats what makes him so good....also he has no ucl and was pitching professionally for over 10 years before he even started throwing the knuckleball

sure, he might pitch until hes 46 but he could also break down by 40

I would argue the fastballs, maybe 3 or 4 per game, RA is the first to throw the "hard knuckle, so the jury is out on that. I think its safe to say there isn't as much stress on the arm as say, throwing a 91 mph fastball, or a hard slider. There isn't any question RA is in great physical condition. He doesn't appear old, nor like someone who's on the threshold of rapid decline, just an opinion based upon common sense.

mets "flexibilty at the deadline" translation...

"maybe next year,maybe the year after,maybe not at all"

yep....pretty much

probably not a hard slider but do you know how you throw a knuckle ball that fast? armspeed

and dickey throws his fastball 15 % of the time...thats more like 15-20 per game, not 3 or 4....check fangraphs if you dont believe me...and he threw it in the mid 80s...to give you a basis of comparison, wakefield threw his on average about 10% of the time and threw it in the low 70s

and you're right, no one has EVER thrown the hard knuckler so there is virtually no way of knowing what will happen to him....that is the point

he also has no ucl and was a traditional pitcher until around the age of 30, meaning he already had a lot of wear and tear on that arm

i just said that dickey could very well pitch till he is near 50....he wouldnt be the first knuckleballer to do it...and he loooks to be in pretty good shape....but, at the same time, bc there is no basis for comparison so you can't just say "oh dickey will pitch forever" bc you don't know that...so COMMON SENSE tells you that GUARANTEEING 5+ years for a pitcher that you can not come close to predicting how he will age over the next few years given the lack of comparable players in history....alll this means that market value for a guy like dickey is a 2-3 year extension on what he already is set to earn....NO TEAM would go beyond that....now, the value of those 2-3 years is really what is on the table....even dickey was never asking for more that 4 years overall

Looks like bad on the fastball. I did not check the fangraph, (and have not checked it yet) and just made my best guess. I have the impression that Dickey relies more on the fastball when there's a control problem (has to throw a strike) and/or a problem with a nail, much less when the knuckle is working. I agree that there's a 3 year window of lower risk. After that the risk goes way up. As you said, maybe he will pitch until he's 50. At this point, anything beyond 3 years is irrelevant, it's wait and see.

Dickey has added a wicked changeup with late movement. He introduced it late last season.