Mets have discussed Michael Bourn January 22nd, 2013 11:58 pm OF Michael Bourn remains on the free agent market. However, if the Mets sign him, they have to give up their first round pick in 2013.
Jan. 22: The Mets have been internally discussing Bourn quite a bit. (Heyman, MLB Network).
Matthew Cerrone, MetsBlog.com:
Jan. 22: The way I understand it, the Mets will consider giving up a draft pick to sign Bourn only if they make another significant acquisition in the outfield. I’m guessing here, but I interpret that to mean Bourn (on his own) is not worth the pick, since his upside will not make a big enough impact alone. However, if another outfielder is acquired, adding Bourn to the mix might make a difference, and might be worth passing on a top pick. It’s all a long shot, though.
So it sounds like if they get another OF they will give up the draft pick to sign Bourn, Go get Upton then Bourn and we are a contender.
Someone made a very good point why would Jewish owners want someone who has made anti Jewish comments?
Would black owners want a member of the KK.K on their team?
If we got Upton AND Bourn, we still wouldn'y be a contender. To be a contender we'd need a lot better BP than we have, and a better starting rotation. One healthy, proven major league caliber starter, (Niese) isn't a contenders pitching staff.
We would be a heck of a lot better than we are. Maybe a .500 club instead of a 95 loss club. However, it's not going to happen. The Wilpons won't even spring for the pocket change it takes to sign Hairston. To think they'd sign either Upton or Bourn, let alone both, is laughable.
As for the draft pick, who cares. You wouldn't sacrifice this years Nimmo...who can't even hit in Brooklyn...for a Bourn? However, I'm sure it will be part of Sandy's excuse for doing nothing.
And you know the young guys plus the guys we will be bringing in wont be a good pen?
Clearly you dont want them to contend, Not sure why but if you think for one second Bourn and Upton would not make this team a contender well I just dont know what to say anymore.
"Someone made a very good point why would Jewish owners want someone who has made anti Jewish comments?"
...because people actually do change sometimes...
He would have been a really good pickup.
Dude your hate for the Wilpons has made you clueless, Clueless beyound that of a 13 year old from the burbs trying to be hood. The Mets picked up payroll in Buck and Dickey was due just five mill, I think with Buck it was close to a wash, Maybe a mill or two but that is nothing, It was about the players we got.
To be honest I have not seen anything of value from you in months and this is just another idiotic post.
"Clearly you dont want them to contend, Not sure why but if you think for one second Bourn and Upton would not make this team a contender well I just dont know what to say anymore."
Getting those two would bring us a lot closer to being a contender, but if the pen doesn't improve and the rotation is stable and good (Santana/Niese/Gee/Harvey/???) we have a decent chance.
I'm currently happy with the infield; guardedly optimistic about the rotation; very guardedly optimistic that the pen is better (it almost HAS to perform better). With Bourn and some other established player, the OF could be at least average.
I would be thrilled if the Mets pulled off Bourne and Upton, but it doesnt make any sense. First off there is no combination of dollars that doesnt pump the payroll up way beyond their reported limits. You are looking at adding at least 12-15 million maybe more in payroll for those 2.
2nd, while I would be thrilled and would love to see a lineup with Bourne, Murphy, Wright, Davis, Upton, Duda, (the power potential is scary), signing those 2 would only make sense by adding at least 2 more bullpen arms (more payroll) and at least 1 quality starter (Saunders Pavano), which again will add more payroll. At the very least it would take $20-25 million for all that talk to make sense.