Anyone who thinks that all the leaks about the Mets having a similar offer to Cleveland are not coming from the Mets is being naive. This spin has started. They want the illusion out there that they tried to sign Bourne. Next, Sandy will say sometime in the next few days: "we were in it til the end", "we have the resources" blah blah blah.. Yet the Mets always have reason to not seal the deal, "the market got too crazy" , "we don't want to lose our #11 pick" When exactly will he stop talking and show us?
Then Fred will say, "we think these young outfielders are talented". "we will be better than people think"
I am not here advocating that Bourne would have been the solution to the outfield problems. But his pursuit is systemic of how the Mets operate now. Leak that they are interested in someone, make an offer that they know will not be accepted and then say they tried. And yet people here still think they will spend next year?
Sandy said in October, "the changes to the outfield will be more substantial then subtle. Well now the off-season is over. All he has done is bring in a collection of career minor leaguers and has beens. I guess that his is definition of substantial change. Maybe he will add another team's castoff during the spring, but when was the last time a guy with any real talent changed teams in spring training? The outfield is by far the worst in baseball, and they know it. Why else would career infielders like Turner and Lutz be given a chance in the outfield?
Get ready for another below .500 season.
*Sandy Alderson told reporters today that agent Michael Bourn’s agent, Scott Boras, had always insisted on including a fifth-year vesting option, which was so easy to attain it was more-or-less a five-year deal. Alderson said he was not willing to give that level commitment. Also, he said, ‘at least early on,’ MLB seemed amenable to protecting his team’s first-round draft pick, in the event he signed Bourn. However, that turned out to not be the case later on. In other words, as he explained, he never got to dealing with the draft-pick issue because of his refusal to give Bourn a fifth-year vesting option. Bourn eventually signed a four-year deal with the Indians that includes the desired vesting option. “Obviously, we made a string effort to sign him and we weren’t able to do it, which is unfortunate,” said Alderson. In regards to the current state of the outfield, he said, in his view, the free-agent market for outfielders is ‘closed.’*
So he made an offer that fell short of what Boras was always insisting on, and he claims he made a strong offer? When you make an offer you know will be refused its not a true offer. That is an offer for P.R. purposes only.
correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bourn, himself, tweeted or posted somewhere, that the Mets did offer him a contract, that would have been as long as 4 years, and he WANTED to come to the Mets, but couldn't wait for the arbitrator to decide if the Mets can keep the #11 pick, which would've been in 2-3 weeks.
My guess for him wanting to be with the Mets over the Indians, is that he's played all his career in the NL, and wanted to stay in that league.
Oh well.. no huge lost.
correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bourn, himself, tweeted or posted somewhere
That was posted by a few writers who were later contradicted when it was reported tha Bourne saw the Indians as a better chance to contend then the Mets.
Then Fred will say, "we think these young outfielders are talented". "we will be better than people think" <<< elsid1986
That depends on what people Fred is talking about. We won't be better than SAZ thinks. They could be better than I think, because I think they'll be awful. They were better than I thought last year. In 2012 I thought 70-92, they were 74-88. Better, but still bad. So, there are degrees of badness. Fred could be right!
No maybe that offer from the Mets was before Cleveland ever got involved. And it was contingent on the saving of the pick. What is wrong with the explanation of how everything worked out? You are just adding your opinions on what they did with no proof. They didn't want to give 5 years period, that should be easy to understand even for you. When they offered 4 years it was the only offer on the table. Cleveland then realized that Bourn's price has come down and didn't care about the 5th year so they jump in before MLB has a chance to okay the pick.
Where is all the spin and excuses that you are imagining. He was not worth what the Mets would have to offer. 5 years and losing the #11 pick. Cleveland only had to offer the 5 years to get him.
Done now move forward.
~~~ So is what you are saying then that Bourne would have accepted the Mets offer even though it didn't have the easily vesting option Boras had insisted on from the begining if it weren't for the draft pick issue? ~~~
I didn't say it, Bourn said it.
~~~ That was posted by a few writers who were later contradicted when it was reported tha Bourne saw the Indians as a better chance to contend then the Mets. ~~~
I never read anywhere that it was "contradicted"
~~~ Did you ever think that what he said was a negotiating ploy to get more money out of the Indians? ~~~
If that was the case, why did Bourn state what he did AFTER he signed with the Indians?
"If that was the case, why did Bourn state what he did AFTER he signed with the Indians?"
Does it ever feel like you're trying to have a discussion with a brick wall?
" but if they cost more than $1.69 to sign, always seem to go somewhere else."
Marcum didn't go anywhere else.
~~~ Does it ever feel like you're trying to have a discussion with a brick wall? ~~~
Sometimes... but when I hit that wall, I just stop. It's not worth the energy or the callouses on my fingertips.
~~~ Marcum didn't go anywhere else. ~~~
Marcum & Ike are two of the main reasons I'm going to participate in fantasy baseball this year. I've been in hiatus from that for a couple of years after doing it non-stop since the mid-90's. I think Marcum and Ike will have very good seasons, and they very likely won't be in many people's radars.