• Welcome Guest
New York Mets

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

    • Wilpons are ALREADY making excuses
  • To:All
  • 2/13/13
  • KB24NYM

Fred is such a weasel...throwing in conditionals like they'll spend/invest in the team "if its appropriate".

In other words, they'll only SPEND if the deal is incredibly team-friendly. Nothing changes.


Edited 2/13/13   by  KB24NYM
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • 4545_ajd
They aren't going to spend just to spend like in the Omar Minaya days and be saddled with bad contracts, hopefully an we will see they actually spend smart and spend big, rather than just one or the other.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Deadtrek
Bad teams tend to have to over pay to get players to come to their team -- ala Werth
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • DFAB
I agree not giving Hamilton 125m, Upton 80m, etc. But there is NO excuse IMO why they couldn't add a Ludwick to a 2/14m deal. That is a VERY fair contract to pay someone who can effectively fill a DESPERATE need the Mets have. THAT is where I am extremely annoyed with this ownership. You don't need a bunch of giant contracts to be good, but you DO have to spend in FA IN ADDITION to building the farm.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • 4545_ajd

"That is a VERY fair contract to pay someone who can effectively fill a DESPERATE need the Mets have. THAT is where I am extremely annoyed with this ownership."

But why do you assume that was on the Wilpons? If they made an offer to Bourn for 4/48 than Ludwick at 2/14M is small by comparison. Marcum can make as much as 8M this season and we didn't even really need much help in the starting rotation.

I think Sandy kept waiting on something better to come and it never came.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Mort2112
It makes no sense to spend big right now.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • gilforhof
What was better? I could see not going after big contracts, but Ludwick would have been a fair deal for both. Not saying Ludwick would agree, but it was something to take a shot at.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Mort2112
Ryan Ludwick? Why bother with him?
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • DFAB
I put any non spending on the wilpons. Until they prove otherwise, I will still believe that their priority is to lower payroll and not spend more than they have to. I think that is a very fair statement regarding the wilpons.....PROVE to your fans that WINNING is the top priority and not saving money.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • nutz4pugs

There's this old joke about polticians: How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

Just subsitute Wilpon for politician.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • hammr1952
thats a big time BINGO!! +1.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Gepett0
soooo what was the wright extension? an illusion?
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • DFAB

"Ryan Ludwick? Why bother with him?"

He is a solid ML OFer who is a RH power bat...something we DESPERATELY need....and the contract he was given was VERY reasonable.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Mort2112
Who cares he wouldn't ahve done much to help us win.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • DFAB

"soooo what was the wright extension? an illusion?"

If you are suggesting that because the wilpons extended Wright, it proves the wilpons are willing to spend, I don't believe that would be accurate. The wilpons knew they HAD to sign Wright. It would have been too much of a PR hit ESPECIALLY with the ASG at CF this year. Also, that extension actually allowed the payroll to be LOWER this year! Wright is making about HALF of what he was going to make this year if he just got the option. After this season, Ike and Murphy will have to be extended if they both have good seasons. The Mets need to keep their home grown talent and have to SPEND in order to do it. So, like I said...I will believe the wilpons increasing payroll when I SEE it.

  • Reply to this Message
  • To:All
  • 2/13/13
  • melloca
Wait until Fredo sees the attendance at the end of the year when there is 30% drop in attendance
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • DFAB
you don't know if he would have enough to help or not...and even if he DIDN'T lead us to a playoff spot, you have TRADE BAIT....which could bring back good prospects, which obviously would improve the future. So really, either way you look at it...there really is no excuse not to offer someone like Ludwick a contract.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • Mort2112
He wouldn't bring back much. Look at his last three years prior to playing in that band box last year.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • 4545_ajd

Just because he signed for 2/15 with the Reds doesn't mean he would have taken a similar contract with the Mets.

You would be asking him to move his family and leave a 97 win team that plays in a band box to go to a 74 win team that plays in a pitchers park.


Edited 2/13/13   by  4545_ajd
  • Reply to this Message
  • 2/13/13
  • MetObserver

Did you see the contract that he signed just to stay in Cincy? He had a $5 million dollar option for this year that was declined by Cincy when they bought him out for $.5 million. Then in just over a month after becoming a free agent 12/10 to be precise he signed for a $2 mil bonus and a $1 mil salary for this year. Then he gets $7.5 mil next year and a mutual option year worth $9 mil with a $4.5 buy out.

Don't think he would have even entertained an offer from the Mets at all. He wanted to stay in Cincy.

  • Reply to this Message
Powered by Mzinga