I have to give the Mets an A for this offseason...building for the future, not overpaying for mediocre players and gettng the payroll uder control...if there are any quality FA next year, now we can afford them.
Based on the off season, I see 71 wins.
A solid D- from me.
Pretty much , last I checked its the MAJOR leagues ,, they play to win.
Being the last major league team to sign a free agent this off season , how helpful was that?
again, you don't know what you are talking about
you think that finishing w/ a 500 record is better even if they mortgage the future to do it...but accepting a bad record for the short term w/ the eye to building long term success that actually has a chance to REALLY do something - thats an unsuccessful offseason to you
you are too short sighted, impatient, and ignorant to actually sit through a rebuild ...which is why the team waited so long to do it - fans like you....and what happened? we wound up w/ one of the oldest and overpaid teams in baseball that required major rebuilding to address its issues
I think that we should have signed Hamilton, B.J. Upton, and J. Upton.
How is that for a realist plan.
A) i didnt say the offseason was perfect
B) i actually feel they should have signed an of but at the same time recognize that there was an argument against every single of on the market (name one and ill tell you why it could have been a terrible signing)
C) in ways it does help in that, by not overpaying for a mediocre player that would have tied up future assets for a season that wouldnt have mattered anyway, it opens up the possiblity of, next season (you know when our young core will actually be w/ the team the entire season) we will have a much larger group of mlb ready prospects that can be offered in trade for players that are set to earn substantial money w/o worrying about having the funds to pay their contracts....you seem to think that its all about one season each offseason...that you pay for 5 seasons for one season of results, completely ignoring the long term ramifications of a short term fix that is usually an overpay
Since you are concerned with those not answering your question, perhaps you would like to answer the OP question first?
Since you seem to be the expert here, what is your expert opinion on what should have been done differently?
Actually there is -- when you sign someone - other teams cant ( although on this board -- we were somehow still going to trade for bourn ) .. seems to me -- having your choice of all available players makes a better team.
What am I missing there?
ok so who would you have signed and for how much? you still havent answered the question....and i suspect that you really don't even know what each player was paid or realistically how much of an upgrade each player truly was
because talking out your *** w/ nothing to back it up is kind of your thing
I would have asked in December about retaining the 11th pick in the draft.
And if the answer was no , I still would have signed Bourn, an all star center fielder for 4-5 years as opposed to a having control over a player for 7 years who has a 20% chance of being a impact player in the major leagues.
Is this our first year of rebuilding or the 3rd??? ------------------------Yes it is the third year so what is your point? You think they should be finished?
Find a team that was as bad as we were with some terrible contracts and no farm system and let me know how long it took them to become competitive. And get back to me with the results.
The Nationals were purchased in 2006 so how many years did it take them? Were were they after their second year? In 2008 they had a 59-102 record. Oh well they must have done better in 2009. Woops 58-103. Shoot they must have become that power house in the fourth year 2010. Again last but with improvement 69-93. After the 5th year they reach .500 81-80 and had a killer payroll of $66 million they were really spending like crazy.
Guess it takes longer that going into the third year, eh!