• Welcome Guest
New York Mets

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

    • Report: Mets asking Bogaerts and Bradley Jr for Dickey
  • 12/3/12
  • gomets66

The Mets met with eight teams today about Dickey, according to Adam Rubin and Joe McDonald of ESPN. The Red Sox were one of those teams, and the Mets wanted Xander Bogaerts and Jackie Bradley Jr. in return. We heard earlier that the Sox didn't have interest in Dickey, so perhaps the Mets' exorbitant asking price is playing a part in that lack of interest.>>>>

there was also this.

Fair or not, Dickey's age and repertoire is making teams reluctant to give up significant talent for him.


Edited 12/3/12   by  gomets66
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • almandareo357
Is this Profar for real? He looks like an infield version of Juan Pierre. :)
  • Reply to this Message
Message 545831.42 was deleted
  • 12/3/12
  • almandareo357
"But then if we get Bofaerts, we could move Ruben back to 2nd, and deal Murphy."
I thought he was lobby for a front office job? :)
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • JackNicholson

This is the biggest reason. Dickey is only owed $5 million this year. Very cheap. Better than Shields as teams are starting to realize that, if you believe you can compete that year, you have to go all out. Acquiring an ace for $5million allows a team flexibility to sign another top flight player financially.

Also, they see how Dickey was a sensation in NY. Fans came to see a losing ballclub just to watch Dickey. You can't buy that draw, especially in an era where the sellout in baseball is becoming rather rare. Also, a lesser talked of thing but still great, players love Dickey and he's a loyal guy. Would sign extension with a team if they give him respect.

All this age talk is legit; 38 years old is old. But you also have to look at depreciation of all talent, regardless of age. Who says Shields or Grienke won't tank out after transferring teams? Look at Barry Zito and that dilemma. Dickey may outperform both Shields and Grienke over a course of a couple years, regardless of age.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • eastvisitr
It's fair. If I was a fan of an opposing team I'd be leary of dealing top prospects for Dickey just because he's such a unique case. The Red Sox are in a strange spot too. Every team in the division is getting better and their best players all had down years or were hurt for a good portion of the season. I'm not sure Dickey vaults them back toward the top even he continues to pitch the way he has been.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • dejavu1
I think a lot of teams, including the Red Sox, will up their offer for Dickey significantly if Greinke signs a monster contract in LA.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • AdrianMonk

We drafted a shortstop last June who is just as good.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • JamesHetfi3ld

...?

You can't honestly believe that, right?

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/3/12
  • AdrianMonk

Bogaerts is listed as prospect #31. That's not exactly elite. I know he's Boston #1, but that just means Boston doesn't have a top prospect.
  • Reply to this Message
Message 545831.50 was deleted
  • 12/4/12
  • skorpio520
why boaerts? we have a shortstop. we need a catcher along with bradley jr.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • 86kid
That kid is like 3-4 years away from the majors at this point.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • ILikeToSneeze
Salty, Bradley and Barnes would be more than fair. Two top 50 prospects and an everyday catcher.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • skorpio520
yeah id do that
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • TheChosen1
Lavarnway, Brentz and Bradley.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • AdrianMonk


According to this, Barnes is #2.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2012/

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/4/12
  • loyalfan28
I don't know much about him but his stats really arent all that impressive to me. You look at someone like Wil Myers and he appears to be much more impressive (numbers wise). Like I said I don't really know much about Profar though.
  • Reply to this Message