• Welcome Guest
New York Mets

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

    • Is any one else confused
  • 12/14/12
  • Gepett0

A) we can get whoever we want? who do we want? that free agent class isnt exactly booming w/ talent and they arent going to repeat the mistake they made w/ bay by overpaying for a guy that isnt really that good

B) you can't count on getting anything out of santana....anything he gives you is gra.vy...and dont forget, to get anything of value, you would have to eat the entire 31 mil

C) there are just too many holes to be able to fill through free agency and we really dont have prospects at those positions...we essentially have 0 outfielders....not one guy in the entire system can be relied upon to develop into an every day player...meanwhile the free agent market for outfielders is pretty mediocre....and next years isnt very good either (just about anyone w/ any value is on the wrong side of 30 and will want at least a 4 year deal) ... nevermind that picking up a solid catcher off the fa market is da.mn near impossible...add to that that 2nd base is far from solidified and you are talking about a lineup that is tejada, wright, davis....and two of those guys arent exactly guarantees either....we need bats....its that simple....and fa is not necessarily the best way to go about that

if dickey brings back 2 impact bats, then the trade is worth it...the key is he has to bring back TWO impact bats or its also not worth trading him

again, im not saying we HAVE TO trade dickey...but id rather trade dickey than niese bc talented young lhp just entering their prime and under team control at reasonable costs dont come around too often and we dont have a single other high upside starting lhp in our entire system outside of steve matz who is a huge injury concern and 4+ years aaway...if you get the RIGHT deal for dickey, you pull the trigger

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • TheFriNgE

Point A is paranoia that's inflicted the Wilpons, and I can't blame them. But, it's bad business to be too conservative. The time will arrive that we once again may have to turn to free agency to fill a void, maybe two. But next time make a more informed decision, better scouting, and most importantly going after the BEST, most talented FA out there, not 2nd best.

Point B is a valid argument. We would be eating all of anyway, so all the better to obtain a good prospect or two.

Point C is arguable, since it's still wait and see. I understand what you're saying, sometimes it is what it is, end of story. I remember how people on this board raved about Duda, and captain Kirk, always optimistic about our rising stars. I think they all deserve a fair chance now, in 2013 to prove what they can do. yeah, we need defense, speed, and bats (who doesn't?) We need somebody who can play RF at Citi.

Agreed that we must receive at least two top prospects. Nobody seems to want to give them up! So, either RA's value isn't as high as the Mets thought; Or AL teams have never been wowed by facing him. Or, other GM's perceive the Mets as too willing to trade RA, so they have raised a skeptical eyebrow.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • Gepett0

A) ok....but you still havent said who you want to give the mega deal to...bc it really is pretty barren....i mean who would you consider the top of, nelson cruz? who will be 33 at the end of the season and has only managed to play in more than 130 games once in his career? or how about jacoby ellsbury, who is maddeningly inconsistent himself? i guess the most consistent option out there is probably choo....who is an interesting possibility ill give you that but w/ boras as an agent, i dont know

none of these guys are worth the 5-6 year deals they will likely seek....and the possibility of signing two or three of them is pretty unlikely.....so exactly what is your plan in terms of fa acquisition on that front

B) i agree that, if santana pitches well in april-june, you move him for whatever you can get, eating all of the money...i just dont know how much that will be and i refuse to believe it will be much until i see him succeed first hand

C) Im not saying that none of those guys will develop into a solid player...in fact i think that kirk, den dekker, lagares, and puello all have potential...ive given up on the idea that duda can play the of....hes just terrible out there defensively and i don't see him getting much better....unless hes hitting 40 bombs a season, i just dont think he makes up for his incredibly bad defense...of the other guys, i think that lagares and puello only can stick if they can stay at cf, & den dekker AND kirk need to stop striking out so much

D) its not that they wont...its that there were other options before....thats exactly why sandy has been dragging this out....now grienke and shields are gone and the market starts to increase....add to that that the angels lost grienke then signed hamilton....now texas is looking to make a splash...at the same time the angels need pitching and dont want to lose the upper hand...there could very well be a bidding war b/t those two teams in the making... if no deal that is worth it materializes in a few weeks then, yes, pay dickey the extra few mil and call it a day....but it would be irresponsible NOT to wait and see what some of these teams are willing to give up now that the other options of that caliber are off the table and would be contenders are starting to get a little desperate...

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • TheFriNgE

Point A: you've called me out. I am too busy these weeks before Christmas to make good on the specifics, but I'd need to take time out to look at the other teams' prospects and current roster. I'll try to put something together. I sell guitars, and work mostly nights, since international sales are made then (it's 5PM and sunny on the Gold coast) And you're correct about the market trend. We would have to pay big money, yep, another big contract, at least one.

B: yes

C: Duda and Murphy multiply defensive liability. If Duda can hit 40, that would be a pipe dream, (he could, has amazing power) So there ya go, a great trading chip to the AL, or retain for lineup protection. (I'd keep 'im) Newy, Den Dekker, have their chance and they know it!

D: great points and well stated, I agree at this stage the Mets have to let it play out. I still prefer to retain Dickey, providing we can obtain position players (who are easier to obtain than a good #1 or #2), or one or more of our guys improve dramatically in 2013. We need a second baseman who can play the position without standing out in RF! lol

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • skorpio520

honestly,i think his age is a factor.i dont think hes gonna get the contract hes looking for and i dont think teams wanna give up two of their best prospects for a one year rental pitcher.

before anyone gives me the "life of a knuckleballer " speech. i didnt say his age was a factor for ME.just that i think its a factor for other gms.i want him to be resigned just because,even if he should fall apart in one of those years.he still did his job,he just did it when he was making 4 million dollars.consider it backpay.

the mets are playing a dangerous game right now with him.but im sorry to say,the game hes playing with them is just as dangerous. do i think 2 for 20 is lowballing him? yes,but there is a part of me that understands why. so they are staring at each other,waiting for the other to blink.if neither blink,and a trade cant be worked out,hes a free agent in 2014.so one of two things happen,he dominates again.a team takes a chance,signs him (noone will give him more than 2 years,atleast noone with intelligence),the mets looks stupid.

something happens ,he gets hurt, he doesnt pitch well, etc,anything.ends up with the best offer being some mlb wanna be team 1 year 8 million,if that.
if i was dickey,id take the money and run.it stinks,but the fact is he emerged late in his career .and he is,infact,38 years,he'll be almost 40 when he hits his free agent years.
in some ways you can compare him to niekro,and wakefield.but in some ways you cant.the style may be the same,but the situations arent .they were both already established long before they were 40. dickey just emerged recently,you had more of a history to base their performance on than you do dickey.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • govmule72

"No, it was still a dumb move and the Mets were still the beneficiary.

Even if he ends up being a bust, Mets still fleeced the Giants."

That makes no sense whatsoever.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • govmule72

"Until Wheeler succeeds at an MLB level, Sandy fleeced no one"

Right.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/14/12
  • govmule72

"Getting ANY team's top pitching prospect (especially one as highly ranked as Wheeler) for an aging OF with knee problems on a losing team for only half a season is getting fleeced."

You have seen Beltran's number since he left, right? So far the Giants saw benefit and we have seen none. Will we some day soon? Of course, and I sure hope so. It looks good so far, but until it is no one got fleeced, and if it doesn't, Sandy has.

"There's no other way around it. Teams covet top pitching prospects, they don't give them away for half season rentals... Besides, Beltran had ZERO purpose here. Of course the Giants were fleeced."

That is obviously yet to be seen.

  • Reply to this Message
Powered by Mzinga