Quote of the off-season from Oct, worth saving ():

Matthew Cerrone, MetsBlog.com

Insiders at the GM Meetings tell me Dickey will want four years, and probably $60 million after 2013, but the Mets are thinking more like two years and $30 million.





Ship this SOB out of town immedately.    4 yrs and 60 mil.... Please.

NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

DocK16 wrote: Quote of the off-season from Oct, worth saving ():

Matthew Cerrone, MetsBlog.com

Insiders at the GM Meetings tell me Dickey will want four years, and probably $60 million after 2013, but the Mets are thinking more like two years and $30 million.





Ship this SOB out of town immedately.    4 yrs and 60 mil.... Please.

If 4/60 is real, and not just a negotiating ploy or a starting number, "don't let the door hit you on the way out". No one is giving him that.

RAD likely wanting a 3-4 yrs ext. at $12-$15M per and forcing the Mets to trade him... will be a blessing in disguise, IMO.

I think we'll get a pretty good package for him.

And, IMO, Wheeler should be ready by mid to late May.

As I brought up the other day, I'd be in favor of pairing FF w/ Dickey... and while getting less value back, clearing the combined $11.5M for '13. Just an option. If not, just trade him alone.

Gstacks177 wrote: RAD likely wanting a 3-4 yrs ext. at $12-$15M per and forcing the Mets to trade him... will be a blessing in disguise, IMO.

I think we'll get a pretty good package for him.

And, IMO, Wheeler should be ready by mid to late May.

As I brought up the other, I'd be in favor of pairing FF w/ Dickey... and while getting less value back, clearing the combined $11.5M for '13. Just an option. If not, just trade him alone.

I'd rather eat FF's contract and get back as much talent as possible.  IMO, we need talented baseball players more than we need short-term financial flexibility.  Granted, that flexibility would allow us to sign more talent, but imo the kind of talent we need is young, cheap, and controllable.

DocK16 wrote:

Gstacks177 wrote: RAD likely wanting a 3-4 yrs ext. at $12-$15M per and forcing the Mets to trade him... will be a blessing in disguise, IMO.

I think we'll get a pretty good package for him.

And, IMO, Wheeler should be ready by mid to late May.

As I brought up the other, I'd be in favor of pairing FF w/ Dickey... and while getting less value back, clearing the combined $11.5M for '13. Just an option. If not, just trade him alone.

I'd rather eat FF's contract and get back as much talent as possible.  IMO, we need talented baseball players more than we need short-term financial flexibility.  Granted, that flexibility would allow us to sign more talent, but imo the kind of talent we need is young, cheap, and controllable.

I see the logic in that thought, I do. Although, w/ the ~$10M we'll have + those $11.5M, we could possibly sign both AJP and BJ Upton.... and backload them a bit (say $6M for AJP in '13, and $8M for BJU) knowing the relief they'll get at year's end.

Hopefully they can at least get a good OF prospect along with another good SP prospect if they were to trade the greatest man of all-time.

I want nothing to do with either AJP or BJU.  I'd be with you if there were someone out there like Aaron Hill last off-season who could be a potential bargain buy, but AJP and BJU are going to be grossly overpaid this off-season.  Those are the kinds of contracts we need to stay away from going forward.

DocK16 wrote: I want nothing to do with either AJP or BJU.  I'd be with you if there were someone out there like Aaron Hill last off-season who could be a potential bargain buy, but AJP and BJU are going to be grossly overpaid this off-season.  Those are the kinds of contracts we need to stay away from going forward.

At reasonable deals: say AJP 3/21, BJU 4/40-48... They could make sense, IMO. Anyhing north off that, I agree w/ you. There is a better chance of them getting those deals you're talking about though....

i'm not sure where to put this, but since i saw his mention above, i figure it can go here.

but can someone explain the appeal of signing AJP to a big contract?  we are talking about a catcher who will turn 36 in december, and who for most of his career, was a 15 homer, .725-.750ish ops guy.  and in his contract year, at age 35, he hits 27 homers (9 higher than his prior career high, and 10 more than his totals in 2010 and 2011 combined),  with an .827 ops (vs .728 in 2011 and .688 in 2010).

does no one else find anything fishy about his 2012 performance?  certainly it should raise enough eyebrows to really re-consider whether this is someone we want the mets to pursue in a multi-year deal that would likely use up most of the available salary this off-season.

I cannot imagine giving AJP a three year deal at $7 million per season.

hobson54 wrote: i'm not sure where to put this, but since i saw his mention above, so i figure it can go here.

but can someone explain the appeal of signing AJP to a big contract?  we are talking about a catcher who will turn 36 in december, and who for most of his career, was a 15 homer, .725-.750ish ops guy.  and in his contract year, at age 35, he hits 27 homers (9 higher than his prior career high, and 10 more than his totals in 2010 and 2011 combined).

does no one else find anything fishy about his 2012 performance?  certainly it should raise enough eyebrows to really re-consider whether this is someone we want the mets to pursue in a multi-year deal that would likely use up most of the available salary this off-season.

You can leave it here, but feel free to start an individual thread in the future or just use the Around the Majors thread for general free agency discussion.

I agree on AJP by the way.  A 35-year-old catcher coming off a career year.  No thanks.

For now I am going to focus on the actual title of the linked article:

Mets GM: Trying to keep RA Dickey.

First and foremost I don't believe for an instant that Dickey is demanding 4/60. And secondly, I lose more respect for this FO every time they choose to play out one of these negotiations in the press. Call me cynical but that is not the way to handle a negotitation when you actually want to sign and keep a player. It's a bush league tactic and it insults my intelligence.

MookieLJL wrote: For now I am going to focus on the actual title of the linked article:

Mets GM: Trying to keep RA Dickey.

First and foremost I don't believe for an instant that Dickey is demanding 4/60. And secondly, I lose more respect for this FO every time they choose to play out one of these negotiations in the press. Call me cynical but that is not the way to handle a negotitation when you actually want to sign and keep a player. It's a bush league tactic and it insults my intelligence.

Admittedly, my headline was based on what I had read on ESPN's bottom line, not the title of the article.  I thought the bottom line report was much more interesting. 

RA Dickey is a phenomenal story and one of the few bright spots in this organization, but I'm ready for wholesale changes.  If that means dealing Dickey and Wright, so be it.  Legacy players and feel good stories do little for me.  I want a baseball factory, like the Rays have become.  Legacies and feel good stories are the last thing they think about when making baseball decisions, and imo that's how it should be.  

If fans want legacies and feel good stories, then they shouldn't complain about the team's lack of success, because sometimes you have to choose between the two, and imo that's where the Mets are right now.

You must trust the Wilpons more than I do. All I can think when I hear that Dickey or Wright might be traded is that the Wilpons want a lower payroll. It has gotten to the point where I literally don't take anything the FO says at face value.

MookieLJL wrote: You must trust the Wilpons more than I do. All I can think when I hear that Dickey or Wright might be traded is that the Wilpons want a lower payroll. It has gotten to the point where I literally don't take anything the FO says at face value.

I don't trust the Wilpons at all, but I take no solace in having one or two 30+ year-old stars on a 70-win roster.  

Trading Dickey and Wright is what a smart franchise in our shoes should do imo.  It is problematic that we may not be doing it for baseball reasons, but that doesn't mean it isn't the right course or that we won't benefit.

I'd be much more concerned if we were doubling down on a failed roster like we've done time and time again in the past.

Do you guys think Dickey,Tejada, Flores would be enough for Justin Upton?

---------------------------------------------
--- DocK16 wrote:

MookieLJL wrote: You must trust the Wilpons more than I do. All I can think when I hear that Dickey or Wright might be traded is that the Wilpons want a lower payroll. It has gotten to the point where I literally don't take anything the FO says at face value.

I don't trust the Wilpons at all, but I take no solace in having one or two 30+ year-old stars on a 70-win roster.  

Trading Dickey and Wright is what a smart franchise in our shoes should do imo.  It is problematic that we may not be doing it for baseball reasons, but that doesn't mean it isn't the right course or that we won't benefit.

I'd be much more concerned if we were doubling down on a failed roster like we've done time and time again in the past.

---------------------------------------------

The only reason it is a failed roster is because payroll was cut by 50M and you were left with Wright and Dickey as the only guys worth anything. I take exception to the idea that this team needed to be blown up. It is a 75 win team because of ownership malpractice, plain and simple. Trading your best pitcher and your best hitter is unlikely to make it any better. Take an objective look at historical trades such as what Dickey and Wright will bring back to the team and tell me how many times you end up getting equal or better value. I'd say it's a one in three proposition at best.

---------------------------------------------
--- DrGuru wrote:

Do you guys think Dickey,Tejada, Flores would be enough for Justin Upton?

---------------------------------------------

Way too much in my eyes. You lose your starting SS, your best SP, and your best positional prospect who's less than 3 years away from the bigs just to improve one position. Who plays SS if you trade Tejada?