Posted: 11/18/2012 8:27 AM
Matthew Cerrone, MetsBlog.com
I realize there are lots of concerns among fans and media, etc., about what the financial future is for the Mets. I get that. The thing is, it’s a private business and only the Mets know the answer. I believe you win in MLB by building up your farm system, creating a base and momentum, andthen spending wisely on free agents and making trades to complete the roster. So, I’m willing to let the jury remain out on the financial side of things… for now. The thing is, they’re building their base, hopefully they find some momentum next year, and then – when a significant chunk of money opens up in the budget after next off season – they start spending again on better, more appropriate players for the team they’re building now. If that happens, I think some fans will cool on their obsession with spending, and I think some media will relax their rhetoric. However, if payroll keeps dropping and the team keeps losing, despite freeing up money, then I think all hell will break loose. Right now, the Mets can point to Johan Santana’s contract, and still Jason Bay’s, and argue they are‘spending,’ and that’s technically true. But, the real proof will be in their actions one year from now, and everyone will be watching.
Michael Baron, MetsBlog.com
I still don’t understand the argument among many fans that spending immediately equates to winning. It just doesn’t – the Red Sox, Angels, Marlins, Cubs, and the Mets are all prime examples where the argument fails. And that’s just in 2012. This year’s weak free agent class is a prime example of that, where early reports suggest the top of this class is in search of big money and making them extremely overvalued, should they sign for anywhere close to what they’re asking for. It’s not that I don’t think there are any number of free agents available who could make the Mets better, nor do I think the Mets can continue to not invest in the big league roster. I understand the message spending sends and what it means in particular with the Mets, especially after what the organization has been through in recent years. And, I think it’s important the Mets prove they have the ability to make investments to the roster. But history has proven that throwing every last resource at free agent is not the answer to success, and the Mets are the prime example of that.
If you’ve followed me on Twitter, I’ve said on countless occasions that the $100 million the Mets are investing in 2013 would be a lot different than the $100 million they would invest in 2014 (assuming they invest $100 million in 2014). And, even if the Mets payroll were to (hypothetically) invest $80 million in 2014, their roster would likely be way more balanced than it is today. Why? Because they have such an imbalance of resource allocation on their roster in 2013, and much of that (in the form of Johan Santana’s and Jason Bay’s deals) won’t exist at this time next year. Don’t misunderstand that as my advocating for the Mets to spend less: it’s a call to spend wisely. Going forward, the Mets should be able to invest in healthier contracts – be it through free agency or trade – and they can get better bang for their buck in the process.
Remember, nearly half of Sandy Alderson’s payroll projection is dedicated totwo players right now, both of which have grossly underperformed the dollar value of their contracts. They had $80.5 million committed to six players before they cut Bay and restructured his deal, and that didn’t include the $2 million the Mets owed to Bay as part of his signing bonus. Even with a nominal increase in flexibility, it’s incredibly difficult to operate under those conditions.http://metsblog.com/metsblog/b...-of-confidence/
Posted: 11/18/2012 8:49 AM
Posted: 11/18/2012 8:58 AM
omnimetfan wrote: I think EVERYONE is missing the point. What if the next big contract turns out to be another Santana or Bay? The point is that any long-term big dollar salaries are extremely risky, but you cannot get the great players without taking that risk. The Mets needed an ace starting pitcher so they traded for and extended Johan Santana, perhaps the best starting pitcher in the game at the time. Did he miss any time due to injury before the signing, no! Even though Bay was not in his prime, he was coming off another stellar season when he was signed. Sometimes winning does require spending and being able to spend even when you are handcuffed by a contract that is no longer good. That the Mets can't spend because they are handcuffed by Bay and Santana is a very very bad sign. Maybe the Mets contend in 2014 and 2015 but what happens when 2016 rolls around and there is a new albatross? Do the Mets go into the we can't spend phase again and let this mess happen again?
Posted: 11/18/2012 10:08 AM
Posted: 11/18/2012 10:31 AM
Posted: 11/18/2012 10:45 AM
DocK16 wrote: omnimetfan wrote: I think EVERYONE is missing the point. What if the next big contract turns out to be another Santana or Bay? The point is that any long-term big dollar salaries are extremely risky, but you cannot get the great players without taking that risk. The Mets needed an ace starting pitcher so they traded for and extended Johan Santana, perhaps the best starting pitcher in the game at the time. Did he miss any time due to injury before the signing, no! Even though Bay was not in his prime, he was coming off another stellar season when he was signed. Sometimes winning does require spending and being able to spend even when you are handcuffed by a contract that is no longer good. That the Mets can't spend because they are handcuffed by Bay and Santana is a very very bad sign. Maybe the Mets contend in 2014 and 2015 but what happens when 2016 rolls around and there is a new albatross? Do the Mets go into the we can't spend phase again and let this mess happen again?The Mets didn't go into hibernation mode because of a couple albatross contracts. They're in hibernation mode because they have liquidity issues. The albatross contracts hurt because the team doesn't have the money to compensate for those two contracts, so we've essentially tried to compete with a $45-50M payroll.
Posted: 11/18/2012 10:49 AM
metdelsur wrote: The point is that thanks to ownerships haphazard investments outside of the franchise, it is now impossible for them to spend "responsibly" on the franchise. We are in the middle of a "disinvestment" process that has started quite some time ago,and that has only slowed down due to the long term commitments on some big contracts... Free agent signings have to be limited to either obtaing one missing piece to win right away, or to sign a potential core player going forward if he becomes available. The Mets are more than one player away from competing making the former option unviable, and are financially unable to exercise the latter should the oportunity arise. I only see a commitment from the Mets current ownership, to do anything possible to hold on to the franchise from an economic standpoint, winning is a very distant priority at this point in time, IMHO, if given the option to lose all 162 games, but to assure 81 home sellouts and a $50 million payroll, they would jump at the opportunity.I guess diehards like myself, will simply continue to follow the team no matter what, but thanks to the Wilpon's I'll do it with little or no expectations until further notice.
Last edited 11/18/2012 12:07 PM by DocK16
Posted: 11/18/2012 12:05 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 2:18 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 2:28 PM
MookieLJL wrote: Baron's first sentence is a tiresome straw man argument. Is any fan suggesting that the Mets just sign every expensive player now? It's sort of true that spending doesn't necessarily lead to winning but it is also true that better players get paid more than bad players. My gut instinct is that better players will generally cause a team to win more games than will bad players. And a GMs job is, in part, to spend money to improve the team. Whether or not he is successful with his investments will determine whether he will get to keep the job. Not spending any money is generally not a recipe for long term success in MLB. Sandy and the FO have gotten a pass so far because they haven't been given money to spend and because most fans are quite open to the idea that money doesn't lead to winning having seen so many contracts not work out in recent years (Bay, Santana, KRod, OP, Castillo). They've obviously been doing the right thing focusing on the farm. Every team, regardless of payroll, should make developing young players its top goal. It's time however to do a lot more than just that. Sandy is on the clock- even if he isn't given more money to spend this winter- to creatively improve this team. And to me, the Wilpons are on the clock as well. They are now saving 10-15M in 2013 cash owed to Bay and are receiving 10M+ more from the national TV contract. I think the least they can do is deploy that 20-25M to improve the team this winter if possible. If they choose not to then they deserve the empty stands they'll see in 2013. I'm trying to take a deep breath and let this offseason unfold but it isn't easy; Our patience and loyalty is being tested immensely.
Posted: 11/18/2012 2:33 PM
I think many fans forget that any MLB team is still a business. The reality is that money is a VERY important aspect in any business. This FO has determined that the Mets are not ready to contend long term (which is the only way to go about in any enterprise you get involved in) in 2013. Even if they went and signed Hamilton or Upton this offseason. The FO would be dumb to invest such a big investment (in both $ and years) on these types of players when they know the farm is not ready to sustain a steady influx of players to help the ML team (both for trades and ML players). The FO, since the start, has hinted that they would be ready to make their mark in 2014 and after. I know it is frustrating that Alderson does not come out and says: "Guys we feel we need to do the following to make the team a good franchise with continuous success. In order to do that we need to: 1- We need to improve our farm system. This is the most important thing!!! Our farm had no track record of developing players and we do not have any depth at the higher levels. (Name one position player we could use in the outfield?) We need to implement a system to develop players in a yearly basis. 2-Wait until the bad contracts runs out so we can re-invest it on the team. Most importantly we will maintain payroll flexibility going forward and not spend 50% of our payroll in two players (look at Santana and Bay)" I don't disagree that if the FO came out and said what their plan was plainly, it would help fans have an idea of what to expect in 2013, but given the fact that the Mets are a business, I don't blame the FO by not being as direct and trying to get as many tickets sold before the start of the 2013 season. Is this a good strategy? I don't know. But at least I can see the reasoning behind it. In short, to me it is very obvious that the Mets have been preparing themselves to start their winning ways from 2014 and forward. These three years (2011, 2012, and 2013) has been used by the FO to put their system in place, improving the farm and cleaning all the bad players that were signed by the previous regime. Would I prefer the Mets were in a better position? Sure!!
But the reality is that only by improving the farm (draft) and improving player development, will this team be set up to have continuous success at the ML level. Unfortunately these things take time and a three year period is probably the minimum time you need to make a farm productive.
Last edited 11/18/2012 2:47 PM by metropolitans86
Posted: 11/18/2012 3:20 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 3:45 PM
metropolitans86 wrote:I'm happy the Mets have a FO with a plan that has the fortitude to stand by it even if some fans don't agree with it.
Posted: 11/18/2012 3:51 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 3:53 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 3:55 PM
Posted: 11/18/2012 4:42 PM
xmulderx wrote: metropolitans86 wrote:I'm happy the Mets have a FO with a plan that has the fortitude to stand by it even if some fans don't agree with it. where is the plan? i don't see any evidence of a plan....
Posted: 11/18/2012 5:16 PM
xmulderx wrote: Look spending does not guarantee anything.. but spending wisely potentially improves your odds of winning.
Last edited 11/18/2012 5:32 PM by TransplantedMet
Posted: 11/18/2012 5:31 PM
xmulderx wrote: You have Baron and Cerrone routinely preaching spending does not = winning. Okay fine but on the other hand they are saying the Mets can then spend next winter & have a better team. LOLLook spending does not guarantee anything.. but it sure improves your odds of winning.
John Adams: At a stage in life when other men prosper, I'm reduced to living in Philadelphia!Mike "Doc" Emrick: THEY SCORE! HENRIQUE!! IT'S OVER!!!
Posted: 11/18/2012 5:32 PM
metropolitans86 wrote: xmulderx wrote: metropolitans86 wrote:I'm happy the Mets have a FO with a plan that has the fortitude to stand by it even if some fans don't agree with it. where is the plan? i don't see any evidence of a plan.... We don't know the exact plan because the FO has not come out an said it explicitly as I pointed out on my post. But everything points out that the FO feels the Mets can again become players in 2014. Why would I think its is true? Here are some points....1- The Mets will have an improved ML team with the current players at the ML and farm. The Mets are expected to have Wheeler and Flores ready for the ML. (I hope we can agree that both of those players look to be high impact players) 2- They can improve via free agency too. They would have 50 Mill + available (even if keeping the 100M payroll limit).3- They would have an additional year to evaluate players and increase their trade value if needed. Some examples: -If Duda has a good season and shows the FO he could be a longterm answer at 1B, you could possibly look to trade Ike for a stud OF and prospects to increase your farm. (If Duda does pan out, the FO will know they need an additional player to replace)-If Gee has a good season you could look to trade him for more ML position players and/or prospects. The ML rotation would still be formidable with Dickey, Harvey, Wheeler, Niese and one of Familia/McHugh/Mejia/Gorski filling out the rotation.4- The farm would continue to be improved. Players like Fulmer, Montero, Tapia, Pill, Degrom, Robles, A. Rod., Nimmo, Evans, Plawecki, Lupo would have an additional year of development and our upper levels should be stregthen (which we currently lack) So, it is easy for me to look at 2014 as the year the Mets would have all the tools available to make this franchise relevant again.Now what makes you think these points could not happen? What do you think the Mets would do come 2014 with all the $ available and an improved farm? Do you think the Mets will take the Marlins approach?
Copyright © 2013
and Scout.com. All rights reserved. This website is an unofficial independent source of news and information, and is not affiliated with any school, team, or league.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2012 Microsoft|