This needs it's own thread.

[Mex17]

With the Vargas signing, the Mets are I believe within $2 million of their 2017 payroll.

So all the talk of them mandating a $20-$30 million cut in the budget in the media was just that. In the end, they have a very competitive team going into the season. So long as health and performance standards hold up, they ought to be right in the thick of things.

It deserves to be mentioned. After all the bellyaching all winter long, it should be acknowledged that the end game panned out at least as far as Hot Stove season goes. It should also be remembered going forward into other Hot Stove seasons (and worth mentioning that they avoided any really huge commitments going into next year's bonanza).

[Guest d'Kong76]

Are we throwing Wright's insurance money out of the total? I've lost track.
They're still cheap and terrible owners for a team hailing from The Capital
of the World. Anyone who can't come to grips with that wears orange and
blue blinders.

That aside, it's almost spring and I'm in LGM and YGB mode right now.

[Edgy MD]

I imagine Wright's salary should be and is counted until the insurance kicks in and negates a portion of it.

But when comparing to last year, it would ultimately be counted (and discounted, as applicable) on both sides of the equation.

[Lefty Specialist]

Well, coming within a few million dollars of last year's payroll isn't necessarily cause for celebration. Last year's team finished 70-92 and they brought pieces of it back (Reyes, Bruce, Cabrera's option). They didn't make any deals that will haunt them, with Bruce's being the longest deal at 3 years.

It's not what you spend, it's how you spend it. Frazier and Bruce were probably good value. Vargas I'm 'eh' on. Gonzales and Reyes were cheap. Swarzak I don't know.

It's all about health, but I don't think I need to tell anybody on this board that. Bullpen's a bit of a concern, and I'll be nervous any time someone not named Syndergaard or deGrom takes the mound.

If it all comes together, they could be good. Not division-winning good, but competitive. If it starts to fall apart early, it'll be interesting to see how Callaway deals with it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'd say that having the payroll come close to last year's means that the rumors of major cutbacks were, as some of us suspected, unfounded.

Whether that translates to winning enough games is another matter, and only time will tell.

[Edgy MD]

Lefty Specialist wrote: Well, coming within a few million dollars of last year's payroll isn't necessarily cause for celebration.

I don't think he's quite saying that. And obviously payroll fluctuates during the season, moving up for contending teams muscling up, and falling away for also-rans shedding contracts. Celebrating salary wouldn't be what I'm in it for anyhow.

The funny thing is that payrolls have generally fallen across baseball with the free agent restraint the teams have shown, so the Mets may end up moving up in salary ranks just by standing still.

But I'm not sure it needed it's own thread. Salary has three or four threads now, with a couple of other threads spilling over into it.

[Guest 41Forever]

Lefty Specialist wrote: Well, coming within a few million dollars of last year's payroll isn't necessarily cause for celebration. Last year's team finished 70-92 and they brought pieces of it back (Reyes, Bruce, Cabrera's option). They didn't make any deals that will haunt them, with Bruce's being the longest deal at 3 years. It's not what you spend, it's how you spend it. Frazier and Bruce were probably good value. Vargas I'm 'eh' on. Gonzales and Reyes were cheap. Swarzak I don't know. It's all about health, but I don't think I need to tell anybody on this board that. Bullpen's a bit of a concern, and I'll be nervous any time someone not named Syndergaard or deGrom takes the mound. If it all comes together, they could be good. Not division-winning good, but competitive. If it starts to fall apart early, it'll be interesting to see how Callaway deals with it.

But to be fair, whenever we throw out last years record, you have to remember A) the devastating injuries, and That it essentially gave up in August by trading away the payers going to be free agents. A team that holds on to Bruce, Walker, Granderson, Duda, and Reed is very likely to win more than 70 games.

Not saying making those moves were the wrong things to do. But saying that 70 wins is not an accurate reflection.

[nymr83]

70 wins is what they did. you are definitely welcome to say the 'baseline' is higher because of the trades/injuries but you need to make that case, not expect others to assume it.

More guys will get hurt this year, we just have to hope those injuries happen to Jose Reyes or Matt Harvey, not Yoenis Cespedes or Noah Syndergaard.

maybe the Mets are buyers rather than sellers this year, but at least on the hitting side the Mets don't appear "built to buy" - there are too many average to just above average guys and its harder to replace those with a meaningful upgrade in-season as opposed to filling a glaring hole.

[Ceetar]

Nymr83 wrote: maybe the Mets are buyers rather than sellers this year, but at least on the hitting side the Mets don't appear "built to buy" - there are too many average to just above average guys and its harder to replace those with a meaningful upgrade in-season as opposed to filling a glaring hole.

If there's no glaring hole it means they won't need to buy offense anyway. A lineup with Cespedes and Conforto with 6 other average guys? That's should do nicely.

[Lefty Specialist]

Worried about that lineup without Conforto, though, which will probably be the case for the first two months of the season.

[nymr83]

I'm not TOO worried because his immediate replacement, Nimmo, is likely the 5th best hitter on the team and if he is given the time to prove it that will be in our long term best interest if Smith fails - I would rather see Cespedes/Conforto/Bruce/Nimmo deployed regularly as compared to any lineup with Gonzalez at 1B and any of those guys on the bench.

[Guest 41Forever]

When will Familia, deGrom, Syndergaard hit free agency? I can understand the team not wanting to give eight-year deals to someone like Hosmer when those guys are going to want to get paid. Not so much Familia, since closers don't get starter money. But you have to figure deGrom and Thor are going to be $100 million+ contracts.

[Guest d'Kong76]

2018: $7.4 million, 2019-20: Arb. Eligible, 2021: Free Agent - deGrom Rotoworld

[Guest d'Kong76]

2018: $2.975 million, 2019-21: Arb. Eligible, 2022: Free Agent - Syndergaard Rotoworld

[Benjamin Grimm]

And Familia is eligible for free agency this coming offseason.

[Guest 41Forever]

Wow, I thought de Grom and Thor were a lot closer than that.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Syndergaard has only had two full seasons, 2016 and 2017. DeGrom's first full season was 2015.

[Centerfield]

Last year, the team had a slightly better than average payroll despite being a NY team that is in "win now" mode after a significant rebuild. Their 12th ranked payroll was inexcusable for a team in the top 5 in revenue.

The idea that payroll would be further slashed $20 to $30 million should be unthinkable, but there we were, facing it as a realistic possibility.

At the end, the payroll is nearly what it was last year. Almost getting back to a level that was unacceptable in the first place deserves no congratulations. I don't know why the rumors were circulated. Whether they really intended to slash payroll, or whether that was done to dampen expectations so that we could be brainwashed into being happy with status quo, I have no idea. I do know that it is incredibly depressing that after years of rebuild, our best case scenario, the peak of our mountain, is "we can probably compete for the wild card if we get lucky"

[batmagadanleadoff]

There's no doubt that the Mets goal is to wild card it into the playoffs. You should've known this from last year's team. Going in, the 2017 team was essentially the same as the 2016 wild card squad. Pitching was supposed to be the Mets strength, depth and quality wise. Yet last year's Mets opened with four starters coming off 2016 season ending surgeries. Their unexpected World Series run of 2015 still serves as cover for how broken and dysfunctional, especially relative to their market, this franchise is.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: There's no doubt that the Mets goal is to wild card it into the playoffs. You should've known this from last year's team. Going in, the 2017 team was essentially the same as the 2016 wild card squad. Pitching was supposed to be the Mets strength, depth and quality wise. Yet last year's Mets opened with four starters coming off 2016 season ending surgeries. Their unexpected World Series run of 2015 still serves as cover for how broken and dysfunctional, especially relative to their market, this franchise is.

wasn't unexpected.

2016 has some snags but it wasn't a foregone conclusion they wouldn't win the division and they didn't really struggle to make the playoffs.

2017 they got hit hard, but they've got a talented team this year and will compete for the division again. Average luck gets them at least a wild card. That'll be 3/4 years. You can yell about lucky runs or unintended success all you want. you can grouse about the partial information we have of expenses and income and complain about payroll rankings. Or, you can enjoy a team that's regularly contending, constantly active and positioned to remain so.

It's an easy choice for the vast majority of Mets fans.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I think the vast majority are like the morons posting in that
Wright fb thread Edgy linked the other day.

Know what I'm sayin'?

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: I think the vast majority are like the morons posting in that Wright fb thread Edgy linked the other day. Know what I'm sayin'?

more or less. If the Mets are exciting to follow they'll follow them.

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Their unexpected World Series run of 2015 still serves as cover for how broken and dysfunctional, especially relative to their market, this franchise is.

bump

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Their unexpected World Series run of 2015 still serves as cover for how broken and dysfunctional, especially relative to their market, this franchise is. bump

their unexpected run of bad luck in 2017 and 2018 was a brief hiatus on a long period of success for the Mets.

It counts. 2015 counts, so does 2016.

Fuck the market, I'm more concerned about the competition. And the division is still very ripe in coming years.

[Centerfield]

I know this is your schtick, but why do you write things that even you can't possibly believe?

Assuming they end up with a losing record this year, that will be 8 losing seasons in the last 10. The only two winning seasons are a 90 win season, and an 87 win season. And now we are looking down the barrel of another rebuild. How can anyone argue the fact that this team is seriously broken.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I know! It's clear that 2015 and 2016 were the exceptions.

[Ceetar]

Because there's no way this team is this bad, they've got more talent than they're exhibiting atm, and with the right moves, they could win the division. They could do this even if they don't raise payroll 50 million, change owners, or fire every doctor that's ever touched a Met. 2015 and 2016 were not flukes, they were a result of key moves. I had a blast those two seasons and they don't need to be dismissed as lucky.

At least make your points without "If you take away the good stuff, this is all bad!"

I mean, the biggest issues this season are that Syndergaard has a finger injury and Cespedes has a chronic hip thing. I really don't see any real cause to say the Mets _caused_ those things. If anything they're being TOO cautious with Syndergaard. Sure, they could still be broken players next season, but so could literally anyone you peg as the guy the Mets HAVE to sign.

At this juncture, I see no reason why the Mets shouldn't be in position to compete next year, so I'm not sure why I should be crying into my beer about this dumb franchise and all doom and gloom.

[Edgy MD]

I've certainly registered my problems with the team's approach, but it's not hard at all for me to think of a dozen scenarios where they are the winningest team over the next 25 years.

Having said that, I think the notion of trading deGrom is for the birds. Sign him to an extension NOW!!!! and start changing the narrative.

[seawolf17]

Edgy MD wrote: Sign him to an extension NOW!!!! and start changing the narrative.

Agree on this. Get him and Thor in a room and sign them both through 2023 immediately.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Meanwhile Matz has been pitching fairly well lately. Would this be a wise time to "sell high" on him? (Relatively speaking, of course.)