Manny to Mets Rumors Rear Their Hideous Heads . . . Again

[soupcan]

Elster88 wrote: ]This team is more fun to watch in the winter than the summer. --soupcan, 11/28/05 is not true at all. Never has been really. I'll take losing baseball over the winter blues any day.

Oh shush. We all would rather watch actual baseball - this is tongue in cheek you chucklehead.

Just my luck - someone finds something I say entertaining enough to want to remember and someone else has to give 'em a hard time.

How's a guy supposed to figure out what to put on his tombstone with critics like you around?

[Elster88]

That's Mr. Chucklehead to you.

I know, soupy. Wasn't teasing you so much as teasing Nymr for using it as a sig line. There's lots of good stuff to use from the dry-wits at this board, and yours is a good one too. Just giving Nymr a hard time because he was next on my list to harass, I haven't bothered him in a while. I guess I can cross you off now too.

[Guest Rotblatt]

I didn't get into the "who's replacing Heilman" thing because it gets awfully complicated at that point. It's not clear who would replace his innings if he got traded, and if Robo (22.6) is on the way out, then we have ANOTHER big hole to fill. Padilla (15.2 in just 36.3 IP, although IMO he was pitching over his head) might be able to replace Robo or Heilman's numbers given a full year, but then we need someone to replace his.

Wagner helps, no doubt, but he was "only" worth 30 runs last year--just 4 more than Heilman.

In short, Heilman is NOT going to be easy to replace. Replacing his production, plus the production we got from Robo, will be extremely difficult.

But for the sake of argument, let's say we resign Robo (who duplicates his 2005) & fill Heilman's spot with Farnsworth at $5.5M per year. Farnsworth was worth 26.1 runs over a replacement play last year, so he'd only be a slight downgrade from Heilman. In that scenario, we gain 29.2 runs between Manny & Farnsworth, but we also are taking on $18.5M instead of just $13M.

And again, that's before we consider likely future performance. Manny will probably decline somewhat at $20M per year, Farnsworth & Heilman will probably stay around the same, but Farnsworth will cost $5M more, and Milledge will start to contribute, probably in 2007.

[duan]

the manny deal that DIDN'T happen round about the trade deadline - it's worth looking at here


More often than not, the trade deadline winds up being anti-climactic. Between large contracts, seven-way wild-card races and a condensed time frame, it's awfully hard to find a deal involving superstar players that is suitable to all sides. The 2005 deadline, unfortunately, has been no exception; we pundits are stuck with the scraps of Geoff Blum and Kyle Farnsworth and a whole bunch of almosts and coulda-beens.
Nevertheless, sometimes the coulda-beens are news unto themselves. Even though a deal was not consummated, it's remarkable that the Boston Red Sox, bathing in cash, coming off a championship and in the midst of a heated pennant race, were seriously contemplating trading Manny Ramirez, who remains one of the best hitters in baseball.

What's also been surprising is the lack of editorial opinion on the deal. Under ordinary circumstances, a contending team considering trading one of its best hitters, a couple of its best prospects and a heap of cash would trigger a lot of questions about the sanity of that team's general manager. In this case, nobody has suggested that Theo Epstein has lost his mind, nor has there been much discussion about whether the deal would be a good one for the Sox. Much of that, I think, is because the would-be trade is awfully tough to analyze from a traditional, on-the-field perspective. The reason the Sox might have traded Ramirez would be to get out of the remaining years of his huge contract. There isn't much debate that Ramirez, even if he ages reasonably well, isn't going to be worth what the Sox will be paying him through 2008. But in order to analyze the deal, you have to have some notion of exactly how much Ramirez's remaining contract years are likely to cost the Red Sox. That's fairly tough to do, but we're going to give it a try.

Ramirez is scheduled to make $23.2 million this year (a figure that includes the final prorated chunk of his signing bonus), $19 million in 2006, $18 million in 2007 and $20 million in 2008. His contract also includes team options for 2009 and 2010, but at such a steep price ($20 million per year) that it's safe to attribute no material economic value to them; they're not going to be picked up.

What sort of return on investment are the Red Sox likely to get for their money? Let's walk through a quick, four-step process:


Step 1: Determine the marginal cost of Ramirez's contract. This is straightforward. We take Ramirez's annual salary and subtract from it the major-league minimum salary of $317,000, the amount Red Sox are obligated to pay to whichever player fills Ramirez' roster slot. This produces a marginal cost of:
2005 $22.88 million
2006 $18.68 million
2007 $17.68 million
2008 $19.68 million
Step 2: Estimate Ramirez's on-field productivity. This would ordinarily be very tricky to do, but fortunately we have PECOTA, which uses comparable players to estimate a ballplayer's performance several years into the future. PECOTA estimated, prior to this season, that Ramirez would be worth 7.8 wins above replacement (WARP) this year, 6.4 WARP in 2006, 5.1 WARP in 2007 and 4.1 WARP in 2008.
Ramirez losing essentially half his value in the span of four years might seem like a fairly steep decline, but it has plenty of precedent. Ramirez's top comparable is Albert Belle, who hung up his spikes after his age-33 season. Also ranking high among his comps are Sammy Sosa and Dick Allen, who lost their skills plenty fast. Certainly, there are also some more favorable names on the list--guys like Frank Robinson and Tony Perez who aged well--but considering that there's some chance of a steep decline for Ramirez (possibly triggered by injury), and a near certainty of at least some decline, PECOTA's estimate seems reasonable. In fact, it may be too generous. Ramirez is on pace to finish at about 6.9 WARP this year, a fair bit worse than the preseason forecast, but for simplicity's sake, we'll go ahead and leave his PECOTA forecast as is.


Step 3: Translate on-field productivity into cash. This is the trickiest part of the problem. We might have a pretty good idea of how many wins Ramirez is worth, but there hasn't been a lot of work done recently on just how much money a win is worth, in terms of increased ticket sales, media exposure, postseason sales and so forth. What's more, this number surely varies from team to team: a big-market team like the Mets that doesn't fill its stadium probably gets more cash benefit from an additional win than, say, the Padres do.
But there is another approach to the problem, which is to determine how much teams are willing to pay for an additional win. In an analysis of last winter's free-agent market, I determined that the market price of an additional win is about $2.14 million dollars. We'll use that as our working estimate, which leads to a marginal revenue product (MRP) for Ramirez as follows:

Year WARP MRP
2005 7.8 $16.69MM
2006 6.4 $13.70MM
2007 5.1 $10.91MM
2008 4.1 $8.77MM
Step 4: Deduct output from cost to determine the marginal gain or loss associated with a contract. This is mostly just a simple subtraction problem, but we'll add a couple of additional wrinkles for the sake of completeness. First, both MRP and cost need to be prorated for 2005, since most of the season has been completed, and since most of Ramirez's contract has already been paid. We'll use one-third as our multiplier, since about two-thirds of the season has been played to date. Second, since a dollar today is worth more than the same dollar tomorrow, we need to discount future years of the contract to account for the time value of money. In order to do that, we'll apply a neutral discount rate of 5% per year. That gives us the following result:
Manny Ramirez 2005(ROY)* 2006 2007 2008 Total

Marginal Salary $7.63 $18.68 $17.68 $19.68 $63.67
WARP 2.6 6.4 5.1 4.1 18.2
Market Value $5.56 $13.70 $10.91 $8.77 $38.95
Net Value -$2.06 -$4.98 -$6.77 -$10.91 -$24.72
Discounted @ 5% -$2.06 -$4.75 -$6.14 -$9.42 -$22.37
* Rest of Year
We estimate that the net present value (NPV) of Ramirez's remaining contract is negative $22.37 million dollars. Put another way, if Ramirez offered to let the team buy out the rest of his contract for $22.5 million, the Sox would benefit from taking him up on his offer. Thus, it's pretty easy to see why the Sox are almost obligated to listen to offers that could reduce the financial burden associated with Ramirez, even if some of these offers might marginally reduce their chances of repeating their World Series championship.
Since a deal was never consummated, we can't know exactly what the Red Sox would have been willing to give up to get this $22.37 million liability off their books. But according to this Jayson Stark column, the Red Sox were at least reasonably close to agreeing to a deal in which they would have given up Ramirez, Hanley Ramirez, Jon Lester and $15 million in cash and received Aubrey Huff and Mike Cameron in return. Would this have been a good deal for the Sox?

We can estimate the NPV for the other player contracts in the same way that we did for Ramirez. This is straightforward in the case of the veterans, who are locked into multi-year deals of their own, but more difficult for the prospects. Let's start with Aubrey Huff:

Aubrey Huff 2005(ROY)* 2006 Total

Marginal Salary $1.39 $7.18 $8.57
WARP 1.9 5.2 7.1
Market Value $4.14 $11.13 $15.27
Net Value $0.91 $3.95 $4.86
Discounted @ 5% $0.91 $3.76 $4.67
Huff is owed $4.5 million in 2005 and $7.5 million in 2006; after that, he can become a free agent. He hasn't quite lived up to his preseason PECOTA projection, which means that this estimate may be slightly too generous, but this still looks like a pretty cheap contract in the near-term. We estimate that the NPV associated with Huff's remaining contract is positive $4.67 million.
Mike Cameron:

Mike Cameron 2005(ROY)* 2006 2007 Total

Marginal Salary $1.89 $7.68 $6.18 $15.75
WARP 1.8 3.4 3.1 8.3
Market Value $3.85 $7.28 $6.63 $17.76
Net Value $1.96 -$0.13 $0.15 $1.98
Discounted @ 5% $1.96 -$0.13 $0.14 $1.97
Cameron's contract includes a team option at $6.5 million in 2007; if the team does not exercise that option, he'll be owed a $500,000 buyout. PECOTA estimates that Cameron's market value in 2007 will be $6.63 million, making it worthwhile to exercise that option, so we've gone ahead and included that year of the contract. All told, his contract looks like a slight net positive for an acquirer.
The economic value of a prospect comes in his first six years of major-league service, when he'll provide value to his team either essentially free of charge (before becoming arbitration-eligible) or at a material discount below market rates (arbitration years). To my knowledge, there hasn't been a study done of just what sort of discount a team can anticipate during a player's arbitration years, but it's clear that 1) arbitration awards or settlements tend to run at least somewhat below what a player would be paid in the free market, and 2) this discount tends to decrease--he makes a larger fraction of his market value--as the player's service time increases. My educated guesstimate is that we're looking at something like this for a typical player:

MLB Year 1 $350,000 salary
MLB Year 2 $500,000 salary
MLB Year 3 40% of market salary
MLB Year 4 60% of market salary
MLB Year 5 70% of market salary
MLB Year 6 80% of market salary
Both Ramirez and Lester look like they're fairly close to major-league ready, especially for a team like the Devil Rays, so we'll assume that their first major-league seasons are in 2006, at which time their arbitration clocks start running. Each will be 22 next season, and assuming they stick in the majors, both would become free agents after their age-27 seasons in 2011.
PECOTA's five-year forecasts give us estimates of each player's value through 2009. For Ramirez, those numbers are 2.5 wins (2006), 2.8 (2007), 2.6 (2008) and 3.0 (2009). He'll be at his age 26-27 peak in the two years that follow, so we'll make a reasonable extrapolation outward and assume 3.5 wins above replacement in 2010, and 4.0 in 2011. Note, by the way, that these WARP estimates are the weighted average, accounting for both favorable and unfavorable outcomes. If Hanley Ramirez becomes a regular major-league shortstop, he'll probably be worth somewhat more than 4.0 WARP in his age-27 season, but there are some unresolved questions about Ramirez' ability. He hasn't had a great year in Portland, and we have to hedge those favorable outcomes against the substantial chance that he isn't able to establish himself, and is worth very little to his club.

Applying Ramirez's PECOTA forecast and the assumptions about his salary from above, we come up with the following estimate of his value:

Hanley Ramirez 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total

Marginal Salary $0.03 $0.18 $2.23 $3.85 $5.24 $6.85 $18.38
WARP 2.5 2.8 2.6 3.0 3.5 4.0 18.4
Market Value $5.35 $5.99 $5.56 $6.42 $7.49 $8.56 $39.38
Net Value $1.77 $1.94 $1.11 $0.86 $0.75 $0.57 $7.00
Discounted @ 5% $1.69 $1.76 $0.96 $0.70 $0.59 $0.43 $6.12
We figure the NPV of Hanley Ramirez's contract (more properly, the NPV of the right to sign him to cheap contracts) to be $6.12 million. Intuitively, that seems pretty reasonable for a B or B+ hitting prospect.
Lester is the player involved in this conversation whose season has deviated most substantially from PECOTA's expectations. He's taken to Double-A very well. I'm going to go ahead and append an additional 0.5 wins/year to his forecast; I think PECOTA will do something similar when we run his new projection this winter. That said, any pitching prospect has substantial risk associated with him until he's demonstrated the ability to stay healthy for multiple major-league seasons, and pitchers don't experience the same predictable improvement in the age 23-26 range that offensive players do, so we shouldn't fudge upward too much. We'll estimate that Lester is worth 2.0 wins/year in 2010 and 2011, the years that aren't covered by his PECOTA forecast.

Jon Lester 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total

Marginal Salary $0.03 $0.18 $1.11 $2.05 $3.00 $3.42 $9.80
WARP 1.6 1.8 1.3 1.6 2.0 2.0 10.3
Market Value $3.42 $3.85 $2.78 $3.42 $4.28 $4.28 $22.04
Net Value $1.13 $1.22 $0.56 $0.46 $0.43 $0.29 $4.08
Discounted @ 5% $1.08 $1.11 $0.48 $0.38 $0.34 $0.21 $3.59
We arrive at a NPV of $3.59 million for Lester.
We can evaluate the entire trade from the Red Sox's perspective by adding up the estimated NPVs of the players involved in the discussions, and subtracting out the reported $15 million ransom that the Red Sox would pay to the Mets:

Manny Ramirez +$22.37MM
Aubrey Huff +$ 4.67MM
Mike Cameron +$ 1.97MM
Hanley Ramirez -$ 6.12MM
Jon Lester -$ 3.59MM
Cash -$15.00MM
---------------------------
Net Value +$ 4.29MM
The Red Sox gain about $22 million from shedding Ramirez's contract, and an additional $7 million or so from picking up Huff and Cameron at reasonable prices. In order to accomplish this, they must part with about $10 million worth of prospects and $15 million in cash. All told, the Stark version of the deal looks like it would have been a slight net positive for Boston, to the tune of about $4 million. That said, $4 million is not a large margin of error in the modern baseball economy, and you can make some other, reasonable kinds of assumptions that push the deal to about break-even, or just below it.
It's no wonder, in other words, that the Red Sox were pushed just about to the brink with the proposed transaction. Theo Epstein may have been getting some value here, but only a little bit, especially considering some intangible factors like a potential public backlash against trading a superstar, or the additional marginal value associated with wins for a team that is in the midst of a tight pennant race. Remove Lester from the equation, or add a decent prospect or two coming in return--the Red Sox were reportedly trying to do both of these things--and the case for the deal becomes much clearer.

No matter how you slice it, the deal looks like a terrible one for the Mets. They'd reportedly have been giving up Lastings Milledge--probably worth between $7-$8 million under this methodology--in addition to getting a raw deal on the valuation of Ramirez's contract.

Frankly, I find it refreshing to go through a process like this on a deal that the Red Sox seemed to regard as fairly close to break-even, and come to the conclusion that the trade would, in fact, have been just about break-even for the Red Sox's bottom line. The names and numbers involved in the reports you've seen about the almost-trade are not pulled out of thin air--the Red Sox almost certainly have gone through a process exactly like this, and that's why they were willing to offer exactly what they were. It might seem cut-throat or Machiavellian to evaluate a deal in this fashion, but that's the perspective that a championship-caliber front office needs to apply.

[seawolf17]

/head explodes

[smg58]

Interesting analysis, and I'm sure GM's do something similar all the time. The question then becomes how certain you are of a prospect's value, and whether or not wins in a coming season are more valuable than wins in the future.

I'd be curious to see how the Delgado trade would look in this analysis, and how contracts to players like Delgado, Wagner, Pedro, and Beltran stack up with Manny's.

[Willets Point]

="seawolf17"]/head explodes

Ditto.

[Elster88]

smg58 wrote: Interesting analysis, and I'm sure GM's do something similar all the time..

Really? I think some GMs are lacking in the brainpower department to handle that.

[Elster88]

Is getting Manny really that terrible if we don't give up Heilman or Milledge? Is the money what's scaring everyone? The Mets done got themselves a spanking new TV station and a city full of bandwagon hoppers (who will eagerly proclaim themselves Met fans to try to disguise their bandwagonness) that will be happy to buy tickets and jerseys.

Not to mention loyalists like ourselves (I plan to go to 40 and a half games next year) and the hordes of media reps that will be taking pictures of Delgado during every seventh inning stretch, regardless of what's playing, God Bless America or Cottoneye Joe. I think Carlos should bring a tazer to every post-game interview session.

And, as shown here, a decent number of us don't care if the Mets spend 300 million next year.

[Frayed Knot]

It's not the money that bothers me per se -- I don't particularly care what they pay these guys. Except to the extent where it handcuffs you for future moves, especially if/when said aging player starts to break down. Piazza & Sosa for instance, were two of numerous ballplayers who go from 'this guy's worth every penny', to, 'how much would we have to eat in order to get rid of him' in a fairly short period. Manny's contract - being one of those from the dot-com era 'boom years' - already overpays him (IMO) and that situation isn't likely to improve over the next 3. Then throw in my previously voiced complaints about his defense, baserunning, "dumpth", lack of a DH option, etc. and there's too much downside to make it a worthwhile risk.

There's also the 'too many eggs' angle.
I don't have a problem with the concept of dealing prospects for established major leaguers -- at least as long as the particulars make sense -- but whether you're a 'build from within' guy, or the type who likes to grab onto to the nearest 'TITTS' and hang on for dear life, there's a definite danger in going too far in either direction. Dealing what's left of the top dogs in our system after so much recent shedding and/or promoting -- [Kazmir, Huber, Petit, Jacobs, Bladergroen, Reyes, Wright - plus the injury to Humber, the visa problems of Soler, and the non-signing to date of Pelfrey] -- and we'd be leaving ourselves with nothing to promote which then throws you into a cycle where you have no choice but to chase FAs at top dollar every year (and lose future picks in the process) just to replace the current parts as they age. Mix all that in with the strides that Milledge made this season and he's one I'd like to hang onto.

[metirish]

Good stuff FK, Omar does not strike me a s "build form within" GM though, it seems, and he may have even stated it that he wants to win a WS in a five year time frame, this is the second year...

[metirish]

not sure if there is any truth to this...

[Guest HappyRecap]

Phils "trumping" the Mets is only true if it is a fact that getting Manny is a good idea which I don't think it is.

Co-workers of mine are based in Philly and can't stand Abreu. I don't have access to these stats but they claim that he his batting average drops considerably from the 7th inning on. And with runners on base, it is even worse. Of course, not having these numbers it is tough to agree or disagree but if true, not good.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Another quote that warmed my heart--from the Post this time:

]Reportedly, the Red Sox had interest in Mets center-field prospect Lastings Milledge as the centerpiece for any deal, but sources said it is "highly unlikely" the Mets will move either Milledge or righty Aaron Heilman. That puts the Mets and Red Sox at a crossroads regarding Ramirez.

Excellent.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

We've discussed Abreu here before. Without implying that he's not been an absolutely tremendous player on balance he just looks sometimes like he's not paying attention.

The Phillies acquisition of Abreu (for Kevin Stocker, via the D-Rays, who'd just expansion-drafted him from the Astros) is one of the greatest heists in recent baseball history, but might not have happened had the Astros (and presumably, the D-Rays, tho whether they knew anything was debateable) not had big questions about Abreu's attitude.

[smg58]

Philadelphia fans look for reasons to not like their best players. Abreu fizzled out late last year, but he's still an OBP machine and a solid all-around player. Burrell and Manny in the same outfield? Met fans would enjoy that.

[metirish]

"Bobby Abreu has to be the most underrated five tool player in the game Ted".....

A pint of porter if you can name the man that utters those words every time the Mets play the Phillies...

[seawolf17]

Yep. This trade would actually help us, I think. Abreu and Manny are pretty close offensively, and although Abreu's not much defensively, we know Manny's probably worse. So this wouldn't be the end of the world at all.

That said, ESPN is quoting a source as saying it's "highly unlikely." So we'll see.

[Frayed Knot]

]The Phillies acquisition of Abreu (for Kevin Stocker, via the D-Rays, who'd just expansion-drafted him from the Astros) is one of the greatest heists in recent baseball history, but might not have happened had the Astros (and presumably, the D-Rays, tho whether they knew anything was debateable) not had big questions about Abreu's attitude.

The Astros chose to protect fellow Venezuelan Richard Hidalgo in the expansion draft at the expense of Abreu, a decision helped along, according to some sources, by Abreu's perceived attitude (not bad ... more like a bit lackadasical).

Abreu's not quite the hitter Manny is, but he's a considerably better defender & runner. It's just that he always seems that he should be a better defender & runner. He's got the talent, just seems to take too many plays off.

The answer to the "underrated" question is, of course, Francis X.

[Elster88]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: We've discussed Abreu here before. Without implying that he's not been an absolutely tremendous player on balance he just looks sometimes like he's not paying attention.

I've always felt the same way. He always looks like he's carrying a couple extra pounds too. It's tricky and dangerous to judge based on body language and weight, but I've gotten the same impression.

Maybe he's one of those guys who was born on third and thinks he hit a triple. Or maybe he was just born on third and a triple (with all of the money that comes with it) is good enough for him.

[dinosaur jesus]

HappyRecap wrote: Phils "trumping" the Mets is only true if it is a fact that getting Manny is a good idea which I don't think it is. Co-workers of mine are based in Philly and can't stand Abreu. I don't have access to these stats but they claim that he his batting average drops considerably from the 7th inning on. And with runners on base, it is even worse. Of course, not having these numbers it is tough to agree or disagree but if true, not good.

I have checked the numbers a little bit. According to espn.com, in "close and late" situations (not sure what that means--maybe 7th inning on, game within 2 runs?) Abreu actually hit better last year than he did overall--.298, with a .571 SA and .422 OBP. Over the previous three years his numbers weren't quite that good in that situation, but they weren't bad. I seem to recall the same sort of thing being said about Rolen--that he didn't hit with runners on--and it was spectacularly untrue. Are Philly fans just in a permanent blind rage?

It's nice to see you all again. I was up for a cup of coffee a couple of seasons ago, but it's been a while.

[Elster88]

Welcome back dinosaur. I thought I recognized your name but wasn't sure.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Rosenthal:

]One thing to remember about any Manny Ramirez trade: Ramirez's new team wouldn't simply need to satisfy the Red Sox with a package of players. It also would need to satisfy Ramirez, whose no-trade protection gives him the right to block any deal. Players generally receive financial inducements to waive their no-trade rights; otherwise, they're forfeiting value in their contract. Ramirez, guaranteed $57 million over the next three seasons, would entertain a contract extension from a potential suitor, according to his agent, Greg Genske. Perhaps more significant, he also would be willing to restructure his present deal. "It's entirely likely that if a team is going to give up what will be required to get Manny, it will want to extend his contract, change the structure or both," Genske said. "We're open to talking about it." The Angels and Mets are believed to be the teams most interested in Ramirez, but Genske said that Ramirez would be willing to listen to overtures from other clubs, including the Phillies. Of course, the Red Sox first must arrange a trade before Ramirez could negotiate with another club.

Okay, so if Manny's willing to take less money--or at least restructure his contract--he must be really, really desperate to leave Boston.

If you're gonna do this, then play hardball, Omar! Rake those beantown fuckers over the coals!

[Frayed Knot]

"It's entirely likely that if a team is going to give up what will be required to get Manny, it will want to extend his contract, change the structure or both," Genske said. "We're open to talking about it."

Of course YOU are!

And besides, while 'Team Manny' may agree to restructure this deal, that rarely means to restructure it downward. Remember the Player's Assoc is adverse to even allowing players to restructure if the new amount means a lesser total value compared to present day money: see; Rodriguez, Alex. Usually what happens is that the player will take less money in the near term for more later on.

ex. If Manny has 3 yrs remaining @ $19/per he is gauranteed $57mil. But he also has a couple of option years so he could agree to lessen the upfront in exchange for having one or more option years picked up thus increasing the total amount earned. He could also defer money for the same purpose (see; Vaughn, Mo) but again, in each case, the PA would want to know that too much wasn't deferred for too long which would reduce the overall value.

Would committing to more than $57mil (or whatever Boston doesn't pick up) but lengthening the deal by a year or more make Manny more attractive? I'm not so sure it would. I'm always more afraid of the length of these deals than I am of the per/year amounts.

[Zvon]

Manny would love that cute little ballpark in Philly(I have heard they are moving the leftfield wall back, tho).

Abreu gets hard knocks because he never seems to get the big hit, but he's as solid as they come. The Phils would be fools to trade him. If they do, it better be to the AL cuz Abreu is a sleeping giant. Id rather see him stayin too comfortable with the Phils. Dont know if he'd be able to handle NY.
If he starts gettin the big hit, he could,lol.

[metirish]

Steve Popper says Omar had a meeting last night with the Boston bigwigs...interesting article too, free agents have offered to come to NY for less money,really?....Grudzielanek maybe?

] By STEVE POPPER STAFF WRITER DALLAS - In the media room at the Wyndham Anatole Hotel, the area around the podium featured some of the biggest powerbrokers in baseball - commissioner Bud Selig included - drawing crowds of reporters. But Omar Minaya slipped into the room and much of the crowd flocked to him, putting on display a fitting example of the magnet that the Mets' general manager has become. Free agents have offered to come to New York for less money than they could get elsewhere. Other teams with high-priced contracts to move ask for a sit-down with Minaya like asking a favor from the Godfather. And the media rushes to him because in the winter Minaya is where the action is. Minaya was in the media room to announce the deal that will bring the Mets Paul Lo Duca from the Florida Marlins in exchange for two minor leaguers. But that was old news already and what everyone wanted to know is: What's next? He wasn't saying, only insisting that he is now comfortable with his team. But he was quick to point out that he doesn't like to feel comfortable. According to one baseball executive the Mets conducted a face-to-face meeting with the Boston Red Sox on Monday night and that means that Minaya is still pursuing the biggest name in the winter meetings - Manny Ramirez. With Lo Duca secured and Carlos Delgado and Billy Wagner already having been fitted for their Mets jerseys, it might seem that Minaya should be comfortable. Watching from afar, Lo Duca saw little need for anything else. "First and foremost I think you don't want to put pressure on yourself," Lo Duca said. "But I think it would be a disappointment if we didn't win the NL East. I think we've got all the tools. "I think it would be a real disappointment with the team we're throwing out there right now not to be competitive to win the World Series." While Minaya has filled in the major holes, he still is working to make more moves - this time from a position of power, being able to turn away a deal that doesn't feel just right rather than having to overpay in dollars or talent. "I'm happy with the club," Minaya said. "I want to be able to say to ourselves, we're in a situation that we wanted to be. Usually you have objectives in the winter and you want to accomplish these objectives. Sometimes you accomplish two out of three. "We are in a situation where we've accomplished these objectives so we feel comfortable that if other situations arise in front of us that make sense from a baseball side and from a financial side, we'll have to consider it. But we don't have to go out and do [something]." While Ramirez might be the dream move for Minaya, who still longs for more middle-of-the-order power even with the addition of Delgado, he was searching for more mundane moves. While he said that Kazuo Matsui, "is our second baseman right now," the team remains interested in free agent Mark Grudzielanek. Mets officials have stated that the team would have to get creative, moving contracts, to be able to land another big contract. The team has explored interest in some of their players - including Kris Benson. Minaya pointed out that the Mets have replaced only the $30 million that came off their books with the departures of Mike Piazza, Braden Looper, Mike Cameron and a handful of other expiring contracts. "I think you always try to upgrade your team," he said. "You're never there. When I say I'm happy to be where we are today, the fact that we are [on] the first day of the winter meetings and our objectives and goals, which really were defined as a closer, the catcher and a power hitter, to be able to be there today and still be with a payroll right about where we were last year, that's what makes me happy. "I always say I don't want to get to the point where I'm comfortable. A comfort zone is not an area that I'm used to. I don't like comfort zones. I'm always thinking, 'What's an area that we can improve?' Let's not get too comfortable here. The fact of the matter is when you get comfortable, that's when your competition catches up to you." E-mail: popper@northjersey.com

[seawolf17]

Carlos Says Yes

]Beltran would love to have Ramirez on Mets NEW YORK -- Carlos Beltran has heard the rumors, that the New York Mets inquired about a possible trade for Manny Ramirez. While trade talk between the Boston Red Sox and Mets appears to have cooled, Beltran would love to have Ramirez alongside him in the Mets outfield this year. "If it happens, that would be great," Beltran said Thursday during a telephone conference call. "Who doesn't want to have Manny on the ballclub? Who doesn't want to have that bat on the ballclub?" Beltran spoke several times during the offseason with Carlos Delgado, the hard-hitting first baseman the Mets acquired from the Florida Marlins to boost their offense and said that he spoke with Delgado just as reports of the trade were breaking. Beltran acknowledged that a deal for Ramirez likely was a long shot. "I think for the Mets to be able to get that done, it has to be a perfect deal," he said. "If it doesn't happen, I think right now with what we've got, we can accomplish what we need to do." Beltran struggled during his first season with the Mets, who signed him to a $119 million, seven-year contract last December. He was bothered by a leg injury, then had a head-to-head collision with right fielder Mike Cameron during an August game at San Diego, which left Beltran with occasional dizziness for a month. Beltran batted .266 with 16 homers, 78 RBI and 17 steals. In 2004, he played for Kansas City and Houston, combining to hit .267 with 38 homers, 104 RBI and 42 steals. In the 12 playoff games with the Astros, he had eight homers, 14 RBI and six steals, a performance he acknowledge "was something special." "2005 was for me a year of adjustment. I was playing all my career in a small market. Being able to sign with a big-market team in New York and playing over there was a little bit different," he said. "I know that if I stay healthy, I know I'm capable of doing a lot of good things on the baseball field, and I know I can help the team win ballgames and win the division." Notes The Mets will open spring training Feb. 16, with pitchers and catchers starting workouts on Feb. 18. Position players report Feb. 21 and start workouts two days later.

[Willets Point]

Manny says: love that dirty water, Boston you're my home!.

[Elster88]

It's snowing on your toaster.

[Willets Point]

You just noticed that now?