Hot Stove 2009-2010

[metirish]

Giants declined to offer salary arbitration Tuesday to catcher Bengie Molina.

[Frayed Knot]

metirish wrote: Giants declined to offer salary arbitration Tuesday to catcher Bengie Molina.

Normally I'd say that's good because it won't cost any picks to get him.
In this case I think it's NOT good because it makes us more likely to sign him.

Anything above a one-year deal won't make me happy.

[metirish]

And you just know if he comes to the Mets it will be at the least a two year deal with an easy to reach option for a third.....at the worst a three year deal with an easy to reach fourth year.

[Guest Edgy DC]

No arbitration for Mike Cameron and Miguel Olivo, among players on the fringes of the Mets shopping list, and naturally none for Carlos Delgado.

Other possible Met targets who were offered arbitration include Holliday (who the Cards clearly want to retain), Pineiro, and Marquis.

Seems funny that teams that were once so adamant that they be compensated if their players broke their hearts and walked away --- so adamant, in fact, that they'd stop the game in its tracks over it --- are every year deciding more and more that the right to compensation is not worth the risk of the heartbreakers come back at a salary determined by an independent arbitrator.

[metirish]

Reports have Halladay wanting to be traded before Spring Training , if not then he will invoke his "no trade" clause and that's that.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

metirish wrote: And you just know if he comes to the Mets it will be at the least a two year deal with an easy to reach option for a third.....at the worst a three year deal with an easy to reach fourth year.

NO VEST!*

*Said with the full realization that we'll likely see as much "vesting" on the field this year as Rockies fans.

[metirish]

I'm sure I am speaking out of line here but Omar seems quite fond of easy to attain options , probably every GM is.

[soupcan]

metirish wrote: Reports have Halladay wanting to be traded before Spring Training , if not then he will invoke his "no trade" clause and that's that.

I may have misheard it, but on ESPN this morning I thought they said that Halladay would waive the no-trade only if he were traded to the Yankees. Seriously. Is that not the case?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Snooze sez Boston, MFYs, Angels and Phils are likliest.

Halladay has the Jays over a barrel.

Say no to no-trade clauses.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I heard the same thing too, but I don't think Halliday specified the "only" part. I think he said he'd waive it for the Yankees, but didn't say that he wouldn't for anyone else. He was probably, I think, responding to a YLDB-reporter asking if he'd like to be a Yankee.

[metirish]

from article

Jeff Berry, who represents Halladay along with Greg Landry, told ESPN that, once the 32-year-old righthander reports to spring training, he'd exercise his no-trade clause to block any deals from that point forward. Halladay can be a free agent following the 2010 season, and the Blue Jays know they won't be re-signing their immensely popular player.

This will eliminate a repeat of the distracting media frenzy of 2009 for both Roy and his teammates, and will allow Roy to focus on pitching at the exceptional level Jays fans have come to expect," Berry told ESPN.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Freaking demanding Blue Jay fans.

[soupcan]

So he's going to be 33 in the first year of whatever deal he signs with a team.

Gotta figure he'll get the 7 year-deal that seems to be the norm for this type of player, so the deal will take him through to age 39. That's a tough call for a GM.

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

bmfc1 wrote: Billy Wagner to the Braves. Wagner ties Schneider by playing for 3 out of the 5 NL East teams.

Et tu, Billy?

[Guest Vince Coleman Firecracker]

bmfc1 wrote: Billy Wagner to the Braves. Wagner ties Schneider by playing for 3 out of the 5 NL East teams.

Mets lose out on 2 good draft picks. Not happy about how this move turned out at all. Kinda angry, actually.

[smg58]

Seven years is the norm when a player in his twenties signs. Halladay can ask for (and will get) low twenties on a per-year basis, because that's what Johan and CC are getting, but I'd stop at five years.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Vince Coleman Firecracker wrote: Mets lose out on 2 good draft picks. Not happy about how this move turned out at all. Kinda angry, actually.

Did they really? I'm not so sure the Mets would have offered arbitration to Wagner. And the Mets did get two players for Wagner; we'll have to wait and see how they turn out.

[smg58]

Vince Coleman Firecracker wrote: Mets lose out on 2 good draft picks. Not happy about how this move turned out at all. Kinda angry, actually.

It's tough to gauge the value of the $3.5M the Mets saved. It could be the difference between landing Holliday or Lackey and settling for not exactly. Or it could just get pocketed. We may only be able to speculate on that.

Chris Carter could turn out to be a useful player on a playoff caliber team, too. He strikes me as the kind of player who just needs a team to give him a chance.

At any rate, we'll be able to evaluate the short-term ramifications soon enough. And yes, there's a risk of the deal looking very shortsighted later.

[Vic Sage]

i'm sorry Smg, but many of us thought it was a short sighted deal AT THE TIME. How it turns out, no one can know. But Wagner was a commodity who was dumped to save money. Now we don't have the #20 pick in next year's draft, plus a supplementary round pick. Fans overpaying for seats, parking and hot dogs have a right to be pissed.

[Guest Edgy DC]

No one's questioning fans' rights. They're trying to objectively analyze the move.

[Vic Sage]

Edgy DC wrote: No one's questioning fans' rights. They're trying to objectively analyze the move.

oh, please. yes, lets pretend my point was about "fans rights" instead of the more obvious point that the "right to be pissed" was a rhetorical flourish in support of Firecracker's expression of anger, and Smeggie's attempt to mollify with the standard "oh we don't know how these moves are going to turn out."

you stood up here and CROWED when the rumor went around that Wagner was going to retire. Now that Boston gets 2 picks, including the #20 overall, its "lets wait and see" and a straw man "fan's rights" discussion.

The Mets were a rich team dumping salary, and getting back a guy who looks on paper like an older, less accomplished Dan Murphy, rather than take a shot at 2 first rounders. It was a bullshit move then. And its proven to be a bullshit move today.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I crowed.

I didn't pretend anything. You want to be pissed, be pissed.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

smg58 wrote: Vince Coleman Firecracker wrote: Mets lose out on 2 good draft picks. Not happy about how this move turned out at all. Kinda angry, actually. It's tough to gauge the value of the $3.5M the Mets saved. It could be the difference between landing Holliday or Lackey and settling for not exactly. Or it could just get pocketed. We may only be able to speculate on that.

Or it's going to guaranteed contracts for this year's Livan and/or Redding (Elmer Dessens, come on down)! Or as 1/4 of big, fat 1-WAR Bengie's 2-year-deal! Or maybe it's been earmarked for bonuses for bench players as a reward for the player in front of them getting hurt (Clubhouse Cora, it's your time)! The imagination reels.

The deal looks very shortsighted now because it was quite literally shortsighted (a short-sold Wagner for $3.5M plus something in-hand now > good shot at 2 HIGH draft picks). It may end up looking better in the rearview, but that doesn't change the fact that it kind of stank in conception.

Frankly, the only reason I'm not as pissed as Sage and VCF is that I'm fairly confident that-- as BeeG pointed out-- the Mets would've fallen for the pile that Bean was shoveling and NOT offered arb, and because I'm kinda out of outrage now (more in a sad pre-Molina resignation mode).

[Guest Edgy DC]

I think the idea is to stay away from speculation on which contract that $3.5 million is going to, and judge the deal by what $3.5 million is worth in win shares on the 2010 open market. I have no idea but I'm sure somebody does. Then you can factor that into the deal. How they actually spend their next $3.5 million --- or each $3.5 million --- can be judged negatively or positively on it's own.

Similarly, you probably shouldn't necessarily judge the deal based on what the two draft picks the Sox actually get do, but on what an typical or average pair of picks in those slots that the Mets would have gotten do, as the picks were abstractions and not actual players when the deal was made.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy DC wrote: I think the idea is to stay away from speculation on which contract that $3.5 million is going to, and judge the deal by what $3.5 million is worth in win shares on the 2010 open market.

Yes, my point is that this front office's valuation system isn't very good at properly reading the label on free agents. The organization is extremely unlikely to turn that spare cash into its equivalent value in win shares/RC/WAR/WPA, because it's proven extremely inefficient at such conversions-- extensions on Wright and Reyes aside-- since 2006.

[Guest Edgy DC]

That's fine, but I think the judgment should come at the point of sale instead of being tempted to say, "What good $3.5 mills when they don't know what to do with it anyhow?"

By that standard, almost any deal can be framed a loser at the outset, and that's no fun.

If that munny's value in win shares plus the win shares garnered by the two players netted adds up to more than the total value of two typical draft choices from those slots --- and I'm certalny not saying that they will --- the Mets win the deal. I'm certainly not trying to factor in the alleged risk assurance the Mets supposedly bought by dealing him rather than risking his retiring. They dodged a risk but exposed themselves to another one. Now the rubber hits the road, and I'm out of metaphors.

[Frayed Knot]

A similar tact could be saying that the draft picks would just go to waste since; 'it's the Mets and they'd only draft some piece 'o shit anyway'.


btw, is anyone besides me a bit stunned - not so much that the BoSox offered him arb but that the Braves jumped on him so quickly?
With a one-two punch of Mike Gonzalez & Raphael Soriano (are they both back?) Atlanta wasn't exactly hurting for back-end relievers. Plus, it's not like their last late-30s ex-Met LHP FA pick-up which cost them a pretty decent draft pick worked out all that well.

The deal, btw, is for one year plus a vesting option.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Frayed Knot wrote: A similar tact could be saying that the draft picks would just go to waste since; 'it's the Mets and they'd only draft some piece 'o shit anyway'.

PatZachry. Probably wouldn't even sign them. How could they without the $3.5 million?

Frayed Knot wrote: With a one-two punch of Mike Gonzalez & Raphael Soriano (are they both back?) Atlanta wasn't exactly hurting for back-end relievers.

Both are Type-A free agents.

Frayed Knot wrote: The deal, btw, is for one year plus a vesting option.

VEST!

[metirish]

Frayed Knot wrote: A similar tact could be saying that the draft picks would just go to waste since; 'it's the Mets and they'd only draft some piece 'o shit anyway'. btw, is anyone besides me a bit stunned - not so much that the BoSox offered him arb but that the Braves jumped on him so quickly? With a one-two punch of Mike Gonzalez & Raphael Soriano (are they both back?) Atlanta wasn't exactly hurting for back-end relievers. Plus, it's not like their last late-30s ex-Met LHP FA pick-up which cost them a pretty decent draft pick worked out all that well. The deal, btw, is for one year plus a vesting option.

6.75 million in 2010 and the deal includes a $6.5 million club option for 2011 with a $250,000 buyout.

That's a WOW from me....Bean Stringfellow is nobodies fool

Rafael Soriano (27 saves) and Mike Gonzalez (10 saves) both became free agents after the season. The Braves offered the pair arbitration on Tuesday, and they have until Monday to accept.


Source NYT

[Centerfield]

I wasn't upset at the time of the trade. I was upset when I found out who the players were. If memory serves me correct, the Red Sox waived Carter at some point.

I think it was pretty obvious Billy was not going to accept arbitration. He said on the record many times he wanted to close. More importantly, when you campaign that heavily not to be offered arbitration, it's a pretty clear signal you are not going to accept it.

I would have taken the picks. High draft picks instantly have value and unless they step off the bus and blow out their knee, you have a window to trade them for value.