Big News! (update: Mets Minority Stake For Sale)

[Benjamin Grimm]

Well, a new owner would bring the Mets out of the Madoff cloud. I don't know that it would bring wisdom where there was foolishness. The Wilpons haven't been the best possible stewards of the franchise, but they haven't been the worst either.

[ashie62]

Ticket plan 162 from Outer Space.

When I look around at ticket prices offered by smaller market teams as low as 2, 3, 4 bucks to get in and then look at NY Prices I am not surprised that Citified (and MFY3) are a tough draw.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

It's curious that a lot of the Freddy-must-go crowd operates-- it seems-- under the vague assumption that whatever comes next will be automatically better.

They forget that Wilpon-- Fred flavor, anyway-- has been remarkably hands-off for a guy with a 100% ownership share, at least as far as baseball operations are concerned. You could argue that his and Saul Katz's decision-making in terms of choosing a management team has been somewhat off-the-beam... but still, he's trusted those guys to make most of the operations decisions. In THAT part of team management-- and at least until minting Jeff as COO-- he's been close to the ideal as a team owner, no?

[Vic Sage]

yeah, i can't see anybody being happy about the prospect of a Donald trump ownership group.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I don't assume that new owners will be any better but the Wilpons are bad enough that I'd welcome the risk that change brings.

With all of their resources, The Mets have managed just one first place finish in the last 21 seasons. In the same time frame, the Pirates won the division three times, and they haven't competed in the NL East since 1993. The Pirates haven't even finished above .500 since 1992.

The Mets play in the most important metropolitan area in the world, and the USA's largest market. NYC could probably support two more baseball teams. And yet the Wilpons buiit a 45,000 seat stadium that's probably too small for most of the other cities hosting MLB, let alone NY. It's the biggest fuck you to the fans from among too many fuck you's from the Wilpons to keep track of. They didn't care because they were going to make their ticket money on the sale of their luxury suites and $200 tickets.

How much worse could it get?

[HahnSolo]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: How much worse could it get?

Oh I don't know...

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

[metirish]

the thread just went pear shaped

[Edgy MD]

[Valadius]

[TransMonk]

[soupcan]

[seawolf17]

That kept getting better and better. (The Al Davis photo is terrifying.)

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

BONUS: Also terrible at running car company

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

seawolf17 wrote: That kept getting better and better. (The Al Davis photo is terrifying.)

[G-Fafif]

Oh, wait...

[Guest The Second Spitter]

[batmagadanleadoff]

What's funnier than the rogues' gallery of owners photos posted above is that you all think that the Wilpons are better.

[ashie62]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: What's funnier than the rogues' gallery of owners photos posted above is that you all think that the Wilpons are better.

I believe the intent was just sarcasm.

[Edgy MD]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: What's funnier than the rogues' gallery of owners photos posted above is that you all think that the Wilpons are better.

The McCourts? Dan Snyder? It's not hard.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Riches to rags: A guide to New York Mets decrepitude

It's a bad sign for any business when getting sued for a billion dollars is the narrative�and then things get worse. But that's exactly what happened to the New York Mets this week, with the news that Major League Baseball had provided the team with a $25 million loan, and wouldn't be providing any additional money. The New York Post now reports that the Mets are seeking a new loan elsewhere, this one to cover basic operating expenses. And it is far from clear than anyone will give it to them. The news provides further evidence that the team has run out of conventional ways to stay afloat financially. Which means that what was unthinkable just a few months ago may soon be a reality: massive cuts in salary. The Mets are well-positioned to dump salary following the 2011 season, merely by letting expiring contracts go without replacing them. In some instances, the effect on the baseball team will be minimal: Luis Castillo's $6 million annual salary and the $12 million owed Oliver Perez for 2011 will come off the books. But others will need to be replaced on the field: Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes and Francisco Rodriguez can all be free agents following the season (though, should he finish 55 games, Rodriguez's absurd $17.5 million 2012 option will vest). The team currently has a payroll of around $135 million, but just under $66 million committed for next season. It is impossible to know what the salary restrictions on the 2012 Mets will be, but as long as the Wilpons both own the Mets and face the financial pressure they are currently under, everything is on the table. Here's a look at the diminishing options the Mets will have, depending on where the budget is set. $150 million: This would represent an increase over 2011, but would keep the Mets in line with their 2010 payroll. At this price, Jose Reyes could be retained, even if a strong 2011 season prices him at around $20 million per season over a long-term deal. If Albert Pujols reaches free agency, the Mets could sign him, and move Ike Davis to right field. That only gets the Mets to around $125 million, including raises from arbitration for players such as Mike Pelfrey, Jon Niese and Angel Pagan. Should CC Sabathia opt out of his contract with the Yankees, the Mets could be serious bidders for him as well. And free-agent pitchers Chris Capuano and Chris Young could be replaced by either free agents with stronger health track records, or through trades that take on additional salary. In other words, the sky's the limit. In this scenario, the Mets also have $90 million to spend. Right now, they are pursuing a loan just to meet basic operating expenses. So they aren't likely to increase their payroll 150 percent. $125 million: This would bring the Mets back to around 2006 levels. Reyes could be retained, either Sabathia or Pujols could be chased, and other marginal improvements could also be made. Having an overachieving GM like Sandy Alderson in charge of making these decisions will maximize what they can do. But once again, this would involve an additional outlay of around $60 million above and beyond the expenses they already are having trouble meeting. $100 million: Jose Reyes can be retained, but that leaves around $12 million to fill the closer's role, several rotation spots, right field, and second base if neither Brad Emaus nor Daniel Murphy proves up to the task. It will mean another off-season of penny-pinching. $80 million: Goodbye, Jose Reyes. The Mets would have around $14 million to fill all the positions mentioned above, along with shortstop. The talent remaining on the team would consist of David Wright, Jason Bay, Angel Pagan, Josh Thole, Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey, R.A. Dickey, D.J. Carrasco, Ronny Paulino, and that's it. They'd have $14 million to fill out the rest of the roster. And remember: That's still $14 million in additional expense. If they are in receivership, for instance, they may not be allowed to spend that money. $60 million: With Bay likely untradeable, they could either decimate the pitching staff by dealing Pelfrey and Dickey�Santana could also be immovable, unless he has a monster second half upon returning from shoulder surgery�or they could just free up salary by dealing David Wright. Clearly, the picture starts to get ugly around $100 million and below. Baseball teams have certainly experienced success below that figure, but they did so on the backs of young, cost-controlled talent. Unfortunately, the biggest liability Sandy Alderson inherited from Omar Minaya was a lack of near-ready minor league talent. Re-stocking that farm system should take several years. Without an injection of new capital, it's hard to see how the Mets will be able to avoid cutting costs. Then they'll lose their most productive players and, before long, their ability to compete with teams whose owners haven't bet the farm on a Ponzi scheme. As long as the Wilpons are hanging on, there is no relief in sight.

[ashie62]

It is time for opening day as this discussion has become nauseating.

[Edgy MD]

Clearly, the picture starts to get ugly around $100 million and below. Baseball teams have certainly experienced success below that figure, but they did so on the backs of young, cost-controlled talent. Unfortunately, the biggest liability Sandy Alderson inherited from Omar Minaya was a lack of near-ready minor league talent.

This is fun to say but terribly untrue. The big liablilities are the team's financial liabilities above. After that (and far after) come poison pill contracts like Perez's and Rodriguez's.

[Lefty Specialist]

I would have to think that if the Wilpons are still in control later this year that there will be pressure from within to keep K-Rod below the magic 55 game closings. I'm thinking Tanya Harding/Nancy Kerrigan kind of pressure.

[G-Fafif]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: What's funnier than the rogues' gallery of owners photos posted above is that you all think that the Wilpons are better.

Over at the Billy Grabarkewitz Board or wherever seasoned Dodger fans engage and amuse each other, I can't imagine the Wilpons' pictures wouldn't have gone up in their "it could be worse than the McCourts" thread. Maybe it wouldn't have gone up immediately (or three years ago), but Fred and Jeff have probably arrived on the grand stage of oh no owners.

Not that it isn't an extraordinarily immense stage.

[Willets Point]

A bad owners rogue gallery needs this Hitler supporter.

[batmagadanleadoff]

G-Fafif wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: What's funnier than the rogues' gallery of owners photos posted above is that you all think that the Wilpons are better. Over at the Billy Grabarkewitz Board or wherever seasoned Dodger fans engage and amuse each other, I can't imagine the Wilpons' pictures wouldn't have gone up in their "it could be worse than the McCourts" thread. Maybe it wouldn't have gone up immediately (or three years ago), but Fred and Jeff have probably arrived on the grand stage of oh no owners. Not that it isn't an extraordinarily immense stage.

You know ... you beat me to that Jeff Wilpon posting. I saw those owner pictures go up from on the road, and immediately though to to post Jeffy, but I don't know how to do that from my smartphone, so I didn't. Then I scrolled down a few more messages and saw that it was no longer necessary.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

There's bad with money... and then there's BAD with money, plus cheap, plus knee-jerk-interfering, plus racist, plus ACTIVELY sticking it to the fans.

Trust me: most, if not all of the above trammel lawns in which the grass is far from green, much less greener than ours. If you disagree, it's because you don't know enough about guys like Snyder, Sterling and the rest... or because you're being willfully ignorant.

[G-Fafif]

More One Hears About An Owner = Worse An Owner Probably Is

Bill Neukom, David Montgomery, Arte Moreno ... a few of the other kind seem to exist.

[soupcan]

Willets Point wrote:

Good one.