Reyes & Wright: Tandem in Twilight?

[G-Fafif]

Anthony DiComo pours on the poignancy regarding the potential end of the Jose-David partnership.

For one of this generation's most exciting, talented and complementary tandems, the end may be drawing near. "I'm a big Jose Reyes fan," Wright said. "He makes everybody around him better, including me. So I hope he goes out there and has a great year and kind of forces the hand of the front office so they lock him up to whatever kind of extension. I hope that's the case." If not best friends, they are nonetheless tremendous teammates -- baseball's version of a quarterback and his star wide receiver, a point guard and his center. Each usually knows what the other is thinking. Each usually knows precisely when to encourage, to console, to goad, to ignore, to razz, to defend. It is remarkable considering that baseball is their only real connection. Reyes is 27 with dreadlocks and a family, splitting his time between Long Island and the Dominican Republic. Wright is 28, clean-cut and single, sticking to Manhattan and Virginia. Even on the diamond they are wildly different; Wright defines his game with power and a bit of speed, Reyes with speed and a touch of power. But they are each Mets to the core, the two longest-tenured players in Flushing and among the longest-tenured teammates in the league. "I feel we're like brothers, we've been with each other so long," Reyes said. "To keep that relationship is good. I'm Dominican. He's American. Different language, but we still get along good."

We may get quite a few of these before the season (or trading deadline) is out. It's not going to be fun.

[seawolf17]

I AM NOT THINKING ABOUT THIS

/ignore

[Guest attgig]

you can't have a Wright/Reyes thread without these pictures:

[Ceetar]

The history and tradition created by having these guys in Mets uniform together for the rest of their careers, and subsequently, lives, is too powerful to let either of them walk away over a couple of million dollars.

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's important that we don't let these eulogies while Jose is still alive overshadow the baseball season. If he does go, it would be a shame if the narrative all year was "What's he going to be like when he's gone?" rather than enjoying him while he's here.

If he goes, we'll know what it's like without him soon enough.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: It's important that we don't let these eulogies while Jose is still alive overshadow the baseball season. If he does go, it would be a shame if the narrative all year was "What's he going to be like when he's gone?" rather than enjoying him while he's here. If he goes, we'll know what it's like without him soon enough.

True. even if he were to go, he's going to be in our record books for decades. Some of us never got to see Seaver play, barely got to see Gooden pitch for the Mets and didn't really appreciate it at the time. (That I have clearer memories of Strawberry and Gooden as Yankees is sad) So we have to try to enjoy Reyes not just because he might leave, but because he might stay. Enjoy it when he laces a 2-run triple into the right centerfield corner against Halladay on Thursday.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'd be about a million times more worried over losing Wright than Reyes in this tandem. I think even beyond the financial implications it makes all kinds of sense to move JoseJose if they can get a compelling enough offer and the circumstances are right.

And if not, I'd be wary of showing him the years.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Putting aside sentiment, it is likely that Jose's best years are behind him, and his biggest paychecks are ahead of him. If he has a mediocre season this year, and his price comes down, and the Mets can sign him for three years, or maybe four, then maybe he can stay. But if he has 20 triples, 10 homers, and wins a Gold Glove, he's gone.

[Willets Point]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Putting aside sentiment, it is likely that Jose's best years are behind him, and his biggest paychecks are ahead of him. If he has a mediocre season this year, and his price comes down, and the Mets can sign him for three years, or maybe four, then maybe he can stay. But if he has 20 triples, 10 homers, and wins a Gold Glove, he's gone.

Huh? If he's mediocre, re-sign him, but if he's good get rid of him?

[Gwreck]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It is likely that Jose's best years are behind him

I'm not sure I agree with this. If Jose gets a 5 or 6 or 7 year contract, I certainly accept that there will be down years at the end of that deal. He still has 2 1/4 seasons before he even turns 30.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Willets Point wrote: Huh? If he's mediocre, re-sign him, but if he's good get rid of him?

Yup. A mediocre Jose Reyes will still be better than whoever would replace him, and he'd be affordable, where a Jose at the top of his game might be too expensive.

[Guest attgig]

It's interesting point Grimm, but for different reasons.
If the mets are not so close to a playoff run this year, but Reyes is tearing it up, the mets are definitely going to trade him away, and the possibility of him signing in the offseason with the mets is low.
If reyes is mediocre, the return for him may not be great, so it might not push us to trade him away. he finishes the year as a met, and possibly resigns for maybe a 1 year deal, or maybe a little longer.

Now, if the mets are contending, AND reyes is doing spectacular - leading the charge, I don't see how the front office gets away with not resigning him. The fanbase would hate them for not resigning the guy who's pushing a team that nobody expected anything of to be a playoff contender. Media would tear them up

[seawolf17]

I AM NOT LISTENING

/puts fingers in ears

LALALALALALALALALALALA

[Guest Edgy DC]

If the script is good, I guess I can see it.

[G-Fafif]

I'm always going to wonder what the photographer suggested to get them to pose like that.

Or if the photographer didn't have to say a word.

[Willets Point]

I'm certain that Wright was wildly enthusiastic about the whole thing.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

With the possible exception of "postgame, 2006 clincher," I don't think I've ever seen Wright happier than he looks in that headlock. (Sober, anyway.)

[Jose? Well, Jose gets that glow when you plop him in front of "Wheel of Fortune," show him a cute baby, or give him some half-finished Sudoku with which to play.]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Putting aside sentiment, it is likely that Jose's best years are behind him, and his biggest paychecks are ahead of him.

His biggest paychecks are most definitely ahead of him. But while it's possible his best years are behind him, I really can't concede that it's "likely." Will he ever have another year like 2006? Maybe, maybe not. But I think he can most assuredly put up a more valuable next five years than he gave the Mets from 2006-2010.

Whether he's healthy or not, 2009 and 2010 will come into play, negotiations-wise. If the team handles negotiations respectfully, an amenable five-year deal can probably be reached, provided he doesn't go supernova over the next six months (and if he does, World Series revenues should cover the price increase).

[Guest Edgy DC]

While I'd say it's better than 50% that his best basestealing and shortstopping years are behind him, it's also better than 50%, I think, that his best on-basing and slugging years are ahead.

But there likely won't be anything new here until mid-season.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Exactly.

I concede that I don't know the plan, exactly. I concede-- for now-- that Sandy Alderson knows more than me about what the club can reasonably do in the future, and-- consequently-- how best to build a winning team given said constraints.

That said, given my limited perspective, I cannot envision a way-- absent freaky hungry-auto-tarpaulin-type injury-- that declining to extend Jose Reyes pre-2011 WON'T bite Alderson squarely on his Jarhead tuchus.

Alderson, it seems, WILL end up with one of the following scenarios:

1) Spending more money on Jose than he would have otherwise, given another year of remove from his "injury troubles."
2) Spending a large amount of buck (albeit for a shorter contract) for far less SS bang in FA (Furcal, Hardy, Scutaro, etc.).
3) Spending a huge amount of resources in trade for less SS bang (the untouchable Tulo and Ramirez being the only significant possible upgrades, with everyone else being much less appealing than even a 2010 Reyes).
4) With no ready heir apparent, spending a gargantuan amount of resources (in at least two of money, time, and/or picks) that could be directed elsewhere grooming an in-house successor while bleeding WAR at the major league level.*

*It's worth noting that the Mets don't seem to have a significant offensive prospect-- Havens possibly aside-- at a "need" position that will be an upgrade over his current major-league counterpart AND be ready to start in the next three years (Flores and Rodriguez are a ways away, and everyone else is a corner OF or IF or Niewenhuis). So improving elsewhere while going with a 1-2 WAR SS from within isn't really an option, either.

[metirish]

None of those scenarios are appealing.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Well, the (too soon dismissed, I think) one where he's replaced by a developing Met is more appealing than most, even if that guy isn't instantly excellent. Reyes wasn't either.

[metirish]

Didn't Reyes hit a grand slam his first game?

[G-Fafif]

metirish wrote: Didn't Reyes hit a grand slam his first game?

First week.

[metirish]

G-Fafif wrote: metirish wrote: Didn't Reyes hit a grand slam his first game? First week.

do that new SS that Edgy is promoting......against the Angels , just creeped inside the foul pole?

[Guest Edgy DC]

Sure, but a few well-timed homers hardly added up to general excellence. The guy was prematurely promoted and took a few years rounding off his game.

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: Sure, but a few well-timed homers hardly added up to general excellence. The guy was prematurely promoted and took a few years rounding off his game.

Yeah I know , having a bit o fun.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy DC wrote: Well, the (too soon dismissed, I think) one where he's replaced by a developing Met is more appealing than most, even if that guy isn't instantly excellent. Reyes wasn't either.

I'll grant that he was rawish. But in his first stint, Reyes put up a .307/.334/.434 with 20-plus XBH and 13 steals in less than half a season. He put up, like, 2 WAR, and got deserved RoY votes. Strictly speaking, he was GREAT right away.

Reyes also came up during a fallow time; the franchise, essentially, would essentially move at the pace of his growth. The new guy this time around would be bred to fill a hole in an extant lineup, with All-Stars or potential All-Stars at a few slots, and an aging Johan fronting a mature rotation.

I'd go with the awkward-sounding "mildly less unappealing" over "more appealing."

[Guest Edgy DC]

This isn't a fallow, diminished expectaton period?

2003 may seem like a pass of a year in restrospect, but if it wasn't meant to be a win-now team If 2003 --- with the last gasp of the 2001-2002 offseason rebuild --- I don't know what is? Alomar, Vaughn, Burnitz, Cedeno, Piazza, Alfonzo, Glavine, Leiter, Trachsel, Benitez, Weathers, Stanton, Franco. Cliff Fuckin' Floyd. That's not a rebuilding team. That's a championship-run team. (OE: ... that sucked.)

[Benjamin Grimm]

Yes, Edgy's right. The idea was that 2002 was going to be an anomaly, and they'd make a quick rebound in 2003.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

The team that Reyes came to was that "win now" team in "fuck it, why not" mode. Piazza and Vaughn were done for the year (and longer, in the latter case); Alomar and Benitez and Burnitz were in the shop window, weeks from being dealt. A distraught Mets populace embraced Jason Phillips as Vail-of-the-moment, fer Chrissakes.

The rebuild had already begun; JoseJoseJoseJose was the distraction.