Re-Sign Reyes NOW!!!!

[Ceetar]

TransMonk wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I remain perplexed as to what's so objectionable about it. I guess I'd like to know what his definition of not punting is...specifically. But like you said, it's early.

When you punt, you ultimately want the ball back. When you get the ball back, Having Jose Reyes on the field would be a good way to not have to punt again.

[Edgy MD]

My understanding is that not punting is continuing to endeavor to put a competitive team on the field in 2011.

I don't have any problem with that (I'd expect any GM to say it), and I don't think it should necessarily undermine any future.

[batmagadanleadoff]

GM Sandy Alderson says Mets plan to make low contract offer to free agent SS Jose Reyes

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/gm-sandy-alderson-mets-plan-contract-offer-free-agent-ss-jose-reyes-article-1.970263


My take on this is that the Mets don't expect to retain Reyes and are now clearly in face saving mode. To me, this business about not extending an offer to Reyes during their exclusive period or going out of their way to announce it whenever they can -- like every four seconds -- that if they do make an initial offer, it'll be on the lowball side, is to save themselves the embarrassment of being blown out of the water by competing offers that they won't be able to afford to match. This way, they'll say that they had more money to offer Reyes but decided not to because the market got out of control. "It's not that we can't afford Reyes, but that we choose other options", is what they'll likely say, more or less.

The way I see it, if Reyes is still a Met next year, it'll be because he's a Met at heart, a Met all the way, and is willing to leave mucho bucks on the table to stay here.

[Edgy MD]

Same quotes as above.

[Centerfield]

I don't see anything in those quotes to suggest the Mets will make a low-ball offer, or that the Mets will not be willing to beat the highest offer out there. Nothing suggests that they will either, but I can't see how any of the Alderson quotes can be seen to confirm anything.

Actually that's not true.

Alderson's quotes confirm what was first reported by CF last week that Alderson plans not to give away his post-season strategy to reporters prior to the expiration of the exclusive FA window.

[Centerfield]

ALDERSON: METS WILL GO ABOVE AND BEYOND TO RETAIN REYES

By Centerfield / cranepoolforum.net

NEW YORK -- Although it is not clear what it will take to retain Jose Reyes, the free-agent shortstop remains the Mets' top priority this winter, and a recent interview with General Manager Sandy Alderson suggests that the Mets would be willing to surpass what the market bears in order to retain him.

"We all have to recognize that certain players are more important to the fan base than others," said Alderson while speaking to the press on Monday.

Alderson's position conflicted with earlier reports, like that of douchebag Andy Martino, that stated that the Mets were going to lowball the free-agent shortstop. Alderson went on to explain that such misconceptions probably arose due the anticipated lengthy negotiations on tap for the ball club.

"Things are going to go slow, which I think is typical of most if not all free agents," Alderson said.

Still, Alderson remained optimistic that such prolonged negotiations should not be taken as a negative, and still believes Reyes prefers to stay home, rather than relocate to another club. "That's not just because players are attracted to other clubs, but because they're not really sure what the market is."

For now, the Mets will simply proceed with their other offseason priorities -- bullpen help and rotation depth -- and deal with Reyes later. Even in the unlikely event the shortstop does not re-sign with New York, the club still plans for its final 2012 payroll to fall in the $100-$110 million range.

"We're not going punt 2012 if Jose doesn't re-sign," Alderson said.

[Ceetar]

I should reblog that 'article'.

[Edgy MD]

I re-facebooked it, or something.

Done mighty well.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: I re-facebooked it, or something. Done mighty well.

I'm pondering if I should edit out the "douchebag Andy Martino" line to be professional or something.

[Edgy MD]

And tie the legs of a stallion?

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: And tie the legs of a stallion?

went for excerpt and link.

[ashie62]

Fred...Need Money for Reyes?

[Piggiestomatoes]

That Corzine pic and caption is hilarious!

[Edgy MD]

Mets settled two lawsuits today. Two! In one day! Unrelated!

First one with a former employee or employees who claimed that the Mets led them to blow their money with Madoff. The second was from the lady injured when the big dude fell on her.

Maybe now we see if we have Reyes money left over.

You want unbecoming statements from a GM, how about if he says, "Can we sign him? I dunno. How much is that fat guy gonna cost us?"

[bmfc1]

According to Rubin's survey of beat writers for opposing teams, there is no interest in Jose:

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/36355/opposing-views-on-reyes

Let's hope so.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It may be true. And I think that article would be different if Jose had played 156 games in 2011 instead of 126. Those two DL stints just have to be worrisome. I'd be very surprised if they didn't end up costing Jose millions of dollars.

[metirish]

bmfc1 wrote: According to Rubin's survey of beat writers for opposing teams, there is no interest in Jose: http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/36355/opposing-views-on-reyes Let's hope so.

one of the best players in the game and not wanted.......the mind boggles

[Ceetar]

metirish wrote: According to Rubin's survey of beat writers for opposing teams, there is no interest in Jose: http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/36355/opposing-views-on-reyes Let's hope so. one of the best players in the game and not wanted.......the mind boggles

and yesterday there were supposedly like 18 teams rumored?

[Benjamin Grimm]

I can guarantee the number of suitors for Jose Reyes will be somewhere between zero and 18.

I'm guessing three or four teams will be seriously involved. If health concerns hold them back from going over five years and going over $20 million per, then the Mets have a shot. But if there's a team willing to go all Crawford on him, then he's gone.

I'll be sorry if he goes, but having survived the loss of Seaver and Strawberry and others, I know I'll be able to move on.

[G-Fafif]

Collusion!

Or not. Despite all of Rubin's buds being so in-the-know, I'm guessing nobody's doing more than educated-guessing right now. All it takes is one suitor to get the ball rolling, and it may be none of those mentioned.

But if it helps Jose circle back to the Mets, fine.

The article mentions concerns by the Phillies about chemistry. If that's real, then eph them. They're as dumb as Gary Matthews and Shane Victorino if they don't glean the joy from Jose.

But eph them, mostly.

Edited November 3, 2011 by Guest

[TransMonk]

G-Fafif wrote: I'm guess nobody's doing more than educated-guessing right now.

This.

[Benjamin Grimm]

G-Fafif wrote: The article mentions concerns by the Phillies about chemistry. If that's real, then eph them. They're as dumb as Gary Matthews and Shane Victorino if they don't glean the joy from Jose. But eph them, mostly.

If they're saying they're concerned about chemistry, I suspect that they're really concerned about money and don't want to broadcast that too much. I don't know how many more times they can go to the well, especially since they may be paying Ryan Howard $25 million to sit out much of 2012.

[Edgy MD]

Red Sox. Dodgers. Diamondbacks. Hello?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Marlins. They would do something like this.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'll be sorry if he goes, but having survived the loss of Seaver and Strawberry and others, I know I'll be able to move on.

As I didn't, I may need some serious couch time.

[TransMonk]

I worry about Washington. Not so much about Milwaukee.

[G-Fafif]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'll be sorry if he goes, but having survived the loss of Seaver and Strawberry and others, I know I'll be able to move on.

I hear ya, but like the athletes for whom we cheer and with whom we identify, I'm finding it harder to bounce back from Met snits as I get older. Alfonzo took me a season and a quarter to unsnit. The first Collapse pissed me off for two-plus seasons. It took me three seasons to forgive Citi Field for its existence.

No Reyes? I don't know.

[Edgy MD]

Wow, according to Rubin's story, Reyes is unwanted and unloved. And destined to die miserable and alone.

I had no idea!

[Vic Sage]

some of those guys are saying their teams won't be interested because OTHER teams will bid up the price too high. But the OTHER teams are also saying the same thing.

this is like the Yogi-ism about the restaurant: "Nobody goes there anymore; it's too popular." or words to that affect.

if injury concerns or reluctance to enter into a bidding war keep teams from getting involved, then no bidding war will ensue, meaning the price will stay low, which will get teams interested (because at the right price, Reyes is an attractive player), which will start the bidding war they were worried about in the first place. Nobody wants to SET the market (which is why Alderson isn't going to blow Reyes out of the water with an initial offer), but once offers and counter-offers start getting tossed around, the market will set itself, and teams will either deal themselves in our out at that point, regardless of all this puffery.

if you think about for a second, though, we could probably see where the market is right now. All the teams in that article (including the Mets) would take Reyes at 5 years / $15m; lets assume that's the floor. Would any take him at 7 years / $20m (i.e., "Crawford money")? Unlikely, but not impossible. It only takes 1 buyer. But lets assume thats the top end. a mid-point is probably 6 years / $17.5m, which would scare off some teams, but probably not all. You could even add an option/buy out provision to bring the total package up a bit, plus incentive clauses that could all back into a "crawford" type deal, if Reyes was healthy and productive.

Could the Mets do this? and should they? I don't know if they CAN, but if that's the market, i'd reluctantly agree they should. But at 7yrs+/$20m+ straight up, i'd understand if Sandy passed.

[Benjamin Grimm]

That sounds right to me. I've been thinking $18 million per year over five years, but add an option for a sixth year and you're right around Vic's projection.

Some have been saying that Jose is certain to get at least $20 million per year, but I'm not all that sure of that.