Re-Sign Reyes NOW!!!!

[Edgy MD]

I felt he'd get his $20 million before the season.

[TransMonk]

Personally, I wouldn't want to offer him any more than five guaranteed years.

[Vic Sage]

i've mentioned my ideal proposal before, but it would work like this:

5 years / $16.5m guaranteed, with $1.5m bonus upon 700 PAs, and $2m in various performance bonuses
- each year he reaches 700 PAs automatically extends the deal an additional year, for up to 3 additional years. If the 3 option years do not vest, they can be bought out for $2.5m each.

minimum deal = 5 years / $90m
max deal = 8 years / $160m

This allows Reyes to get BETTER than "Crawford money" if he stays healthy and productive, which saves face for him and basically makes him a Met for life, while offering the Mets at least some downside protection if Reyes continues to break down every year.

of course, 1 owner offering 7 years/$140m will likely blow such an offer out of the water.

[Guest attgig]

Edgy DC wrote: Red Sox. Dodgers. Diamondbacks. Hello?

I don't see the dodgers throwing in all the money, unless they get a new owner FAST.
the RedSox were ruled out with their re-up of scutaro, but that would be an interesting case where they have scutaro be the solid backup in case reyes gets hurt. They already do have a solid top of the order though...
and dbax? isn't Drew signed in there long term?

[Edgy MD]

Dodgers: new owners could come along fast. Richie Rich folk too.

Red Sox: always got money and Scutaro is a valuable trade commodity at that option price to help them add pitching.

D-Backs: Steven Drew, tradeable also. I just threw them up against the wall as a f'rinstance.

None of these teams are likely, but the small likelihood of each, taken collectively, makes for a challenging situation for the Mets.

My dark horse bet... HOUSTON!

[TransMonk]

Vic Sage wrote: 5 years / $16.5m guaranteed, with $1.5m bonus upon 700 PAs, and $2m in various performance bonuses - each year he reaches 700 PAs automatically extends the deal an additional year, for up to 3 additional years. If the 3 option years do not vest, they can be bought out for $2.5m each. minimum deal = 5 years / $90m max deal = 8 years / $160m

I like this offer a lot, although it would be my final. If someone wants to offer him 7yrs/$140M, I'd help him pack.

[Guest attgig]

Vic Sage wrote: i've mentioned my ideal proposal before, but it would work like this: 5 years / $16.5m guaranteed, with $1.5m bonus upon 700 PAs, and $2m in various performance bonuses - each year he reaches 700 PAs automatically extends the deal an additional year, for up to 3 additional years. If the 3 option years do not vest, they can be bought out for $2.5m each. minimum deal = 5 years / $90m max deal = 8 years / $160m This allows Reyes to get BETTER than "Crawford money" if he stays healthy and productive, which saves face for him and basically makes him a Met for life, while offering the Mets at least some downside protection if Reyes continues to break down every year. of course, 1 owner offering 7 years/$140m will likely blow such an offer out of the water.

I like it, but I doubt Reyes would accept. he hasn't touched 700 PA since '08. I'd think he'd more likely accept at 650, which, honestly, I could live with.
I could see something like:
5 years 17 guaranteed. 1mil for 600, 1 mil for 650. 1mil 700 (2012-2017)
6th year at 22 mil guaranteed kicks in with MVP award, WS MVP or 600PA in 2017 or 1150 combined for 2016 & 2017. - single 5mil buyout if goals aren't met, contract over.
7th year with 24 mil guaranteed kicks in 2 MVP/WS MVP or 600 in 2018 or 1150 combined 2017 & 2018


anyways, there's my WACP....

[Vic Sage]

Reyes has been in the majors for parts of 9 seasons. Out of those 9, he's had only 4 "full seasons" (2005-2008) where he's played at least 150 games. In each of those 4 seasons, he exceeded 700 PAs. So i don't think my proposal based on 700 PAs established an unrealistic expectation for a full-time leadoff hitter. I would only agree to move the threshold down to 650 if he was moved down in the batting order.

I'm not particularly interested in Reyes for 600 PAs, when he has missed 20%-25% of the season... at least not for $17m-$20m/yr. And so I don't think the Mets should pay that unless we're getting prime/full-season production. If we do, he gets his money. If we don't, he still gets $16.5m, which ain't bad either. he just doesnt get to roll that into bonuses and additional years.

would he take something like this? well, that depends entirely on his options.

[Ceetar]

this thread needs more ! because it doesn't appear to be getting through to Sandy/Jose.

[Edgy MD]

Well, you could set a lower bonus at 650.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Vic Sage wrote: 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.

If you want everybody else to spend more than you would, wouldn't the only guys you publicly say "no" to be the guys you actually want?

[Vic Sage]

Edgy DC wrote: Well, you could set a lower bonus at 650.

YOU could, but i wouldn't.

As far as i'm concerned, it's a slippery slope. Sure you could give them a lower bonus at 650, and a lower bonus at 600, and at 550 too. My point to them would be "I'm already paying you $16.5m if you play less than a full season. If you want that big money bonus PLUS the addition of another year to the deal, then show up healthy and play a full season." I'm not even tying these particular bonuses to PRODUCTION... if he just shows up and plays, he keeps getting $18m and another year added to the deal. If he produces, too, he could add up to another $2m per season.

I don't know, i think its more than fair. is it enough to get a deal done? Again, depends on his options. I'm with Monk, though... if he gets 7yrs/$140m guaranteed, i'll drive him to the airport.

[Guest attgig]

I think the problem is that there will be another team that will guarantee more without that 700 PA. I don't think i've ever seen anyone take a 700 PA option.

looking at some other players options based on plate appearances:
Bobby Abreu has a 550 PA or 1100 over 2 years.
Jason Bay has a 600 PA or 1000 PA over 2 years.
Chipper had a 450 PA option in '07 & 08.
Rickie Weeks has a 600PA or 1200 PAS over 2 years.
Furcal has a 600 PA option in '11




list can go on, but... nobody even has an option that kicks in for 650PA's. that in itself would be unprecedented. I just don't see anyone accepting something that's so out of the norm.

[Guest attgig]

and. 700 is 153+ games a year (2006). 650 is probably in the 140-145 range. I think I would be pretty happy seeing him play 140-145 games. allows for 1 15day dl stint a year or just a good number of off days spaced well through the year.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, you want to reward a guy for staying healthy, not force him to be an iron man, or to play through discomfort when it's not wise.

That 700 number leaves almost no margin for error, and negotiators of good faith have to leave some.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: Yeah, you want to reward a guy for staying healthy, not force him to be an iron man, or to play through discomfort when it's not wise. That 700 number leaves almost no margin for error, and negotiators of good faith have to leave some.

It wouldn't be hard to speculate, and Terry even did some of this, that the "iron man" attitude may have led to some of the hamstring issues. Also, perhaps playing every damn day at 110% may have contributed to a mental/physical wearing down in September of 07/08?

This is reading WAY too much into it (isn't that what the offseason is about?) perhaps Reyes managing to play through a similar tightness in his hammy this September was both a sign that he can slow down when it's in his best interest (Of course, very easily could've been just a financial decision to avoid a third DL stint) AND can still contribute at a pretty high level even without his legs being 100%.

[Edgy MD]

As far as slowing it down, he didn't play particularly well in July and August.

[Ceetar]

Edgy DC wrote: As far as slowing it down, he didn't play particularly well in July and August.

well, comparing him to say..Jose Reyes, he didn't. But he still pretty much played above average level for SS.

[batmagadanleadoff]

The Mets insist they want to retain Jose Reyes, but at their reasonable price and, well, they really should stop saying that. It is akin to going into a Mercedes dealership, badly wanting a new model and telling a salesman you are willing to go as high as $5,000 to get one. Free agency has begun and, thus, the fantasy that Reyes will fit into some bargain slot for the Mets is over. Whatever his injury history -- and it is concerning -- Reyes is one of the three or four most attractive players on the market and is going to have multiple bidders for his services. That combination will assure his payday soars well above the Mets� budget. As a Mets official told me this week after the familiar mantra of we want him at our price, �I think he will be blown away by someone else.� Another Mets official said, �My instinct is no shot.

Rest of article at http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/trickle_down_economics_G5wFhNifw09CEk4T1NzDSP#ixzz1ckZzar4T

I'm posting this excerpt from Joel Sherman's piece mainly because it's perfectly consistent with what I believe. I think Reyes will get a huge contract offer, hammies notwithstanding. For two months last year, Reyes was baseball's best player. He's now the reigning batting champ, and baseball's most exciting player. He's a shortstop ferchrisakes. He's still only 28 and won't turn 29 until about the middle of next season. And if you believe that a baseball player's prime begins at 30, as many do, well then Reyes' prime won't begin until ... ah, do the math. I'm speculating that the Mets, privately, probably believe that they have no realistic chance at all of retaining Reyes.

[Vic Sage]

well, comparing him to say..Jose Reyes, he didn't. But he still pretty much played above average level for SS.

yeah, no. he didn't. July = ops+ 62; August = 63, and that's over a combined 100 PAs for the 2 months, which is 1/2 of the PAs you get from the "average level for ss". in other words, he was mediocre when he played, but he didn't play much.

Guys aren't great when they don't play. Except Capuano. Apparently, according to m.e.t.b.o.t., the less he pitches the more he helps the team. So if he's out for the season, he becomes the team MVP.

But when Reyes showed up, from 2005-2008, he was an MVP candidate and the kind of guy you could build around. the guy who has otherwise played 120-140 games? Not so much. Even when he produces at a great rate, as he did this past season, his 2nd half coincided with their decline from .500 team to stinky cheese. Winning a batting title on your ass is all well and good, but you don't win a division that way.

Edited November 4, 2011 by Guest

[metirish]

From said article

I still suspect Reyes will get six years in the $114 million range, but to get there he will have to patiently let negotiations for Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols play out and/or let the other NL East teams fret about what happens if a switch-hitting, multi-talented, 28-year-old shortstop ends up with a competitor. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/trickle_down_economics_G5wFhNifw09CEk4T1NzDSP#ixzz1ckdh6Jjq

Mets better not think this is Reyes getting blown away.

[Frayed Knot]

And if you believe that a baseball player's prime begins at 30, as many do ...

Many do? Really?

[ashie62]

I though age 26 was the breakout year....

[batmagadanleadoff]

Vic Sage wrote: Ceetar wrote: well, comparing him to say..Jose Reyes, he didn't. But he still pretty much played above average level for SS. yeah, no. he didn't. July = ops+ 62; August = 63, and that's over a combined 100 PAs for the 2 months, which is 1/2 of the PAs you get from the "average level for ss". in other words, he was mediocre when he played, but he didn't play much. Guys aren't great when they don't play. Except Capuano. Apparently, according to m.e.t.b.o.t., the less he pitches the more he helps the team. So if he's out for the season, he becomes the team MVP. But when Reyes showed up, from 2005-2008, he was an MVP candidate and the kind of guy you could build around. the guy who has otherwise played 120-140 games? Not so much. Even when he produces at a great rate, as he did this past season, his 2nd half coincided with their decline from .500 team to stinky cheese. Winning a batting title on your ass is all well and good, but you don't win a division that way.

It's well established by now, as you'd probably agree, that when healthy, Reyes is a superstar MVP caliber player. I say well established because it's based, not only on his 2011 batting champ campaign, but on Reyes's last six seasons (06-11). And he's still 28. Of course, a rational person shouldn't discount the injury history but I'm guessing that when 31 potential bidders are in the mix, someone's gonna bust their budget for Reyes. Barring collusion, has their ever been an offf-season where at least one free agent didn't sign a contract that exceeded expectations?

[Edgy MD]

And letting the market come to you, while terribly risky, is in no way analogous to setting your price ceiling at $5,000 at a Mercedes Benz dealership. Most obviously, the Mets haven't set a ceiling --- not one that he or I are privy to.

Seriously, Sherman?

[Guest attgig]

If I were another team, I'd be willing to bet that my team's medical staff will do a better job than the Mets staff, and he'll be a lot healthier going forward, even if he does turn 30 in a couple.

Risk that I'd be willing to take.


there was an article on espn giving a plan B if the cardinals didn't resign pujols, which included moving Berkman to 1b, craig to RF, and then signing both Reyes and Kelly Johnson (for ~price of what they would pay pujuls). it seems like a very solid plan b if they don't get pujols...

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy DC wrote: And letting the market come to you, while terribly risky, is in no way analogous to setting your price ceiling at $5,000 at a Mercedes Benz dealership. Most obviously, the Mets haven't set a ceiling --- not one that he or I are privy to. Seriously, Sherman?

I will guess that we will never officially learn the Mets top number for signing Reyes. This way, they can always claim, after they get blown out of the waters, that they had a competitive offer but chose not to sign Reyes.

On Sherman ... well , yeah ... the Mets won't offer Reyes $5,000. Sherman's $5,000 was not literal, dont'cha think? $5,000.00 was simply a figure of speech, applied to something to which the figure is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance. You know, like a metaphor. I think that what Sherman is really saying is that the Mets can't afford Reyes but have too much pride to admit it, so they engage in, or will engage in these machinations to make it appear that they are in complete control of the situation.

[Edgy MD]

That's a lot of sarcasm.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I could do more.

[Edgy MD]

Please do less.