RA. Dickey Trade Rumors Deserve Their Own Thread

[Frayed Knot]

"metirish": "it sure is looking that way" -- It increasingly makes sense on a number of levels, doesn't it?



"I suppose I am a bit stunned that they are talking top of the line prospects....." -- two months of Beltran netted a top prospect. So did Denard Span to Washington. Considering that a prospect, no matter how highly touted, is still an unknown quantity, the team getting the established player has to give up something potentially quite valuable in order to get the immediate and known help. And RA, coming off the CY year adds more than most to a club's staff and that he's signed cheaply for next season brings more teams and therefore more competition into play.



"did Alderson say that he wants players that can help soon? , how soon?" -- from the Adam Rubin piece: Sandy said he [is] "looking for 'difference-makers' in return for Dickey - not low-Class A prospects - Because R.A. is a difference-maker."



"the players being talked about, are they ready soon? ..." -- Keep in mind that anyone being talked about at this point is mostly media and/or fan speculation. Folks hear that 'Team X' is interested so everyone immediately goes to the list of that team's prospects and says that it'll probably take someone like [insert prospect here] off the top of that list to get Dickey especially if that prospect is seen to fit the Mets needs (which pretty much everyone short of 1Bs or 3Bs do at this point). None of this means that said player is actually being discussed by the GMs.
That said, in the case of Myers from KC he probably would be ready this season. The two Boston guys seem a bit further away like maybe late 2013. Other top prospects are going to vary. 'Top' usually means the projected highest ceiling and not necessarily closest to being ready, although Sandy's vow about "not low-Class A players" indicates he's looking more for near-term help than for a project who hit big down the road but also has a higher chance of flunking out.

The good thing about this remains that if he doesn't get all he wants the fallback position of simply hanging onto him for next season - extension or not - is hardly a bad one.

[metirish]

Excellent, looks like a win win......

In regards to Wheeler IIRC there was another prospect form the Giants being touted by the media and initially it looked like the Mets didn't get all they could....of course Wheeler quickly dispelled that notion.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Sandy was talking to Kevin Burkhardt on Mets Hot Stove last night, and he said he wants somebody who will be able to play for the Mets right away, or if not that, then very soon. Not somebody who's two years away. Sounds like he wants someone who has played at AAA and ready to play for the Mets some time in 2013.

[Frayed Knot]

metirish wrote: In regards to Wheeler IIRC there was another prospect form the Giants being touted by the media and initially it looked like the Mets didn't get all they could....of course Wheeler quickly dispelled that notion.

My memory is that speedy OFer Gary Brown was the other choice being talked about.
Again, not sure if that was just media/fan speculation or if he was really in the mix, but he was on the same level as Wheeler (High-A) at the time of the deal and was about as highly touted (although also more than 1-1/2 years older). The good news is that Brown seems to have stalled a bit at AA in 2012 whereas Wheeler really stepped it up and there's no question that ZW will be the higher rated prospect this winter. So at this point anyway (and assuming it was ever an either/or thing) the Mets made the right call.

[Edgy MD]

I think the Mets are on the brink of success.

How precipitous that brink is, that's a question for Alderson to wrestle with. But I think his real issue is that his funds are too limited and veteran pitching too risky, not that his team is too weak to justify re-signing an all-star.

[Guest vtmet]

Did anyone catch Faith and Fear in Flushing's column today titled "The Devil and Angel in Sandy's Call"? It's a pretty hilarious take on the sign or trade RA debate...

http://www.faithandfearinflushing.com/2012/12/04/the-devil-angel-on-sandys-call/

a few small samples from the article:

�All right, thanks Angel. If you guys wouldn�t mind, Paul and I would like to hear a little more of your respective cases. Angel, we�ll start with you this time.� �Sure, Sandy. R.A. Dickey was your best player last year and has been your most consistent pitcher for three years. Furthermore, he�s your most popular player. Never mind that tired line about �face of the franchise�

�Those are interesting points, Angel. Now I�d like to hear a little more from you, Devil.� �Well, Sandy, you�ve finished fourth every year you�ve had R.A. Dickey and, based on the track record, I�d say you can finish fourth without him. But your goal isn�t to finish fourth, is it? He�s never going to be better than he was last year

�Those are good points, too, Devil. Based on your assessment of our organization, when do you project us as contenders?� �Oh, never. Remember, I�m the Devil. I see nothing but pain and suffering for you and your fans. But it�s my nature to want you to believe that whatever good thing you have right now can�t possibly be as good as what you might attain via trade or other acquisition. So go ahead, trade your best and most beloved player and get some minor leaguers. I�m sure Paul has glowing reports on all of them.�

[Frayed Knot]

Time for your daily Dickey [insert FMan joke here] courtesy of Joel Sherman this morning:

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/voir_Kfrc0zULvws2dYVab0CFsI

Tidbits:

- The Mets have told R.A. Dickey what they are willing to do in a contract extension [and] they have told teams interested in acquiring Dickey the types of players � notice the plural � necessary to obtain him.
Neither the Dickey camp nor another club has yet to go to the level established by the Mets. First one that does wins.

- One outside executive aware of [the Mets'] requests said, �The price is through the roof. He�s good, but he�s a 38-year-old knuckleballer. What is his shelf life? ... I would take him, but for top prospects, no.�

- the Mets have done some groundwork by meeting with Long Beach native John Lannan�s reps.

- For now, multiple Mets officials have described to me essentially a 55-45 percent likelihood that Dickey stays.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Pure speculation here, but now that Wright's in the fold we might have less use for Wilmer Flores down the road, so if it's the loss of as prospect that scares Dickey folks, maybe we can include something else. We also seemingly have enough good young arms to sweeten the pot without robbing our depth too badly.

So I'm thinking, maybe, Dickey AND Flores for Wil Myers and another KC outfielder. Or Dickey AND Familia for Jackie Bradley Jr. + etc etc

[smg58]

The latest report is that Dickey would sign for 2 years and $26M. If that is indeed the price, there is no sensible reason to say no.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Well, the fact that we need outfielders pretty badly remains whether or not they can pay him. I'm convinced by now if it's not Dickey than it's Niese who gets shipped out, I'm not sure I'd be happy with that either.

Harvey?

How do you get an outfielder?

[metsmarathon]

dickey for reyes is a terrible idea. simply terrible. there's no way i want any part of that reyes contract, as much as i would love to have him back. especially not at the cost of an underpaid cy young award winner, and an underpaid up and coming young shortstop.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Doesn't really solve any problems.

[Benjamin Grimm]

And it would be deadly on the back-end. Isn't Reyes due to get $22 million in 2017?

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Well, the fact that we need outfielders pretty badly remains whether or not they can pay him. I'm convinced by now if it's not Dickey than it's Niese who gets shipped out, I'm not sure I'd be happy with that either. Harvey? How do you get an outfielder?

buy one or two? trade for one or two with prospects? Both seem like possibilities and maybe better ones.

[A Boy Named Seo]

smg58 wrote: The latest report is that Dickey would sign for 2 years and $26M. If that is indeed the price, there is no sensible reason to say no.

Martino sez the Mets are balking at that seemingly reasonable (to me) figure, so they gotta be shopping him pretty hard, looking for young studs to lead their 2k14 championship run. Unless there's a no-trade, would that extension help/hurt a team pursuing RA? Are there rules in MLB preventing a team from trading a guy who just signed an extension? They do that shit all the time in the NBA.

If I'm the Royals and I'm shopping Myers for an 'available' stud SP, my choices in this order are James Shields then Dickey. I wouldn't come near Jon Lester.

[metsmarathon]

smg58 wrote: The latest report is that Dickey would sign for 2 years and $26M. If that is indeed the price, there is no sensible reason to say no.

if that's the price, and especially if he's still only going to cost $5M next year, i'd jump on that like a sugar-addled suburbanite kid on a backyard trampoline

[Ceetar]

metsmarathon wrote: smg58 wrote: The latest report is that Dickey would sign for 2 years and $26M. If that is indeed the price, there is no sensible reason to say no. if that's the price, and especially if he's still only going to cost $5M next year, i'd jump on that like a sugar-addled suburbanite kid on a backyard trampoline

I'm not buying any rumors on amounts. this is the high-rumor season after all.

We've heard 2/26, 3/39. we've heard they're not talking, and we've heard that they agree on years but not $/year. Perhaps the Mets want a 2/26 extension and Dickey wants a 3/39 offer to start this year.

[duan]

The latest report is that Dickey would sign for 2 years and $26M. If that is indeed the price, there is no sensible reason to say no. if that's the price, and especially if he's still only going to cost $5M next year, i'd jump on that like a sugar-addled suburbanite kid on a backyard trampoline

The $5 million is the bit that I haven't seen actually stated.
If it's seeking a 3 year deal for $31 million (ie: next year's 5, plus another 2 years @ 13 each)
that's one thing.
If it's next year and 2014 for $26 million, that's another.

In all honesty, if you told me you'd get him to sign an extension which gives you him for 3 more years @ less then Andy Pettite is getting for this year I'd have think you'd do it unless you were given a great deal of prospects in return.

However, RA is probably more motivated to get an extension done then the Mets are. To some degree he REALLY needs to get one done. He's still only an injury away from retiring with only $5 million guaranteed & a 38 this is definitely his best time to try and secure his future. That means two things, he needs to get as much as he can, but he also needs to do it. To some degree I think the mets are happy to wait him out a little bit and if it was my money I'd probably play the hand in the same way.

[Ceetar]

duan wrote: To some degree I think the mets are happy to wait him out a little bit and if it was my money I'd probably play the hand in the same way.

Well, they're apparently looking for a steal of a deal, also gauging interest. They can get the money down a bit on an extension if they come back and say "look, these teams don't seem to value you _that_ much, and after another year older it's unlikely you'll get anything close to this. come down a bit."

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Ceetar wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Well, the fact that we need outfielders pretty badly remains whether or not they can pay him. I'm convinced by now if it's not Dickey than it's Niese who gets shipped out, I'm not sure I'd be happy with that either. Harvey? How do you get an outfielder? buy one or two? trade for one or two with prospects? Both seem like possibilities and maybe better ones.

Bah. They don't have the scratch to buy one, particularly if they keep Dickey around. I'm OK with the prospect trade but I don't think there's a Wil Myers type prospect in the system but for Wheeler.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Well, the fact that we need outfielders pretty badly remains whether or not they can pay him. I'm convinced by now if it's not Dickey than it's Niese who gets shipped out, I'm not sure I'd be happy with that either. Harvey? How do you get an outfielder? buy one or two? trade for one or two with prospects? Both seem like possibilities and maybe better ones. Bah. They don't have the scratch to buy one, particularly if they keep Dickey around. I'm OK with the prospect trade but I don't think there's a Wil Myers type prospect in the system but for Wheeler.

They've deferred a bunch of Bay and Wright's money. Seems silly to do that if you don't plan on spending it.

[metsmarathon]

unless you don't expect to have it in the first place, of course.

[Ceetar]

metsmarathon wrote: unless you don't expect to have it in the first place, of course.

not that we should take much of anything GM/execs say as anything but words that form sentences, it doesn't jive with what they've hinted/said the payroll will be. They're only committed to about $75 mill or so at this point in 2013.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Andy Martino, in this morning's Daily News, says that the Mets are "sitting on at least one acceptable deal" for Dickey. No further details.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Andy Martino, in this morning's Daily News, says that the Mets are "sitting on at least one acceptable deal" for Dickey. No further details.

continuing to over-analyze rumors, I'll guess 'acceptable' means they'd actually prefer keeping Dickey than trading him, are hoping to use the 'value' from the trade to adjust the extension offer Dickey accepts. Or just holding out for something better. Or have a trade/signing in the works that might negate the need for the Dickey trade. Or they're working on said trade to turn back to the Dickey traders to say "We're prepared to make this other deal. sweeten the pot."

[Frayed Knot]

Andy Martino, in this morning's Daily News, says that the Mets are "sitting on at least one acceptable deal" for Dickey. No further details.

So, taking that at face value while also assuming there are no other potential deals, the inevitable step is to go to Dickey and tell him that you've got a move that you like so either he signs for X or they'll pull the trigger and move him.

Of course there are a number of different ways to interpret Martino's line:
- "acceptable" can be read as "only OK" and they'd prefer to keep him so long as his demands aren't totally outrageous
- that they're bullshitting but want this story out there so that RAD feels pressured to sign for their number/length
- that they'll continue to shop for better offers because there's really no hard deadline on this thing
- that Dickey's camp knows the specifics of the offer (is anything a complete secret in winter meetings?) and are willing to call the team's bluff that they'll actually do it
and so on

[Ceetar]

Frayed Knot wrote: (is anything a complete secret in winter meetings?)

You can probably sneak some stuff through in all the noise. Like how the Mets are maybe rumored to be looking at an outfielder (well, duh) but you don't really get any names and anytime anyone asks Alderson talks about Hairston.

[Frayed Knot]

Well, we, and even reporters, certainly don't know/hear everything.
But it's safe to assume that insiders make it their business to know what going on on the inside; in this case meaning Dickey's agent probably has some idea of the who, the what, the if, and the odds of any potential deal involving his #1 (and possibly only) client and so wouldn't be flying totally blind if/when the Mets came to him with a take-it-or-leave-it offer.

[Benjamin Grimm]

More from Andy Martino. It seems like one of the Mets better options is Texas, and the player they'd get is a... third baseman?

Andy Martino wrote: If the current stalemate between the Mets and R.A. Dickey leads to divorce, the Texas Rangers are one of the strongest candidates to land the Cy Young Award-winner in a trade. Toronto, Baltimore and the Dodgers are also real possibilities, according to major league executives with direct knowledge of the process; the Yankees, who have also shown interest in the pitcher, are not. In an extremely fluid situation, the Mets were said to like Toronto catching prospect Travis D�Arnaud, and Texas third baseman Mike Olt as major pieces in potential deals. The Mets met on Monday with Toronto brass, but talks stalled and appeared dead. Then, Sandy Alderson and Jays GM Alex Anthopoulos resumed discussions on Wednesday, although they still had no deal. "Alex would rather move (catcher J.P.) Arencibia than D'Arnaud, but that could change," said a person briefed on Toronto's thinking. A different major league executive said that Texas would be willing to part with Olt in the right deal, especially if the Rangers are unable to sign free agent starter Zack Greinke. As for Baltimore, a league source said that they liked Dickey, but were not close to finding a match in a trade. All through the week, the rival executives maintained that the Mets� asking price for Dickey was extremely high. "It should be," said one Mets person. "He won the Cy Young." Kansas City, which balked earlier this week at the notion of trading top outfield prospect Wil Myers for Dickey, left the meetings "definitely not in on Dickey," according to a National League executive briefed on the situation. Additionally, a Mets source told the Daily News on Thursday that the Yankees and Nationals were early suitors for Dickey at the winter meetings. "Washington liked Dickey a lot, and so did the Yankees," the source said, while stressing that talks did not progress, and a deal with either club would not happen. After general manager Sandy Alderson determined that he did not want to trade Dickey to a National League East rival, the Nats signed starter Dan Haren. The Yankees, who attempted last winter to trade for Jon Niese, did not have prospects that fit the Mets' needs, and talks stalled. Despite all of those trade discussions, the Mets are far from ruling out keeping Dickey on a contract extension. The winter meetings ended with the sides far apart on the dollar value of a two-year deal, and the Mets' current offer was well below Dickey's initial asking price of approximately two years, $26 million, plus the pre-existing $5 million club option. The Mets will not meet that price, according to sources. Before leaving Nashville, Alderson indicated that he did not receive an offer for a trade worth making. "We haven't made a trade," the GM said. "You can read into that what you like." "Things are moving forward on two tracks," he added. "While we are waiting for a better trade offer, we are still exploring bringing R.A. back." Alderson reiterated what chief operating officer Jeff Wilpon has said several times, that the Mets were open to retaining Dickey for next year without signing him to an extension. "I don't think its necessarily the optimum result, but it's a possible result," Alderson said. "If that's the one that ultimately transpires, then we'll be happy with that."

[Frayed Knot]

Both Olt & D'Arnaud are major prospects, probably will be along with Myers from KC in the top dozen in the whole circuit this winter.
Olt should be young enough and athletic enough to play elsewhere on the diamond which of course he'd have to if we got him.