Mets Still Broke

[batmagadanleadoff]

I know, there's probably another thread or eight that should logically accommodate this post. And until the forum search engine acts as efficiently as it ought to, I ain't bothering to look.


Jeff Wilpon and the myth of a free-spending Mets winter to come

By Howard Megdal
12:59 pm Jun. 6, 2013




Jeff and Fred Wilpon.

Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the New York Mets, was back in the news Wednesday, about a week after he conceded the 2013 season to Mariano Rivera. This time, Wilpon visited Binghamton, the Double-A home of the Mets. Whether this was a previously scheduled visit, or a public relations response to the Wall Street Journal piece which reported a primary factor in the Mets getting stuck with Las Vegas as a Triple-A affiliate was Jeff Wilpon, is unclear. Wilpon was there to preach patience. He said some hard-to-fathom things about general manager Sandy Alderson taking "two or three years to get the plan into effect, and we have to see and wait it out." Wilpon spoke the truth, but not quite in the way he intended. Waiting out Wilpon's ownership, devoid of the resources to field a good major league team, will require even more patience than Mets fans have given so far, for a major league team that's won progressively fewer games each year since 2010. So for a fan base that has already written off 2013 as surely as its owner did, the view has turned to this winter. The hope, and increasingly, the conventional wisdom, is that with a number of large contracts coming off the books, the Mets will spend money on new talent the team desperately needs, and which isn't coming through the minor league system just yet. The problem with this theory comes from treating the Mets, and their ability to spend money, as an independent function of the team's payroll alone. This winter promises to be far more complicated than that, and ownership's ability to spend will hang in the balance while Wilpon and his partners attempt to stave off the debt reckoning barreling toward them. Remember, this is fundamentally different than paying the annual interest on their debts, which has financially crippled the team annually, and forced things like a minority sale in March 2012, and a large loan this past winter. So measure the impact of these two things, if you wish: Johan Santana's $31 million coming off the books, along with Jason Bay's $21 million. This is more complicated than it sounds, in terms of freed-up money, since $15 million of Bay's $21 million was deferred, the Mets just choosing to call that money part of 2013 payroll (likely to inflate the 2013 number for public consumption), while $5 million of Santana's 2013 salary was already deferred, and another $5.5 million of that $31 million is a buyout of Santana's 2014 option, not due until the end of the season. So functionally, Bay and Santana earned $32 million this season, not $52 million. How that supposedly stopped the Mets from improving the team last winter would be a mystery, absent other information. But naturally, we have other information. And a cursory look at the obstacles ahead quickly makes thinking of how the Mets will spend this winter in terms of Bay and Santana look like the red herring it is. Mets' ownership is still financing an enormous debt load, took another $160 million in loans against their S.N.Y. ownership stake last winter, all part of their year-by-year effort to keep the ball in the air. They owe $320 million in a loan against the team, due in June 2014. And their debt total against S.N.Y., including the new loans last winter, are up over $600 million, and due in 2015. Getting their creditors to sign off on major new outlays of money isn't easy. JP Morgan Chase objected to the proposed deal with David Einhorn back in the summer of 2011 at first, because the original Einhorn-Mets deal put Einhorn in line among Wilpon creditors ahead of the team loan. And the same need to keep J.P. Morgan Chase happy led to the heavily deferred contract with David Wright, signed last winter, actually reducing the amount the Mets owed Wright between the date it was signed and the June 2014 due date for the team loan. It is unlikely the Wilpon and his partners would have been allowed to make the offer otherwise. Accordingly, the Mets have seen money come off the books before, like after 2011, when Carlos Beltran, Francisco Rodriguez, Oliver Perez and Luis Castillo no longer clogged the team's payroll. Back in early 2011, Jeff Wilpon preached a single year of patience. But it's not up to him. Those creditors are why it isn't just money in, money out on payroll. It's about getting their creditors to go along with new spending. So now consider the real winter ahead for the New York Mets owners. They have less than a year to either find a way to pay J.P. Morgan Chase $320 million, or convince the bank to give them more time. And they'll have to do so with more than just a Fred Wilpon press conference sunnily declaring his money problems a thing of the past. If the bank believes, unlike Standard and Poor's, that the Mets are on the cusp of profitability, or that a forced sale now will produce less revenue than giving ownership more time, then a stay of execution is possible. But it's more complicated than that. Any additional time built into this loan needs to also pass muster with the group holding the more than $600 million in debt against ownership's S.N.Y. holdings in 2015. The structures of the two loans, both held by ownership's parent company, will need to be reconciled. At that point, can the Mets spend money to sign new players? In theory, if J.P. Morgan Chase decides that an infusion of new talent is worth seeing a bunch of money go to, say, Shin-Soo Choo ahead of the bank to help turn the Mets profitable. And if the S.N.Y. creditors agree. While all of this is resolved, one way or another, 29 other teams, flush with new television money that will put an additional $50 million in their coffers in 2014, but without the need to go through a Queen of Versailles-style gauntlet to spend, can also bid on Choo and other free agents. So the Mets certainly have holes, between an outfield in need of three starters next season (Marlon Byrd's recent hot streak notwithstanding), possible starters at shortstop, first base, even catcher, depending on the progress and recovery of Travis d'Arnaud. But Jeff Wilpon is right: Mets fans really need to be patient. Wilpon and his partners have lots to do before Sandy Alderson's plan can include anything like spending money on baseball players.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/06/8530740/jeff-wilpon-and-myth-free-spending-mets-winter-come

[ashie62]

I do not agree with Medgal's financial interpretation here...

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ashie62 wrote: I do not agree with Medgal's financial interpretation here...

Why? (Not that the Wilpons seem to have dodged every bullet so far, including the potential H-Bomb Picard lawsuit.

[ashie62]

I don't believe the big numbers that Megdal quotes to build his "model".. Have the Mets bankers shown him the books?

I doubt it..

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ashie62 wrote: I don't believe the big numbers that Megdal quotes to build his "model".. Have the Mets bankers shown him the books? I doubt it..

The Mets bankers may disclose the team's financials only to entities that are authorized to view..... But Megdal, almost certainly, has a confidential informant feeding him a good amount of the team's private financials. Those financials were exposed to a lot of new eyeballs over the past few years as the Mets sought additional financing. Someone likely breached their confidentiality agreement.

[ashie62]

I want Einhorn and Greenlight Capital to try buying in again...Einhorn almost gored Fred the first time... Then a Greenlight activist Apple Computer can buy the Mets and play at the Ifield..

I can dream...

[Guest vtmet]

Mets are broke until they aren't broke anymore...and they can't get unbroke until they ain't broke no more...

[Benjamin Grimm]

I guess it matters whether they're broke or not, but I'm not sure how much.

The hope (and perhaps even the expectation, who knows?) was that the 2013 Mets would take a few strides forward, and be only a few key players away from being at least on the fringe of contention. But they're in a much deeper hole than that. I'd say they may need as many as five or six position players and I only see one such player (d'Arnaud) as someone who's already in the organization. Even if they were fabulously wealthy, there won't be enough players available on the free agent market to get everyone they need. Unless things change direction in a hurry, I'm figuring that we have to hope (not expect) that 2014 will be what 2013 was supposed to be, and that 2015 will be what 2014 was supposed to be. And we also have to prepare ourselves that the calendar may very well have to be adjusted again a few more times.

[Edgy MD]

You don't see Wheeler as projecting to have an impact? Rafael Montero or Rainy Lara or Jack Leathersich or anybody?

Man, some of those guys are gonna flail and fail, but some are gonna punch the world in the face. Some of them.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm quite happy about their pitching prospects. I just think that there are too many needs for position players for there to be a quick (meaning next year) turnaround.

I'm happy with Wright and Murphy and hope to be happy with d'Arnaud. Maybe Lagares too, if he gets a chance and makes the most of it.

But Davis, Tejada, Byrd, Duda? We need to do better than that.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

That's why Ike's troubles are so ... troubling. He was supposed to be part of the solution but became part of the problem. He's just one guy but also, the cleanup hitter. His setback is everyone's setback.

Oh, Duda is not a problem. I like the Dooder.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm quite happy about their pitching prospects. I just think that there are too many needs for position players for there to be a quick (meaning next year) turnaround. I'm happy with Wright and Murphy and hope to be happy with d'Arnaud. Maybe Lagares too, if he gets a chance and makes the most of it. But Davis, Tejada, Byrd, Duda? We need to do better than that.

Why? What if Davis does get it back together?

Duda, after slumping for a bit now, is still 19% better than league average by OPS. That's certainly contributing. Yeah, You'd like .779 OPS to be the low point given his defense, but it seems like it is. Besides he fits the "contributing but we hate him" role on the roster that all Mets fans seem to need.

Tejada is so young you could call him up for the first time now and you'd still say he was a young callup, maybe he shakes off whatever stupidity infected him early on and goes back to being an averagish defender with an okay bat at a prime position. If d'Arnaud makes an impact they could simply sign one very good outfielder and have a very good offense even if only some of these things happen. And a very good offense with the potential of this pitching staff is is a team that wins a lot of games.

It's not all doom and gloom.

[Benjamin Grimm]

So you would keep everyone they have and hope that they get better? I think there are better odds of being a good team if you have guys who start hitting in April instead of July.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: So you would keep everyone they have and hope that they get better? I think there are better odds of being a good team if you have guys who start hitting in April instead of July.

you said yourself you can't replace all of them, so the point is to look at the guys that actually have potential instead of sweeping them all out with the trash. Marlon Byrd, John Buck fine. 1B is usually easier to fill, but Tejada for instance..where you finding someone even approaching his career numbers at a reasonable rate? Is that available? Or are you going to get stuck with Quintanilla there in the rush to cut out the problems?

[metsmarathon]

i like duda a lot, but, unless the metrics are wrong about him, his defense really is so bad that it's detracting from his entire offensive worth.

baseballreference has him at -0.1 WAR, and fangraphs has him at -0.4 WAR. that is a terrible score.

[Frayed Knot]

metsmarathon wrote: i like duda a lot, but, unless the metrics are wrong about him, his defense really is so bad that it's detracting from his entire offensive worth.

(I think it was) Ronnie who pointed out the other day that Duda never looked so smooth and confident on defense as when he, along with the rest of the NYM OF, were in one of their countless innings of no-doubles defense over this past weekend. His point was that, when forced to play extra deep, everything seemed to come easy to Lucas because he was coming in on every hit. It's the going back on balls that seriously flummoxes him meaning that maybe he's just the kind of guy who needs to play deep more often than not. Yeah you'll increase the number of singles dropping in front of you (which will probably still be reflected in one or more of the defensive metrics) but it beats getting beat on doubles & triples all the time. Davey pretty much reached this same conclusion with a young Strawberry back in the day. He never really stated as much except to make occasional references to the fielder's "comfort zone" whenever complaints via the then new media of sports talk radio starting yapping about how the Met OFers all played too deep.

[Ceetar]

Well Duda slumped the last two weeks or so, which wouldn't be so bad if someone else picked him up, or hell, maybe he wouldn't be slumping so hard in a better lineup (pressing, not getting as good pitches to hit, etc).

I agree that the .777 he's slumped down to is probably too low for his defense, but if he can get back above .800 I think it works out nicely. Obviously you don't want him/that to be the best outfielder of the 42 the Mets have, but it should be a pretty solid contribution.

He's clearly very bad at defense, but I think the defensive metrics might be overstating it just a tick. Last year I didn't think he was getting any better out there and was worried, but this year it does seem like he's grown a little.. One specific I've noticed is that he seems to be over-committing less than he was early on, but maybe that's just a sample size issue too. He seems to have a poor sense of when he can get to the ball with a dive, and a problem lining up his glove while he does so. I wonder if this is how all bad Outfielders eventually adjust; accept that you suck, stop trying to be Ron Swoboda or Endy Chavez and accept that those balls are going to fall in. Limit the singles from becoming doubles and triples, and his arm is at least decent that perhaps he can keep runners scoring from first on doubles.

[Edgy MD]

I imagine we're all more comfortable outfielders when we get to play deeper. It would be a strategic surrender to have him play generally deep as a rule, but it would be strategic.

An alternative that remains is have him start coming in, and then moving over to his left, until he finds himself positioned at first base.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: I imagine we're all more comfortable outfielders when we get to play deeper. It would be a strategic surrender to have him play generally deep as a rule, but it would be strategic. An alternative that remains is have him start coming in, and then moving over to his left, until he finds himself positioned at first base.

What I worry about in that regard is something I'm starting to worry about in all regards, and I've noticed some of it in previous years too. They press when it's tight. (and it's certainly tight a lot more often) He goes for the all-in play in a tie game when he should probably just take the hop. Like how all the hitters can be patient and work walks and try to wait for their pitch to hit, then suddenly it's the bottom of the 9th (or 19th) and they're all "OMG I want to go home! SWING AS HARD AS I CAN AT PITCHES EVEN VALDESPIN LETS GO"

While I'm not against playing Duda at first if that's how the roster fits best, I'm still not sure it's a net positive, and certainly not something he's suddenly going to be even passable defensively at. Defense at first is less valuable, so he hurts you less, but on the other hand, those balls in the dirt and stretching for the extra inch (although he's got plenty of inches) can be important. I think it'll be worth noting over these next couple of weeks (if Ike's demotion even lasts that long) how Wright, Murphy and even Tejada if/when he returns plays look.

[Frayed Knot]

Edgy MD wrote: I imagine we're all more comfortable outfielders when we get to play deeper. It would be a strategic surrender to have him play generally deep as a rule, but it would be strategic.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting a permanent no-doubles strategy; just one which allows him to be a bit deeper than where you'd normally station your LF just so the ratio of balls he needs to come in vs the ones he has to turn on tip a bit in favor of the ones he not only can make but seems comfortable making. And then maybe gradually and with repetitions he moves towards normal positioning.

And if 1B becomes open territory (and we actually find ourselves a few ML-capable OFers at the same time) then, Hell Yeah, consider him a candidate.

[Edgy MD]

Nobody's suggesting that first is easy, ceetar. Or that he won't have an issue or two there.

But the job is currently open, and he's current playing left poorly enough that it seemingly negates 100% of his offensive value, which is the fourth highest in the league. And that's while looking more comfortable than last season.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: Nobody's suggesting that first is easy, ceetar. Or that he won't have an issue or two there. But the job is currently open, and he's current playing left poorly enough that it seemingly negates 100% of his offensive value, which is the fourth highest in the league. And that's while looking more comfortable than last season.

I know. I just mean that it seems easier to me for the Mets to find someone to play first base (and at a reasonable price) than three outfielders. If Duda fits at first, then fine, sure, I'm not against it, but the idea of it just seems very haphazard and shuffling the deck chairs type stuff. Especially since the problem is offense and Duda + Satin/Turner seems better than Duda+More Cowgill.

Rather than try to maximize Duda's value (unless you're looking to trade him I guess) let's try to get contributors in here and if the best way to fill out a lineup is to move Duda to first, then by all means..

[Edgy MD]

Well, they currently have a plethora of outfield candidates, and their firstbase candidates are a couple of converted middle infieders.

[TransMonk]

I'm not ready to write off 2014 yet.

I'm hope, hope, hoping that this is rock bottom.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Excerpt from Adam Rubin's Morning Briefing ... Megdal's latest piece cited by ESPN ...

� On 2014 payroll, Joel Sherman in the Post writes after speaking with Alderson: It was Alderson�s best guesstimate that the Mets are committed to roughly $55 million next year with raises on long-term deals for David Wright and Jonathon Niese, and increases for arbitration eligible players likely to be retained including Daniel Murphy and Bobby Parnell and -- depending how you calculate it -- the buyout on Santana and deferrals to Bay. He believes the team will have a 2014 payroll between $90 million and $100 million. So that is $35 million-$45 million to spend. Which sounds like improvement, but keep in mind that would rank the Mets 15th this year -- exactly the midpoint -- in payroll. And should a team in New York with dedicated fans, a still relatively new stadium and its own network be 15th in payroll? �I think it is unlikely to go from $55 million to $150 million,� Alderson said. �Do I think we can get there? We would have to outperform our payroll, so we can increase attendance and increase payroll consistently over time. Overall, I agree with you [that a Met payroll should be near the highest], but I think we will get on a progression toward something. We will basically spend [on 2014 payroll] almost as much as we currently have committed next year, so that is a doubling. �It [the lowered payroll] is not because [of ownership financial problems]. It is because they have been burned by the big, long contacts, so we are not prepared to go from zero to 60 [mph] in 3.5 seconds, which I can�t argue with. But if we have enough young pitching, then $100 million will be enough to be competitive because we can use the money on position players, which is our problem right now.� Howard Megdal at Capital New York is skeptical the Mets will spend this offseason, even with a ton of money coming off the books. That is, the Mets won�t spend unless debt holder J.P. Morgan Chase signs off, according to Megdal.

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/69177/morning-briefing-90-100m-payroll-in-14

[ashie62]

Its going to be a long haul with alot of moving parts and changing faces..

[Edgy MD]

It always is.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Sandy Alderson's spending plans don't add up

By Howard Megdal
3:23 pm Jun. 12, 2013


Sandy Alderson. SNY

It's June, so naturally, Mets fans are focused on the offseason. Sandy Alderson understands. He's taken to the airwaves, and talked to the columnists, to lower your expectations and sell some hope derived from an odd way of looking at the numbers. With a caveat about the reliability of Alderson's specifics in the past, which have regularly been rendered inoperable by sharp declines in the state of ownership's finances, let's take a closer look at the budget, as Alderson laid it out. From Joel Sherman's Tuesday column: "It was Alderson�s best guesstimate that the Mets are committed to roughly $55 million next year with raises on long-term deals for David Wright and Jonathon Niese, and increases for arbitration eligible players likely to be retained including Daniel Murphy and Bobby Parnell and � depending how you calculate it � the buyout on Santana and deferrals to Bay." OK, let's stop you right there. Bay and Santana? Really? It has been an article of faith that the reason the Mets couldn't spend on players like, say, starting outfielders that wouldn't draw the derision of the team's own general manager, because payroll was right up against a self-described ceiling of $90-100 million. But the payroll was only remotely close to that high in 2013 because we were apparently counting all of Santana's $25.5 million 2013 salary, his $5.5 million buyout, Bay's $6 million to be paid in 2013, and the $15 million in deferred money to be paid to Bay in 2014-15. Take away the non-2013 portion of that money, and the Mets have a 2013 payroll right around $80 million. (It's less than that, really: $3 million of David Wright's $11 million 2013 salary is also deferred.) Alderson is double-counting. Even so, $55 million would mean counting all of the Santana buyouts, Bay's deferred money (collectively, $20.5 million), Wright's $20 million 2014 salary, Jonathon Niese's $5 million, and $9.5 million for arbitration salaries paid to Daniel Murphy, Bobby Parnell, Dillon Gee, Justin Turner, and if they are kept, Ruben Tejada and Ike Davis. That sounds reasonable. Let's estimate roughly another ten players at the league minimum through pre-arbitration contracts, including the best bargain in baseball, Matt Harvey, costs another $5 million. It also leaves $40 million for seven players if the Mets check in at $100 million, $30 million if they reach $90 million. That's the range Alderson put payroll at the moment. Where that money has magically come from (a zimmo real estate market?) is anything but clear. But let's play along for a bit longer. The math gets even trickier. If they need to stretch that $30-40 million to sign three outfielders, a first baseman, a shortstop, and depending on the health and development of Travis d'Arnaud, a catcher, that money will disappear fast. One coveted free-agent target, Shin-Soo Choo, is a good bet to earn an annual salary of $15-20 million just by himself. And an overheated free agent market, between fewer players hitting free agency and 29 other teams with more money to spend thanks to television revenue, promises to force prices up. And if the Mets enter 2014 counting on, say, Lucas Duda in left field, Tejada at shortstop and Davis at first, they have fewer holes to fill via free agency. But they also have an untenable defender in left field, a badly regressing shortstop, and a first baseman who hit .161 and got sent to the minor leagues. So these aren't so much holes filled as placeholders retained. Alderson himself acknowledged much of this, pointing out to Mike Francesa that neither Duda nor Tejada were part of what he saw as the core of the team. (A vaguely infuriating game is going back and forth between the 2013 quotes from Alderson and other leaked comments from team officials on Tejada this season, and how everyone spoke about him right after the Mets let Jose Reyes get away.) Alderson also said that he plans to be active in the trade market, the solution he touted last August before ... not making any major trades. This isn't just a failure of Alderson: You need to trade excess assets, and while the Mets have a number of starting pitching prospects, they don't clearly have many more of them than rotation spots, unless Gee, Jeremy Hefner and the free agent to be Shaun Marcum (who would also eat into that newfound salary bounty) are all being counted on in 2014 as well. And if you can't add players via trade with significant contracts, you are adding younger, pre-arbitration hitters ... who cost much more in talent than the Mets can likely give up without decimating their pitching prospect stash, certainly more than once. Even this scenario relies on ownership either coming up with $320 million, or convincing J.P. Morgan Chase to push back the due date on the $320 million debt due in June 2014 without increasing the interest rate and simultaneously allowing a ton of new spending ("We can't pay you now, but is it okay if we give Shin-Soo Choo $80 million before we do?"). But even by Alderson's own calculations, even if that windfall is somehow available, it will be virtually impossible to fix the Mets this winter. And even his new projections of $90-100 million are a walking back of the leaked figure to the Daily News back in March of $125 million. That was for "the right players," though. This is the same game Alderson played last year. He told Francesa that the reason he hasn't added players this season is due to the dearth of quality available in April, May and June. That would make more sense without the context of knowing Alderson described the need for major changes this way, last August: "So we need an infusion of players, productive players, players who are going to hit for power." He joked about the outfield in November. This position player problem isn't some recent discovery, even to him. How the Mets get the right players with even their own newly altered figures, to improve a team on a 63-99 pace: that's the mystery.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/06/8530882/sandy-aldersons-spending-plans-dont-add?--bucket-headline

___________

I'm on Sandy's side. My guess is that he doesn't have anywhere near the autonomy he insisted on having in order to take the GM position. Sandy's in a high stakes poker game against formidable card pros and he's not even holding a pair of deuces.

[batmagadanleadoff]

The Mets are Still Broke. Financially Broke. Operatively Broken. Spiritually Broken. The State of the Mets by Ben Berkon, for Yahoo! Quotes from Greg Prince, Howie Megdal, and other familiar Mets bloggers.

The New York Mets Fan: A Dying Breed
Yahoo! Contributor Network
By Ben Berkon | Yahoo! Contributor Network � 1 hour 45 minutes ago

COMMENTARY | About 66 million years ago, dinosaurs roamed the Earth. These magnificent creatures came in all different shapes and sizes, were mostly carnivores or herbivores, and as suggested by the film "Jurassic Park" would probably not have meshed well with modern-day humans. But due to a dramatic shift in their environmental surroundings, these native animals went extinct. In 2013, the world potentially faces its next significant phase of extinction: the New York Mets fan. After achieving a franchise-best attendance record of 4,042,045 during the 2008 season, attendance has dramatically fallen over 29 percent since 2009 (when the team broke ground at Citi Field). And while the front office has promised to field a competitive, farm-built team in the near future, it's conceivable that if the rebuilding efforts in 2013 and 2014 prove to be unsuccessful by 2015, the Mets could enter an "Ice Age" of new fandom. But the Mets have been bad before. In fact, they've been far worse. Besides the inaugural 1960s, from 1977 to 1980, the Mets lost 382 ballgames -- and if not for the strike in 1981, the team might have averaged 90+ losses through 1983. From a pure loss-column perspective, it was arguably the team's bleakest years. This depressed period in Mets history is due in part to the team's decision to trade homegrown ace Tom Seaver to the Cincinnati Reds on June 15, 1977. Then-chairman and minority owner M. Donald Grant had poor foresight about the future of free agency, which was still in its infancy. Grant's inability to understand the value of players -- especially one like Seaver -- resulted in the Mets parting with not only a beloved player but also a quite valuable one, too. As infuriatingly conservative and thick as the Mets' front office and ownership was, their ineptitude was at least earnest. As Whitney Herzog once stated, "[M. Donald Grant] didn't know beans about baseball but thought he did." The current Wilpon regime, however, is a horse of a different color. "Most fans don't believe in the Wilpons' repeated public assertions that the Madoff mess isn't impacting the team's operations," said Greg Hanlon, a writer and beat reporter for Capital New York. "The common perception is that ownership is struggling to stay solvent, and that fielding a winning team is a distant secondary priority." The Wilpons' insistence on being financially sound, despite their involvement with "the biggest Ponzi scheme in United States history," as Toby Hyde, founder of Mets Minor League Blog asserted, is perplexing and unanimously dishonest. Like the Seaver trade, the current Mets organization witnessed Jose Reyes, a player of similar fan and production appeal, slip away. Supposedly concerned about Reyes' injury history, the Mets stood idle while one of their cornerstone players signed a six-year, $106 million deal with the division rival Miami Marlins. This "non-prohibitive dollar amount," as Hanlon put it, left a bad taste in most fans' mouths. Without a suitable Plan B at shortstop in Ruben Tejada, the Mets had a difficult time selling fringe fans on a Reyes-less product. And their first Reyes-less season, marred by 88 losses, was a bad one. As Jeffrey Paternostro, a writer for SB Nation's Amazin' Avenue, astutely said: "The only worse sin in New York City than losing is losing cheap." Perhaps the most bewildering decision wasn't necessarily not re-signing Reyes, but rather not acquiring prime young talent in exchange for him -- like the team did with Carlos Beltran and R.A. Dickey. If the Mets knew they couldn't afford Reyes after the season -- or just didn't want him -- why hold on to such a valuable trade commodity and belittle fans into thinking there would be an extension on the table? And even if Kevin Plawecki, whom the Mets selected with their Reyes draft compensation, pans out, fans would be right to wonder if Alderson could have acquired another Zack Wheeler-type, pulling St. Louis Cardinals top outfield prospect Oscar Taveras, for instance. Unfortunately, fans will never know. As a result of the Wilpons' dwindling finances, the Mets brand has suffered tremendously. "You will always have the diehards but the casual fan won't come and you won't attract the next generation," said radio personality Mike Silva. Simply put, a continuously losing team doesn't attract the bandwagon fans needed to keep the stadium packed. Fingering the country's bad economy might be a weak argument, too, thinks Howard Megdal, author of "Wilpon's Folly" and writer for Capital New York. "The Mets have been giving tickets away, and still not drawing right now," Megdal said. "The Phillies have been selling out right into the teeth of the Great Recession. [The poor attendance] isn't a product of the economy." The Mets' status as a perennially losing franchise is only a recent stigma. As agonizing as the infamous Carlos Beltran-looking strikeout in 2006 as well as the late-season demises in 2007 and 2008 were, the team isn't that far removed from being a competitive franchise. Other organizations like the Toronto Blue Jays, Kansas City Royals, Pittsburgh Pirates, and -- until last season -- Baltimore Orioles, haven't made the playoffs in decades. Some of those franchises have gone long stretches without even winning seasons. But as close as the Mets were to becoming a consistent playoff contender, they fell short -- and into a rut. "Stars left the team and nobody replaced them," said Greg Prince, author of the book and blog "Faith and Fear in Flushing." "The Mets brought their fans to the precipice in 2006 [�], 2007 and 2008 [�] but there isn't quite that link [now] to the less-invested New Yorker." The Mets are no longer just one or two players away from competing like they might have been five seasons ago, but their inability to spend money could be seen as a blessing in disguise. Considering even the better Mets teams from 2006 to 2008 were mostly built from free agency, their current "small market" approach has forced the organization to build from within -- a strategy that is universally successful, and yet has been absent from Flushing since the 1980s. But fans can sometimes have selective memories, opines Matthew Meyers, a senior editor at ESPN. "Fans seem to be angry because the Madoff mess is preventing the Wilpons from spending money on free agents like they used to. However, they conveniently forget that spending on free agents has never been the Mets' problem," Meyers said. "Rather, it was the inability to produce even average major leaguers [from within] to support the core of Wright, Reyes and Carlos Beltran that led to disappointing [years]." The hope is that, once the Mets can afford a good free agent, they'll actually spend their money wisely. The list of poor free agent signings is comically long, and the last thing the organization and its fans needs is another Jason Bay or Oliver Perez fiasco. Yet not all fans are gung-ho about rebuilding. Even though Forbes contributor Tom Watson feels the fan base "has seen too many 'big ticket' arms [like Jason Isringhausen, Bill Pulsipher and Paul Wilson] fail in New York [before]," to Sandy Alderson's credit, the organization has retooled its farm with high shelf-pitching talent like Zack Wheeler, Noah Syndergaard, Rafael Montero, and Michael Fulmer in a very short period of time. It's conceivable that by mid-2014, the Mets could sport a completely homegrown -- and low-cost -- rotation of Matt Harvey, Jonathon Niese, Wheeler, Syndergaard, and Montero. The Mets' young pitcher depth is typified by how Fulmer could eventually make Niese, who will earn a combined $16 million from 2015 to 2016, expendable by 2015. As exciting as the above rotation could be, the Mets obviously aren't the only major-league franchise building a farm system. "The one thing which can get easily forgotten in the Mets' plan for long-term success is other teams have their own plans as well," said Michael Baron, a contributor to MetsBlog. Aside from the Atlanta Braves, who always find a way to stay atop the National League East, the Washington Nationals are also a giant step ahead of the Mets in terms of developing their own players. "The Mets' farm system has made large improvements under Alderson, but most of the names you hear are still prospects," said Paternostro. "[The Nationals] have [already] turned their prospects into above-average major leaguers. They have a young core comparable to the mid-'90s [New York] Yankees." To Paternostro's point, the Nationals' boast homegrown starters like Ryan Zimmerman, Bryce Harper, Stephen Strasburg, Ian Desmond, Jordan Zimmermann, and Drew Storen -- all of which have excelled at the major-league level. The Nats' knack for quickly developing top-tier players has also enabled them to fill holes with quality veterans, like Gio Gonzalez, Rafael Soriano, Jayson Werth, Denard Span, Dan Haren, and Adam LaRoche. The Mets' major-league roster pales in comparison. Pitching depth aside, the biggest issue with the Mets' farm system is offense. Alderson has begun to address this void, most notably by acquiring Travis d'Arnaud, who will likely be the team's catcher by midseason -- but the rest of the team's hitting prospects are too young or raw to genuinely be penciled in for the future. With first-round picks Brandon Nimmo, Gavin Cecchini, and, most recently, Dominic Smith all years away from making a difference, the Mets will have to hope Lucas Duda, Ike Davis, Ruben Tejada, and even Wilmer Flores can at least be league-average producers in the interim. Regardless, if you're a patient Mets fan, it's hard to argue with the front office's pitching-heavy focus. Ted Berg, a sportswriter for USA Today, agrees. "I think the Mets' plan is to stockpile enough young talent that they're prepared for some guys to disappoint," Berg said. Considering major league teams spent over $750 million collectively this past offseason on free-agent pitchers, perhaps the Mets' plan is a prudent one. With their pitching depth, the Mets could look to adopt the 2010 World Series champion San Francisco Giants' winning formula of leveraging top-tier pitching to compensate for league-average hitting. In 2010, Giants hitters ranked 17th in OPS (.729), 17th in runs (697), and 10th in home runs (162) -- but, luckily, the pitchers dominated. Behind dynamite performances from Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Jonathan Sanchez, Madison Bumgarner, Brian Wilson, and Sergio Romo -- all homegrown talent -- Giants pitchers combined for a 3.36 ERA (1st), 1331 strikeouts (1st), a .236 batting-average against (1st), and a 1.27 WHIP (tied for 4th). The 2012 World Series champion Giants, too, while not built as extreme in its disparities, depended on consistently above average pitching. Apparently, pitching does win. Even if the likes of Duda, Davis, Tejada, and Flores contribute, the Mets still cannot continue to place the sole run production duties on the shoulders of David Wright. Especially as Wright creeps into his early-30s, he'll need some outside-the-organization help. But some writers have faith. "[One has to think that] at some point, the financials should allow [the Mets] to supplement with free agents," said Eno Sarris, a writer for FanGraphs. Sarris' conviction actually received a little support from Sandy Alderson himself in a recent interview with New York Post columnist Joel Sherman. Alderson claimed that, with all the contracts coming off the books at season's end, the Mets could have between $35-45 million to spend in the offseason. To-be free agent Shin-Soo Choo, who will likely command between $15-18 million per season, would instantly kill two birds with one stone, as the slugger is also a bona fide outfielder to boot. The 30-year-old Choo plays all three outfield positions competently, with the corners being his defensive strength. Signing Choo is a necessity for the Mets. In addition to him becoming a second offensive weapon to Wright, Choo would also provide a new-found sense of momentum for fans -- perhaps the same kind the Mets gained by acquiring Gary Carter prior to the 1985 season. "The thing [Gary] Carter brought was momentum," said Prince. "The Mets had improved in 1984 and Carter's acquisition told New York that it wasn't a fluke, that ownership was serious." Granted, the 1984 Mets did win 90 games -- but with the recent, increasing trend of teams extending their top players, the Mets' fate might rest in the hands of a single, big-name acquisition. Adding Choo or trading for another player of similar caliber doesn't guarantee the Mets will be a winning ballclub in 2014, but at the very least it might help win back some of the disenchanted fans that the Wilpons alienated along the way. "Fans want to see a winning team," said die-hard Mets fan Matt Kaufman. "Or at least a team they think can win." Ben Berkon is a freelance sports, humor, and tech writer/blogger from New York City. Berkon's work has been featured on The Huffington Post, The Onion, Contently, Medium, and Rising Apple, and he also manages The Beanball and Blah Blah Berkon, his personal stat-heavy baseball and humor blogs, respectively. He's [unfortunately] been a Mets follower his entire life.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/york-mets-fan-dying-breed-153300689.html

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

What college paper was that originally published in I wonder