Mets Finances -- The Offseason (Bonus: 2014 season content)

[Ceetar]

I divined a fourth conclusion. Spending for the sake of spending just because you suddenly have the money to spend is not the best way to build a contender.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: I divined a fourth conclusion. Spending for the sake of spending just because you suddenly have the money to spend is not the best way to build a contender.

And that's exactly what the Mets'll say if they don't spend what they implied they'd spend for 2014. And you'll never know if they're being honest or full of shit and still financially strapped.

The real silver lining here is that the Mets don't have to increase payroll to buy more talent. About $40M worth of 2013 payroll was tied up in dead contracts (Santana & Bay). So the Mets can get an additional $40M worth of talent without increasing payroll.

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: I divined a fourth conclusion. Spending for the sake of spending just because you suddenly have the money to spend is not the best way to build a contender. And that's exactly what the Mets'll say if they don't spend what they implied they'd spend for 2014. And you'll never know if they're being honest or full of shit and still financially strapped. The real silver lining here is that the Mets don't have to increase payroll to buy more talent. About $40M worth of 2013 payroll was tied up in dead contracts (Santana & Bay). So the Mets can get an additional $40M worth of talent without increasing payroll.

And knowing the Mets, what they'll probably do is reduce 2014 by about $20M and sell it to the fan base as increasing real talent by $20M.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Jeff will spend the other $20M on hookers and blow.

[Vic Sage]

About $40M worth of 2013 payroll was tied up in dead contracts (Santana & Bay). So the Mets can get an additional $40M worth of talent without increasing payroll.

well of course that's not true.

Other than the expiring contracts, there are 8 guys up for arbitration (where salaries only go up), and 16 not yet arbitration eligible but still likely to get salary increases (if they make the team). There are only 2 under contract: Niese (5m) and Wright (20m). And they will still owe Santana $5.5m and Harang $2m to buy out their 2014 deals, giving them $7.5m of dead money on the budget for next year.

So even if they sign nobody new, the payroll would end up in the range of $65m after all those salary bumps, by my rough calculations, to field this year's team next year. This would give them about $20-$25m to play with at most, assuming they plan to keep within the same mid-market budget range. That's enough for 1 big guy or a couple of smaller ones.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Gaaah. What a silly oversight. Well at least the principle holds true, if not the full $40M.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Does the number really matter? If they spend $80M this off-
season you'll find something wrong with it. Admit it.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I probably would. The owners are a disaster area. Just about everything Mets they've touched has turned to shit. But you'd find something to pick on in my posts no matter what I wrote. You've been doing this since about my first week here. But go ahead and blame me for the state of things with the Mets.

[Guest d'Kong76]

There are plenty of others who point out your OCWD lol.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Kong76 wrote: There are plenty of others who point out your OCWD lol.

Like who? And what's OCWD.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Obsessive Compulsive Wilpon Disorder!

[Fman99]

Intra-forum animosity is the best. I just read this thread while jerking off into a coffee can.

This is the greatest thing since I offended Cooby for making a joke about women's self-examination of their breasts for tumors. Or maybe it was for comparing my neglect of adopted prospect Dylan Owen to a teen who abandons her baby in a dumpster at the prom. I forget.

[Guest d'Kong76]

No real animosity here, but I know what you mean.

[batmagadanleadoff]

The Wilpons are the baddest, most deplorable thing to ever happen to the Mets. The Wilpon problem dwarfs the Seaver trade in magnitude and in scope, and also, because the de Roulet Mets were probably a last place team even with Seaver. A year ago, these owners didn't even have the funds to keep the stadium lights on -- they had to borrow multi-millions of dollars from MLB twice just to meet basic operating expenses. There's overwhelming credible and compelling evidence that they had to have known that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme, including the fact that Sterling even solicited investors for Madoff while simultaneously enforcing Madoff's bizarre raise-a-red-flag rule prohibiting those new investors from asking the most basic questions about their investments. This makes the Wilpons out and out crooks rather than dumb or unwitting sympathetic victims. They don't even deserve to own the team. Because looking back, it appears that the owners were able to get the loans they needed to buy out Doubleday based on a balance sheet full of imaginary Madoff holdings. The Madoff situation alone might set the organization back by 5-10 years, maybe more. Had enough? This doesn't scratch the surface. How about one first place finish in 25 years even though there are only four other teams in their division (five from 1989-1993)? How about one all star game in 50 years, even though hosting an all star game isn't like winning a World series: every team gets one -- usually every 25 years or so? want me to go on? I can, you know. Because it's all my fault, not the Wilpons. But you go ahead and be a real happy Mets fan because the NYT reports that mid and small market teams can have some success.

If you're not obsessed with the Wilpons, then your head's in the sand.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Kong76 wrote: No real animosity here, but I know what you mean.

Of course not. Because you say so.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I feed the ostriches, my head is above the sand ...

[Fman99]

[Guest d'Kong76]

Uh, let's keep the lid on that F'99!

[Benjamin Grimm]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: If you're not obsessed with the Wilpons, then your head's in the sand.

I would say... if you're not obsessed with the Wilpons then you have a healthy perspective about what is and isn't important in your life.

[Guest 86-Dreamer]

Vic Sage wrote: About $40M worth of 2013 payroll was tied up in dead contracts (Santana & Bay). So the Mets can get an additional $40M worth of talent without increasing payroll. well of course that's not true. ........And they will still owe Santana $5.5m and Harang $2m to buy out their 2014 deals, giving them $7.5m of dead money on the budget for next year.

Whoa, why would they owe anything to Harang? I am pretty sure they signed him as an FA after he cleared waivers. I'd lose all remaining faith in management if they burned $2 million of next years payroll for a few meaningless starts by Harang.

[Ceetar]

86-Dreamer wrote: Vic Sage wrote: About $40M worth of 2013 payroll was tied up in dead contracts (Santana & Bay). So the Mets can get an additional $40M worth of talent without increasing payroll. well of course that's not true. ........And they will still owe Santana $5.5m and Harang $2m to buy out their 2014 deals, giving them $7.5m of dead money on the budget for next year. Whoa, why would they owe anything to Harang? I am pretty sure they signed him as an FA after he cleared waivers. I'd lose all remaining faith in management if they burned $2 million of next years payroll for a few meaningless starts by Harang.

supposedly they factored in the buyouts into the 2013 budget.

[Vic Sage]

According to Cots contracts (a pretty reliable source):

Harang: 2014 mutual option between $7M and $8M ($2M buyout)

2014 option valued at:
*$7M with 360 IP in 2012-13, including 175 IP in 2013
*$7.5M with 380 IP in 2012-13, including 180 IP in 2013
*$8M with 400 or more IP in 2012-13

[Guest 86-Dreamer]

According to Cots contracts (a pretty reliable source): Harang: 2014 mutual option between $7M and $8M ($2M buyout) 2014 option valued at: *$7M with 360 IP in 2012-13, including 175 IP in 2013 *$7.5M with 380 IP in 2012-13, including 180 IP in 2013 *$8M with 400 or more IP in 2012-13

but the Mets did not sign him to that contract, assume it on waivers or trade for it. they signed him to a minor league deal. I don't believe they have any obligations related to his former contract:

http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/mets-sign-aaron-harang-to-minor-league-deal/?_r=0

[Vic Sage]

Sorry, my mistake then... i thought we had assumed his contract.

Be that as it may, i don't think the $2m will have a significant impact on their off-season plans and the 2014 budget, one way or the other. Assuming it will be around $85M-$90M, that gives them $20M-$40M to spend this upcoming year, subject to arbitration results and contract renewal costs. If they non-tender a bunch of the arb-eligible guys and keep the others at a relatively low price (including the renewals) by populating the bench with kids instead of vets, then yes, $40m may be available. more likely, though, it'll be closer to $20-$25M.

[Ceetar]

Megdal floating $47 million after arbitration in the second post in this thread. I didn't fact check him, but the expected arb numbers are readily available, although the Mets rarely actually arbitrate, the contract values are usually pretty close anyway. (in part because the expected values are readily available) Maybe someone like Davis gets a smidge less, but still, $47 and then fill out the roster with 500mill guys and you still have a pretty penny to sign guys, not spend it all, and still have a lower payroll.

[batmagadanleadoff]

There but for the grace of Selig go the New York Mets
By Howard Megdal
2:37 pm Oct. 16, 2013

LOS ANGELES�Mets fans could be forgiven for watching the Los Angeles Dodgers in the National League Championship Series, and thinking that the Dodgers' story could easily be unfolding at Citi Field. After all, Major League Baseball managed to force out Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, while extending a loan to Fred Wilpon and his partners that kept them afloat financially. The two were very different, insisted Bud Selig, commissioner of baseball, back in 2011. He never explicitly said why, of course, suggesting distinctions that largely boiled down to intent. McCourt looted the Dodgers for his own financial gain, lowered payroll drastically, and his only way out of his own financial mess was to use the equity in rapidly expanding television value, something Selig rejected. By contrast, according to this thinking: "In New York, the Wilpons -- Fred and his son Jeff -- generally have tried to act in the best interests of their team for 30 years," Jon Heyman wrote back in April 2011. "They certainly haven't used the club as their personal piggy bank, which is what Frank McCourt appears to have done in his seven years in Los Angeles." Yes, well, about that. In March 2012, Wilpon and his partners sold minority shares in the team, not for any gain for the Mets, but simply to stay afloat. $110 million of that $240 million went to pay down some principal on a massive loan against the team, the rest to pay back loans from Major League Baseball and Bank of America that kept them from insolvency, along with debt service. And even that minority sale, largely to S.N.Y., came in exchange for the Mets extended their way below market television deal with S.N.Y. Put another way, the Mets monetized their local television deal like so many other teams, but used it to hold onto the team. You know, like Frank McCourt tried to do. As for that payroll, which was over $140 million in 2011: it was in 2013, functionally, lower than McCourt's $83 million that was so untenable for Major League Baseball back in 2011. That's a bigger gap than it even seems, with salaries climbing in the intervening years. This, despite Mets ownership borrowing another $160 million against their stake in S.N.Y., something only worth as much as it is thanks to the below-market television rights deal the network enjoys with the Mets. And payroll, incidentally, looks to be dropping this winter, even more, as Mets ownership figures out how to navigate that large loan against the team. �I keep reading they�re similar but they�re clearly not similar,� Selig said in April 2011. �Anyone who portrays that as similar is wrong.� They're sure not similar anymore. In the 2011 offseason, while the Dodgers could offer Matt Kemp eight years, $160 million as part of the course of normal business operations during a bankruptcy, Jose Reyes headed elsewhere as the Mets lined up a bridge loan to stay afloat until March. Dodger Stadium gave thunderous cheers to Adrian Gonzalez Tuesday night when he lined an R.B.I. single down the right field line. Gonzalez, acquired from the Red Sox, is due another $106 million over the next five years. Kemp is injured. Doesn't matter: the new Dodgers ownership is willing, and able, to spend whatever it takes to get to the playoffs. The team's best hitter, Hanley Ramirez, was acquired as a salary dump from the Miami Marlins, earning $15.5 million this year, and $16 million next year. The team's Game 5 pitcher, Zack Greinke, signed last winter for six years, $159 million. The most exciting player they have is Yasiel Puig, purchased by new Dodgers ownership as, essentially, a seven-year, $42 million lottery ticket. And if he hadn't paid off, they'd just go out and get somebody else. They can afford to, and you can argue, given the link between payroll and attendance (certainly reflected at Dodger Stadium), they can't afford not to. Mets ownership, meanwhile, can't afford much of anything these days. Bud Selig is right, finally. The situations sure are different. Why'd that happen again?

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/10/8534693/there-grace-selig-go-new-york-mets

[ashie62]

We may not know the answers to all the finance questions until we see how the 2014 squad shpes up..

[Edgy MD]

I'd really appreciate a commentary or a statement or something along with the reposting of a guy's essays.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

brazenmegdallinkfarm

[batmagadanleadoff]

Jeff Wilpon's mother wears combat boots.

______________________________

Alderson can dream, but the Cardinals are in another league
By Howard Megdal
2:37 pm Oct. 14, 20131

ST. LOUIS�It's a time-honored tradition in baseball for the teams at home in October to watch the playoff teams and dream of emulating them some not-so-distant fall. Mets general manager Sandy Alderson reportedly harbors such an aspiration: "Sandy Alderson dreams of an October sometime in the next few years when the Mets are in a similar position, trying to win a championship on the strength of their young pitching." A Daily News column on Alderson's dream goes on to allude to the Mets' "surplus of pitching prospects ..." The Mets do in fact have lots of decent young pitching compared to, say, what Alderson inherited when he took over as the team's G.M. in October 2010. There's Matt Harvey, who we'll include on this list, despite the fact that he will be recovering from Tommy John surgery next year, as a pitching prospect who will arrive in 2015. There's also Zack Wheeler, who held his own in a half-season with the Mets in 2013. There's Noah Syndergaard, who dominated for Double-A Binghamton in 2013. There's Rafael Montero, who pitched quite well at Double-A and Triple-A. And there are a handful of second-tier and third-tier guys, like Jacob deGrom and Cory Mazzoni. So all the Mets need to do is let those guys come to the big leagues, form a Cardinals-like pitching staff in concert with established starters Jon Niese and Dillon Gee, and they'll be all set. That is, if absolutely everything goes right with health and performance of these guys; if Jenrry Mejia, who's never stayed healthy, stays healthy, then sure, the Mets would have enough pitching. Unfortunately, that never happens. And it didn't, by the way, even happen for the Cardinals. The Cardinals are where they are because they built up a massive pitching surplus. Jaime Garcia was their Jon Niese entering the season, mid-20s, signed to a long-term, team-friendly deal. And his season ended in May, thanks to a shoulder injury requiring surgery. The same thing happened to John Gast, who'd posted a 1.16 E.R.A. in seven Triple-A starts, but was lost for the season, having shoulder surgery. These weren't two random guys, but two highly-touted pitching prospects. Among those who remained, Shelby Miller is five months younger than Zack Wheeler, the current best combination of potential, big league success and health the Mets have. He put up a 3.73 x.F.I.P. this year in 173 1/3 major league innings, compared to Wheeler's 4.21 in 100. Miller can't crach the Cardinals' postseason rotation. Wheeler is expected to form part of "a Big Three of Harvey, Zack Wheeler, and Noah Syndergaard that could finally make them serious contenders again", per Harper. The Cardinals have Michael Wacha, Joe Kelly and Lance Lynn in their playoff rotation, along with that Adam Wainwright guy. "These guys are pretty talented, immensely talented, actually," Wainwright told me at his locker following Game 2 Sunday. "They're great guys, they work hard, they're very talented. What more do you need? From our standpoint, we're kind of in awe what all these guys are doing." Miller, a truly gifted young pitcher, has so far thrown one inning, total. Why? Because the Cardinals have even more young pitching out of their bullpen. There's electric Carlos Martinez, who routinely throws in the upper 90s with his sinker, his four seamer, and then counters with a ridiculous changeup nearly 20 miles per hour slower. Oh, and he's throwing his slider now, which is "a game-changer for him," per Cardinals pitching coach Derek Lilliquist. There's Trevor Rosenthal, one day older than Wheeler, who put up very similar minor league numbers to Wheeler, then pitched out of middle relief for much of the season in St. Louis, striking out just under 13 batters per nine innings. He can't crack the rotation, either. Neither can Kevin Siegrist, a lefty starter in the minor leagues, a lefty specialist in the big leagues with a 0.45 E.R.A. this season. Neither can Seth Maness, an ultra-control artist who walk 0.7 people per nine innings in the minor leagues, and posted a 2.32 E.R.A. in relief for the Cardinals. Neither can Tyler Lyons, a Rafael Montero type who can't even get onto the Cardinals' roster. By contrast, the Mets's dream bullpen, as described in that News column, is this: "If closer Bobby Parnell returns to form from neck surgery, the Mets could build a similar bullpen, filling it with power arms such as Jeurys Familia, Vic Black, and perhaps a Montero or Mazzoni, plus hard-throwing lefty Jack Leathersich." I hope so! But that's a pretty big "if" when it comes to Parnell, who is recovering from a neck injury severe enough that his manager said it caused him to lose 30 pounds. Vic Black is a power arm who can't generally find the plate, which is why the Pirates were willing to throw him into the Marlon Byrd/John Buck deal. Leathersich was actually demoted earlier this year, from Triple-A to Double-A. This is not to say some of these guys couldn't eventually help the bullpen. But any kind of comparison to how the Cardinals did it, staffing their pen with massively successful minor league starters, not fringe minor league bullpen guys, falls apart quickly. At least the idea is merely that the Mets have enough young pitching, rather than holding onto the idea, propogated back when Matt Harvey (who is super-awesome, but also, just one guy) was healthy, that the Mets have some kind of super-abundance of young pitching they can trade for, you know, hitting. It didn't look terribly realistic then, and it sure doesn't now. And if you're wondering how the Cardinals got enough hitting to go along with that pitching: Carlos Beltran, the hero of Game 1, signed via free agency. So did Matt Holliday. They developed Yadier Molina, but then they kept him with a massive long-term deal. Even their pitching isn't purely made up of young, low-cost talent. They traded for Wainwright as a minor leaguer, then signed him long-term. The Cardinals have a lot more young pitching than the Mets do. They've also spent a lot more money than the Mets have. And even if the Mets manage to bridge that enormous talent and budget gap, they'll still run up against the Cardinals, right in their own league, not going anywhere. "We're still playing this year," Wainwright said. "But it's pretty promising, going forward the next few years, with what our staff is capable of doing." Other than that, sure, the Mets are the new Cardinals. Maybe they can even trade Zack Wheeler from that pitching surplus for the hitting they desperately need, which is one scenario that's being kicked around. I mean, you've got to dream, right?

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/10/8534629/alderson-can-dream-cardinals-are-another-league