Allow Us to Exchange Remarks on... Jhonny Peralta

[Benjamin Grimm]

If he doesn't get his act together, he may be a free agent well before 2016.

[Frayed Knot]

It did seem odd at the time that the Mets were slow in bringing back Ruben in September.
That the team would do so for that reason does make some sense: they CAN therefore they did; and yet on another level it doesn't: Are they really that worried about when Tejada gains FA-gency? Like Grimm says, there's a decent chance that he never gets that far, at least not in a NYM uniform.

Now you can certainly understand why Ruben is upset as he figures to eventually reach that point whether it's as a Met or somewhere else. I don't know that I've ever heard of a case like this going to grievance so I wouldn't even guess at the odds of an outcome.

[MFS62]

He's mulling over filing a grievance because the Mets wouldn't bring him up to play?
I'm mulling over filing a grievance against the Mets for charging us money to watch him play when he got here last year.

Later

[Edgy MD]

Even if Tejada doesn't get to free agency as a Met, he's a more valuable asset to them if and when they trade him, with one more year of control for the team he's going to.

It's miserly, but it's protecting the value of their assets. Is it the sort of breach of faith that is worthy of a grievance? Well, to my mind, no more so or less so than keeping a rookie --- that you explicitly feel is good enough to make the team --- down on the farm the first six weeks of the season to deliberately delay his arbitration eligibility.

[Frayed Knot]

The team has a better argument from the rookie standpoint in that they can always claim that we just didn't think he was ready yet.
In this case they're taking their now healthy SS who was their starter for half the year and deciding they had no use for him during expanded roster time until ... THIS DATE, one which just happens to coincide with keeping his total service time just short of a full year.
It's definitely the more manipulative move, or certainly the more provable one, so I can see where Tejada would have a case whereas the rookie can talk until he's blue in the face but it's not going to sway anyone.

Of course the Mets could simply turn around and decide next season that he needs to start the year in AAA and he's back below the threshold again so he's probably not going to win in the long run even if the grievance process (assuming it ever gets that far) goes his way.

[Edgy MD]

Frayed Knot wrote: The team has a better argument from the rookie standpoint in that they can always claim that we just didn't think he was ready yet.

Except that teams have taken to more or less explicitly admitting when they are intentionally delaying arbitration.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Tejada should take 'em to court. I hope he wins too, and that extra hundred grand or whatever is what bankrupts Fred and Saul for good.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: The team has a better argument from the rookie standpoint in that they can always claim that we just didn't think he was ready yet. Except that teams have taken to more or less explicitly admitting when they are intentionally delaying arbitration.

Indeed, and it's not like they weren't playing a worse option.

Does whatever value they gain over that extra year of free agency really offset the damage they've done via leaving him down, and being so down on him overall? Everyone knows the Mets don't value him very much, so why would they give up anything to get him? This is made even worse if they get a SS like Peralta.

To me it almost looks like they're going going all or nothing with Tejada. He'll get some reps this season and become marketable or useful, or they'll sever ties.

[Mex17]

Word is that Peralta has agreed with the Cardinals. No news yet on what the terms are, but there was a rumor a few days ago that he had a four for $52 offer on the table (only $2 million more than what I said would be my celing for him).

It is absolutely worth noting here that the St. Louis Cardinals organization is about the farthest you can get from what you would call reckless or undisciplined with regard to how they build their rosters or manage their payroll. This is the franchise that, just recently, let the 2nd greatest player in their history (and, at the time, still probably among the top three contemporary hitters in the sport) walk over contract demands and then promptly went out and won a World Series title and then another pennant. So this is not about saying "OMG, look at how they overpaid. . .just look at how old he is and what his WAR and BABIP is compared to other guys!!!". This is just where the market has gone overall for the entire landscape. I have more thoughts about this and how it pertains to our team, but will shelve that for now until things flesh out a little more.

As far as what this means for the Mets shortstop situation, I think now that you have to look at giving Tejada another shot. I mean, if Alderson is willing to roll the dice on Chris Young bouncing back at age 30 at $7.25 million, why would he not be willing to do the same with a 24 year-old Tejada who is still making close to league minimum. I do still think that you go dumpster diving in January for at least one guy who can potentially push him in Spring Training while on a minor league contract. As I stated before, it looks like Tejada's biggest problem is self-motivation when he is handed the starting job on a platter.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mex17 wrote: As far as what this means for the Mets shortstop situation, I think now that you have to look at giving Tejada another shot.

Maybe you're right, but BLAH! That's the kind of decision that leads to another 73-win season.

[ashie62]

With Peralta gone and Drew unattainable...Ruben must be feeling pretty good..me? Not so much..

[Benjamin Grimm]

Well... there's always Furcal.

I suppose if they soup up in other areas they can allow themselves to be weak at shortstop, but I do have to say that none of the developments so far have been at all encouraging. But it's still early.