Let's talk about The Grandy Man

[Vic Sage]

it's just money, and it's not mine. if you're as flush as you say, Freddie, then sign him.

[metirish]

Numbers and $$ aside, did he attain true Yankee status?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Vic Sage wrote: it's just money, and it's not mine. if you're as flush as you say, Freddie, then sign him.

Agree. Besides, Granderson should be a huge upgrade over any other current Mets outfielder, barring a significant decline. He'd be their best outfielder, and best home run hitter. I still doubt the Mets'll win half their games next year but that probably won't be Granderson's fault.

[ashie62]

metirish wrote: Numbers and $$ aside, did he attain true Yankee status?

Nah.. we're safe...

[Mex17]

This is worth noting, and encouraging. . .

https://twitter.com/TheNotoriousT0m/status/399974749696053248/photo/1

I think that it is also worth stating that not every "lost" home run would necessarily translate into a flyout. What about them (or at least a portion of them) becoming doubles/triples that are either off the wall or in the gap where the defenders cannot get to them in time?

[Frayed Knot]

The question about Granderson is whether he can re-adjust his approach and return to being more of the Reyes-like gap hitter w/speed and .360-ish OBA that he was during his peak years in Detroit prior to quite intentionally changing to a more pull-happy mode when he started playing half his games in YSIII that dropped his BA nearly 30 points ... and whether he can do all that starting at age 33.

[Zvon]

Vic Sage wrote: it's just money, and it's not mine. if you're as flush as you say, Freddie, then sign him.

I agree with this but also want them to spend as wisely as ever. Grandy would not be an unwise move. If they can pull him in, sure, yea, go for it. Gimme something to watch next season.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

The thing that seems to be lost on those having the what-the-last-three-year's-home-runs-would-have-been analysis-type discussions is that the Mets would not be paying for the last three years, but the next 3-4, pricier and well after the onset of his decline phase.

Granderson of the last three years would be a massive upgrade for the Met outfield. Granderson of the next half-decade will likely have more of a familiar, poutine-and-Pearl-Jam-and-concussions kind of smell to it.

[Mex17]

Another advantage to signing Granderson is that, by taking the prime lefthanded power bat off of the market, you then increase the trade market for the two lefthanded power bats that you are shopping around yourself.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Reports say Granderson and Alderson met with each other yesterday.

[MFS62]

Matthew Cerrone ? @ matthewcerrone
@ Mets & Granderson see eye-to-eye on a 3-yr deal, but he's still looking to find a team willing to give to go to four.

Later

[Vic Sage]

I'd be ok with 3 years for Grandy. but yes, they should let him go to any team that offers 4. He's already in decline, and while he'll be useful for a few more years, after that he will be a destabilizing burden for a small-market team like the Mets.

[Edgy MD]

That kind of runs against your "it's just money, and it's not mine" comment above, though.

If the per-year money's the same, would you go with Beltran for three or Granderson for four?

[MFS62]

With the Ellsbury signing, there are going to be a lot of people whispering in Sandy's ear (press, fans) to get something done quickly. But I don't think he'll listen/ feel/ respond to any pressure.
You can always tell a Marine. You just can't tell him too much.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy MD wrote: That kind of runs against your "it's just money, and it's not mine" comment above, though. If the per-year money's the same, would you go with Beltran for three or Granderson for four?

Neither, for one?

Gun to head, I'm going Beltran for rational (I've got them about the same in terms of player value, Beltran's primary deficiency is buffered by the other defenders we'd have in the field with him) and irrational (c'mon) reasons.

Also... given the declining both have been going through, Beltran seems a little like the more stable bet at this point, more likely to stay what he has been over the last season or two, or a reasonable approximation thereof.

[Frayed Knot]

Granderson for four is a better idea than Beltran for three [as is Granderson x 3 > Beltran x 2]

I liked Beltran while he was here as much as anyone and more than many, but he's a full four years older with injuries that are slowing him down and not going away.
For all of Granderson's missed time last season, both stints were as the result of HBPs on the hand & wrist. Not that those are good things, but they are kind of flukey injuries and ones not likely to repeat (his HBPs/year have been in single digits all but one season).

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, while Beltran's bet is probably more reliable and less likely to degrade precipitously, his knee is a miracle of science and one quick jump away from exploding on him.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Not to put too fine a point on it but I think Beltran actually wrote that "We are never ever getting back together" song and sold it to Miley Cyrus or whoever sings it. There's just no way he comes back and I think very little chance we even ask about it. He just won't.

I guess Grandy at 3 is as good as we can do here. Of course someone will give him 5 probably.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Not to put too fine a point on it but I think Beltran actually wrote that "We are never ever getting back together" song and sold it to Miley Cyrus or whoever sings it. There's just no way he comes back and I think very little chance we even ask about it. He just won't. I guess Grandy at 3 is as good as we can do here. Of course someone will give him 5 probably.

Beltran's been on record saying he'd come back to the Mets though.

The older player doesn't really fit with the Mets this/next year, but I'd love to see him here.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'd be okay with a fourth year for Granderson. It's not ideal, but it seems that you have to take a risk on the back end of a contract to land some free agents. Sometimes it kills you, but sometimes it doesn't. You just have to hope that the early years of the contract are good enough to offset the last year or so.

[Edgy MD]

With regard to Beltran, I was just doing a thought experiment there. Wanted to use him to measure just how tough a risk that fourth year to Granderson was.

[Vic Sage]

Edgy MD wrote: That kind of runs against your "it's just money, and it's not mine" comment above, though. If the per-year money's the same, would you go with Beltran for three or Granderson for four?

Granderson; and the "it's just money" is based on my philosophy, not the Wilpons. So knowing that, paying Grandy $15m 4 years from now will cripple this team because, unlike the Yanks, they won't just eat it and move on. In the abstract, or in a universe where the Mets are operating as a big-market team that can survive its burdensome contracts, then yes, Granderson for 4.

[Centerfield]

Vic Sage wrote: ...or in a universe where the Mets are operating as a big-market team...

You should see how hot the chicks are in that universe. OMG.

[dinosaur jesus]

Please, no. He's just not that good. Certainly not anymore.

[Edgy MD]

And frankly, he's just not that into you.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Things are starting to get "intense".

Mets, Granderson are talking about deals ranging from 3 to 5 years Former Yankees outfielder Curtis Granderson and the Mets are engaging in talks as the club tries to solve its outfield issues. Word is the Mets are offering a three-year deal, with Granderson believed to be seeking five, at least at the start. A likely solution could be a four-year deal. Granderson is likely seeking close to $17 million annually. The Mets seem to prefer him, if only slightly, to Nelson Cruz for two reasons: 1) he's left-handed and could provide a batting-order complement to franchise player David Wright, and 2) he's a proven performer in New York. The Mets, who previously signed Chris Young to a one-year, $7.25 million deal, would not have to surrender a No. 1 pick since they possess the 10th and final protected pick. The Mets showed interest in Shin-Soo Choo but after saying they didn't see a $100 million player on the market after Robinson Cano, it woould appear their chances to sign Choo are close to nil, barring a change of heart. Mets general manager Sandy Alderson met with Granderson last week in San Diego. The Mets met with Cano, but that is seen as a long-shot play. They could show interest if the price falls below $200 million, though, one person suggested. Granderson led the majors by hitting 84 home runs between 2011-12 but was derailed last season by two pitches that hit him, finishing with only seven homers and a .229 batting average. Adam Rubin of ESPNNew York suggested talks were "intensifying."

[metirish]

2) he's a proven performer in New York.

Ugh .....useless "stat"

[dinosaur jesus]

Edgy MD wrote: And frankly, he's just not that into you.

We had some good times, me and Curtis. But it's time to move on.

I don't even want to talk about me and Carlos.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Guest

[Zvon]

If the Mets are going to make a splash this off season they better go for it while there are still some big fish in the pool.

[ashie62]

Red Sox may pursue Granderson per Crasnick ESPN