2014 IPP: Chris Young

[Edgy MD]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The media has to gripe about the Mets because it's their job, but I can't believe that rational adults, smart Mets fans are still complaining about Alderson and the 2014 Mets.

You really can't believe that?

[ashie62]

Frayed Knot wrote: Is that directed at me? -- And, if so, maybe you could explain what you mean by it.

No! Met hatters..

[ashie62]

How did David Wright come up??

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back?

[metirish]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back?

one year at $8 million , lot of cabbage hoping for a bounce back, he is worse than useless...

[batmagadanleadoff]

metirish wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back? one year at $8 million , lot of cabbage hoping for a bounce back, he is worse than useless...

CY was a poverty pick. There were steadier guys to be had, but I'm guessing that the Mets rolled the dice on CY's higher, though unlikely, power ceiling -- hoping that CY would re-discover his 30 HR power stroke from a few years ago. This is the long-shot desperate kind of gamble the Mets are forced to make because they don't have enough money to pay for quick-fix reliable talent. That costs money.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: metirish wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back? one year at $8 million , lot of cabbage hoping for a bounce back, he is worse than useless... CY was a poverty pick. There were steadier guys to be had, but I'm guessing that the Mets rolled the dice on CY's higher, though unlikely, power ceiling -- hoping that CY would re-discover his 30 HR power stroke from a few years ago. This is the long-shot desperate kind of gamble the Mets are forced to make because they don't have enough money to pay for quick-fix reliable talent. That costs money.

You beat that drum a lot, and I'm not sure it's always fair.

Granderson and Colon also cost money, and the Mets pulled the trigger on those contracts.

And I say it again....who available last year did you want the team to spend the money on? Tanaka? We don't need long-term starting pitching.

Colon is doing exactly what we need him to be doing -- being a reliable spot in the rotation until Harvey is healed and the kids are ready.

I'd rather over pay for Hanley Ramirez next year than Sin So Choo this year.

If they had signed Nelson Cruz, there would be all kinds of gripes about being a roid player.

[Ceetar]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back?

he's still better than EY.

But if Abreu continues to be valuable or someone else does, not long.

I imagine you give him until it's unlikely he can do anything to be worth trading. Like, if he went the next month and hit .300/.350/.450 someone would probably be willing to float you a nice reliever or a single A MI prospect or something.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Does Young have a one-year contract or a two-year contract. If it's a one-year deal, how much longer do you give him once Lagres and EYoung come back? one year at $8 million , lot of cabbage hoping for a bounce back, he is worse than useless... CY was a poverty pick. There were steadier guys to be had, but I'm guessing that the Mets rolled the dice on CY's higher, though unlikely, power ceiling -- hoping that CY would re-discover his 30 HR power stroke from a few years ago. This is the long-shot desperate kind of gamble the Mets are forced to make because they don't have enough money to pay for quick-fix reliable talent. That costs money. You beat that drum a lot, and I'm not sure it's always fair. And I say it again....who available last year did you want the team to spend the money on? Tanaka? We don't need long-term starting pitching…. I'd rather over pay for Hanley Ramirez next year than Sin So Choo this year.

We’re at a standstill on this one. I’d like to see Hanley in a Met uniform, too, but have no confidence whatsoever that the Mets can pay him the roughly $20M or so a year he’s gonna command on the FA market. I think your posts imply that the Mets are in a position, financially, to land a top-tier free agent. If so, I don’t see it that way.

Granderson and Colon also cost money, and the Mets pulled the trigger on those contracts.

I’m not impressed. In early 2013, Fred Wilpon announced that the Mets money woes were in the rear-view mirror; that Alderson will now have the authority to raise the payroll to pre-Madoff levels. And don’t forget the two years worth of constant remindering that this is the year that $45M comes off the payroll from the now expired Santana and Bay contracts -- the implication and innuendo from that oft repeated reminder unmistakably being that the Santana/Bay $$ would be reinvested in the team. It wasn’t. They lied. After a historical payroll reduction following 2011, and another payroll cut after 2012, the Mets cut 2014 opening payroll by another almost $10M.

So yeah, Granderson and Colon cost money. But even if you add Chris Young’s contract to the Granderson and Colon contracts, the total sum is about $10M less than the expired Santana/Bay money, and, coincidentally, about the difference between the 2013 payroll and this year’s once again diminished payroll.

From another angle, though, I suppose I should be grateful for the Grandy/Colon/Young signings. After all, the Mets weren’t obligated to acquire those three FA’s. They could have, instead, promoted three or four more major league minimum wage earning rookies to the 25 man roster and gone with a payroll of about $55M. So I guess I should be thankful for that.

Colon is doing exactly what we need him to be doing -- being a reliable spot in the rotation until Harvey is healed and the kids are ready.

Yeah. But Colon doesn’t belong here. He should be pitching for a pennant contender in need of one pitcher to round out the rotation. Colon’s 41. It’s gonna end up real bad and real soon for Colon. That’s the lay of the land for 41 year old pitchers.

Anyways, my original post on Chris Young, which prompted your response, was written to address more of the “What the hell is Sandy doing? “posts, which I don’t get. Alderson’s first order of business was to cut payroll by about $50M, 33% -- historical drops. Sandy was essentially required to take 10 steps backwards before he could try and take one forward step. I know how repetitive this all must sound, but on the other hand, it’s hard to have an accurate macro discussion on the Mets problems without addressing their crushing financial situation. And this is before conceding that Sandy inherited a barren farm and a major league roster crumbling or goiong nowhere at almost every turn.

Fred Wilpon: Mets' money woes over Updated: February 13, 2013, 6:32 PM ET By Adam Rubin | ESPNNewYork.com PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. -- New York Mets principal owner Fred Wilpon said his family is free and clear of past financial woes and that general manager Sandy Alderson has the financial flexibility to make major free-agent signings in upcoming offseasons. Wilpon, 76, favorably settled a lawsuit brought by the trustee trying to recover funds for victims of Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme last year. He added that the family's improved financial complexion also is the result of the rebound of real estate, his primary business, as well as stock-market gains and the thriving of SportsNet New York, the television network in which the family owns a majority stake. "It's all in the rearview mirror," Wilpon said about past financial woes Wednesday after arriving at the team's spring training complex. "... The family is in great shape. The family really is in great shape. Sometimes luck is the residue of design." Wilpon originally faced a $1 billion lawsuit regarding the Madoff scheme, but the settlement will result in the family ultimately having to pay no more than $85.7 million -- and likely far less than that. Wilpon said the payroll, slashed in recent seasons under Alderson, could return to past levels if the team is prudent. The payroll went from a high of $148 million late in Omar Minaya's tenure as general manager to roughly $95 million last year. Wilpon pointed to bank debt as a primary reason for an un-New York-like payroll in recent years. The Mets have produced four straight losing seasons and have not reached the postseason since 2006. "It wasn't, as people have written, the reason," Wilpon said about the Madoff issue and payroll slashing. "It was a balance there, because we had to make sure the banks got paid off all of the debt. There's no one in my family -- there's the Katz family, the Wilpon family, kids -- [that now] has any personal bank debt. Zero. Everything has been paid. We don't owe a dollar to anybody. We have mortgages on buildings and stuff like that, but we don't owe a dollar. "That's what made us tight. We were still getting revenues. Lots of revenues. But those revenues were going to pay off debt. That's done." The Mets did pursue free agent Michael Bourn until he agreed this week with the Cleveland Indians, so some of the recent financial constraints have resulted from the conservative bidding by Alderson as opposed to an ownership mandate. Will the team be aggressive bidding next offseason? "I think we would anticipate being big investors if that were appropriate," Wilpon said. "That depends on what the market is. If the market is such that that's where we have to be to be competitive and winners, yeah. "This is, to me, a break-even business. I always strive to break even. I'm not looking to make any money. I strive to break even. So if [fans] don't show up, that's hard. So you have to balance it. We fed it pretty good the last five or six years. I think if the market was such, yes, the payroll could go up, but not to just have payroll go up so you can write headlines -- if that, in fact, improves the team. "I don't know what the market will be at that point. But the payroll will be commensurate with anything we've ever done because we can do it. Remember, the people have to come to the ballpark obviously. If you have a competitive team, they will. Everything that was in the past, that you guys saw the pain that we went through, is gone. It's gone."

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/8943949/2013-spring-training-fred-wilpon-says-new-york-mets-financial-woes-past

[Edgy MD]

Headline aside, there's a ton of ambiguity and caveats and codicils in that article.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: Headline aside, there's a ton of ambiguity and caveats and codicils in that article.

I know exactly whatcha mean.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

We’re at a standstill on this one. I’d like to see Hanley in a Met uniform, too, but have no confidence whatsoever that the Mets can pay him the roughly $20M or so a year he’s gonna command on the FA market. I think your posts imply that the Mets are in a position, financially, to land a top-tier free agent. If so, I don’t see it that way.

Here's where I get confused, and I don't mean to be beating the deadest of horses. But it doesn't seem right to accuse them of not spending money this year without saying who you wanted them to be spending money on.

Hanley is next year's issue, and I can't go gloom and doom on that until next year. If there are really good players available that fill a gaping hole and the Mets still don't try to spend, then I would agree.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote:
Granderson and Colon also cost money, and the Mets pulled the trigger on those contracts.
I’m not impressed. In early 2013, Fred Wilpon announced that the Mets money woes were in the rear-view mirror; that Alderson will now have the authority to raise the payroll to pre-Madoff levels. And don’t forget the two years worth of constant remindering that this is the year that $45M comes off the payroll from the now expired Santana and Bay contracts -- the implication and innuendo from that oft repeated reminder unmistakably being that the Santana/Bay $$ would be reinvested in the team. It wasn’t. They lied. After a historical payroll reduction following 2011, and another payroll cut after 2012, the Mets cut 2014 opening payroll by another almost $10M.

So yeah, Granderson and Colon cost money. But even if you add Chris Young’s contract to the Granderson and Colon contracts, the total sum is about $10M less than the expired Santana/Bay money, and, coincidentally, about the difference between the 2013 payroll and this year’s once again diminished payroll. From another angle, though, I suppose I should be grateful for the Grandy/Colon/Young signings. After all, the Mets weren’t obligated to acquire those three FA’s. They could have, instead, promoted three or four more major league minimum wage earning rookies to the 25 man roster and gone with a payroll of about $55M. So I guess I should be thankful for that.

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Colon is doing exactly what we need him to be doing -- being a reliable spot in the rotation until Harvey is healed and the kids are ready.

Yeah. But Colon doesn’t belong here. He should be pitching for a pennant contender in need of one pitcher to round out the rotation. Colon’s 41. It’s gonna end up real bad and real soon for Colon. That’s the lay of the land for 41 year old pitchers

But wait, you accuse them of making poverty picks, then criticize again when they did spend -- on a guy who was an All-Star the year before and has pitched well this year. He belongs here as the bridge to the return of Harvey and the arrival of Thor and the maturation of Wheeler. If it goes bad at age 41 or next year, we'll have fresh blood.

Anyways, my original post on Chris Young, which prompted your response, was written to address more of the “What the hell is Sandy doing? “posts, which I don’t get. Alderson’s first order of business was to cut payroll by about $50M, 33% -- historical drops. Sandy was essentially required to take 10 steps backwards before he could try and take one forward step. I know how repetitive this all must sound, but on the other hand, it’s hard to have an accurate macro discussion on the Mets problems without addressing their crushing financial situation. And this is before conceding that Sandy inherited a barren farm and a major league roster crumbling or going nowhere at almost every turn.

I don't think anyone disputes that there were crushing financial restraints brought on not just by the outside troubles but by some bad contracts. If he's been tasked with clearing out those contracts and replenishing the system, I think it's fair to say he's doing that.

I don't think we can fault Sandy for having three pitchers -- including the ace and the closer -- missing a year for TJ surgery. How much better would we be with a douchy but healthy Harvey atop the rotation, Parnell in the pen? And both of those would free up Mejia to either be a set-up man and probably not needing Colon at all.

I guess I'm just seeing the glass a little more full.

[metirish]

Could be cut Thursday

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/89890/source-chris-young-may-be-cut-thursday?ex_cid=espnapi_public

[Edgy MD]

That sure would be dramatic.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Can never count on something like that. Someone will get hurt or something, you just watch.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I was wondering about that as I read that Lagares' return may be imminent. I'd much rather remove Chris Young from the roster than Kirk Nieuwenhuis. The only argument for keeping Young is his salary. And that's rarely, if ever, a good reason.

That signing never made any sense to me.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I was wondering about that as I read that Lagares' return may be imminent. I'd much rather remove Chris Young from the roster than Kirk Nieuwenhuis. The only argument for keeping Young is his salary. And that's rarely, if ever, a good reason. That signing never made any sense to me.

A guy that has power potential and decent ability. Can play CF pretty well (if you're figuring Granderson is better served in a corner) Both things the Mets needed, reasonable buy low guy.

Didn't work out as of yet. these things happen. But it's not like the Mets have three good outfielders either. Lagares and Granderson. Even if Abreu continues to play well, you're not playing him everyday. And if you are playing him, you might rather have a Righty than a Lefty. (Eric doesn't hit Lefties either)

Of course, Andrew Brown at this point is a better option in that role. You've already burned Nieuwenhuis' option for this year though, so it might just be prudent to drop him, no matter what rumors Rubin spreads. You can always release Chris Young next week.

[ashie62]

cueing up the memories of thread...

[Edgy MD]

If there's any truth to this, it really sucks for Sandy that the plans leaked.

[seawolf17]

Play him against the two lefties and cross your fingers that he gets five hits and is suddenly tradeable.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm hoping it will inspire Chris Young to hit three homers on Tuesday night.

[Frayed Knot]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: That signing never made any sense to me.

There was certainly some logic to it. We've been short of having a legit complement of OFers for years now and have been lucky with a couple of low-budget chances (Hairston - Byrd) just to fill some of the spots we did have.
That C. Young had good seasons in the past, isn't injured, wasn't old, can play CF (I still don't think we have a handle on how well Lagares will hit) can run, etc. made him a decent candidate to have a bounce-back year in a field, beyond Granderson, that's full of questions marks [Lagares, Brown, Nieuwenhuis, MdD, EYJ]. It obviously hasn't worked and it cost them a lot more money than the others to find that out, but the move never struck me as odd. A bit wishful maybe, but not odd.

If there's any truth to this, it really sucks for Sandy that the plans leaked.

Is there anything with this team that doesn't leak?

[ashie62]

The toilets?

[Zvon]

Edgy MD wrote: If there's any truth to this, it really sucks for Sandy that the plans leaked.

I think a leak makes it easier for Sandy. CYoungs probably already packed.

[Edgy MD]

Easier? No way! It totally subverts your plans. If it's true, and you've got to release him before tomorrow's game. Can't have a guy everyone knows is doomed hanging out, and sure can't stick him in the game.

If it's not true, you've got to issue an explicit denial, and some sort of endorsement --- when you'd rather have your options open and not be forced to endorse a player who is playing his way over the horizon.

Either way, your hand is forced.

[seawolf17]

Yes, BUT.

If there's a team out there who thinks they can use him, it might make them give Sandy a call and offer a warm body for him, and then maybe you don't eat as much of the salary as you would if you just cut him.

[Benjamin Grimm]

He can say "no decision has been made yet." Many people won't believe him, but he can say that.

[Ceetar]

nah, a simple "At this time Adam Rubin is not involved in our decision making process. When we're ready to activate Juan Lagares, we will make a corresponding roster move based on the information we have at that time." will do.

You don't have to give light to every rumor.

[Edgy MD]

seawolf17 wrote: Yes, BUT. If there's a team out there who thinks they can use him, it might make them give Sandy a call and offer a warm body for him, and then maybe you don't eat as much of the salary as you would if you just cut him.

I think teams have a solid network for letting other teams know which players of theirs are on the block, without unwieldy leaks.

[Zvon]

Edgy MD wrote: Easier? No way! It totally subverts your plans. If it's true, and you've got to release him before tomorrow's game. Can't have a guy everyone knows is doomed hanging out, and sure can't stick him in the game. If it's not true, you've got to issue an explicit denial, and some sort of endorsement --- when you'd rather have your options open and not be forced to endorse a player who is playing his way over the horizon. Either way, your hand is forced.

Not if the leak is part of the plan. If that's the case, yes, he will be gone before tomorrow nights game, one way or the other. If the leak is not part of the plan & it's true, same thing. CYoung will be prepared to be released tomorrow.

If it's not true Sandy doesn't really have to say anything. He owed CYoung some at-bats, and he gave him plenty. That was his endorsment and it's all used up. In this case I'd respect him more if he didn't respond to shit stirrin' stuff like this. Until a move is made I don't put any weight in articles that are "in the know" but don't let me know where they got their information from. It's just too easy for writers to write to soft spots that they know will cause (or feed) a flurry in the fan base.

I think Sandy should cut him if that's his plan, and just ignore it if it isn't.

No matter what the truth is in the CYoung situation, he's got to know that he has been given a fair chance and he didn't rise to the occasion. That's the only endorsement he should give him at this time and I'd rather he just kept quiet.