Payroll 2016

[Edgy MD]

Vic Sage wrote: I don't know, maybe Jones isn't the right guy, but I'd kind of like the Mets to be working the trade angle more than the FA angle here. i don't understand that view. Why give up players instead of $$, if you don't have to? How often does a 26-27 year old 5-tool stud OFer come onto the open market?

I'm less convinced that he's a stud so much as the best available guy on the market. Coming into his prime, though.

[HahnSolo]

Heyward is definitely intriguing and best available, but my gut says he's re-signing with St. Louis

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: Vic Sage wrote: I don't know, maybe Jones isn't the right guy, but I'd kind of like the Mets to be working the trade angle more than the FA angle here. i don't understand that view. Why give up players instead of $$, if you don't have to? How often does a 26-27 year old 5-tool stud OFer come onto the open market? I'm less convinced that he's a stud so much as the best available guy on the market. Coming into his prime, though.

Like the Wilpons are gonna pay for a stud. It's obvious that they can't even afford Murphy or Cespedes, let alone Murphy and Cespedes, but hardly anyone could admit that so instead they blame the market because there aren't any Willie Fucking Mayses out there. Like the Mets could afford a Willie Fucking Mays.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Guest

[Edgy MD]

That's an agenda post. My statement stands.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: That's an agenda post. My statement stands.

Talking to me? What the hell is an agenda? That the owners are fucking broke but if anyone dares mention it, it's an agenda?

[Centerfield]

I would certainly be open to trading for Adam Jones if it didn't include Matz. Maybe Wheeler? But the O's most likely don't take that. So the point is likely moot.

Also, I don't understand the preference for trades. If you trade Matz you create another hole, which, in all likelihood, will cost money. So you end up paying for Jones, and paying for Matz' replacement. Who in the end, will likely not be as good as Matz.

Plus trading young players defies the organizational mantra of player development.

Guys, it's not our money. And it's money that they should be spending on payroll.

[Edgy MD]

Trades can sometimes be a preferable target in that they sometimes get you a shorter contract for a player that might otherwise expect you to extend beyond your comfort zone, and the value of the contract is a known going in.

[Vic Sage]

I'm less convinced that he's a stud so much as the best available guy on the market.

That may be true. I'll trust Sandy on this. But if a 5+WAR season is considered an "all-star" year by stat guys, Jason's had 2 consecutive seasons of that, and he's still just 26, so I'd put my money on him. or more accurately, Fred's money.

[Edgy MD]

So tiresome.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: That's an agenda post. My statement stands. Talking to me?

I think you know.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: What the hell is an agenda?

I think you know.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: That the owners are fucking broke but if anyone dares mention it, it's an agenda?

I think you know this one too, but no.

[Ceetar]

Vic Sage wrote: I'm less convinced that he's a stud so much as the best available guy on the market. That may be true. I'll trust Sandy on this. But if a 5+WAR season is considered an "all-star" year by stat guys, Jason's had 2 consecutive seasons of that, and he's still just 26, so I'd put my money on him. or more accurately, Fred's money.

depends how much of All-Star you consider defense, etc.

I don't think Adam Jones is it, and i do kinda like Heyward, but the argument for a trade is that the Mets do in fact have pieces, like Niese and Plawecki, that are more valuable to someone else, and you might be able to increase the overall value for your 25 guys that way. And perhaps it's possible to find a guy that fits the team in a more flexible way with fewer risks. Our money or not, broke or not, if you can get similar production without committing 7 years to a player that's not special. Heyward's very good, and can probably play a plus, or at least averagish CF, for at least a few more years, but there are other ways to go.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Trades can sometimes be a preferable target in that they sometimes get you a shorter contract for a player that might otherwise expect you to extend beyond your comfort zone, and the value of the contract is a known going in.

Sure. That's the upside. The downside is that you give up a prospect that you've been reading about, hoping for, and just when you see a taste of what he can offer you, he's gone. GONE!

I mean, Matz for Jones. Are you ok with that? I'd much rather keep Matz and sign Heyward. Look at our rotation. How can anyone break that up?

Fuck. If it came to it, I think I'd rather keep Matz and hope for Lagares to get better.

[Centerfield]

I got it. Wheeler, Duda, Lagares and Plawecki for Adam Jones.

Then go sign Chris Davis.

Get it done Sandy!

[Ceetar]

rather target Matt Carpenter. Johnny Peralta. Xander Bogaerts.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: I mean, Matz for Jones. Are you ok with that?

Heavens, no.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: I got it. Wheeler, Duda, Lagares and Plawecki for Adam Jones.

Heavens, no AGAIN!

[Centerfield]

You know, it occurs to me, if you want to open up a corner OF position, you could slide Granderson over to CF and platoon him with Lagares. Plus have Juan come in for late-inning defense.

I don't know how Curtis would be in CF, but he's only 2 years from having played it regularly for the MFY's, and he still seems pretty fast. Arm aside, I thought he played very well in RF this year.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I think it says a lot about Granderson's ability to handle center field, and the Mets' feelings on the matter, that Cespedes was passing as a center fielder for two months with this squad over Granderson.

[Ceetar]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I think it says a lot about Granderson's ability to handle center field, and the Mets' feelings on the matter, that Cespedes was passing as a center fielder for two months with this squad over Granderson.

I have no doubt Cespedes is a better CFer than Granderson, but I don't know that it'd be the end of the world if the Mets did something that forced Curtis there in 2016.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

It'd put an old guy with a shitty arm and poor range where a young guy with a good arm and great range used to be. It'd be catastrophic.

[Centerfield]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: It'd put an old guy with a shitty arm and poor range where a young guy with a good arm and great range used to be. It'd be catastrophic.

Understood that it's not a perfect solution. But the alternative is downgrading from Cespedes to Lagares. This give you a drop of .300 points of OPS. And this is assuming Conforto and Granderson repeat their performances in 2016.

I get that you are not happy about putting Granderson in CF. How do you propose to offset the offense that was lost?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

This morning I'm leaning to Desmond at SS, Span/Lagares in CF, Flores/Hererra to 2B, banking on a little more pop from Wright, Conforto, Duda & d'Arnaud. That could do it on paper.

That's just free agency solutions though; I think they ought to explore Hahn's Adam Jones idea but that's still more moving around stuff.

[Centerfield]

I think your idea is far more likely to materialize than mine. One thing I didn't realize until last night is that Desmond is fast. He'll steal 20 bases a year. Couple him with Span, Granderson and Herrera and suddenly you have a running team.

Sucks that Washington extended the QO on Desmond.

[Benjamin Grimm]

If the Mets were to sign Desmond, would that cancel out the draft pick the Mets would get for losing Murphy?

Or would they lose their first round pick, but retain the supplemental pick they'd get for Murphy?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Yes Mets get the pick from the Muffy signee & Washington gets Mets' slot. That's a likely drop in the order, but not a huge swing either way.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: If the Mets were to sign Desmond, would that cancel out the draft pick the Mets would get for losing Murphy? Or would they lose their first round pick, but retain the supplemental pick they'd get for Murphy?

they'd lose their first round pick, retain the supplemental.