metsmarathon

There could be more physicals pending. Ya never know…

if i recall my back-of-baseball cards, i believe bryn smith had gotten his name as an acronym from his grandparents' first names, or something similar. i don't know what bryn alderson's excuse is.

oh god, i love that t-shirt sniper ad. also, i miss t-shirt snipers in games. when did that stop being a thing?

murder hornets wasn't one of us, was it? if so, renew thyself, dangit! please.

you only do it if you can find a way to celebrate it, and celebrate bobby bonilla. otherwise you're unfairly clowning on him. and i don't think bonilla deserves that shit.

i'm ok with this. he has a good first name.

i don't want mancini because i'd rather see him get a full-tie job somewhere. duvall probably would be best, though i don't really like the bat. thunder, yes, but that thunder generates a lot of wind. i kinda like pham, but sheesh, last year he was just slapping at the ball with a wet noodle, wasn't he? profar would seem to be the best option, but is he interested in a part time gig? do we really need any of these guys?

think they'd take ruf back for him?

lindor should be on most of those offensive lists by the end of the season.

part of it, too, is a sense of responsibility to those that come after, not to take a pay cut so that those next players can get every dollar they can, too.

Adam jones?

cutch... better than ruf was with the mets last year. worse than ruf was with the giants last year. better defender but still not good. brings veteran presence. is somehow two months younger.

there's also more money available in the out years to extend the right side of our infield, which should really be the first next thing they do.

daily news for the win, easily.

we're a 101-win team from last season that: a) didn't have anybody wildly outperform their projection/expectations c) barely got 200 innings from their pair of aces atop the rotation didn't lose any key pieces that weren't replaced like-for-like (except maybe seth lugo...?) c) has the top prospect in the game due to come up, with more in the pipeline d) projects to the same WAR total for the coming season I mean, shit can always turn south, but fuck. it's not like we were a .500 team just hoping to scrape into the playoffs without him. we're in a dead heat for best team in the league. losing correa just knocks us back from being a pre-season juggernaut. and gosh, I'm just going to have to be ok with that.

Huh.

Lefty Specialist wrote: You kind of get the feeling that if the Mets balk, Boras will sign a shorter-term deal with the Twins, who always seem to be in the background. They've seen the medicals and were OK with offering him the 3-year deal for over $100 million that he opted out of. They also made a long-term offer that the Giants blew out of the water. So they'd be a pretty reasonable fallback. but did they give him a new-hire-type physical after the ankle incident late last year? They saw the prior medicals, but if there's something new with that old injury, maybe they wouldn't be quite so fast to pull a trigger.

looks like boras isn't the only one who can play this game.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Exactly. If they go with Escobar and/or Baty and/or Vientos at third base, they're still a likely playoff team. without correa, we were an even bet to take the NL east. damn right we're a likely playoff team even without him!

yeah, i mean, i'm just waiting for it to be done so that i can stop wondering how it's gonna get done. but i'm hardly worried that it gets done. and if it doesn't get done? well, shit, it's not like we were a bad team before the signing.

=vtmet7 post_id=116030 time=1672846460 user_id=80] Eye don't get it: hot dog, pretzel, NY?

yeah... yikes. i mean, it makes things look better for the giants, that's for dang sure. if the past leg injury is really, truly a concern, here's a thought. keep the overall parameters of the deal the same, but with a fair bit of guarantee, but also a lot of reasonably achievable vesting options. my first idea is a framework, that i haven't put nearly enough thought into the underlying math of... six years guaranteed, and automatically vesting options whereby if he averages 100 games over the prior three seasons he locks in for the next year, and so on. if he's healthy for the duration of the deal, he gets paid in full. alternatively, and maybe a better idea for the player... stick with the same 12-year contract, where the first six years are full rate, and the last six are reduced rate, with achievable massive bonuses for playing time. similar situation, he gets paid a ton either way, and if he's reasonably healthy he gets paid in full. but if not, the mets would have some measure of risk mitigation in case the leg really is a big deal.

good for him!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: =nymr83 post_id=115400 time=1671773092 user_id=54] I wonder which team will decide the talent is worth the baggage? Would we be all that surprised if it turned out to be the Mets?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It will be interesting, if it ever comes out during our lifetimes, to learn the inside story of why 26 other owners decided to vote to approve his ownership. He's going to help drive an increase in salaries across the game and even though his money can't guarantee World Championships, if the Mets are dominant every year, that's one fewer playoff spot available to each of the other National League teams. it would be pretty fucked up to come out and say "you're too rich to own one of our teams" when every single one of them would hope to be able to sell their team to someone so rich and willing to pay for it.