Manny

Yes 17 votes

No 9 votes

Maybe 4 votes

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 05 2008 08:18 AM

1 Year, 1 enormous pile of cash (25 mills+?)

explain & discuss

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 05 2008 08:20 AM

I'm like, yeah.

metirish
Dec 05 2008 08:20 AM

For 1 year I would do it , what could go wrong?

OK a lot of things could go wrong but I would risk it for one year.

DocTee
Dec 05 2008 08:25 AM

I voted No. Too many other holes to fill with that cash.

One year? Hadn't seen that.....hmmmmm

sharpie
Dec 05 2008 08:27 AM

I voted yeah but I'm thinking that if he accepts a 1-year deal it'll be Dodger-arbitration.

Frayed Knot
Dec 05 2008 08:32 AM

One year - yeah, but he'll never sign for that.
He wanted out of Boston because they had him for 2 consecutive one-year deals (club option) at $20/per and part of the OK for the deal to LA was that they agree not to pick up the options.

He'll get 3 years from someone and I don't want him for that.

themetfairy
Dec 05 2008 08:33 AM

I vote no. He's talented, but he's too much of a headache.

Edgy DC
Dec 05 2008 08:38 AM

Headaches on one-year deals are more manageable.

metsmarathon
Dec 05 2008 08:51 AM

i voted no because i believe that left field is among our lesser concerns with murphy, evans, and tatis all available to spend some time out there. i believe it more important to spend our money on pitching, and i believe that giving $25M to manny means that there's $25M less to give to pitching.

now, if spending $25M on manny means that there's only $15M or $10M less to go to pitching, because we would expect to recoup that money more readily due to his presence, or because the single season makes the increase in budget more palateable, then i think i'd be content to click on yes. but i don't at this point consider that to be the case.

Benjamin Grimm
Dec 05 2008 08:57 AM

I'm a maybe. I'd do it if there would still be money to upgrade the bullpen. If it means we get Manny and the Mets bullpen next year is the same assortment of losers, then no.

Probably a moot point, anyway. I don't think Manny will sign a one-year deal. (Maybe if he was 29 and coming off a bad year, but not at his age. Too much risk that he won't be able to command as much next time around.)

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 05 2008 09:36 AM

="Frayed Knot":2boovb3u]One year - yeah, but he'll never sign for that. He wanted out of Boston because they had him for 2 consecutive one-year deals (club option) at $20/per and part of the OK for the deal to LA was that they agree not to pick up the options. He'll get 3 years from someone and I don't want him for that.[/quote:2boovb3u]

You think? It wouldn't be the first time an agent mis-read the market or the economy, and the red flags around manny's motivation aren't going to help.

I said 25+ bercause I figured that'd be around what he'd get in arbitration, plus a few buxx. Maybe 30 M?

I'm not all that CAHNfident in a Murphy/Tatis platoon. I mean, I am, but I don't like it in combination with questionable production outta Church in RF.

Vic Sage
Dec 05 2008 09:50 AM

]I'm not all that CAHNfident in a Murphy/Tatis platoon. I mean, I am, but I don't like it in combination with questionable production outta Church in RF.

and questionable production out of Castillo at 2b and Schneider at C. And i don't know if Delgado, at 37, will repeat his 2nd half performance or his 1st half.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 05 2008 09:51 AM

Yup, yup and yup.

Edgy DC
Dec 05 2008 09:53 AM

Makes you realize in part how lucky the Mets were to finish where they did.

Gwreck
Dec 05 2008 09:56 AM

Manny? Sure...

...if it's a one-year deal only
...if it doesn't limit our ability to spend on Texeria
...if it doesn't limit our ability to spend on pitching

etc.

In the middle of the lineup, he'd be tremendous...

Reyes
Murphy
Beltran
Ramirez
Wright
Delgado
Church/Tatis
Catcher

Willets Point
Dec 05 2008 10:11 AM

="Vic Sage]
And i don't know if Delgado, at 37, will repeat his 2nd half performance or his 1st half.

How about both?

Frayed Knot
Dec 05 2008 10:24 AM

"You think? It wouldn't be the first time an agent mis-read the market or the economy, and the red flags around manny's motivation aren't going to help."

I'd be shocked if Manny didn't at least get 2+option.
Boras started out talking about 5 but I agree that ain't happenin'.

smg58
Dec 05 2008 11:35 AM

I'd vote yes for the pitching equivalent of Manny, because I think the need is greater there.

smg58
Dec 05 2008 11:38 AM

I also wouldn't be surprised if Manny and a few other free agents decide to go with the big arbitration amount for a year and then try the market again next year, under hopefully more favorable economic conditions.

Farmer Ted
Dec 05 2008 11:44 AM

I'd rather have CC and K-Rod for that cash.

Edgy DC
Dec 05 2008 11:55 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 05 2008 05:08 PM

I don't think that sort of money buys CC. It might get you 2+ years of the K, but he's getting at least three and 33.

Zvon
Dec 05 2008 03:06 PM

As long as we address what we really need as well, one year?
sure.

Valadius
Dec 05 2008 07:26 PM

I voted maybe. I wouldn't mind it, and I'd sure appreciate the offense, but restructuring the bullpen must become the priority it should have been last offseason.