Master Index of Archived Threads


Left Field 2010

Centerfield Dec 15 2009 07:57 AM

My apologies if a thread has already been started. In addition to the rumors that someone has gone 5 years for Bay, there is an article at ESPN that says the Cards may have guaranteed an 8th year to Holliday (16 million per). If that's true, that probably takes Holliday out of the Mets' plans. I wonder if this is going to become Bay or nothing for the Mets.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 15 2009 08:09 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Oh, Boston Herald reports the MFYs have contacted Bay. I'm thinking maybe Omar needs to make a trade. I've sorta thought all along that the rotation and catching questions might be answered in a trade, maybe the outfield questions do too.

attgig Dec 15 2009 08:46 AM Re: Left Field 2010

boston is out for bay. if angels end up signing matsui, i'd think they're out. other teams were never really in the fold for bay. Unless the yankees do something big right now, i think bay comes to the mets.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 15 2009 08:52 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="attgig":o3i8x4bu]Unless the yankees do something big right now, i think bay comes to the mets.[/quote:o3i8x4bu] Good! And then the issue becomes not so much whether Bay is better than Holliday, but whether Bay is better than Sullivan.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 08:56 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Fifty craneys says Bay is better than Sullivan. I'm going all-out.

Valadius Dec 15 2009 08:57 AM Re: Left Field 2010

The Mariners are still out there for Bay, aren't they?

attgig Dec 15 2009 09:24 AM Re: Left Field 2010

have the mariners really shown interest? I know the media keeps on throwing them in it, but seriously, the real hubub i've seen is how bay would bend over backwards to play near his wife's hometown. he has no negotiating power with the mariners. i honestly don't see them giving bay 5 years.

Ashie62 Dec 15 2009 01:30 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Report say Bay will make a decision with "a few days" So...time for the river card. Will Omar go all in? Stay tuned

TransMonk Dec 15 2009 02:49 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Where does this Bay talk leave F-Mart's future as a Met? Is he traded or does he sit in the minors or on the bench until Beltran's contract is up?

Benjamin Grimm Dec 15 2009 02:51 PM Re: Left Field 2010

I think he'll be traded.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 15 2009 03:00 PM Re: Left Field 2010

French's year-to-year. So you could hand him those keys as soon as he's ready... or, alternatively, if Beltran's knees continue to give him (and us) sleepless nights, you could slide him into CF for a spell (assuming he cleans his cleats so they don't catch in the grass or anything).

attgig Dec 15 2009 03:01 PM Re: Left Field 2010

either that, or we see how Francour does, and he takes over in right. he needed a full year in AAA, after the showing he had in the majors last year. let him play a year in AAA. if he rebounds and francour doesn't get back to being good, dump francour. if he rebounds and francour stays good, Fmart just gained himself some trading value. if he doesn't rebound... well... (lwfs beat me to it i guess)

Vince Coleman Firecracker Dec 15 2009 03:09 PM Re: Left Field 2010

I'm in no rush to trade a 20-year old that just posted an .877 OPS in AAA. My Magic 8 Ball says Fartinez will be the Mets' starting right fielder in 2011. And he'll be pretty good. That's if he's not traded, of course. My Magic 8 Ball has a tough time reading Omar Minaya.

Edgy DC Dec 15 2009 07:47 PM Re: Left Field 2010

It's like we don't want to get fooled. Love is a risky proposition. But it's also a rewarding one. Let F-Bomb into your heart. If everybody plays well, delaying his crack of the lineup at 21, that's a good problem to have.

RealityChuck Dec 16 2009 07:23 AM Re: Left Field 2010

The MFY have said they don't want Bay. It's far too early to speculate about what happens to F-Mart in 2011. He needs a year at AAA and the Mets needs an outfielder, so Bay makes sense. In 2011, you can think about trading him or Francour (though I would lean toward keeping both).

Benjamin Grimm Dec 16 2009 07:47 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Jon Heyman"] Mets tweak offer to Bay, re-enter chase for Holliday Jon Heyman, SI.com Moving aggressively to try to secure a power-hitting left fielder, the Mets tweaked their offer to Jason Bay to give him a five-year option and are getting back into the ballgame for Matt Holliday, as well, SI.com has learned. Mets GM Omar Minaya and Bay's agent, Joe Urbon, spoke at length on Tuesday. Minaya is thought to have offered a five-year deal (at slightly lower dollars per year than the original four-year offer for close to $65 million), but with Bay still believed to be seeking a six-year deal from them, the Mets apparently have decided to dip back in on Holliday. The Mets, who are now believed willing to go to about $75 million for five, originally concentrated on Bay in the hope that they might be able to sign him quicker. Minaya is expected to talk to Holliday's agent, Scott Boras, as soon as Wednesday. Mets people suggest there could be a trade option to fill their offensive gap, but it appears that Bay and Holliday are their two top targets to enhance their power. Meanwhile, the talks with catcher Bengie Molina are said to be at a standstill. Molina is believed to be seeking a three-year deal for as much as $20 million. The Mets are likely to be willing to give Molina a two-year deal for perhaps $10 million. Molina is clearly the Mets' top catching target, but there is concern the aggressive Mariners could become a player for him. It remains somewhat of a mystery where the competition for Bay is coming from, but the Mariners and Angels seem like possibilities. The Red Sox don't appear to be aggressive players for Bay at the moment after spending about $85 million on John Lackey and signing outfielder Mike Cameron. The Cardinals are actively trying to secure Holliday, and one Cardinals person expressed faith it could get done. But Holliday is still talking to other teams. The Mets are one of them now.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 16 2009 07:51 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Wait... Omar talked to Bay's agent on Tuesday??? I thought he was too busy playing tiddlywinks. (What the hell are tiddlywinks anyway? But I digress...) I'm kind of okay with them going to five years for Bay, but six seems like way too much. Hopefully they'll be able to get him for less than that. I'd be surprised if the Holliday thing happens, but I didn't expect Pedro or Beltran either, so you never know. And if Molina is demanding three years, they should tell him to go to hell. They really only "need" him for one, if Thole is on target for 2011. I'd much rather see the Mets get by in 2010 with Blanco/Coste/Santos/Thole than sign Molina through 2012.

MFS62 Dec 16 2009 08:16 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Agreed. If they want to sign a slow FA catcher with power, I'd bet they can get Rod Barrajas for 2 years (or 1 + 1 option year), and for a lot less money. That money they save can then be put to use to help address other positions. Later

Benjamin Grimm Dec 16 2009 08:55 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Buster Olney":lusvtack]The Mets are monitoring the Matt Holliday negotiations, but are not actively involved, and it could be that talks for the outfielder are out of their price range. The St. Louis Cardinals have an offer on the table to Holliday, widely believed within the industry to be for something in the range of five years and $80 million. Internally, the Cardinals have expressed doubt about whether any team is going to be willing to make an offer at that level to Holliday, and it's unclear whether there will be major movement to St. Louis' offer.[/quote:lusvtack] $80 million over five for Holliday? Except for the extra year, that's right around the average yearly salary that the Mets are said to be offering Bay. If that's the range that Holliday is in, then he probably is a viable option for the Mets. (Unless they're really sold on their preference for a pull hitter over a gap hitter, which I kind of doubt.)

metirish Dec 16 2009 08:58 AM Re: Left Field 2010

That's got to be a mistake because that's what most expect Bay to go for.....would you want the Mets to go 5 years/$100 million for Holliday if that got it done?....or the 5 years/$80 million for Bay?

Hawkeye57 Dec 16 2009 09:21 AM Re: Left Field 2010

As much as I would prefer Holliday over Bay, I think signing Bay for less might be a good option. Perhaps use this money to get a starting rotation that is better than one deep?

attgig Dec 16 2009 09:29 AM Re: Left Field 2010

it really seems like there aren't any major players that are threatening the mets from getting who they want... bay OR holliday. the angels just got matsui, so i think they're pretty much set. i think it's just the cardinals and mets, and maybe the mariners. of those three, if the mets are the team that loses out, i don't know what i'll do.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 16 2009 09:34 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I think the MFYs may go for Holliday.

Edgy DC Dec 16 2009 09:35 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Hawkeye57":18bzmxk3]As much as I would prefer Holliday over Bay, I think signing Bay for less might be a good option. Perhaps use this money to get a starting rotation that is better than one deep?[/quote:18bzmxk3] Don't believe that. With injury upon injury gutting the roation and backing them with sub-standard defense, the Mets were still pretty middle-of-the-pack in starting pitching in 2009. One can always use more pitching, but I don't think it's such a desperate priority.

Hawkeye57 Dec 16 2009 10:03 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC":1yplziuk]Don't believe that. With injury upon injury gutting the roation and backing them with sub-standard defense, the Mets were still pretty middle-of-the-pack in starting pitching in 2009. One can always use more pitching, but I don't think it's such a desperate priority.[/quote:1yplziuk] Good point, wasn't really taking the injuries into consideration. Just saying that beyond Santana and maybe Pelfrey, they might need a bit of help. Maybe a Jason Marquis or something like that to give a legitimate #3, instead of Olli.

Centerfield Dec 16 2009 10:04 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Benjamin Grimm":3pqjrr9k][quote="Buster Olney":3pqjrr9k]The Mets are monitoring the Matt Holliday negotiations, but are not actively involved, and it could be that talks for the outfielder are out of their price range. The St. Louis Cardinals have an offer on the table to Holliday, widely believed within the industry to be for something in the range of five years and $80 million. Internally, the Cardinals have expressed doubt about whether any team is going to be willing to make an offer at that level to Holliday, and it's unclear whether there will be major movement to St. Louis' offer.[/quote:3pqjrr9k] $80 million over five for Holliday? Except for the extra year, that's right around the average yearly salary that the Mets are said to be offering Bay. If that's the range that Holliday is in, then he probably is a viable option for the Mets. (Unless they're really sold on their preference for a pull hitter over a gap hitter, which I kind of doubt.)[/quote:3pqjrr9k] Yup. I'd put that offer out there now and tell Holliday and Bay that the first one to sign gets it.

metirish Dec 16 2009 11:20 AM Re: Left Field 2010

More on this According to Heyman the Mets have offered a fifth year to Bay (whom they offered a four-year, $65M deal to late last week) and are willing to go as high as five years, $75M. Bay, 32, is believed to be holding out for a sixth year option

Farmer Ted Dec 16 2009 11:58 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Mike Cameron signs with Boston. Where the hell have I been not to know that sooner? So, he's out of the mix, mos def.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 17 2009 07:12 AM Re: Left Field 2010

The latest Bay updates appear to be conflicting. [list:23fq5u9k] The Mets won't go to five for Bay. They're considering going five for Bay. They've offered Bay a fifth year.[/list:u:23fq5u9k] I think ultimately he'll get that fifth year from them.

Edgy DC Dec 17 2009 08:18 AM Re: Left Field 2010

OK, you need a leftfielder, but two leftifielders are commanding a disproprotionate amount of attention because they are the best of weak market. The challenge should be to focus on Bay and Holliday, but commit yourself to not overextending yourself for either of them, and be ready to pursue plan B quickly. Despite Steve J.'s derision, the year they went for David Segui instead of going large at first was a good exercise in realistic restraint. I'll throw some darts. How about Rick Ankiel? Rocco Baldelli?

MFS62 Dec 17 2009 10:18 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC":2dcxe6xv]OK, you need a leftfielder, but two leftifielders are commanding a disproprotionate amount of attention because they are the best of weark market. The challenge should be to focus on Bay and Holliday, but commit yourself to not overextending yourself for either of them, and be ready to pursue plan B quickly. Despite Steve J.'s derision, the year they went for David Segui instead of going large at first was a good exercise in realistic restraint. I'll throw some darts. How about Rick Ankiel? Rocco Baldelli?[/quote:2dcxe6xv] Ankiel is a good idea. Baldelli seems to be as snakebit as F-Mart. Ankiel was hurt last year when he ran into the outfield wall and got a concussion that kept him out of the lineup for a few weeks. But otherwise, has remained relatively healthy since his re-emergence in the majors as an outfielder. The only problem I see would be that he's a lefty batter and the Mets need a righty power bat, IMO. Later

attgig Dec 17 2009 10:25 AM Re: Left Field 2010 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 17 2009 10:27 AM

Ankiel is another Boras client. I'd be weary of the kind of money that he would want, and if that would really be an upgrade over Pagan based on the money. Pagan isn't a horrible option. hopefully, the constant presence of some of the other veteran guys will keep his head on straight, so that he won't make stupid baserunning mistakes. But otherwise, he's been pretty productive, and a pretty good glove in LF. of the other FA outfielders, who could come cheap, I'd be interested in what johnny gomes could do, as well as Nady and if omar HAS to sign an old guy like he does every season, maybe vlad... I'm also interested as to why there's been absolutely no mention of dye. he had a not so good '09, but could still be somewhat productive at the right price.

Edgy DC Dec 17 2009 10:27 AM Re: Left Field 2010

But otherwise, has remained relatively healthy since his re-emergence in the majors as an outfielder. The only problem I see would be that he's a lefty batter and the Mets need a righty power bat, IMO. I don't see any particular imbalance. As it stands now: C -- Blanco, Coste, Santos all R (Thole L) 1b -- Murphy L 2B -- Castillo S SS -- Reyes S 3b -- Wright R LF -- ? CF -- Beltran S RF -- Francoeur R Got a lot of potential lefties on the bench in Carter, Martinez, and Cora, but, if anything, the lineup is overbalanced to the right. As far as Boras and the money he asks for, it can't hurt to inquire.

Frayed Knot Dec 17 2009 10:30 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Jermaine Dye? A fading star to be sure, but a possible one-year stopgap.

metirish Dec 17 2009 10:33 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Nothing tingling in my pants looking at the lineup.

Edgy DC Dec 17 2009 10:37 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="metirish"]Nothing tingling in my pants looking at the lineup.

Well, don't look at me. I'm not gonna help you.

TransMonk Dec 17 2009 10:40 AM Re: Left Field 2010

At least nothing's tinkling in your pants.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 17 2009 10:46 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC":2o4d3tz6]OK, you need a leftfielder, but two leftifielders are commanding a disproprotionate amount of attention because they are the best of weak market. The challenge should be to focus on Bay and Holliday, but commit yourself to not overextending yourself for either of them, and be ready to pursue plan B quickly. Despite Steve J.'s derision, the year they went for David Segui instead of going large at first was a good exercise in realistic restraint. I'll throw some darts. How about Rick Ankiel? Rocco Baldelli?[/quote:2o4d3tz6] Byrd (2.5-3.5 WAR the last three seasons, solid defense, nice legs, winning smile) is the word?

MFS62 Dec 17 2009 10:47 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="attgig":bxx275wm]Ankiel is another Boras client. I'd be weary of the kind of money that he would want, and if that would really be an upgrade over Pagan based on the money. [/quote:bxx275wm] Ankiel would be more costly that we might think. Boras will demand that any team signing him will have to paint the outfield wall to look like home plate to ensure that Ankiel won't hit it. Later

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 17 2009 10:59 AM Re: Left Field 2010

edit, wrong thread, I think

Vince Coleman Firecracker Dec 17 2009 11:12 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="metirish":3ae9tdl9]would you want the Mets to go 5 years/$100 million for Holliday if that got it done?....or the 5 years/$80 million for Bay?[/quote:3ae9tdl9] I'd much rather take the Holiday deal if I had to choose between these two.

Centerfield Dec 19 2009 03:22 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Bay's taking too long. Make an offer to Holliday.

Edgy DC Dec 19 2009 04:45 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Really, I think anylong is too long. If Bay didn't jump at the first offer, I think they should have gone right to Holliday. It's clear now that the Mets are the top buyers in the leftfield market. One team with two guys to choose from, they have a chance to sieze control and turn it into a buyer's field.

Kong76 Dec 19 2009 06:37 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Doesn't this happen every year? The Mets are closed the Friday before Xmas and won't be re-opening until the Monday after New Years. Unfortunately, the papers will still be selling papers.

metirish Dec 19 2009 06:47 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Kong76":27auwucn]Doesn't this happen every year? The Mets are closed the Friday before Xmas and won't be re-opening until the Monday after New Years. Unfortunately, the papers will still be selling papers.[/quote:27auwucn] thanks for the laugh

Benjamin Grimm Dec 26 2009 10:08 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I'm wondering if Jermaine Dye might be willing to sign a one-year deal?

smg58 Dec 26 2009 10:59 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I'd give six years to Holliday before I'd give five to Bay. But it's not clear that either is priced beyond a reasonable range just yet. Much like Teixeira last year, I'm not sure I'd trust the Yankees when they say they aren't interested.

Edgy DC Dec 26 2009 11:28 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I too go six years for Holliday before five for Bay, I think. What has teams a little more shy about Holliday, I think, seems to be his less impressive two thirds of a season in Oakland, but it was two thirds of a season, and it wasn't that disappointing. His net OPS+ over his full (including St. Louis) season (139) was right where it was the year before (138). I bet if his fractions of seasons weren't broken up like that on his stat charts, they would be looked at as normal statistical variance.

smg58 Dec 26 2009 03:07 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Holliday's month-by-month OPS breakdown (not counting October): April .648 May .872 June .814 July (18 games with Oakland) 1.026 July (8 games with St. Louis) 1.490 August .963 September .901 Obviously he had a bad April, for which there could be any number of explanations beyond switching to a more difficult league (playing with a minor injury, adjusting to unfamiliar pitchers, adjusting to not playing his home games at 5000 feet, simply being off form for a month, even a statistical fluke). But he hit fine in Oakland afterward, and was already starting to sizzle when he got traded. Regardless, the initial impressions he made with both clubs couldn't have been more different, and that has clearly affected people's perceptions of him.

Ashie62 Dec 26 2009 05:56 PM Re: Left Field 2010

I would be very surprised if the Mets got Bay or Holliday... The Mets are being perceived as a team and situation that agents don't want to send their clients too. Mets will be fortunate to land Pineiro and hope Pelfrey can keep his E.R.A. under 5 and Ollie & Maine can be durable and effective Screw big dollars for an LF, the starting pitching is a more pressing issue

Edgy DC Dec 26 2009 10:06 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Ashie62"]The Mets are being perceived as a team and situation that agents don't want to send their clients too.

Perceived by whom? My impression is that agents love the Mets, and are desperate to get the Mets (and their largest payroll in the National League last year) involved in bidding for their clients.

Mex17 Dec 26 2009 11:39 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC"][quote="Ashie62"]The Mets are being perceived as a team and situation that agents don't want to send their clients too.

Perceived by whom? My impression is that agents love the Mets, and are desperate to get the Mets (and their largest payroll in the National League last year) involved in bidding for their clients.

That's been the case in the past, but maybe not anymore. This organization is currently woefully dysfunctional, incompetant, and malfecant.

Players have to be concerned that, by coming here, their careers will be put in further jeopardy if they suffer the misfortune of getting hurt. Becasuse they will not be cared after properly if they do. . .the past two seasons ('08 with the Church fiasco as well as all of last year when injuries were made worse by way of executive decision) have proven that in spades.

Edgy DC Dec 27 2009 06:26 AM Re: Left Field 2010

"Malfecant"? Anybody?

Mex17 Dec 27 2009 06:39 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC":132xi44f]"Malfecant"? Anybody?[/quote:132xi44f] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malfeasance Maybe I spelled it wrong. Anyway, it was one of the things that Mr. Potter was accusing George Bailey of near the end of that movie.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 27 2009 06:41 AM Re: Left Field 2010

That's very funny.

Frayed Knot Dec 27 2009 07:01 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Mex17"][quote="Edgy DC"][quote="Ashie62"]The Mets are being perceived as a team and situation that agents don't want to send their clients too.

Perceived by whom? My impression is that agents love the Mets, and are desperate to get the Mets (and their largest payroll in the National League last year) involved in bidding for their clients.

That's been the case in the past, but maybe not anymore. This organization is currently woefully dysfunctional, incompetant, and malfecant.

2003 - Glavine + Floyd
2004 - Cameron
2005 - Beltran + Pedro
2006 - Wagner + O. Hernandez
2007 - Alou
2008 - Santana
2009 - F. Rodriguez

So tell me when exactly this parade of avoidance started and the list of those doing the avoiding?
My guess is that it started and was immediately declared a "fact" over the last several weeks by fans and scribes who get upset when the April roster isn't finished by Thanksgiving.

Players have to be concerned that, by coming here, their careers will be put in further jeopardy if they suffer the misfortune of getting hurt. Becasuse they will not be cared after properly if they do

Horseshit!

. . .the past two seasons ('08 with the Church fiasco as well as all of last year when injuries were made worse by way of executive decision) have proven that in spades.

Double horseshit!!

Benjamin Grimm Dec 27 2009 07:32 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC"]"Malfecant"? Anybody?

Mex17 Dec 27 2009 07:50 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Frayed Knot"][quote="Mex17"][quote="Edgy DC"][quote="Ashie62"]The Mets are being perceived as a team and situation that agents don't want to send their clients too.

Perceived by whom? My impression is that agents love the Mets, and are desperate to get the Mets (and their largest payroll in the National League last year) involved in bidding for their clients.

That's been the case in the past, but maybe not anymore. This organization is currently woefully dysfunctional, incompetant, and malfecant.

2003 - Glavine + Floyd
2004 - Cameron
2005 - Beltran + Pedro
2006 - Wagner + O. Hernandez
2007 - Alou
2008 - Santana
2009 - F. Rodriguez

So tell me when exactly this parade of avoidance started and the list of those doing the avoiding?
My guess is that it started and was immediately declared a "fact" over the last several weeks by fans and scribes who get upset when the April roster isn't finished by Thanksgiving.

Players have to be concerned that, by coming here, their careers will be put in further jeopardy if they suffer the misfortune of getting hurt. Becasuse they will not be cared after properly if they do

Horseshit!

. . .the past two seasons ('08 with the Church fiasco as well as all of last year when injuries were made worse by way of executive decision) have proven that in spades.

Double horseshit!!

I saw what I saw, friend.

Frayed Knot Dec 27 2009 10:06 AM Re: Left Field 2010

You saw what you saw and by that have concluded that players all over MLB are of a collective mindset to refuse to come here for fear of their health based on ... ummm, Bay not signing yet?

smg58 Dec 27 2009 10:43 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Like I said a while ago, people seem to have already forgotten that CC Sabathia sat on an enormous offer for more than a month last offseason. A few people questioned his desire to play for the Yankees and whether he was worth the trouble, but it was simply a business decision that ultimately paid off in the form of a bigger deal. There was really no reason to think he was motivated by anything other than the desire for an even bigger contract, and there's no reason to think differently about Bay. Hell, Matt Holliday has been sitting on an offer from St. Louis, after many people reported that he loved playing there.

Edgy DC Dec 27 2009 01:36 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Mex17":386k6m8c]Maybe I spelled it wrong.[/quote:386k6m8c] You were nowhere close. And Frayed Knot is giving you too much credit. You're not claiming it's the players refusing to come here because of these things that sound kind of like words, but their agents steering them away. Agents advising their clients to turn down the most money over multi-year deals. Agents, as a group --- except somehow for the agents fo all those players Frayed Knot cites? Really? You really think that's a sustainable argument?

batmagadanleadoff Dec 27 2009 07:27 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Peter Gammons did a live-radio interview with the Red Sox radio network a few days ago. Here's a highlight of what Gammons had to say about free agent Jason Bay: I think [Bay would] rather be playing in Beirut than Queens.... I think in Jason’s case, it would have been really easy to take 4 x 15 [million dollars] in July, which I thought, actually, at the time was a little bit high as an offer. It was clear that the Red Sox just wanted to get him signed and get him out of the way. While the Mets offer is four [years] for 65 [million], it’s so backloaded that I’ve been told by Mets people that it’s far less than what the Red Sox were offering in present-day value. And he obviously doesn’t want to play there. http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston ... le-holley/

Edgy DC Dec 27 2009 07:37 PM Re: Left Field 2010

I can believe that the backloading of the Mets offer makes the contracts comparable. But the Beirut thing is Gammons talking, and he has a professional interest in Bay coming back to Boston.

Rockin' Doc Dec 27 2009 07:41 PM Re: Left Field 2010

hey, Gammons...

Frayed Knot Dec 27 2009 08:06 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="batmagadanleadoff"]Peter Gammons did a live-radio interview with the Red Sox radio network a few days ago. Here's a highlight of what Gammons had to say about free agent Jason Bay: I think [Bay would] rather be playing in Beirut than Queens.... I think in Jason’s case, it would have been really easy to take 4 x 15 [million dollars] in July, which I thought, actually, at the time was a little bit high as an offer. It was clear that the Red Sox just wanted to get him signed and get him out of the way. While the Mets offer is four [years] for 65 [million], it’s so backloaded that I’ve been told by Mets people that it’s far less than what the Red Sox were offering in present-day value. And he obviously doesn’t want to play there. http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston ... le-holley/

And it's quite possible that Bay doesn't want to come here, maybe based on last year's results, based on him being a west coast guy, based on preferring the Amer Lg, on not liking the looks of CitiField, or based on any one of a number of factors.
But that's quite different from claiming it's been "proven" that agents are steering clients away from the Mets due to an incompetent organization (the one picked for 90+ wins and the WS by several publications just 9 months ago) and for fear that their careers will be in jeopardy once they get here; observations based on nothing other than a talk-radio concocted "trend" (one that has apparently just started by the looks of major FA signings & player-approved trades over the past decade) and apparently involves just one player - a player who hasn't signed anywhere yet no less.

Edgy DC Dec 27 2009 08:20 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Jason Bay --- The One-Man Trend.

metirish Dec 27 2009 08:22 PM Re: Left Field 2010

The guy isn't a Mets player and I'm sick of him already.

Ashie62 Dec 27 2009 09:23 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Edgy DC":2m8xsaed]Jason Bay --- The One-Man Trend.[/quote:2m8xsaed] you forgot Lackey

Benjamin Grimm Dec 28 2009 05:01 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Lackey never, as far as we know, got an offer from the Mets, so it's hard to argue that he snubbed them in any way.

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 05:34 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I didn't forget a thing.

Mex17 Dec 28 2009 06:45 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Frayed Knot"]You saw what you saw and by that have concluded that players all over MLB are of a collective mindset to refuse to come here for fear of their health based on ... ummm, Bay not signing yet?

No. not exactly. What I have concluded is that that, in recent years, decisions that management made in regard to injuries once the injuries occurred played a significant role in how those injury situations progressed. This whole agent thing is just speculation within this thread.

I have no idea what is happening with Bay. Perhaps he is just blindly holding out for a fifth year out of a sense of entitlement. Perhaps he really wants Seattle to step up because his wife is from there (that sounds familiar). Or maybe there is a genuine concern about joining the Mets on account of the way the orginization has performed off the field.

I am not saying that the third possibility is without a doubt true, or that there is a definate sense of that with the players and agents that are out there. What I will say is, if it were the case, I would not be the least bit surprised nor would I be able to blame anyone for feeling that way.

metirish Dec 28 2009 07:33 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Holliday? Bay may be Mets' backup plan By: Rob Bradford Speaking at the ninth annual "21 Days of Clemente" in New York, honoring the late Roberto Clemente, Mets general manager Omar Minaya told NY Sports Day that his team is, indeed, still interested in free agent outfielder Matt Holliday, as well as Jason Bay. "We are pursuing Matt Holliday," Minaya said. "It seems to be easier to make a deal for Jason Bay." It appears the St. Louis Cardinals have made the biggest push to sign Holliday, although according to ESPN.com if that plan falls through the Cards would turn their attention to pitching rather than make a run at Bay. In other Hot Stove news, the Chicago Tribune is reporting that the Yankees may have interest in free agent outfielder Jermaine Dye. Not sure what Omar's quote means right there.

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 07:36 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I don't know either. I guess the best way I can take it is that Holliday has a first choice in the Cardinals (and is perhaps not fielding other offers until he's hit a standstill there), while Bay is currently wide open.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 28 2009 07:53 AM Re: Left Field 2010

They could have dropped a key word when quoting him. (Or maybe Omar himself dropped it.) But the quote would make more sense in the context of the article, and would be a minor bombshell (if that's not an oxymoron) if this is what he actually said: "We are pursuing Matt Holliday," Minaya said. "It seems to be easier {than} to make a deal for Jason Bay."

Frayed Knot Dec 28 2009 08:05 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I read it as: * "We are pursuing Matt Holliday," -- Translation: despite what you may have heard, we're not exclusively Bay-ophiles * "It seems to be easier to make a deal for Jason Bay -- Translation: we pursued Bay earlier and harder because we assumed a deal for him would come easier ... IOW, no Boras

MFS62 Dec 28 2009 08:33 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Joel Sheehan at BP has a great post up about the Mets and what he thinks they should do this off-season. It's a subscription site, so I can only post a few snippets: "With so many suitors finding other answers, both Jason Bay and Matt Holliday are still available, and presumably at a price that gets a little better every day. I've recommended staying away from both, as both are declining stocks, good-but-not-great players likely to be overpaid because of their status as the top guys in a weak year. The Mets, however, are a special case, a big-market club with some money to spend, a core that would allow either player to be the fifth-best on the team, and a short time horizon. For the Mets, Matt Holliday could make sense, as he's a gap-to-gap hitter who should play well in Citi Field, he's good enough defensively to cover ground in those same gaps, and he fits within the payroll parameters. Bay would likely be less expensive and require a shorter commitment, but his defensive issues would give back a lot of the offense he provides. This will be the first time I've recommended this for anyone, but the Mets should sign Matt Holliday for up to $18 million per season on up to a five-year deal. They'll be hurting a little on the back end of that, but the improvement over Murphy or Pagan (who is a strong fourth outfielder, and probably better than Francoeur) in the short term is worth that. The Mets have to fix their offense before they fix their pitching. They should be spending their money on bats, rather than on starters, and given the high-risk pitching that's out there, money spent on Joel Pineiro or Jon Garland or Jarrod Washburn doesn't change things for them, it just adds the type of pitcher they already have but with more recent success. The Mets needed a John Lackey, someone to be a clear second starter between Johan Santana and the rest of the field, and there was exactly one John Lackey available this season. A move for a high-upside player, such as Ben Sheets or Erik Bedard, would make more sense for them, while allowing them to stay in the market for hitters." His take on Molina: "Signing Bengie Molina wasn't going to help things. The Mets, in fact, got a player who provides 90 percent of Molina's value when they signed Henry Blanco to a one-year, $750,000 contract. Blanco has a legitimate cannon behind the plate and he hits left-handed pitching well enough to carry that half of a platoon. Moreover, there's little temptation to bat him high in the lineup or give him a bigger job than that. Molina's inflated RBI counts hide the fact that he's an offense-killer, posting a sub-.300 OBP in two of the previous three seasons. He's also one of the slowest men in the game, and not a particularly good defensive catcher. To sign him and bat him sixth in 125 games would make the Mets actively worse. What they need is a lefty bat to pair with Blanco; I'm open to the idea that Josh Thole can be that player, but Thole has to hit .290 to play and it's an open question whether his Mike LaValliere act will carry forward to the majors. Josh Bard, who can't throw and might hit, could serve as a stopgap while Thole spends two months at Buffalo, but the real key here is to avoid signing Bengie Molina. It would be wasted money." There's much, much more. It's a great read, and I highly recommend subscribing if you don't already. I think his use of the past tense when talking about a Molina signing is kind of interesting, like he considered it to have been a done deal by the time the article would be published. Later

Nymr83 Dec 28 2009 08:39 AM Re: Left Field 2010

I think his use of the past tense when talking about a Molina signing is kind of interesting, like he considered it to have been a done deal by the time the article would be published. I think he was using the past tense to refer to the Blanco signing

MFS62 Dec 28 2009 08:44 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Now that you mention it, I think you're right. Also about: "We are pursuing Matt Holliday," Minaya said. I would like to take this opportunity to announce that I am pursuing Angelina Jolie. Unfortunitely, I think Omar and I will have the same degree of success. Later

Edgy DC Dec 28 2009 08:49 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Well, he said "wasn't going to help things," which implies that the Mets have moved on, though I don't know that we have evidence that supports that. I agree that Blanco gives you most of what you want in Molina. The upside of Molina would then be reduncancy, and that can be had more cheaply. It's the Left Field thread, but Josh Bard? Wy not? He has a Piazza connection.

Centerfield Dec 28 2009 09:07 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="MFS62":13cftfq4]Joel Sheehan at BP has a great post up about the Mets and what he thinks they should do this off-season. It's a subscription site, so I can only post a few snippets: "With so many suitors finding other answers, both Jason Bay and Matt Holliday are still available, and presumably at a price that gets a little better every day. I've recommended staying away from both, as both are declining stocks, good-but-not-great players likely to be overpaid because of their status as the top guys in a weak year. The Mets, however, are a special case, a big-market club with some money to spend, a core that would allow either player to be the fifth-best on the team, and a short time horizon. For the Mets, Matt Holliday could make sense, as he's a gap-to-gap hitter who should play well in Citi Field, he's good enough defensively to cover ground in those same gaps, and he fits within the payroll parameters. Bay would likely be less expensive and require a shorter commitment, but his defensive issues would give back a lot of the offense he provides. This will be the first time I've recommended this for anyone, but the Mets should sign Matt Holliday for up to $18 million per season on up to a five-year deal. They'll be hurting a little on the back end of that, but the improvement over Murphy or Pagan (who is a strong fourth outfielder, and probably better than Francoeur) in the short term is worth that. The Mets have to fix their offense before they fix their pitching. They should be spending their money on bats, rather than on starters, and given the high-risk pitching that's out there, money spent on Joel Pineiro or Jon Garland or Jarrod Washburn doesn't change things for them, it just adds the type of pitcher they already have but with more recent success. The Mets needed a John Lackey, someone to be a clear second starter between Johan Santana and the rest of the field, and there was exactly one John Lackey available this season. A move for a high-upside player, such as Ben Sheets or Erik Bedard, would make more sense for them, while allowing them to stay in the market for hitters." His take on Molina: "Signing Bengie Molina wasn't going to help things. The Mets, in fact, got a player who provides 90 percent of Molina's value when they signed Henry Blanco to a one-year, $750,000 contract. Blanco has a legitimate cannon behind the plate and he hits left-handed pitching well enough to carry that half of a platoon. Moreover, there's little temptation to bat him high in the lineup or give him a bigger job than that. Molina's inflated RBI counts hide the fact that he's an offense-killer, posting a sub-.300 OBP in two of the previous three seasons. He's also one of the slowest men in the game, and not a particularly good defensive catcher. To sign him and bat him sixth in 125 games would make the Mets actively worse. What they need is a lefty bat to pair with Blanco; I'm open to the idea that Josh Thole can be that player, but Thole has to hit .290 to play and it's an open question whether his Mike LaValliere act will carry forward to the majors. Josh Bard, who can't throw and might hit, could serve as a stopgap while Thole spends two months at Buffalo, but the real key here is to avoid signing Bengie Molina. It would be wasted money." There's much, much more. It's a great read, and I highly recommend subscribing if you don't already. I think his use of the past tense when talking about a Molina signing is kind of interesting, like he considered it to have been a done deal by the time the article would be published. Later[/quote:13cftfq4] Yes. Absolutely. Joel Sheehan for GM!

Ashie62 Dec 28 2009 10:07 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Would a Santos/Blanco platoon be so bad while waiting for Thole?

MFS62 Dec 28 2009 10:17 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="Ashie62":1p7v33tk]Would a Santos/Blanco platoon be so bad while waiting for Thole?[/quote:1p7v33tk] Not unless you feel that you have to have a lefty hitting catcher. Later

metirish Dec 28 2009 10:27 AM Re: Left Field 2010

The more time that has passed and the more I have read here on this site and elsewhere about Molina the more I don't want him on the Mets.....

Ashie62 Dec 28 2009 10:38 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="metirish":1l5uwwmn]The more time that has passed and the more I have read here on this site and elsewhere about Molina the more I don't want him on the Mets.....[/quote:1l5uwwmn] As time goes on I don't want Molina, Bay, Holliday or much else out there. It is becoming tiring. I am OK with Jermaine Dye being signed and on to spring training**

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 28 2009 11:39 AM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="MFS62":fk5jhjgf][quote="Ashie62":fk5jhjgf]Would a Santos/Blanco platoon be so bad while waiting for Thole?[/quote:fk5jhjgf] Not unless you feel that you have to have a lefty hitting catcher. Later[/quote:fk5jhjgf] Gregg Zaun would have been a PERFECT, cheap fit here. And overpaying for him would have meant less money than the Royals gave f-ing Jason Kendall.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 28 2009 01:48 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="batmagadanleadoff"]Peter Gammons did a live-radio interview with the Red Sox radio network a few days ago. Here's a highlight of what Gammons had to say about free agent Jason Bay: I think [Bay would] rather be playing in Beirut than Queens.... I think in Jason’s case, it would have been really easy to take 4 x 15 [million dollars] in July, which I thought, actually, at the time was a little bit high as an offer. It was clear that the Red Sox just wanted to get him signed and get him out of the way. While the Mets offer is four [years] for 65 [million], it’s so backloaded that I’ve been told by Mets people that it’s far less than what the Red Sox were offering in present-day value. And he obviously doesn’t want to play there. http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston ... le-holley/

Perhaps they should offer a truckload of these in lieu of a fifth year:

batmagadanleadoff Dec 29 2009 10:25 AM Re: Left Field 2010

While the Mets offer is four [years] for 65 [million], it’s so backloaded that I’ve been told by Mets people that it’s far less than what the Red Sox were offering in present-day value. The Mets like to hold on to their money a little longer than other teams do because Wilpon knows this hedge fund guy that guarantees hefty inflation beating profits on any investments made.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 30 2009 04:46 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Bay or Holliday. Holliday or Bay. So did any other NL East team improve their left field going into 2010 as much as the Mets did?

smg58 Dec 30 2009 05:59 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[url]http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bay-deal-and-the-time-value-of-money Fangraphs has an interesting article on Bay and the value of backloaded contracts. The conclusion is there's no way of doing the math that would make the Mets' offer less than the Sox' alleged offer.

Edgy DC Dec 30 2009 08:06 PM Re: Left Field 2010

Well, the Dow Jones could grow 40% in the next five years.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 30 2009 08:48 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="smg58"][url]http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-bay-deal-and-the-time-value-of-money Fangraphs has an interesting article on Bay and the value of backloaded contracts. The conclusion is there's no way of doing the math that would make the Mets' offer less than the Sox' alleged offer.

Nice piece-- caught it yesterday.

I'm no accountant, but... well... how's about them state taxes?

Edgy DC Dec 31 2009 08:02 AM Re: Left Field 2010

Now that this stupid fabricated "Is Omar Asleep?!" drama is drawing down, I wonder about the other offseason plot. The Cards are in a tight spot with Matt Holliday. They've offered him a bunch of different deals between five and eight years --- longer commitment generally meaning lower annual salary, and they're still getting dicked around by Scott Boras. But here's the thing --- they have two years left with Albert Pujols, and they have to watch every future penny if they have any dreams about him continuing his career with them beyond that, and I don't think they can keep throwing money as this Holliday guy without wondering if it means a future parting of the ways with Pujols, who, if he stays healthy, has a good chance to exceed A-Rod's standard of the highest annual salary. If Holliday doesn't sign with the Cards in a few days, I expect to read a few stories --- if only ones planted by Scott Boras --- about the richer teams (including the Mets) kicking his tires.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 31 2009 05:02 PM Re: Left Field 2010

[quote="batmagadanleadoff":1g1c0bhu]Bay or Holliday. Holliday or Bay. So did any other NL East team improve their left field going into 2010 as much as the Mets did?[/quote:1g1c0bhu] ... and who's the best left fielder in the NL East -- Jason Bay? Raul Ibanez? Chris Coghlan? Josh Willingham? Melky Cabrera?

Ashie62 Jan 01 2010 09:23 AM Re: Left Field 2010

R.J Anderson's piece is irresponsible and incomplete A players contract calls for compensation in any variety of ways..Greenbacks obviously, but beyond that.. It could be an annuity. An annuity can contain stocks, muni bonds, Corporate bonds, mutual funds. The agent or players financial advisor can choose an annuity containing what they wish, with a maturity they desire. Holders of annuities have ALL income tax deferred until maturity or early withdrawal. For the author to suggest a dollar today is less than a dollar a year from now is pure speculation. Finally, money tends to "double" every seven years with most, if not all, investment vehicles..