|
Here's a whole transcript, it's long but a good Q&A. I think Sandy knows what he's doing. I like that he ID'ed the defense and Pagan as crititical areas.
Mets general manager Sandy Alderson confirms 2012 payroll expected to fall between $100 million, $110 million
Published: Thursday, September 29, 2011, 2:49 PM Updated: Thursday, September 29, 2011, 3:42 PM
By Andy McCullough/The Star-Ledger
NEW YORK – It was cleanup day at Citi Field, and the Mets clubhouse was mostly empty. But general manager Sandy Alderson did offer a 30-minute post-mortem on the season just passed.
We’re henpecking out the entire transcript, but here are the highlights:
1. Alderson confirmed that the payroll is expected to reside between $100 million and $110 million. Earlier this season, Alderson indicated that number could be closer to $120 million. Either way, the team does receive a good deal of salary relief due to the expiring contracts of players like Luis Castillo, Oliver Perez and Carlos Beltran.
2. Alderson also indicated that the front office had already formulated a potential breaking point in regards to shortstop Jose Reyes. That number is fluid, of course.
3. Alderson did not offer a ringing endorsement for center fielder Angel Pagan. Due for a raise in arbitration, Pagan is a non-tender candidate after a disappointing 2011 season. The new front office has not been impressed with his play.
4. Alderson offered strong praise for Daniel Murphy, but could not say where Murphy would play in 2012. That depends on Reyes’ return, as well as the composition of the outfield.
5. Two areas that obviously need to be improved? Both the bullpen and the defense, Alderson said.
More coming. But here’s the start:
A couple of things, reflecting on the season. I think that obviously, there were disappointments. And at the same time, I think there were some successes, encouraging signs. In the disappointment category, I think you start with the won-loss record. I think at 77 wins, we fell short of what we thought we could accomplish coming out of spring training. There are a number of reasons for that. But in the final analysis, you live with your won-loss record.
And I would have hoped that we could have done, not only in the overall season, but even in finishing up. I think one of the disappointments for me was that we started poorly and we ended poorly. I think as I’ve said before, first impressions are important and last impressions are important. I think there were a lot of good things between those two bookends. But I think the poor start and the difficult finish may obscure some of that.
Obviously, we had some players that underperformed. And today’s not the day to catalog that. but every team has players on its 25-man roster over a season that just don’t play up quite to where they would have expected. Certainly, we had some of that.
Injuries played a part for us. I know the Mets lore regarding injuries. And now I’ve experienced it personally. But one of those things that we will look at to see if there’s anything systemic that we need to deal with. But there’s no question that impacted our overall season.
Some of our issues, some of our problems were self-inflicted. We made a couple of trades that I think will help us certainly in the long term. But in the short term made it more difficult. We traded Carlos Beltran and also Frankie [Rodriguez]. If you look at the bullpen as one of those areas that were a particular disappointment, I think we were thin there to begin with. Much of our bullpen was populated by six-year free agents, non-tenders and so forth, minor-league contracts.
Under the radar, we lost Taylor Buchholz early on. But really, most critically, Frankie. Because I think it led to a number of different auditions for the closing role, and some uncertainty as to other roles. And there’s no question that blowing saves at a pretty spectacular rate is debilitating on a team. I just saw yesterday that [Detroit’s Jose] Valverde converted 51 in a row. So I think in retrospect, that also had an impact.
On the other hand, I think we had some successes. The thing that we were trying to do through this season was to begin, at least, to change the perception of the Mets as a franchise, as a baseball operation. And I think to some extent, hopefully, we’ve succeeded in doing that.
Largely responsible for that, if it currently exists, is the manager, Terry Collins. I think one of the real positives coming out of this season is we found a manager, somebody that we have confidence in going forward and somebody that we think can lead us to greater success in ensuing years.
I think as a result of the injuries, we actually found some players that could help us long-term. Daniel Murphy came back from an injury, performed well for us. We talk about the trades and losing Beltran and so forth. But to me, the bigger demarcation, if you will, was basically losing Reyes for a period of time and Murphy for the rest of the season on the same day. I think one was first in the league in hitting that day. The other was fifth.
Murphy provided something that most other players didn’t, and that was kind of a spirit, a tenacity. He faced adversity in his playing past, because of injuries. He faced adversity almost on a day-to-day basis, given the number of positions that he played and some of the instances, whether it was making an error or something else. But he persevered. He kept pushing it. And he continued to provide a real element for us.
But he played well. He had come back. I think he’s somebody that we’ll look toward in future years. Lucas Duda, Ruben Tejada, Dillon Gee, Justin Turner. A number of guys who emerged and were very useful parts of the team this year, and will be in the future. So I think in that regard, too, it was an encouraging year for us.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention something about Jose. We were fortunate to experience an outstanding year from Jose. There’s obviously uncertainty about where he’ll be next year. But we will see where that takes us. At the same time, it was great to be able to watch him play unfettered for half a year, and even with some limitation in the second half. I was pleased that he was able to win the batting title. That’s positive for him, and historically positive for the organization.
Those are my opening remarks. Thanks for bearing with me.
You mentioned Murphy a lot. What challenge is it finding a position for him for next year?
Well, where he fits will in part be a function of where everyone else fits. And from whom we have to choose to fit at those positions. But I do think he’ll be a very important part of our team. And whether that’s at one position, all the time, as a starter, or at different positions off the bench, we’ll just have to see based on the other personal that we have.
With Jose, can you fathom a way you could sign him during the exclusive negotiating window after the World Series?
We haven’t had a conversation yet. I expect we will have one in the next day or two. So I don’t really want to speculate on what might happen or not happen before his exclusive negotiating period expires. However, if history is any guide, most players who get to this point don’t see any reason to make a decision within the next 30 days, that close to free agency.
So I wouldn’t want people to expect that something is going to happen. It certainly could. But we’ll just have to wait and see how it develops.
How vexing is the decision with Jose? Any comparable situation in your career?
Look, in my career, I’ve faced a number of free agency decisions. And many, we’ve reached an agreement on a new contract. In some, we haven’t. And I haven’t gone back to actually think about each of those contracts and how they turned out. But it’s not vexing. It’s not troublesome. I know that’s the job at hand. We have to deal with it, and we have to try to do so in the best interest of the Mets. That takes into account a number of different situations.
Is Reyes the only big-ticket free agent you plan to target? Can you rule out players like Pujols, Fielder and C.J. Wilson?
Well, I can’t comment on any of the other specific possibilities. We have, I think, a plan for approaching all of this. But it’s a very fluid situation. It’s a fluid market. And it’s possible that if one thing were to occur, it would preclude us from doing something else. On the other hand, if we’re not able to accomplish something, it might allow us to do something else.
I think that without saying that we’re going to be in the market or out of the market, Jose is obviously the biggest decision that we have to make. Once that’s resolved, or as its moving toward resolution, we have to be flexible, and see what our other possibilities are.
So you could imagine spending big on someone else.
I can imagine it.
You’re not ruling it out.
Yeah, I’m not ruling it out. But at the same time, I think that we will try to be as creative as we possibly can, and look at what’s available across the board. We could get into a free agency negotiation beyond Jose if, for example, the market is different than we anticipate. Or we trade somebody. There are a variety of different things that could happen.
When you evaluate Jose, how do you separate his baseball profile from what he means to the fans?
Well, I don’t think you separate them. But I think you’re right to say that they are both considerations. So I think a player like Jose, or any core player who has an identity with your fanbase, it has to be viewed on almost two levels. And both of those things have to be taken into account.
With Jose, does his second half give you pause?
Well, I think that in any situation like this, you have to consider the whole body of work. And that’s not limited even to the previous season. You really have to look. What someone has done over a course of time is somewhat, at least, predictive of what might happen in the future. That doesn’t mean that it will happen. But you certainly have to take it into account. Otherwise, it’s irrelevant.
Just as I would say that his extraordinary performance in the first half of the season is relevant. So is what’s happened in the second half of the season, and so is his whole body of work before this year.
You talked last season about gaining flexibility. If you commit to Jose, you’ll have big money given to Wright, Reyes, Bay and Santana for the next two years, at least. Does that end your flexibility?
You’re right to point it out. I think that if you look at where we are currently, with or without Jose we have a very small number of players and a large amount of money tied up in those players. Adding Jose would contribute to that same situation, and create less flexibility for us than we would like to have. That’s something we have to take into account. But there are pluses and minuses to every situation. We’ll just have to weigh those.
You told writers in Buffalo that the payroll for next year would be between $100 million to $110 million. Was that hypothetical or reality?
I think we’re going to be somewhere in that range. I don’t see us going below $100 million. But as is pretty well-documented, I don’t see us being where we are today, either.
So $100 million to $110 million?
Well, somewhere in that range. I wouldn’t say that $110 million is a cap.
Despite the court ruling the other day, does the Madoff situation still hover over you?
As long as its not resolved completely for the Wilpons, I think it has a lingering effect on them. Does that translate directly to what our payroll will be, or what have you? I don’t think so. On the other hand, I think things looks brighter today than I think it did a week or so ago. That’s a plus, first and foremost, for the Wilpons. And I think the rest of the organization as well.
You made clear your hands were tied this year with spending. The attendance was not optimal this year, and there still are significant drags on the payroll. Do you still see flexibility for expenditures?
I think when I got here last year, we were already at about $130 million. So what I think we spent additionally was another $10 million or so, which is another seven or eight percent of the total. This year, if going into the offseason – and put Jose aside for just a second – I think we would be down to, pulling a number out, because I don’t have it, $75 million. Versus $130 million.
And that may be a little bit low. It’s in that range, that order of magnitude. Now even if you put Jose back in that picture, yes, I think you still have some latitude. In part because having an extra month or so to actually sort through what we have, and where we are, and prioritizing some of our decisions and needs gives us a big lift.
If you look at our roster today versus our roster last year at this time, we’re a little better off in certain areas than I think we were than last year, as far as anticipating what some of the younger guys might be able to do for us. From my standpoint personally, just having a year’s worth of operating experience and knowledge of the players that we have in this organization, together with a number of other people who came with me about the same time, gives us not more flexibility, but a lot more confidence in using that flexibility to our best advantage.
Do I think we have more financial flexibility this year than last year? Yeah, I think we do.
You’ve mentioned that you don’t think next year’s closer is in the organization. Would you say next year’s center fielder is in the organization?
Well, it may turn out that next year, the closer has come from the organization. But I think we need to provide ourselves with the kinds of options that don’t currently exist. It’s conceivable that we don’t have in our organization the guy who will be catching, playing first base . . .
To me, again, we have a better understanding of where we are as an organization. What our strengths are. What our weaknesses are. And at some point, maybe you deal from a position of strength in order to fill a weakness.
I wouldn’t say that we’ve definitely got to go do this at this position or we definitely don’t have somebody for that position. I think, again, it’s a total picture that we have to be able to get our hands on. And we won’t know what’s out there, what the market is, for another month or so. Because it’s not just the free-agent market. It’s the trade market, and that doesn’t really start to develop until maybe the first of November, as well. Maybe the general managers’ meetings. There will be conversations before that. But it’s like anything else. Baseball has its own tempo.
But there are positions you can say are filled for next year – like third base. So is center one of those positions?
I think we have to look at our whole outfield situation and see where we are. And whether that means different personnel or personnel playing different positions or what have you. There are offensive considerations. There are defensive considerations. One of the things that I didn’t mention in my opening remarks is our defense, which needs to be improved dramatically, as well.
That could come from healthier players. It could come from acquisitions. Now, having said all of that, center field is a critical position for us defensively in this ballpark, with or without changes in the fences. Center field will remain a significant position for us defensively, as our most positions up the middle. But certainly in this ballpark, center field is a critical positions.
Historically, big-time free agents don’t sign until late December. Can you afford to keep your plans on hold until that time, while you wait for a decision on Reyes?
I think that a lot of what we might consider is dependent on what happens with Jose. At the same time, one of the things we will have to do is constantly reassess where we are, and what the likelihood is that we’ll be able to sign him and what the alternatives are and whether they will disappear or reappear. It’s a dynamic environment, which we’ll have to stay on top of.
But it doesn’t necessarily have to be sequential: “Until this happens, we can’t . . .” I think you’re right to point out that a lot is dependent on what Jose does. But at the same time, we have to constantly be aware of what those other options are.
So you may have to pursue options other than Jose, while still pursuing Jose?
That’s conceivable. But, again, you want to keep your options open. So until it was clear to us that it wasn’t going to happen, we’ll keep our powder dry.
Have you already established internally how many years and dollars to offer Reyes? Or is that in flux?
Well, it would be foolish for us not to have thought through this and where we think things might end up. And what our choking point is versus what somebody else’s choking point might be. At this point, that’s all speculation. But we do have to be grounded in a rational end point, that at least gives us a frame of reference, so that when things become a little more emotional, we recognize that there’s that element to it.
So, yeah, we have sort of an idea, at this point. But that doesn’t mean it won’t change.
If you are already preparing for what other teams might offer, does that tell your gut that someone might over-pay?
Not necessarily. We’ll have to wait and see. I mean, last night might have had an impact. Who knows how people respond?
Sometimes, this is like going to a grocery store. You’ve got a list until you get to the check-out stand. And then you start reading People magazine, and all this other crap ends up in the basket.
It seems like someone gets over-paid every year. Can you foresee the industry drawing the line with Reyes?
I’m trying not to foresee anything at this point. But there are other quality players that may be in the free agency market as well.
Since you have a breaking point, do you feel like early in the process you’ll know whether it’s realistic to bring him back?
I think it’s possible that we would know early in the process. But I think it’s possible that this thing would go on for a long time. It’s hard to know where things will end up over a period of time. But we’re talking about several weeks here. As I said, clubs intentions ebb and flow, and so will ours.
You’ve often mentioned that fan’s connection with Reyes. Is this someone who has impressed you, who you want to be part of the solution going forward?
Oh, I’ve enjoyed watching Jose play. I think he was a big part of whatever success we had. On the other hand, I think that our success or failure was as a team. There were a lot of things that we did offensively that were a positive. We had the second highest on-base percentage in the National League. We had one of the lowest slugging percentages.
If you ask me how we get better offensively, we maintain our on-base percentage and get better on the other side with more power. At the same time, a player like Jose is an entirely independent dynamic. He certainly doesn’t hurt you with on-base percentage. And he provides the perfect complement to the power component you hope you have and we can have here with some of the players we expect to get back.
Is there a minimum OBP you need from a leadoff hitter?
No. An actual number? Like .500.
Do you anticipate ask changes to the training staff?
We’re not prepared at this point to say – and this goes to the coaches as well, that question was going to probably come up – I think we want to make a decision on all of those staff positions as quickly as possible. But I’d rather not comment at this point. We may have some changes. We may not.
Anything more concrete on the stadium alterations?
I don’t have anything more concrete at the moment. But things are still moving forward. And we should have a final decision sooner rather than later.
Do you expect that before free agency starts?
I still expect it’ll be some time in October. Maybe in the first half of October.
Is it realistic to think you can contend next year without Reyes? And if not, how difficult is it to sell rebuilding to this fan base?
Let’s say without any one player, rather than Jose. But I think the answer is yes. Because I think a lot of it depends on our pitching. Our pitching this year, on the positive side, most of our starters were healthy all year, with the exception of Niese at the end, and what have you. But we didn’t have the quality overall that we needed. And toward the end of the season, we had some real breakdowns, even in the starting rotation.
Of course the bullpen was a big disappointment, overall and certainly the last two months of the season. So I think a lot of our success or failure next year is going to be a function of pitching, regardless of who’s playing for us. Now that doesn’t mean we’re going to go spending all of our money on pitching and not try to sign Jose, or what have you. But I think our fate lies more on the pitching side than anything else.
Do you figure you have to spend more on the bullpen for 2012 than you did in 2011?
Might have to, if possible.
If you spent seven or eight percent of this year’s payroll, and next year it’ll be closer to 40 percent, at what point in time do you take responsibility for the organization’s success or failure?
I think it shifted a long time ago.
You mentioned both the need to improve the defense and the slugging. Is one need more important to you?
Obviously, there needs to be a balance. The nice thing about reconfiguring the stadium, if you think about it conceptually, you can actually improve your power and your defense at the same time. And from out standpoint, maybe that’s relative, because you have an opponent. But if it’s a little easier to hit the ball out of this ballpark, even though the number of doubles would be reduced, you also have less ground to cover.
So when there’s less ground to cover, the true differential between the great outfielder and the adequate outfielder becomes more minimal. It’s minimized somewhat. Not to malign Manny Ramirez, but he seemed to do a good job in Fenway.
Will Reyes be a Type-A free agent?
He won the batting title yesterday. I think he’s a Type-A.
And Capuano?
I think our working assumption with Chris is he would not be a Type-A or a Type-B. That could change. |
|
