Master Index of Archived Threads


Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Benjamin Grimm May 14 2012 07:04 PM

The Wall Street Journal wrote: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal By BRIAN COSTA MIAMI -- The Mets waved goodbye to one franchise player last winter. They are not about to lose another, at least not without making an aggressive push to re-sign him. The team is quietly preparing to offer third baseman David Wright a long-term contract extension at some point later this year -- perhaps as soon as this summer -- according to a baseball official briefed on the Mets' thinking. The Mets hold a $16 million option to retain Wright for 2013, so there is no urgency for them to begin discussing an extension with his representatives. But they are likely to do so before next winter, the official said, because if they cannot reach an agreement, the Mets would have to consider trading him in the offseason. General manager Sandy Alderson is still assessing Wright's long-term value, and no decision has been made on either the terms or the timing of any offer. But it has become increasingly likely that Wright, 29, will remain a Met for years to come. Alderson declined to comment on any potential contract negotiations Sunday. But he all but ruled out trading Wright this summer. "I certainly do not foresee, under any circumstances, David being a topic of discussion at the trade deadline," Alderson said. After going 1 for 3 in Sunday's 8-4 loss to the Marlins, Wright leads the National League in both batting average (.400) and on-base percentage (.489). Just as Jose Reyes did a year ago, Wright has repeatedly expressed a desire to remain with the Mets long-term. But several factors make that more likely to happen than it was with Reyes, who signed a $106 million deal with Miami. The Mets always believed Reyes would sign with whichever team offered him the most money. They are optimistic that Wright's affinity for New York will play a greater role in negotiations with him. Also, whereas Reyes was on the cusp of free agency a year ago, the option on Wright's contract effectively means he won't become a free agent until after next season. According to the official briefed on their thinking, the Mets are hopeful that by committing to Wright potentially up to a year and a half before he would reach free agency, they'll be able to secure a more favorable deal. Still, to keep Wright in New York, it might take an offer similar to the six-year, $100 million extension the Washington Nationals recently gave third baseman Ryan Zimmerman. Wright's agent did not return a call for comment. But the Mets are more motivated to keep Wright than they were with Reyes, if only because with Reyes, they knew they still had an iconic player in Wright. Now, Wright stands alone as the face of the franchise.

Ceetar May 14 2012 07:45 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

believe it when I see it.

Edgy MD May 14 2012 09:16 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

What's to disbelieve? You don't think they're going to make an offer? Tim McCarver said there was no way this could happen.

Ceetar May 14 2012 09:36 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Edgy DC wrote: What's to disbelieve? You don't think they're going to make an offer? Tim McCarver said there was no way this could happen. it's all machinations until his name is on the piece of paper. Until then, i'm just gonna watch the games.

Ashie62 May 14 2012 10:02 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: What's to disbelieve? You don't think they're going to make an offer? Tim McCarver said there was no way this could happen. it's all machinations until his name is on the piece of paper. Until then, i'm just gonna watch the games. You still want Reyes back.

Ceetar May 14 2012 10:06 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ashie62 wrote: Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: What's to disbelieve? You don't think they're going to make an offer? Tim McCarver said there was no way this could happen. it's all machinations until his name is on the piece of paper. Until then, i'm just gonna watch the games. You still want Reyes back. no, i'm just THRILLED with Ronny Cedeno.

Edgy MD May 14 2012 11:19 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: What's to disbelieve? You don't think they're going to make an offer? Tim McCarver said there was no way this could happen. it's all machinations until his name is on the piece of paper. Until then, i'm just gonna watch the games. So I'm still unsure what you're disbelieving.

Benjamin Grimm May 15 2012 05:08 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

He's just being a pessimist, as always.

metirish May 15 2012 07:10 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He's just being a pessimist, as always. lol lock him up now dammit

Ceetar May 15 2012 07:44 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He's just being a pessimist, as always. basically. Luckily Wright's not anywhere near as close to free agency as Reyes was, so there is no counter-offer/other option. Yet.

G-Fafif May 17 2012 06:20 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Attendance this week has been less than middling, each game announced in the low 20,000s (looking like considerably less on TV). Unhelpful weather Monday and Tuesday -- though that doesn't speak to advance sales -- but beautiful night last night, the team playing exciting ball of late for the most part, Johan pitching and David scorching...yet 22,000 despite value-date pricing. (Yes, local hockey playoffs are in progress and school isn't out, but the Mets have attracted large crowds on similar May nights before; and such circumstances don't bother Red Sox and Phillie fans.) I bring this up because though it's early and perceptions take time to catch up to reality for the gate to feel a positive impact, it's not like Mets fans are busting down doors to see their homegrown hero in all his glory. It was more or less the same deal last year when Jose was having the season of his (and, in a way, the franchise's) life and for all the coverage of the guy holding the Don't Trade Jose sign, there didn't seem to be an attendance groundswell on Reyes's behalf. There's more to a star player's popular appeal than how 'x' number of dates draw (never mind impact on the team's long-term competitive fortunes), but when a potentially monster contract is being weighed, I can't imagine it won't enter somebody's mind across the table from David's representatives that, sure, your boy had a great season, but his drawing power is negligible. Or in Branch Rickey terms, we finished 12th in league attendance with you, we can finish 12th without you.

Edgy MD May 17 2012 06:31 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ceetar wrote: Luckily Wright's not anywhere near as close to free agency as Reyes was, so there is no counter-offer/other option. Yet. It's not really luck.

Benjamin Grimm May 30 2012 07:41 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

N.Y. Daily News wrote: Sandy Alderson wanted to set the record straight on Tuesday night. Responding to an Internet report quoting the GM as confirming the Mets will offer David Wright a contract extension, Alderson, after Tuesday’s 6-3 victory over the Phillies, delivered this message: “I think what I’ve said in that regard is that we’ll talk to (Wright’s) agent sometime this season,” Alderson said. “I don’t want to infer that we will make an offer, that we won’t make an offer. We expect to talk to his agent this season certainly. But I don’t want to answer that question for 20 or 30 other people. We expect to talk to the agent this year. I can’t exactly foresee what will take place, but that’s as far as I’ve gone at this point.” Wright, who went 1-for-4 with an RBI, can become a free agent after the season (there is a $16 million club option for 2013). Alderson clarified that discussions with Wright’s agent won’t necessarily facilitate an offer. “We can talk about a lot of things that would come up short of an offer,” Alderson said. “And I’m not trying to suggest that we’re going to make one or not make one or what-have-you. I’ve said we’d like to have David here long term. I stand by that statement. But I just want to make sure the record is clear.”

metirish May 30 2012 07:47 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I need a code breaker to decipher this [code:3b7g93ai]“We can talk about a lot of things that would come up short of an offer,” Alderson said. “And I’m not trying to suggest that we’re going to make one or not make one or what-have-you. I’ve said we’d like to have David here long term. I stand by that statement. But I just want to make sure the record is clear.”[/code:3b7g93ai] is it any clearer now, the record I mean?

Ceetar May 30 2012 07:50 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

it's really a message to reporters "This is what I have to say on the matter. bugger off and stop calling me about it."

Gwreck May 30 2012 08:07 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

G-Fafif wrote: I can't imagine it won't enter somebody's mind across the table from David's representatives that, sure, your boy had a great season, but his drawing power is negligible. I don't buy this argument, and I doubt David's agents will either. The downward trend of attendance is due to a confluence of factors, including: 1. Poor overall team performance for three consecutive seasons (following two seasons of "collapses"); 2. (Over)pricing problems; 3. Fan apathy/anger at Wilpons. Plus, it's pretty clear that David being on the team gives Mets a better chance to win games. Nothing will fix the attendance problem better than consistent winning (no, a good two months to start this year does not qualify).

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 30 2012 08:15 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I'm one of the biggest Mets fans any of you guys know and I didn't feel like they deserved my ticket-buying support till just last week. And yes, its because the Wilpons are fuckups whose contempt for the franchise and fans has been exposed. Let's see how long they can still pay bills when they let Wright walk. Try us, you fucks.

Edgy MD May 30 2012 08:28 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Wright wron't wralk.

Gwreck May 30 2012 08:32 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm one of the biggest Mets fans any of you guys know and I didn't feel like they deserved my ticket-buying support till just last week. Why last week? I went from a >40 game/year attendee to basically nothing this year. I am going Friday, but that's for Carlos. Making a long-term commitment to Wright might make me reconsider for 2013.

MFS62 May 30 2012 08:33 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm one of the biggest Mets fans any of you guys know and I didn't feel like they deserved my ticket-buying support till just last week. And yes, its because the Wilpons are fuckups whose contempt for the franchise and fans has been exposed. Let's see how long they can still pay bills when they let Wright walk. Try us, you fucks. Starting the negotiations is about as obvious as remembering to pay the electric bill for your heart/ lung machine. Later

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 30 2012 08:36 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 30 2012 11:09 AM

Gwreck wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm one of the biggest Mets fans any of you guys know and I didn't feel like they deserved my ticket-buying support till just last week. Why last week? I went from a >40 game/year attendee to basically nothing this year. I am going Friday, but that's for Carlos. Making a long-term commitment to Wright might make me reconsider for 2013. I like that they were hanging in there, that's all, plus the weather is warmer. It's been [crossout]10[/crossout] 15 years since I waited so long to break a cherry; usually I'm bundled up at the first April night game. But I was never a season-ticket buyer you like crazy people.

Vic Sage May 30 2012 09:05 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I'm taking Vic Jr tonight, but only because its part of a school outing. I haven't bought any other Tix this year, nor last year, and its for a few reasons: - I don't like CitiField. Yes, its pretty and the food is better, but the view from the cheaper seats suck worse than Shea and the good seats are too expensive (not to mention overpriced parking/merch/food). - I don't like the Wilpons and their management; their shady dealings cast a shadow over the franchise and their Dodgerphilia taints their perception of team history; - I don't like the trend of the team's performance since Beltran watched strike 3. - I have better things to do with my money, - And, as i've gotten older, the live experience of dealing with remote parking, traffic, crowds, long lines, price gauging, and drunken assholes has grown considerably less charming, and so I'm content to watch them on my big screen TV. the only reason i buy tix at all anymore is that my kids like to go once in a while, so i take them when the opportunity arises. That being said, they'd be devastated if Wright left (my daughter wears "5" on her HS team jersey), and i wouldn't be surprised if, after losing Reyes, that wasn't the last straw for them.

seawolf17 May 30 2012 10:56 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I saw a story (Jayson Stark?) recently that said basically that there was no reason in the world for Wright to sign, so the Mets can try all they want, but he ain't signing. Since then, I've put the Wright contract situation out of my mind. But dammit, Sandy, you gotta get this fuckin' guy signed. Ten years, $300 million, 25% of the team, and you rename it Wright Field. I don't care. Just fucking sign the guy.

Edgy MD May 30 2012 11:24 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

seawolf17 wrote: I saw a story (Jayson Stark?) recently that said basically that there was no reason in the world for Wright to sign, so the Mets can try all they want, but he ain't signing. That's kind of silly, don't you think?

metirish May 30 2012 11:31 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Edgy DC wrote: seawolf17 wrote: I saw a story (Jayson Stark?) recently that said basically that there was no reason in the world for Wright to sign, so the Mets can try all they want, but he ain't signing. That's kind of silly, don't you think? sounds a bit stark to me.

Vic Sage May 30 2012 11:34 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I might understand Stark if Wright was playing out his option, but there are all kinds of reasons for him to sign now rather than later. If he gets no extension, he's locked in here for 1 more year at $16m, so he can't play out his current deal for a while, during which he is getting paid less than his current market value for this and next year; and in the meantime: - he could revert to CitiField Dave; - he could suffer significant injury; - he could get traded or otherwise purged in more Wilponian cost-cutting; - he could get caught with a dead school girl in his trunk; - or "other" Frankly, the BEST time to lock in on a long-term deal is when your hitting .375 I would think that Sandy's best strategy is to wait till the off-season, pick up the option, and THEN start negotiating a "blend and extend" deal in the 6yr/$110m range (assuming Wright finishes the season as strongly as he's begun it). There's no advantage to the Mets for him to "buy high" on David.

seawolf17 May 30 2012 11:37 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ten years, $350 million. DO IT, SANDY.

Ceetar May 30 2012 11:51 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

As if Jayson Stark has any credibility.

Ashie62 May 30 2012 04:02 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Wouldn't it make more sense for David to do this while healthy? Then again, no predicting what Wilpon wants to do, probably wait too long and blow it.

Edgy MD May 30 2012 05:52 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

...which is a prediction.

Nymr83 May 30 2012 06:55 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: The downward trend of attendance is due to a confluence of factors, including: 1. Poor overall team performance for three consecutive seasons (following two seasons of "collapses"); 2. (Over)pricing problems; 3. Fan apathy/anger at Wilpons. 4. The novelty of Citi Field has worn off and despite the food it just doesn't have the FEELINGS of Shea, so people don't go.

Edgy MD May 30 2012 07:04 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

5. The narrative around this team, right or wrong, has been so negative, that even when positive things happen, many potential customers respond cautiously.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 30 2012 09:06 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

The downward trend of attendance is due to a confluence of factors, including: 1. Poor overall team performance for three consecutive seasons (following two seasons of "collapses"); 2. (Over)pricing problems; 3. Fan apathy/anger at Wilpons. 4. The novelty of Citi Field has worn off and despite the food it just doesn't have the FEELINGS of Shea, so people don't go. With all due respect (to you and everyone else here with the "it isn't Shea" business), until 2008, people didn't come to Shea for Shea.

Vic Sage May 30 2012 09:17 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

just to clarify: i hated Shea. But when given a clean slate to create a whole new park, they did more wrong than right, as far as I'm concerned. So Citi doesn't excite me, even in comparison to the crap palace it replaced.

Gwreck May 30 2012 09:24 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Vic Sage wrote: - he could get traded or otherwise purged in more Wilponian cost-cutting; Note that a trade this season voids the 2013 option.

MFS62 May 30 2012 09:36 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ashie62 wrote: Then again, no predicting what Wilpon wants to do, probably wait too long and blow it. (Channeling fMan) If he does that, then he can just blow me. Somebody has to smack Jeffie up side of the head. http://espn.go.com/espnw/mlb/7989832/je ... t-due-time Later

Benjamin Grimm May 31 2012 04:00 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: With all due respect (to you and everyone else here with the "it isn't Shea" business), until 2008, people didn't come to Shea for Shea. I did. (At least, partially.)

Nymr83 May 31 2012 07:34 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Benjamin Grimm wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: With all due respect (to you and everyone else here with the "it isn't Shea" business), until 2008, people didn't come to Shea for Shea. I did. (At least, partially.) I feel if they were still at Shea I would have been to a game already this year, which I haven't been. Maybe its just a shift in my priorities, going out to the game isn't as important as it used to be, but I think that shift happened right when the Mets moved, I can't really say for sure if that's a coincidence or not.

Benjamin Grimm May 31 2012 07:44 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I've probably posted this analogy before, but I'll do it again anyway. When my parents still lived in the house that I grew up in, when I'd visit them I felt like I was going home. Now they live in a different house. When I visit them, I'm going to a familiar, comfortable, and friendly place, but it's not home. I don't live in New York anymore, and I'll never go to as many games at Citi Field as I went to at Shea. Citi Field, at best, will be like my parents' current house. In the later years, a big part of the draw for me in going to Shea was that feeling of connection to my past. I can understand that those of you who haven't left New York probably don't feel that way, but for me, yes, Shea became part of the draw. A fairly big part.

seawolf17 May 31 2012 07:47 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Yes and yes to both nymr's and Grimm's points.

Edgy MD May 31 2012 08:10 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Sure, but we need to come around to the idea that our feelings of familiarity were never going to float this franchise for very long. They need to make new connections with a new audience, and they saw a new park as the way to do it. I disagreed with that. I was in the minority.

Ceetar May 31 2012 08:20 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I've probably posted this analogy before, but I'll do it again anyway. When my parents still lived in the house that I grew up in, when I'd visit them I felt like I was going home. Now they live in a different house. When I visit them, I'm going to a familiar, comfortable, and friendly place, but it's not home. I don't live in New York anymore, and I'll never go to as many games at Citi Field as I went to at Shea. Citi Field, at best, will be like my parents' current house. In the later years, a big part of the draw for me in going to Shea was that feeling of connection to my past. I can understand that those of you who haven't left New York probably don't feel that way, but for me, yes, Shea became part of the draw. A fairly big part. I think i've posted my analogy too, but anyway.. My parents still live in the house I grew up in. I had fond memories of living there. But I'm so so glad to be in the new place, and couldn't wait to get out. And this was nothing against the people living there, because it was always pleasant.

Gwreck May 31 2012 08:37 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Objectively, the reasons for replacing Shea all made sense, whether it was seat comfort, aesthetics or financial potential. Most people probably would have embraced the new stadium had the Mets not screwed up so many things with the transition in one way or another. If it wasn't the lack of Mets' history in the park, or the way ticket plans were handled, or the offensive name, it was the lack of affordable seating, or the obstructed view seats. Add in the teams' extremely poor performance on the field, and they reaped what they sowed. I am curious what the new place will be like when (if) the Mets start winning consistently.

TransMonk May 31 2012 08:38 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: I am curious what the new place will be like when (if) the Mets start winning consistently. Yup.

Ceetar May 31 2012 08:39 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: I am curious what the new place will be like when (if) the Mets start winning consistently. packed, loud, busy with long lines and more complaints about things like lines, bathrooms and getting around.

The Second Spitter May 31 2012 08:40 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Nymr83 wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: With all due respect (to you and everyone else here with the "it isn't Shea" business), until 2008, people didn't come to Shea for Shea. I did. (At least, partially.) I feel if they were still at Shea I would have been to a game already this year, which I haven't been. Maybe its just a shift in my priorities, going out to the game isn't as important as it used to be, but I think that shift happened right when the Mets moved, I can't really say for sure if that's a coincidence or not. Shea had ghosts that kept you entertained when the team on the field wasn't doing so well.

batmagadanleadoff May 31 2012 03:31 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I don't like CitiField. Yes, its pretty and the food is better, but the view from the cheaper seats suck worse than Shea and the good seats are too expensive (not to mention overpriced parking/merch/food). - I don't like the Wilpons and their management; their shady dealings cast a shadow over the franchise and their Dodgerphilia taints their perception of team history; just to clarify: i hated Shea. But when given a clean slate to create a whole new park, they did more wrong than right, as far as I'm concerned. So Citi doesn't excite me, even in comparison to the crap palace it replaced. "But our dividerless urinals are a modern upgrade over the standard piss trough." "And on the field, the bases are precisely 90 feet apart from each other. That was especially my idea."

MFS62 May 31 2012 09:21 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: "But our dividerless urinals are a modern upgrade over the standard piss trough." "And on the field, the bases are precisely 90 feet apart from each other. That was especially my idea." They could make a lot of fans happy by putting Jeff's picture at the bottom of those dividerless urinals. They could make a lot more fans happy by putting Jeff's head at the bottom of one of those dividerless urinals. Later

Ashie62 May 31 2012 09:29 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Home is where the heart is >>>>> Shea...

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 06:43 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

They could make a lot of fans happy by putting Jeff's picture at the bottom of those dividerless urinals. They could make a lot more fans happy by putting Jeff's head at the bottom of one of those dividerless urinals. Catering to the hate ain't going to work.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 01 2012 06:51 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: Objectively, the reasons for replacing Shea all made sense, whether it was seat comfort, aesthetics or financial potential. Most people probably would have embraced the new stadium had the Mets not screwed up so many things with the transition in one way or another. If it wasn't the lack of Mets' history in the park, or the way ticket plans were handled, or the offensive name, it was the lack of affordable seating, or the obstructed view seats. Add in the teams' extremely poor performance on the field, and they reaped what they sowed. I am curious what the new place will be like when (if) the Mets start winning consistently. All this. It's really astonishing how stupidly they handled the whole thing, not only alienating the fans in almost every way, but how they dared to defy the recession right in the thick of it. As always, they had no Plan B.

Ceetar Jun 01 2012 06:56 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

did anyone have a plan B for the recession? would a plan B even have worked considering they also got 'hit' with Madoff and a crazy amount of injuries at the same time. Didn't have a plan D.

Frayed Knot Jun 01 2012 07:12 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Well the building and stuff was all on-going as the recession hit so there was nothing anyone was going to do about that. The problem was that all these teams w/new buildings -- including, at the same time, the Yanx, and, later on, the Giants & Jets with their PSL plans -- had worked some sort of super-pricing plan for the prime seats into their budgets and were (and, you could claim, still are) super-slow in backing off those plans as the recession first hit and then lingered.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 07:20 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

As for "extremely poor" performance, isn't it more fair to call the showing "disappointing," "uninspiring" or maybe "lackluster"? The team has eight straight years of over seventy wins. If they make it a ninth this year (and it certainly looks like they will), that'll tie them for the longest such streak in team history. In itself, that's no big deal. If folks don't want to support such a team, that's great. But it helps to keep perspective.

Vic Sage Jun 01 2012 07:56 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

70 wins is a pretty low threshold for "lackluster". I'd say 80 wins is "lackluster" or "disappointing"; I'd refer to 70 wins as "playing like shit".

Benjamin Grimm Jun 01 2012 07:58 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I put my threshold at 73 wins. Losing fewer than 90 games makes the season at least a little bit less than horrible.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 08:13 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Yeah, that's all fine. As I said, you're perfectly entitled to reject them for their play. But as I said, it's on the verge of tying the longest streak in their history. If that's "extremely poor" then the definition of extreme has changed. Winning percentage wise, I'd imagine the Wilpon-Katz-Wilpon team has been more successful than any managing ownership group in the team's history. It's not saying much, and that's fine, but this endless cycle of fan revolts popping up on site after site and thread after thread. If that's what folks want, great. Baseball rips your heart out. There's no denying it. But perspective is warped enough all over the internet without stretching the facts to fuel our outrage. Somebody's gonna get hurt.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 08:22 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Vic Sage wrote: 70 wins is a pretty low threshold for "lackluster". I'd say 80 wins is "lackluster" or "disappointing"; I'd refer to 70 wins as "playing like shit". It's not as if they've won 70 games every year, either. But rather 71, 83, 97, 88, 89, 70, 79, 77, and (if their pace holds) 89.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 01 2012 08:40 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ceetar wrote: did anyone have a plan B for the recession? Yes. Lots of businesses found a way to thrive in the recession, especially they were prepared to offer value. The Mets couldn't be bothered to offer their fans anything in the way of value, the business model simply didn't account for it -- and that goes for everything from the lazy way they ran the team to the ticket prices to the stunning lack of awareness for what their own fans wished to see in the new park. I'd argue if they'd been more sensitive to fans' wallets and their sensibilities from the get-go they might not be giving away tickets they way they did last year. would a plan B even have worked considering they also got 'hit' with Madoff and a crazy amount of injuries at the same time. Didn't have a plan D. The recession was bad timing but let's not excuse the Mets for being so dumb that their only financial strategy was investing with a crook.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 08:42 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

This is about the most contrived piece of dreck I ever heard. We should love the Wilpons because the Mets win more than 69 games a season? What's next? Rey Ordonez for Cooperstown because he hit more than five doubles every season?

Vic Sage Jun 01 2012 08:45 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Death to modifiers! Yes, i agree, "extremely poor" is inaccurate; i think "poor" covers it well enough. In the 11 full seasons since our WS loss to the MFYs in 2000, we've had 8 seasons as total non-factors (finishing from 3rd to 5th), 2 frustrating near-misses and 1 post-season appearance. This year? We'll see. And what this record signifies to me is over a decade of suckitude (albeit not "extreme suckitude"), with 1 post-season peekaboo that ended in heartbreaking fashion. If you want to salute this streak of 70+ win seasons as if its some sort of accomplishment, then knock yourself out.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 08:46 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is about the most contrived piece of dreck I ever heard. We should love the Wilpons because the Mets win more than 69 games a season? Bull. (1) That's cuh-learly not what I said. (2) It's doubly ironic that you respond to a plea for perspective by bloody doubling down on the distortions. Lighten up for once. Vic Sage wrote: If you want to salute this streak of 70+ win seasons as if its some sort of accomplishment, then knock yourself out. And you know well enough that I didn't "salute" anything. Hey, let's play a game. You say something, and I'll pretend you said something else. And you pretend I said something else. And we all get to fight and act all goddamn right about everything! Let's call it "The Internet."

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 08:49 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Vic Sage wrote: Death to modifiers! Yes, i agree, "extremely poor" is inaccurate; i think "poor" covers it well enough. In the 11 full seasons since our WS loss to the MFYs in 2000, we've had 8 seasons as total non-factors (finishing from 3rd to 5th), 2 frustrating near-misses and 1 post-season appearance. This year? We'll see. And what this record signifies to me is over a decade of suckitude (albeit not "extreme suckitude"), with 1 post-season peekaboo that ended in heartbreaking fashion. If you want to salute this streak of 70+ win seasons as if its some sort of accomplishment, then knock yourself out. You really wanna knock yourself out? Since 1988, the Pittsburgh Pirates won the NL East twice as many times as the NY Mets. And Pitt hasn't been in the East for about 20 years, and hasn't finished over .500 since Barry Bonds signed with the Giants. Love the Wilpons? Really?

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 08:50 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Yeah, let's pretend I said that too.

Vic Sage Jun 01 2012 09:12 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

The team has eight straight years of over seventy wins. If they make it a ninth this year (and it certainly looks like they will), that'll tie them for the longest such streak in team history. ...it's on the verge of tying the longest streak in their history. If that's "extremely poor" then the definition of extreme has changed. Winning percentage wise, I'd imagine the Wilpon-Katz-Wilpon team has been more successful than any managing ownership group in the team's history. Is "saluting" too strong a description? Ok. However you'd like to characterize it, it seems to me you're using "the streak" to rebut or at least blunt the anger directed at the Wilpons' ownership, but i think it is evidence in support of that anger.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 09:17 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Is "saluting" too strong a description. Please give me a break. Please? Is was a horseshit description full of unjustified smug sarcasm directed at me. And I'm beyond tired of it and its like.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 09:22 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jun 01 2012 09:27 AM

So what did you say? It's obvious that according to you, we're not supposed to criticize something because the Mets win more than 69 games a season. So what kind of equity or goodwill do you suppose the Mets get for that streak?

Vic Sage Jun 01 2012 09:23 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 01 2012 09:24 AM

Please give me a break. Please? Is was a horseshit description full of unjustified smug sarcasm directed at me. And I'm beyond tired of it and its like. whatever, dude. i hereby rescind the use of "salute" in honor of national donut day. instead i offer to replace it with the phrase: "mention for no apparent rhetorical purpose whatsoever". now THAT was smug sarcasm... see the difference?

Benjamin Grimm Jun 01 2012 09:24 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Geez, all he was saying is that the Mets have been less than completely horrible.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 09:26 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

So what did you say? I think you're more than capable of reading what I "said." Or you can keep rephrasing it into something for you to attack. I'd really like to ask again that you do the former. The internet has enough of the latter. If a coherent conversation is ever going to occur here again, I need you to try.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 09:26 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Great. "We can build a tiny 40,000 seat stadium in New York City because we're better than the '62 Mets. Mingle with your fellow pissers without mingling your actual piss."

Ceetar Jun 01 2012 09:30 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Great. "We can build a tiny 40,000 seat stadium in New York City because we're better than the '62 Mets. Mingle with your fellow pissers without mingling your actual piss." Mets averaged 41k or so (capacity of Citi is 41.8 and they could push that to 44 if they were selling out) in 2006. they got higher in 2007 and 2008 but a large part of that was Shea Goodbye. They've never topped 40k without Citi Field looming. Why bother building another deck of further away crappy seats for people that are probably not going to come?

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 09:38 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Great. "We can build a tiny 40,000 seat stadium in New York City because we're better than the '62 Mets. Mingle with your fellow pissers without mingling your actual piss." Mets averaged 41k or so (capacity of Citi is 41.8 and they could push that to 44 if they were selling out) in 2006. they got higher in 2007 and 2008 but a large part of that was Shea Goodbye. They've never topped 40k without Citi Field looming. Why bother building another deck of further away crappy seats for people that are probably not going to come? They averaged 40K by drawing 50K on weekends and 25-35K on cold weekday night games. The smaller stadium discourages many fans from even considering attending a game. But the Wilpons couldn't give a shit so long as attendance multiplied by the price of admission is satisfactory. And they could care less about how much goodwill they squander in order to hit their goals.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 10:00 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Great. "We can build a tiny 40,000 seat stadium in New York City because we're better than the '62 Mets. Mingle with your fellow pissers without mingling your actual piss." Mets averaged 41k or so (capacity of Citi is 41.8 and they could push that to 44 if they were selling out) in 2006. they got higher in 2007 and 2008 but a large part of that was Shea Goodbye. They've never topped 40k without Citi Field looming. Why bother building another deck of further away crappy seats for people that are probably not going to come? They averaged 40K by drawing 50K on weekends and 25-35K on cold weekday night games. The smaller stadium discourages many fans from even considering attending a game. But the Wilpons couldn't give a shit so long as attendance multiplied by the price of admission is satisfactory. And they could care less about how much goodwill they squander in order to hit their goals. And another thing --- how do you know that the Mets wouldn't have averaged 44K or 48K during Citi Field's first seasons, instead of 41K, if capacity was larger?

Ceetar Jun 01 2012 10:08 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: They averaged 40K by drawing 50K on weekends and 25-35K on cold weekday night games. The smaller stadium discourages many fans from even considering attending a game. But the Wilpons couldn't give a shit so long as attendance multiplied by the price of admission is satisfactory. And they could care less about how much goodwill they squander in order to hit their goals. yup. That's every business ever. And it's a really sucky trend around baseball in general with all the payrolls and expenses skyrocketing the mean price for tickets goes up and up. It's also not just baseball. Right now there are scores of affordable seats thanks to sucking and economy. if they make the playoffs and are averaging 32k in September, next year it'll be a lot harder. Personally I would've preferred they build an extra 10k seat upper deck with crappy views and cheap seats, but hell they were paying for it themselves and they would probably never even break even on the added construction costs and operation expenses of building that. If the Mets start competing and maxing out, it's practically a given that they'll find a way to add a couple thousand extra seats. They didn't sell the place out in 2009 despite coming off a competitive year and it being a new building and they were above .500 into July and only 2 games below going into August with still the hope of reinforcements and a run, so it's not like they completely sucked.

Gwreck Jun 01 2012 10:10 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Edgy DC wrote: As for "extremely poor" performance, isn't it more fair to call the showing "disappointing," "uninspiring" or maybe "lackluster"? I don't think "extremely poor" was an unfair description. The team has eight straight years of over seventy wins. If they make it a ninth this year (and it certainly looks like they will), that'll tie them for the longest such streak in team history. True, the Mets are better than they have been in the past. But seventy wins itself is certainly not "good," and I'm not uncomfortable with deeming seventy wins "poor." If folks don't want to support such a team, that's great. But it helps to keep perspective. Folks do want to support such a team. The problem is that tickets to that team are priced as if the team has a regular streak of seasons with 82 or more wins.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 10:15 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: Edgy DC wrote: As for "extremely poor" performance, isn't it more fair to call the showing "disappointing," "uninspiring" or maybe "lackluster"? I don't think "extremely poor" was an unfair description. The team has eight straight years of over seventy wins. If they make it a ninth this year (and it certainly looks like they will), that'll tie them for the longest such streak in team history. True, the Mets are better than they have been in the past. But seventy wins itself is certainly not "good," and I'm not uncomfortable with deeming seventy wins "poor." If folks don't want to support such a team, that's great. But it helps to keep perspective. Folks do want to support such a team. The problem is that tickets to that team are priced as if the team has a regular streak of seasons with 82 or more wins. Thanks for responding. Unfortunately, through no fault of yours, I've lost all taste for discussing this.

Ceetar Jun 01 2012 10:16 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Gwreck wrote: Edgy DC wrote: If folks don't want to support such a team, that's great. But it helps to keep perspective. Folks do want to support such a team. The problem is that tickets to that team are priced as if the team has a regular streak of seasons with 82 or more wins. Tickets are priced as an entertainment option in NYC. We've had this discussion before, but especially this year tickets are extremely affordable. Yes, you need to pay more for more access and closer and better games but there are so many under $20 tickets that get you a very good view of the game.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 01 2012 11:16 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

LET'S! GO! ARGUE ABOUT MODIFIER USAGE FOR HOURS! I didn't like the misbegotten birthing of the thing. But it's miles more comfortable, now appropriately "home"y (really, with the Museum/various adornments, it's decor does more to celebrate Met history than Shea did), and the food/beer may be a little overcelebrated, but it's generally excellent. Shea felt like home, yes. So, too, does a jail cell to the instiitutionalized, or a padded one to those become a certain kind of psychological support. Also... I think that it's great that the Mets are likely to offer DW an extension.

Mets – Willets Point Jun 01 2012 11:31 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Last year I took my son to a game in the 500s for $15 a ticket. Sat right behind homeplate and had a great view of everything. And despite being near the back row, I still felt closer to the action than the the front row of the Upper Deck at Shea. I like the ballpark, and as I've said before the main thing I'd would've liked is a more of a neighborhood location rather than the same old sea of parking that surrounded Shea Stadium.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 01 2012 11:59 AM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: LET'S! GO! ARGUE ABOUT MODIFIER USAGE FOR HOURS! I didn't like the misbegotten birthing of the thing. But it's miles more comfortable, now appropriately "home"y (really, with the Museum/various adornments, it's decor does more to celebrate Met history than Shea did), and the food/beer may be a little overcelebrated, but it's generally excellent. Shea felt like home, yes. So, too, does a jail cell to the instiitutionalized, or a padded one to those become a certain kind of psychological support. Also... I think that it's great that the Mets are likely to offer DW an extension. I could care less about modifiers. I'm simply not on board with the absolutely ridiculous pollyanna notion that it's supposed to be some cause for celebration should the Mets spend the rest of eternity going 71-91 every goddamn season. Quite frankly, everything about the Mets is not good and anyone who thinks otherwise has no credibility. And nobody here should have to walk on eggshells when the mood strikes them to quite accurately point out that Alex Cora sucked.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2012 12:07 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

And I'm not on board with you mischaracterizing me. Over and over and over and over and over. I'm so not on board with it. I ask you and ask you again. Kindly as I can in the midst of you piling such utter nonsense on top of nonsense on top of me. I don't need to be re-assured that I have credibility with you. I really don't. Just please cut the game with misrepresentation in order to give you a target for your crusade. I'm not playing that role for you. Find another shop for that. Or please just stop. You're smart enough that you don't need to play that game to get your point across. I agree with you on like 80% of all issues. You realize this, right?

Ceetar Jun 01 2012 12:31 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'm simply not on board with the absolutely ridiculous pollyanna notion that it's supposed to be some cause for celebration should the Mets spend the rest of eternity going 71-91 every goddamn season. Pollyanna? There are very many people who've been telling me since the start of 2011 that the Mets will suck for a couple of years and that's okay because there's a shot they'll be starting to be good in 2014 or so. Mets – Willets Point wrote: Last year I took my son to a game in the 500s for $15 a ticket. Sat right behind homeplate and had a great view of everything. And despite being near the back row, I still felt closer to the action than the the front row of the Upper Deck at Shea. I like the ballpark, and as I've said before the main thing I'd would've liked is a more of a neighborhood location rather than the same old sea of parking that surrounded Shea Stadium. Shea didn't celebrate history at all except for some hard to see banners as you went (often walked) up huge escalators. Obviously the neighborhood was/is the same and they're "working on it" or whatever. I wonder what the general fan perception would've been if they'd moved elsewhere in Queens in order to find a better neighborhood? or *gasp* Brooklyn. That place the Nets are going probably would've been a fairly decent location, Sterling-wise. Would've been able to have all sorts of business ventures and apartments and what not around the stadium right?

metsmarathon Jun 01 2012 12:59 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

knocking down houses would've been another thing to kill the wilpons over. the thing about shea was that the whole thing opened up around you. it was expansive. it was overly large and it surrounded you. i was awed the first time i stepped onto the field in a run to home plate. it was enormous. i think that's what i don't like about citi. it feels like we traded down. it's also a little bland on the inside, though i haven't been there this year to experience the blue walls. it lacks architecture. it has some design, but it lacks architecture, and therefore character. it feels more like a replica than an authentic construct, though that's fairly true of all ballparks today (i actually feel like ysiii is worse in that respect) shea was familiar to us. we knew it well. it's hard to replace that. it was a dump, though i didn't mind it too much. i felt that it could have been rehabilitated, though that probably would have cost as much as building a new stadium. the wilpons are awful. i like the mets despite my dislike of them. the mets were here first, and i trust they'll be here last. the wilpons have done a shit job building a stadium, maintainting a fanbase, and, for hte most part, building a long-lasting competitor. my only hope is that somehow, the thought process whereby they added sandy alderson and his compatriots may signal some sort of enlightenment whereby they are open to not only new but good ideas. and indeed, tehy are not the worst ownership group in sports, nor are they the worst ownership group in this sorry little team's sorry little existence. i do not cheer them for this fact, i allow it to temper my disregard for them. i don't know what this has to do with anything, because i don't know what any of all of this has to do with anything. but i sure as hell hope they find a way to resign david wright at a reasonable price in a reasonable time frame.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 01 2012 01:22 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

I sort of miss everything that Shea stood for. It was big and welcoming, so that everyone who wanted to see a game could see it. It wasn't pretty but it was practical with the idea that it could be a football stadium with a little imagination, or a concert venue, or a wrestling arena. It wasn't "home" for the Mets; it was home for the fans of the Mets. It was blue and orange like the Mets and the official colors of the city. To the extent it was designed, it was in the style of the early 1960s, perfectly appropriate and contemporary. The Wilpons (like owners before them) turned these quaint ideas of practical hospitality and utility on their ear and made a stadium whose purpose was to exclude fans, reduce utility, recall a completely different era design-wise, dress in black and sand, pretend to be a restaurant, sell advertising inside and out, provide luxury for the richest and spoil the ballplayers. Other than that it's a great place to watch a game.

metirish Jun 02 2012 02:26 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

As Gary just said lost in the shuffle last night was Wright saying on the WFAN pre-game that he will not be talking extension/contract during this season...or next here it is y Matt Ehalt | Special to ESPNNewYork.com NEW YORK -- New York Mets third baseman David Wright will not discuss his contract with the team during this season or next, and will engage in contract talks only during the offseason, he told WFAN radio Friday. Wright has a $16 million team option for the 2013 season. "I think that there's too much good going on right now with this team and so many positive vibes with this team right now that it wouldn't be fair to my teammates; it wouldn't be fair to this team to do something as selfish as talk about a contract for me," Wright said. "It doesn't just affect me, it affects the guys in the clubhouse and it affects the vibe that's in the clubhouse. "Like I said, it's part of the business but in the same hand, it's selfish when I feel I'm discussing me when we should be discussing we as a team, especially the good start we've gotten off to." Wright said his previous experience signing a deal in 2006 helped lead him to this decision. He understands the difficulty of having to prepare for a game while dealing with contract talks. He stressed winning and his love for the organization, and added that the Mets did not come to him regarding putting off the talks. "I want to win and I want to win badly and this takes away from the way we prepare every day. Having other guys in this clubhouse have to answer about me, I was in this situation last year," Wright told the radio station. "I had to answer about Jose Reyes and I know the last thing I want to do some days is talk about another guy's contract. I don't want those guys to continue to have to talk about this. We have a good thing and I don't want to selfishly put me ahead of the rest of the guys in this clubhouse." Mets general manager Sandy Alderson said Tuesday that he planned to talk to Wright's agents during the season, although he didn't specifically say an offer would be made. Mets COO Jeff Wilpon said the team will let it play out and "there's no gun to anybody's head," meaning there's no rush to complete a deal. When asked about Wilpon's comments, Wright said he considers Wilpon a close friend, and that the right time will have to be the offseason to have these talks. The 29-year-old third baseman, who entered Friday night's game with a .365 average, second highest in the National League, wants to be able to help the Mets become a contender. "I've said it once, said it a million times, I love it here," Wright said. "I want to be a big reason why we get this thing turned around and headed in the right direction and, of course, I want to be a part of it. Those discussions, we'll wait into the offseason when we can kind of delve into that headfirst and not have to worry about Adam Wainwright's curveball and what's going on behind doors with the contract talk."

Edgy MD Jun 02 2012 03:06 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Well, almost 100% of every other free agent says the same. He signed his last contract in-season however. But it's probably best for both him and the team to wait 'til the offseason. Not best for me, though.almost

Frayed Knot Jun 02 2012 04:25 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

Remember the other thing Gary said about that Wright statement: that it's the right thing to say even if it's not true because it gets everyone to stop asking all the time. IOW, I don't think this tilts the final 'will he or won't he?' decision even an inch one way or the other.

Edgy MD Jun 02 2012 04:40 PM Re: Mets Likely to Offer Wright a Long-Term Deal

(Yeah, I tried to imply that to some extent with my second sentence.)