Master Index of Archived Threads


Sandy speaks!

Benjamin Grimm Nov 08 2012 02:46 PM

Mets' GM: Trying to keep R.A. Dickey By Wallace Matthews ESPNNewYork.com INDIAN WELLS, Calif. -- New York Mets general manager Sandy Alderson said Thursday he expects R.A. Dickey to become the Mets' first Cy Young Award winner in more than a quarter-century. He also said it was conceivable that Dickey could be an ex-Met soon afterward. "It would be a little unusual to trade a Cy Young winner," Alderson said, "but I can remember a time (as CEO of the San Diego Padres) when we traded for the leading hitter in the National League at the time, so it happens." However, Alderson emphasized that the organization's focus was to try to sign Dickey and David Wright, its two marquee players, to long-term deals. Both had their options for 2013 picked up last month. Alderson said he met with Wright at his home in Virginia "a couple of weeks ago" and had intended to visit Dickey in Nashville, Tenn., "but it turned out not to be necessary." Of Dickey, the 37-year-old knuckleballer who went 20-6 with a 2.73 ERA in 2012, Alderson said, "We'd love to retain him. We're trying to." He also said that "conversations are ongoing" with Wright, the team's best all-around player who hit .306 with 21 home runs and 93 RBIs this past season. And Alderson was quick to point out that unlike last year's non-negotiation with Jose Reyes, who wound up signing with the Miami Marlins without ever receiving an offer from the Mets, "there's much more engagement, let's put it that way," with Wright and his representatives. When the Mets picked up both options -- Wright's called for $16 million, Dickey's for $5 million -- Alderson had said he wanted a quick resolution to both situations. That has not happened. "Maybe it was a little bit unrealistic on my part to think that we get something done," he said. "But I think it was important for me to emphasize that we were going to get going early, in order to avoid any speculation about a Jose Reyes-type approach to this. So in that sense it was probably a good idea to emphasize speed but unrealistic to expect that this was all going to be concluded quickly." Along with Clayton Kershaw of the Dodgers and Gio Gonzalez of the Washington Nationals, Dickey is a finalist for the NL Cy Young, the winner of which will be announced Wednesday. Dickey could become the Mets' first Cy Young winner since Dwight Gooden in 1985. "From my standpoint, I already assume he's going to win," Alderson said. However, that would not stop the GM from considering trading him, or one of the Mets' other starting pitchers -- one of the team's few areas of strength -- to shore up other areas, notably the outfield. Or, as Alderson cracked, "What outfield?" At the moment, the Mets are counting on Lucas Duda, recovering from surgery on a fractured wrist suffered while moving furniture, as their left fielder for next year, and are considering Kirk Nieuwenhuis, a rookie last year, as their center fielder. They are also trying to come to terms with free agent Scott Hairston, who hit 20 home runs for them last season, although Alderson acknowledged, "We would love to have him back, but I suspect there will be interest in him elsewhere, so we'll just have to see." Alderson said unloading Jason Bay and the remainder of his four-year, $66 million contract has given the Mets "some flexibility" in their budget this offseason, but it sounded as if trading a starting pitcher was a more likely way for the club to add a major league-ready outfielder for 2013. "I would hate to give up, for different reasons, an R.A. Dickey or a Jonathon Niese or a Dillon Gee, but it is our strength and it's something we would have to entertain," he said. "I don't want you to leave here thinking we're going to trade a starting pitcher and that's an absolute. But it's logical for us to consider that."

Edgy MD Nov 08 2012 05:36 PM Re: Sandy speaks!

The record suggests Reyes received an offer. It just wasn't a formal written offer on paper. It's exactly the sort of grass that Matthews would try to make hay from, but...

Ceetar Nov 08 2012 05:57 PM Re: Sandy speaks!

and he hints that his remarks about the speed of the negotiations that some chose to make light of when it didn't happen that fast, were said with a mind towards reinforcing how serious they were in getting Wright signed more than an expectation that it would happen that fast.

Edgy MD Nov 08 2012 06:05 PM Re: Sandy speaks!

Now that was a tough sentence to parse.

Ceetar Nov 08 2012 07:15 PM Re: Sandy speaks!

Edgy DC wrote: Now that was a tough sentence to parse. yeah, I sorta got stuck in a logic loop in my brain and then realized I needed to check on dinner so didn't proofread. oops.

Edgy MD Nov 09 2012 07:06 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

No, it actually holds together. Just took a while is all.

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 07:17 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Edgy DC wrote: No, it actually holds together. Just took a while is all. I get paid by the word. Attempting to parse that Hairston comment, to me, sounds like they'd like Hairston back but expect him to get offers beyond what he's worth to the Mets.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 09 2012 07:34 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

I think Dillon Gee, if not for that demoralizing injury, would have been very tradeable. He still may be, except that it probably won't be until after he proves he's healthy, which he won't have a chance to do until next spring.

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 07:37 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I think Dillon Gee, if not for that demoralizing injury, would have been very tradeable. He still may be, except that it probably won't be until after he proves he's healthy, which he won't have a chance to do until next spring. maybe, maybe not. It was a medical thing after all, not a physical thing. I think that plays differently. Still, the return you get for Dillon Gee types is probably not worth it.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 09 2012 07:41 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Joel Sherman sez Ike Davis NOT for sale anymore, and compares the '12 Mets to the '11 A's, saying in fact the Mets could rebuild with the verity same guys. Pretty reasonable take I think: [url]http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/mets_cast_vote_for_ike_in_jixDREtiuMClT5Xx0RYBSK The Mets also will have to find their own cost-effective Gomes, Moss and Carter. Heck, including maybe Gomes (a free agent), Moss and Carter, who along with lefty slugger Seth Smith are probably available from Oakland. Here are others who could fit this category: Free agents such as Raul Ibanez, Russell Martin, Kelly Johnson, Miguel Olivo and Alex Gonzalez or trade candidates such as Baltimore’s Nolan Reimold, Boston’s Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Pittsburgh’s Garrett Jones, the White Sox’s Tyler Flowers and the Cubs’ Bryan LaHair. None of these are sexy names, but the Mets cannot afford sexy names as they pursue their first magic number of 2013 — 170 homers.

Edgy MD Nov 09 2012 07:54 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Congratulations to Sherman for being the first New York tabloid columnist to write an offseason column suggesting a team shore up and trust the process rather than pursue high risk/high headline value transactions. Remember that offseason that every columnist in town insisted that the Mets get Alfonso Soriano?

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 07:58 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Raul Ibanez, Russell Martin, Kelly Johnson, Miguel Olivo and Alex Gonzalez or trade candidates such as Baltimore’s Nolan Reimold, Boston’s Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Pittsburgh’s Garrett Jones, the White Sox’s Tyler Flowers and the Cubs’ Bryan LaHair. Let's see, Ibanez a really bad outfielder, lefty which the Mets don't need. LaHair is even worse. Russell Martin is probably just an older Josh Thole. Salty might be a good backup/platoon guy since he's basically a low-OBP slugger. Flowers has been floated, he might be a nice pickup but he hasn't done anything in the majors. Olivo sucks. Kelly Johnson is not a bad player, but he's a second baseman. I'm not sure why the Mets would be targeting that except as a shuffle moving Murphy out but that's mostly going to be a lateral move. Alex Gonzelez is a backup MI..probably a good one, but he's a bench player. I'd gladly take Reimold if the Orioles are out to trade him in his first arb year. The same with Garrett Jones, except he's a lefty so low priority there.

Vic Sage Nov 09 2012 08:21 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

I agree with Sherman's premise; Pitching + Power = winning team. So i don't think the Mets can be too choosy about populating their OF, vis-a-vis the L/R issue. They need players, regardless of what side they hit from. Sure, ideally you want some balance in the lineup, but the budget being what it is, Sandy's not in an "ideal" situation. I don't think he should pass on Garrett Jones, or even Ibanez, solely based on handedness.

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 08:31 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Vic Sage wrote: I agree with Sherman's premise; Pitching + Power = winning team. So i don't think the Mets can be too choosy about populating their OF, vis-a-vis the L/R issue. They need players, regardless of what side they hit from. Sure, ideally you want some balance in the lineup, but the budget being what it is, Sandy's not in an "ideal" situation. I don't think he should pass on Garrett Jones, or even Ibanez, solely based on handedness. The Giants would disagree. and Ibanez really sucks. It's possibly to overcompensate for sure, but with Murphy, Davis, and probably at least most of Duda, Nieuwenhuis, Thole (And throw in Baxter and Turner as well) you need some right-balanced desperately or you're gonna get chewed up by lefty pitchers.

Vic Sage Nov 09 2012 08:48 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Ceetar wrote: Vic Sage wrote: I agree with Sherman's premise; Pitching + Power = winning team. So i don't think the Mets can be too choosy about populating their OF, vis-a-vis the L/R issue. They need players, regardless of what side they hit from. Sure, ideally you want some balance in the lineup, but the budget being what it is, Sandy's not in an "ideal" situation. I don't think he should pass on Garrett Jones, or even Ibanez, solely based on handedness. The Giants would disagree. and Ibanez really sucks. It's possibly to overcompensate for sure, but with Murphy, Davis, and probably at least most of Duda, Nieuwenhuis, Thole (And throw in Baxter and Turner as well) you need some right-balanced desperately or you're gonna get chewed up by lefty pitchers. the giants would disagree about what? that pitching and power is a viable formula? I didn't say its the ONLY way, nor did Sherman. But its a perfectly viable one. And Ibanez sucks? Tell that to the Orioles. At age 40, he hit 20 HRs in 400 PAs. Can he field? no, but neither can Duda. look, i'm not saying we should sign a 40+ year old guy on his way out, but we're going to have to be creative and broadminded in filling out this team in a way that will make it competitive on a budget eaten up by a small handful of players. And not all LHs are eaten up by lefty pitchers, and not all RHs are great at hitting lefties either. And beggars can't be choosers. we're going to have flaws somewhere. I'd just as soon they find the best available OFers and not be concerned overmuch by what side of the plate they stand on.

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 09:03 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Vic Sage wrote: And not all LHs are eaten up by lefty pitchers, and not all RHs are great at hitting lefties either. And beggars can't be choosers. we're going to have flaws somewhere. I'd just as soon they find the best available OFers and not be concerned overmuch by what side of the plate they stand on. Right, but you get more value by hitting the bigger weaknesses. An outfielder that hits lefties is going to provide more value to the Mets than the other (particularly if there are limited funds) And, generally speaking, there are more right-handed hitting players than left-handed ones, so the cost might actually be cheaper there. Obviously the best options are guys that are simply good baseball players and don't get eaten up by lefties or righties, but if the Mets are strapped for options and need to sign flawed players, it benefits them much more to have that flaw not be "can't hit lefties". Especially if Duda, Davis and Nieuwenhuis are going to struggle with that one and could use someone to take some of those innings. Ibanez hit 20 home runs in 400 PA in a tiny ballpark after hitting for power in a tiny ballpark in the previous years. Yes, he ran into some against the Orioles. But that's an extremely small sample size. I don't want Mark Reynolds either, even though he hit a whole bunch against the Yankees. Raul's platoon splits the last couple of years are laughable. Mike Baxter is better. the Met would be better with Mike Baxter playing than Raul Ibanez. and they have Baxter already.

Vic Sage Nov 09 2012 09:44 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

we're talking in circles. i'm not arguing for Ibanez, per se. I'm saying we shouldn't disqualify him because he's a LH. There may be plenty of other reasons to exclude him. Obviously if there are RHers available at a cheaper price, or even at the same price, as comparable LHers, they're preferable. But even while "handedness" could be a tiebreaker among similar players, it doesn't overcome the need for best possible players.

metirish Nov 09 2012 11:01 AM Re: Sandy speaks! Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 09 2012 11:19 AM

Ken Rosenthal says that the Mets are just bullshitting on Dickey, every chance that Ken is bullshitting too. Assorted notes from the GM meetings 23 hours ago by KenRosenthal INDIAN WELLS, Calif. — Assorted notes from the baseball general managers' meetings: • I already can hear the New York Mets’ spin on right-hander R.A. Dickey now — the tried and true “Greedy Ballplayer” theory. Dickey, the Mets will say, wanted too much in a contract extension, so the team traded him rather than get suckered into a bad deal. Such a portrayal simply would not be accurate. The Mets, sources say, have shown little actual interest in negotiating with Dickey, who is under contract for next season at $5 million. Instead, they’re discussing him in trades at the GM meetings. If they get the right deal, they will just move on. Trading Dickey, 38, probably is the right thing for the Mets to do, considering all of their holes. But the Mets intend to pin this on Dickey, they first need to make him a substantial offer. That, sources say, has not happened. http://mlbbuzz.yardbarker.com/blog/mlbb ... _post=true

Frayed Knot Nov 09 2012 11:16 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Of course with Dickey under contract for next year at such a beneficial price, and that he'll be 39 next year, and that he's unlikely to match this past season, there's less urgency to sign him to a new deal and more caution about over-paying if you do. None of which would justify doing what they're doing if, as Rosenthal suspects, they're doing it solely for the purposes of making it look like RAD's fault when they make the trade that they've already decided to make ... but that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves at this point.

Edgy MD Nov 09 2012 11:22 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

I'm willing to bet, should the Mets not land Dickey, that no senior members of Sandy's team will be found to utter the word "greedy." I mean, have they ever ripped a ballplayer a new moral asshole for signing elsewhere? Even Darryl? Even Hampton, who was taking it pretty hard in the court of public opinion anyway? Maybe there'll be alleged leaks that senior Mets personnel privately spit on the ground every time Dickey's name is mentioned. They likely will be no more substantive than the ones Rosenthal is working with now. Besides, if Dickey doesn't sign, the Mets trade him for some player or players they want and that remain under their control, and it's a win either way for a team that spun a little gold from the straw of a minor league contract to veteran. Why would they subsequently rip the guy? Makes no sense except Rosenthal must see pre-emptive baiting as a job requirement.

themetfairy Nov 09 2012 11:26 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Every time I see the title of this thread, all I can think is "Arf!"

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 11:35 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

has a reporter ever sited a 'leak' as being leaked solely for negotiating tactic it usually is? i.e. The Mets are mentioning Dickey in trades because A. it helps establish what his value is to other teams, and B. it's a bluff suggesting that the Mets are willing to move on and aren't desperate to keep him at any cost?

Edgy MD Nov 09 2012 11:41 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

The important thing to me is that Rosenthal is playing both sides of the question. The Mets, he seems to be suggesting, (a) would be wise to deal Dickey, (b) would totally be douchebags anyway if they do. He gets to rip them after the fact either way.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 09 2012 11:46 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

themetfairy wrote: Every time I see the title of this thread, all I can think is "Arf!" Like

Ceetar Nov 09 2012 11:47 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

Edgy DC wrote: The important thing to me is that Rosenthal is playing both sides of the question. The Mets, he seems to be suggesting, (a) would be wise to deal Dickey, (b) would totally be douchebags anyway if they do. He gets to rip them after the fact either way. he's probably already written both columns too.

Swan Swan H Nov 09 2012 11:54 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

themetfairy wrote: Every time I see the title of this thread, all I can think is "Arf!" BOC!

Ashie62 Nov 09 2012 05:04 PM Re: Sandy speaks!

Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: No, it actually holds together. Just took a while is all. I get paid by the word. Attempting to parse that Hairston comment, to me, sounds like they'd like Hairston back but expect him to get offers beyond what he's worth to the Mets. Winner! and Dickey is gone also..

Lefty Specialist Nov 10 2012 04:34 AM Re: Sandy speaks!

I'm willing to bet, should the Mets not land Dickey, that no senior members of Sandy's team will be found to utter the word "greedy." I mean, have they ever ripped a ballplayer a new moral asshole for signing elsewhere? Even Darryl? Even Hampton, who was taking it pretty hard in the court of public opinion anyway? Maybe there'll be alleged leaks that senior Mets personnel privately spit on the ground every time Dickey's name is mentioned. They likely will be no more substantive than the ones Rosenthal is working with now. Besides, if Dickey doesn't sign, the Mets trade him for some player or players they want and that remain under their control, and it's a win either way for a team that spun a little gold from the straw of a minor league contract to veteran. Why would they subsequently rip the guy? Makes no sense except Rosenthal must see pre-emptive baiting as a job requirement. Wow, a "Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard" reference. :)