Master Index of Archived Threads


Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

smg58 Dec 13 2013 07:26 AM

He had a .777 OPS (111 OPS+) for Boston last year. It comes after two down years affected by an ankle injury, but the OPS+ is consistent with his best seasons in Arizona. He plays shortstop, and will be 31 in March. He's generating far less press on the rumor mill than Jhonny Peralta did, despite Peralta's PED suspension. What's up with him?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 13 2013 07:32 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I believe signing him would cost us another draft pick. I have no idea about this guy.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 13 2013 07:35 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Scott Boras is his agent. He initially wanted five years, but the buzz is that nobody wants to go that long for him, and maybe three years would get him. He probably won't get cheap enough for the Mets to bite, but who knows? If he gets into January, unexpected things might happen.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 13 2013 07:46 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Scuttlebutt is that we're interested, but playing coy. Then again, that and commodity pricing for 123 lbs of eggs and turkey bacon and coffee cake will get breakfast for you and Bartolo. I think I'd rather live with Ruben at short-- hell, I'd rather live WITH Ruben, at home-- than pay Boras money for this guy's age-36 season.

metirish Dec 13 2013 07:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

From what I saw in the Playoffs he was terrible....at the plate anyway.

Edgy MD Dec 13 2013 07:57 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

He would join the ranks of Mets whose names are complete sentences (Rick Waits, rush chairman), but otherwise, there's wisdom in not killing yourself to solve all your problems at once.

Ashie62 Dec 13 2013 04:06 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Screw the lost pick cmon..

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 13 2013 05:07 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

They've already given up one pick. You want them to give up another AND five years-- NOTE: One MORE year than they gave Jason Bay-- to a 30-year-old shortstop with 48-year-old knees, who played 124 games last year, and hadn't played more than 86 in the two seasons prior?

Benjamin Grimm Dec 23 2013 08:17 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Boras isn't getting the interest in Drew that he wanted. There are indications that he may drift the Mets' way, although it sounds like at this point it's still considered unlikely. I recall that a few years ago Boras had one of his players sign a one-year contract, figuring that it would be better to try again a year later and hopefully find a more favorable market. I wonder if this will happen with Drew? From the Mets perspective, they may not want to lose that draft pick for a one-year shortstop, so maybe the middle ground is a two-year contract. It will be interesting to see if this scenario grows more likely in the next couple of weeks.

Ceetar Dec 23 2013 08:19 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I recall that a few years ago Boras had one of his players sign a one-year contract, figuring that it would be better to try again a year later and hopefully find a more favorable market. I wonder if this will happen with Drew? From the Mets perspective, they may not want to lose that draft pick for a one-year shortstop, so maybe the middle ground is a two-year contract. Was that Madsen? Who signed a one year deal with the Reds in 2012 and promptly got hurt in Spring Training and hasn't pitched since?

Nymr83 Dec 23 2013 06:43 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ceetar wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I recall that a few years ago Boras had one of his players sign a one-year contract, figuring that it would be better to try again a year later and hopefully find a more favorable market. I wonder if this will happen with Drew? From the Mets perspective, they may not want to lose that draft pick for a one-year shortstop, so maybe the middle ground is a two-year contract. Was that Madsen? Who signed a one year deal with the Reds in 2012 and promptly got hurt in Spring Training and hasn't pitched since? Not sure if he was a Boras client, but that was what happened to him. If Drew drops down into the affordable 3 year range I'd hope the Mets would give it a shot, but I'm skeptical that Boras and Wilpon aren't just enjoying a mutually beneficial "leak" of their conversations... Boras gets the perception of a greater market while Wilpon gets the perception of at least pursuing big-ticket free agents.

Edgy MD Dec 23 2013 07:25 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'd be surprised and disappointed to find out the Mets are playing a game for peception purposes.

Frayed Knot Dec 23 2013 09:17 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

There was something in one of the papers today about Drew possibly winding up with either NYC team - although no evidence was given in either case, most just a statement, "it could happen". Personally I can't see him going to the Bronx and having to sit and/or DH half the time, and I sure can't see the Yanx telling Jeter that HE is going to be the backup. As far as the Mets go, the article speculated that Drew/Boras wanted three years while the Mets wanted to hold things to two. I suppose you can call that progress as I think the early reports were that Drew was looking for five years coming off his first good and healthy year in a while.

Nymr83 Dec 25 2013 10:29 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Frayed Knot wrote: There was something in one of the papers today about Drew possibly winding up with either NYC team - although no evidence was given in either case, most just a statement, "it could happen". Personally I can't see him going to the Bronx and having to sit and/or DH half the time, and I sure can't see the Yanx telling Jeter that HE is going to be the backup. As far as the Mets go, the article speculated that Drew/Boras wanted three years while the Mets wanted to hold things to two. I suppose you can call that progress as I think the early reports were that Drew was looking for five years coming off his first good and healthy year in a while. Drew isn't even close to being a good enough hitter for an AL team to consider him as even a part-time DH though, his value comes from being an average bat at a position devoid of bats. if you just wanted DH production, trade for Lucas Duda.

Ceetar Dec 26 2013 11:05 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Nymr83 wrote: Drew isn't even close to being a good enough hitter for an AL team to consider him as even a part-time DH though, his value comes from being an average bat at a position devoid of bats. if you just wanted DH production, trade for Lucas Duda. Do the Yankees have anything worthwhile to trade? Beltran and half his salary maybe?

Frayed Knot Dec 26 2013 11:24 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Nymr83 wrote: Drew isn't even close to being a good enough hitter for an AL team to consider him as even a part-time DH ... I'm not suggesting he is. What I'm saying is that I don't see (despite an article claiming otherwise) a spot for Drew in the Bronx because of Jeter's image being tied to getting as much time at SS as possible and about the Yanx being tied emotionally to Jeter at SS. IOW, why the hell would Drew agree to go there knowing the shit storm he'd be heading into (and the DH time he'd be forced to log) even if it's just for year one of the deal?

Edgy MD Dec 26 2013 11:38 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Maybe he'd play second for a year, while preparing to serve as Jeter's successor in year two, and be ready to step in earlier if necessary. Maybe?

Edgy MD Dec 26 2013 11:46 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, too crazy, I guess.

Frayed Knot Dec 26 2013 12:33 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well yeah, the Yanx might want to put him at 2B for a season where he'll share time with Brian Roberts & Kelly Johnson, and maybe play some 3B depending on the length of ARod's suspension, all while he waits for Jeter to get [even]old[er] and to the point where both he and the team no longer automatically see him as having the right of first refusal at the field's most important defensive position ... but if you're Stephen Drew, coming as you are off a great year for a championship team at SS, why would you possibly agree to that set-up at a time when you have other options?

Edgy MD Dec 26 2013 12:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well, I guess my answer is why does anybody agree to subject themselves to the countless indignities of playing for the Yankees? Why would Alex Rodriguez, at the apex of his offensive ability and the current Gold Glove and on a track to challenge Honus Wagner for the title of GREATEST SHORTSTOP EVER deign ---absolutely deign --- to come to the Yankees and switch positions in deference to his utterly obvious inferior. The answer is... scads and scads of money.

Frayed Knot Dec 26 2013 02:03 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, but ARod was low on options. He wanted out of Dallas (and Rangers mgmt wanted out from under ARod) and, even with Texas agreeing to eat as much as $75 million future dollars, no one would accept that contract except for the Yanx. Even the BoSox' deal, you'll remember, couldn't be arranged in a way so as to satisfy the PA. So he went with his money intact and an out-clause in his pocket, agreeing to give up SS no doubt but also most likely seeing enough championshipS in his future to cement his legacy from that end. After all, how could a team that had won four times in the previous six years add HIM and not win at least as often going forward? Drew on the other hand, having multiple teams to talk to and in an age where the money gap between the MFY and those also-rans that make up the rest of MLB isn't nearly as stark as it was a decade ago, can be a full-time SS somewhere for probably the same money that the Yanx would give him and not be the 2nd or 3rd option depending on the whims of 2 or 3 other players or the hatred of being the one who shoved St Derek permanently out of his position.

Ashie62 Dec 26 2013 08:16 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

The market for Drew is not getting any stronger of late.. Why any team could sign him really.....

86-Dreamer Dec 27 2013 07:27 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Drew at SS and Morales at 1B would make the Mets a very good team. They are both 30 years old and seem attainable for 3 year contracts. If the goal is to present a winning product that fans will support, then these are obvious moves.

Edgy MD Dec 27 2013 08:18 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well, the goal is generally to present a winning product that fans will support while not crippling your ability to continue to do that in the future. Morales would likely be giving up quite a bit (including a draft pick) for somebody that isn't necessarily an obvious bet to outperform who they already have.

Vic Sage Dec 27 2013 08:46 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Morales is 30, with an average OPS+ of 120, with a .280/30hr/90rbi line. And you don't think he is an obvious choice to outperform Ike or Lucas? Yeah, i'll just say i strenuously disagree. While the race doesn't always go to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, that's the way to bet. as to his cost, we don't have to trade for him. As i understand it, the Mets won't have to give up a top pick (it's protected, yes?), so the cost here is money. Same for Drew. Which is why neither will happen; Sandy has likely maxed out his card. But lets not pretend either move wouldn't be an obvious and immediate upgrade on the field or in any way cripple the ability of a big market team to move forward.

Ceetar Dec 27 2013 09:05 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

obvious or immediate? Well, Lucas Duda's OPS+ isn't that far off, and the Duda actually has the higher more valuable OBP. (and yes, is cheaper) And who really knows about Davis? His 170 OPS+ in the second half last year is as good or better than any of Morales months and Kendrys had his sucker months too. (.235/.265/.306 .571 in June and his August was poor too) Granted, Ike struggled worse and for longer and Kendrys was more balanced in 2011 but still only finished .016 better in OPS than Ike. Is that really an obvious replacement? It seems like more of a steadier replacement, but unless money is absolutely no object, which isn't not for any team, I'm not sure it's a clear-cut expenditure unless he's just asking like 1-2 years for 4-5 per.

Edgy MD Dec 27 2013 09:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Vic Sage wrote: Morales is 30, with an average OPS+ of 120, with a .280/30hr/90rbi line. And you don't think he is an obvious choice to outperform Ike or Lucas? Yeah, i'll just say i strenuously disagree. While the race doesn't always go to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, that's the way to bet. Yeah, Morales has a career OPS+ of 120. By firstbaseman standards, that's not so high as all that. Duda, three years younger, is at 114. Davis is at 112 and four years younger. Factor in time missed --- which was 1 2/3 years for Morales, and that's meaningful. I don't see anything so obvious there that's worth paying additional tens of millions and a draft pick for. Does he by himself improve the team's immediate prospects? Sure, 120 is greater than 114 and four firstbasemen is greater than three. But to the degree he'd cost, I don't think that's likely. If he missed all that time for the Mets after injuring himself in a homerun celebration, fans would certainly be wary and weary of him. I think he's a negative on defense. I'm all for upgrading at shortstop and generally pursuing guys who can play positions.

86-Dreamer Dec 27 2013 09:58 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ceetar wrote: obvious or immediate? Well, Lucas Duda's OPS+ isn't that far off, and the Duda actually has the higher more valuable OBP. (and yes, is cheaper) And who really knows about Davis? His 170 OPS+ in the second half last year is as good or better than any of Morales months and Kendrys had his sucker months too. (.235/.265/.306 .571 in June and his August was poor too) Granted, Ike struggled worse and for longer and Kendrys was more balanced in 2011 but still only finished .016 better in OPS than Ike. Is that really an obvious replacement? It seems like more of a steadier replacement, but unless money is absolutely no object, which isn't not for any team, I'm not sure it's a clear-cut expenditure unless he's just asking like 1-2 years for 4-5 per. Our catcher, SS and at least 2 if not 3 of the outfielders are anything but steady. Mets need steady to balance out the risks at those positions. Duda and Ike increase that risk from justifiable to reckless.

Edgy MD Dec 27 2013 10:11 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well, again, I don't see Morales as all that great (or all that likely) an improvement to justify the investment of limited resources. Shortstop, starting pitcher, sure. If I had money to spend, I'd look in those directions.

Edgy MD Dec 27 2013 10:14 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

While I think while the team can get a mercurial range of outcomes from any of their first base options, I think among Davis, Duda, Satin, and even Murphy and others, steady is certainly available.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 27 2013 10:22 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Morales would be a super guy to have on the bench. Can play a corner OF or first base, switch hits, has some powa and could compete for starting jobs in the positions he plays moreso than command one. I'm sure he'd never go for such an opportunity but in the event it's the best he can do...

Ashie62 Dec 27 2013 11:34 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Well, again, I don't see Morales as all that great (or all that likely) an improvement to justify the investment of limited resources. Shortstop, starting pitcher, sure. If I had money to spend, I'd look in those directions. Are you ok with Recker as the #2 behind Travis? I see Travis with 400 PA.. Soo... I agree with Vic on Morales..Kendry has a nice resume and is till coming around from his celebration dislocation. I'll take the 30/80 .290 of Morales over anything the Mets currently have. keeping Ike and Duda around really feels like punting.. Progress Sandy..it aint early anymore..

Edgy MD Dec 27 2013 12:00 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Am I OK with Recker? I'm not NOT OK. I imagine some vets will be brought in on minor league deals. I won't be too upset if a major league signee isn't among them, but since catchers get hurt, a big league vet would be nice. But then, our conversation gets further and further away from Stephen Drew.

smg58 Dec 27 2013 05:35 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Am I OK with Recker? I'm not NOT OK. I imagine some vets will be brought in on minor league deals. I won't be too upset if a major league signee isn't among them, but since catchers get hurt, a big league vet would be nice. But then, our conversation gets further and further away from Stephen Drew. A healthy Stephen Drew can give you an OPS+ at or above 110. Shortstops who can do that aren't so easy to come by. Tejada has broken 90 in the past, but a full rebound season would still make him a poor bet to break 100. By contrast, Ike Davis has broken 110 in three of his four seasons, and Duda had a 118 OPS+ last year to compare with the 123 that Morales gave the Mariners. This isn't meant to knock Morales -- of this year's free agent outfield class, only Choo and Beltran are demonstrably better hitters. But Drew would improve the Mets more.

Frayed Knot Dec 27 2013 07:42 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Morales only briefly played the OF and is no longer an option there. Some have questioned whether he's even a 1st baseman going forward or is strictly a DH from here on out.

Ashie62 Dec 27 2013 08:32 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Am I OK with Recker? I'm not NOT OK. I imagine some vets will be brought in on minor league deals. I won't be too upset if a major league signee isn't among them, but since catchers get hurt, a big league vet would be nice. But then, our conversation gets further and further away from Stephen Drew. Sticking to Stephen Drew..He is simply too expensive for the plan Sandy and Jeff are executing. Ruben Tejada and Tovar are on board and cheap...

Benjamin Grimm Jan 05 2014 10:29 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Adam Rubin wrote: The Mets remain engaged with agent Scott Boras about free-agent shortstop Stephen Drew, but a source familiar with the process continues to portray Drew as more of a "possibility" than a "probability." Team officials are divided about how valuable Drew would be to the Mets, who otherwise appear prepared to use Ruben Tejada at shortstop. The team would be more willing to consider a one- or two-year deal for Drew at the right monetary figure, while likely being averse to anything three years or beyond. But if Drew were to accept a shorter-term deal, the feeling is that he ultimately would just return to the Boston Red Sox. So there is some belief within the Mets organization that Boras partly is engaging the Mets in order to maximize the terms with Boston. The Mets' first-round pick is protected in 2014 and the second-round pick has been forfeited to the Yankees for signing Curtis Granderson. So the Mets would lose a third-round pick if they were to sign Drew -- something they are not totally averse to considering. The Mets partly are downplaying their interest in Drew because they do not want to get the fan base excited and then seem to fail in pursuing a player they believe ultimately will end up back with the Red Sox anyway. A team insider does not believe the Mets would need to first shed payroll -- Ike Davis and/or Daniel Murphy -- in order to free available space for Drew. Drew, who turns 31 in March, hit .253 with 13 homers and 67 RBIs in 442 at-bats last season with Boston.

Frayed Knot Jan 05 2014 10:43 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, the problem with luring him via a short term deal is that he's got that 1-year/$14.1mil offer already in his pocket. So unless the Mets were willing to go purdy durn high for say two years, he'd probably just be tempted to take Boston's qualifying offer and do the FA deal again next year.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 05 2014 10:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

When is the deadline for him accepting/rejecting that $14 million?

Frayed Knot Jan 05 2014 10:56 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: When is the deadline for him accepting/rejecting that $14 million? I'm not sure. Boston, I suppose, could reach a point where they'd make other plans and simply withdraw it. I assume that would then result in them not gaining the draft pick if and when he signs elsewhere.

smg58 Jan 05 2014 11:12 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'm not sure how you justify four years for Granderson but would balk at three for the younger Drew.

Frayed Knot Jan 05 2014 11:35 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Recent track record of staying on the field. Drew turns 31 in March but hasn't had a 500+ AB season since he was 27

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 05 2014 03:51 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

What FK said. Hell, during last year's successful "comeback," he only played 124 games.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 09 2014 06:37 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Jim Duquette and Andy Martino were both on Mets Hot Stove today. Sounds like they feel that Drew to the Mets is becoming a bit less remote the closer we get to spring training. Martino says that, right now anyway, the Mets are holding to only offering a one-year contract, but would probably be willing, eventually, to go to two years or three. (My hunch is that two could get it done.) Duquette says that there are only two teams in serious play for Drew, the Mets and the Red Sox, with the Twins as a possible dark horse.

Centerfield Jan 10 2014 07:06 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I don't really understand why the Red Sox would want him. Don't they have that prospect Bogaerts ready to slot in at SS?

Edgy MD Jan 10 2014 07:25 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

And that explains why the Sox are being coy too. They could certainly use him on terms favorable to them --- after all they're the champs and they're playing for keeps, and not all prospects slot in nicely. But they don't want to make any extended or extensive commitment to him. In the long term, they have healthy options and don't want to be tied up and tied down. Probably something akin to why the Mets wouldn't offer more years to Ray Knight in 1987.

MFS62 Jan 24 2014 07:18 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Jon Heyman mentiones Drew. Oh, crap! http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/ ... er=ya5nbcs Later

Frayed Knot Jan 24 2014 07:44 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Vacarro over at the Post is banging the drum for the Mets to step up for Drew. He talks about a three-year deal although that becomes a bit risky with his past health issues and being on the other side of 30 - although it's hard to get a read on where the market is for him right now. With what I saw from Drew last season (my first lengthy look at him) I think he'd be nuts to take a job where he wouldn't be the #1 SS. That alone would rule out the Yanx because if St. Derek is even somewhat healthy he's going to play SS and there are only limited opportunities to DH with Soriano, Beltran and others in the mix. Heyman mentions other teams with 2B possibilities also but, if I'm Drew, I'm going somewhere where I'm the first option at SS even if it's for a shorter deal that let's me do this all over again next year.

MFS62 Jan 24 2014 08:13 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

As mentioned before, he's a Boras client. Does Scott have a history of letting his players double clutch for a year to allow the road to open up for them later? I can't think of another example. Later

Frayed Knot Jan 24 2014 08:16 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Although I can't think of any specific examples at the moment, if Drew winds up accepting a one-year deal a few months after Boras announcing to all concerned that only ___ years at $_____ would be acceptable, it wouldn't be the first time.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 24 2014 08:22 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I think that with each week that passes, Drew to the Mets looks more and more likely. I know that they still want a veteran reliever, but if it's true that they were offering $12 million/2 years to Grant Balfour, that means they still have money to spend.

Edgy MD Jan 24 2014 08:24 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Mystery teams seem like bullshit, but Boras has managed to make good on such bluffs before. That said, a good 2/3 of me thinks that reports of the Yankees being interested have been carefully engineered by Boras and his agency. I think Harvey is the Mets' only current Boras client.

MFS62 Jan 24 2014 08:39 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Mystery teams seem like bullshit, but Boras has managed to make good on such bluffs before. I hereby place Edgy's name in nomination for this year's "I Can Spot Bullshit When I See It" Award (another one we didn't know existed). Both Olney and Rosenthal are tweeting that the Yanks won't be going after Drew. Good call. Later

bmfc1 Jan 24 2014 10:12 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

"A potentially great player." http://www.gammonsdaily.com/what-youre- ... phen-drew/ Yeah, the Mets wouldn't want THAT when they have Tejada.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 24 2014 11:19 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Wily Mo Pena... now there was a potentially great player. Drew makes some sense on the right deal, but... come on. It's not like he's the last piece of this championship puzzle, and WHYGODWHYWON'TTHECOUPONSPULLTHETRIGGER.

Edgy MD Jan 24 2014 11:22 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

What price would you put on the guy? Two years, and $22 million? $24 million?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 24 2014 11:27 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'd do either. I'd probably top at out somewhere near $25-26M, with a goodwill mutual option for 2016.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 24 2014 11:35 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'm sort of hoping he'd come here for 1 year. Be a potential tradeaway guy at the deadline.

Edgy MD Jan 24 2014 11:37 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'd do either. I'd probably top at out somewhere near $25-26M, with a goodwill mutual option for 2016. That's a lot of lettuce for a guy who just reached triple digits in games for the first time in four years. Here's me being creative: Two years, $22 million, with a one million dollar bonus if he clears 100 games, and another million if he clears 130. If he clears, say, 270 games, that third year option of $14 million becomes automatic from the Mets side, but Drew can still opt out.

Ashie62 Jan 24 2014 11:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Drew has rebounded well after a career threatening ankle dislocation. At this point his price isn't going up.. I'd like the Mets to get him but Boras would love to trump any Met bid..

Benjamin Grimm Jan 24 2014 11:54 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm sort of hoping he'd come here for 1 year. Be a potential tradeaway guy at the deadline. I'd be okay with two years. I suspect the Mets are more likely to contend in 2015 than 2014 (and not because of Matt Harvey) so it may make more sense to have the veteran shortstop available for that second year, especially if they're giving up a third-round draft pick to get him. None of the Mets top shortstop prospects seem at all likely to arrive before 2016 (if then) so I'd prefer a two-year solution to a one-year solution.

Edgy MD Jan 24 2014 11:58 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If they get him, great. If up his price for somebody else who eventually outbids them, great. I view him the way I do all non-Met players. With deep suspicion.

Ashie62 Jan 24 2014 04:13 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I feel that way about agents...

Ceetar Jan 26 2014 05:30 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm sort of hoping he'd come here for 1 year. Be a potential tradeaway guy at the deadline. eh, I hate playing the stock market this way. I'd more hope he has a great year and they can qualifying offer/draft pick him, or have first dibs at re-signing him if other options haven't surfaced.

Edgy MD Jan 26 2014 05:38 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I hear ya. But I'd more hope he hits 74 homeruns.

Ceetar Jan 26 2014 07:30 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: I hear ya. But I'd more hope he hits 74 homeruns. yes, and then qualifying offer him, thank him for the WS ring, and take the draft pick. He's not repeating that in 2015.

Ashie62 Jan 27 2014 10:47 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

It is 1/27.....have the MFYs signed this guy yet?

Frayed Knot Jan 29 2014 06:35 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Anthony DiComo - MLB.com In a telephone interview Tuesday evening, general manager Sandy Alderson reiterated that his team is "unlikely" to sign Stephen Drew, despite the shortstop's perceived lack of suitors on the free-agent market. ... Alderson recently checked in again with Drew's agent, Scott Boras, [but] he described the talks as "sporadic." "We haven't ruled it out, but I think doing anything is unlikely," Alderson said. "I think that Stephen will always have other opportunities. We continue to monitor his situation. We're looking at other free agents that are still available and trying to judge their status, and how they might fit with us. I know there's been a lot of speculation about Drew and the Mets, but at this point, that's what it remains -- speculation."

seawolf17 Jan 29 2014 07:09 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I have zero interest in Drew.

Frayed Knot Jan 29 2014 07:16 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Why not big boy?

Ceetar Jan 29 2014 07:34 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Frayed Knot wrote: Anthony DiComo - MLB.com In a telephone interview Tuesday evening, general manager Sandy Alderson reiterated that his team is "unlikely" to sign Stephen Drew, despite the shortstop's perceived lack of suitors on the free-agent market. ... Alderson recently checked in again with Drew's agent, Scott Boras, [but] he described the talks as "sporadic." "We haven't ruled it out, but I think doing anything is unlikely," Alderson said. "I think that Stephen will always have other opportunities. We continue to monitor his situation. We're looking at other free agents that are still available and trying to judge their status, and how they might fit with us. I know there's been a lot of speculation about Drew and the Mets, but at this point, that's what it remains -- speculation." Sounds like the Mets might just be getting this guy.

MFS62 Jan 29 2014 07:53 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Sounds like the classic sales "Takeaway" move by Sandy. Boras may feel he has a reasonable offer from the Mets, so he's now checking out other teams to see if he can do better. And Sandy is telling Boras his interest is waning, trying to get Boras to take his offer while its still on the table. And Spring Training is about two weeks away. Interesting. Later

Ceetar Jan 29 2014 07:56 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

MFS62 wrote: Sounds like the classic sales "Takeaway" move by Sandy. Boras may feel he has a reasonable offer from the Mets, so he's now checking out other teams to see if he can do better. And Sandy is telling Boras his interest is waning, trying to get Boras to take his offer while its still on the table. And Spring Training is about two weeks away. Interesting. Later yeah, that's how I read it. (of course, there could be another layer of subtlety I'm missing) Sounds like we have the best offer but Drew doesn't like it.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 10:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Sounds to me like he's easing fans into the (likely disappointing) reality of the situation --- that he believes Boras likely has better bids in hand and they are not interested in being drawn above their position into a bidding war.

TransMonk Jan 29 2014 10:57 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Sounds to me like he's easing fans into the (likely disappointing) reality of the situation... I've gotten this impression every time Sandy has opened his mouth in the past 4 years.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 11:01 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Which is probably why we should take him at his word this morning. OE: And heck, if he's just trying to bluff Boras that he's walking away, how can we expect Boras to buy it if we don't? Deep sad sighs, everybody.

Ceetar Jan 29 2014 11:41 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Which is probably why we should take him at his word this morning. OE: And heck, if he's just trying to bluff Boras that he's walking away, how can we expect Boras to buy it if we don't? Deep sad sighs, everybody. There is pretty much zero truth to anything either party says in a (semi) active negotiation.

Ashie62 Jan 29 2014 11:53 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Badabing..

Ashie62 Jan 29 2014 11:54 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Sandy has a bad case of Californiaitis paralysis by analysis.....Make the move dude...

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 29 2014 11:55 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Still think the everpopular Someone Else will be at SS for the Mets this year. Still think it will involve a trade.

seawolf17 Jan 29 2014 11:57 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

It's just Stephen Drew, people. We're not talking about Cal Ripken in his prime.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 12:20 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ashie62 wrote: Sandy has a bad case of Californiaitis paralysis by analysis.....Make the move dude... What move are we talking about? Five years and $250 million? Every deal has a price. It's part of GM's job to get the right price for his organization. If that means walking away from Stephen TinTin Drew, I get that.

Mets Guy in Michigan Jan 29 2014 12:47 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I think the Tigers said they weren't interested in signing Prince Fielder -- none whatsoever -- right up until the moment they announced they signed him. I don't think we can believe much of what we read about these things. Boras is a notorious leaker and he often waits until the last minute. Plus, Sandy hasn't created the salary hole by trading Ike or Duda.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 29 2014 01:03 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew? Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 29 2014 01:05 PM

seawolf17 wrote: It's just Stephen Drew, people. We're not talking about Cal Ripken in his prime. Yabbut, Cal Ripken in his prime doesn't ever make it to free agency anymore. And if it's not Drew, well, the pickings look slim, or at least iffy/less appealing (including attendant stuff like draft-pick-loss, etc.), for the next few years. I'll stick with my two-plus-non-vesting-mutual-option thing, but I'm REALLY coming around to "yes" on Drew. Ruben makes a better backup plan than he does a Plan A.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 01:04 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I think the Tigers said they weren't interested in signing Prince Fielder -- none whatsoever -- right up until the moment they announced they signed him. I don't think we can believe much of what we read about these things. Boras is a notorious leaker and he often waits until the last minute. Plus, Sandy hasn't created the salary hole by trading Ike or Duda. I don't recall that. By the way, at the risk of hijacking, how much bloody damage is Fielder going to do with his bat in Texas?

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 01:14 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Yabbut, Cal Ripken in his prime doesn't ever make it to free agency anymore. Really? I think it happens all the time. This year, Cal Ripken's name was Robinson Cano. Last year: Zach Greinke, Josh Hamlton. Two years ago, Pujols and Fielder hit the market a the same time. Hall of Fame talents in their prime, all.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 29 2014 01:21 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

In their primes? "Near their primes, with said primes just in the rearview," (Cano included, I'd bet a kidney) more like it.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 01:26 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Cano was coming off his age 30 season. Greinke off of age 28. Hamilton 31. Pujols 31. Fielder 27. The prime is pretty much the median in there, I think. Ripken's best season was at age 30. We can disagree on "prime," but I think 28-31 or 32 feels right. But it goes without saying that if a HoF talent in his prime signs a free contract, that contract will likely take him well past said prime. Glory is fleeting.

Mets Guy in Michigan Jan 29 2014 01:34 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: I think the Tigers said they weren't interested in signing Prince Fielder -- none whatsoever -- right up until the moment they announced they signed him. I don't think we can believe much of what we read about these things. Boras is a notorious leaker and he often waits until the last minute. Plus, Sandy hasn't created the salary hole by trading Ike or Duda. I don't recall that. By the way, at the risk of hijacking, how much bloody damage is Fielder going to do with his bat in Texas? Big Time. The Tigers were here in the state Capitol and Dombrowski was asked about Fielder specifically. He said Fielder "wasn't a good fit." And it was like, the next day that he was signed.

Frayed Knot Jan 29 2014 02:09 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

So it's settled then, Drew will be taking his NYM physical tomorrow.

Edgy MD Jan 29 2014 02:15 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Not quite yet, though. Deep sad sighs.

seawolf17 Jan 30 2014 07:18 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I don't know that Tejada's the answer either, but spending good money and a draft pick on a guy who's going to strike out 140 times and hit .250 and is eight years older isn't the answer either. I still pass.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 30 2014 07:27 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Plus he's a bland, Southern Jesus type of guy and we have enough of those.

MFS62 Jan 30 2014 07:40 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Plus he's a bland, Southern Jesus type of guy and we have enough of those. What would you prefer, someone who looks like the sixth guy from the left in a police lineup? All I want is someone who could bat sixth from the top in the Mets lineup, and play good shortstop. Later

Nymr83 Jan 30 2014 08:17 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

seawolf17 wrote: I don't know that Tejada's the answer either, but spending good money and a draft pick on a guy who's going to strike out 140 times and hit .250 and is eight years older isn't the answer either. I still pass. A 3rd round draft pick really shouldnt be stopping a team from signing a guy.

Ceetar Jan 30 2014 08:32 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Nymr83 wrote: I don't know that Tejada's the answer either, but spending good money and a draft pick on a guy who's going to strike out 140 times and hit .250 and is eight years older isn't the answer either. I still pass. A 3rd round draft pick really shouldnt be stopping a team from signing a guy. Stop me when you've more than heard of a guy: Casey Meisner Ivan Wilson Matthew Koch Logan Verrett Blake Forsythe Robbie Shields Kirk R Nieuwenhuis Eric M Niesen Stephen P Clyne Joseph M Smith Gabriel Hernandez Leonard E. DiNardo Joshua Reynolds So like..one major leaguer and it's a middle reliever.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 30 2014 08:36 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ivan Wilson's gonna break Strawberry's home run record. WRITE IT DOWN. I'm just not that excited over Drew, and I think we will add a guy by trade/other team attrition during ST. Oh, I was joking over the bland Jesus thing, though it is true.

Vic Sage Jan 30 2014 08:38 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew? Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 30 2014 09:04 AM

Nymr83 wrote: seawolf17 wrote: I don't know that Tejada's the answer either, but spending good money and a draft pick on a guy who's going to strike out 140 times and hit .250 and is eight years older isn't the answer either. I still pass. A 3rd round draft pick really shouldnt be stopping a team from signing a guy. THANK you. Without overstating the value of Drew, he is a better option than any other we currently have. And I don't think we're talking about signing him to a big$/long term deal that can hamstring an organization; it's not like he's the last piece of a 2014 championship run so there's no point in overpaying in years and dollars (in my view, if he won't take less than 3+yrs, at $10m+/yr or more, Sandy should walk away). But assuming he can be had for 1-2 years at under $10m/yr, he's a valuable upgrade. And Tejada would still be a backup plan, if Drew goes down again. But money aside, the notion that we would choose not to improve immediately because it'll cost us a THIRD round pick, a pick whose chances are remote of ever one day becoming as good a major league ballplayer as Drew is now, seems absurd to me.

Edgy MD Jan 30 2014 08:38 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, here's all the third-round draft choices from Mets history. The last four or five have yet to peak, perhaps, but out of the 94 guys listed, maybe five you wouldn't swap for Drew in a heartbeat. And even those are five aren't all sure things. Most are utterly forgotten. Year Player 2013 Ivan Wilson 2013 Casey Meisner 2012 Matthew Koch 2011 Logan Verrett 2010 Blake Forsythe 2009 Robbie Shields 2008 Kirk Nieuwenhuis 2007 Stephen Clyne 2006 Joe Smith 2004 Gaby Hernandez 2001 Lenny DiNardo 2000 Josh Reynolds 1999 Jeremy Griffiths 1998 Jason Saenz 1997 Cesar Crespo 1996 Ed Yarnall 1995 Ryan Bowers 1994 Bryon Gainey 1993 Mike Welch 1991 Jeff Kiraly 1990 Micah Franklin 1989 Brook Fordyce 1988 Derrick Warren 1988 Doug Saunders 1987 Tim Hines 1986 Jim Morrisette 1986 John Wenrick  1986 Ronald Height 1985 Rob Lemle 1985 Andy Berg  1985 Robert Doman  1985 John Sellick  1984 Mark Brunswick 1984 John Alva  1984 Mike Westbrook 1983 Rick Aguilera 1983 Miles Schuler 1982 Roger McDowell 1982 Jim Benedict  1982 Kal Daniels 1982 Marvin Parker 1981 Greg Griffin  1981 Reynaldo Tolentino  1981 Nick Esposito  1980 Jody Johnston  1980 Charles Nat 1979 Craig Jones  1979 Sheldon Andrews  1979 Marques Cooper 1978 Brian Giles 1978 Marty Barrett  1977 Steve McQueen  1977 Donald Hess 1977 Michael Matlock 1976 Curtis Baker  1976 Michael Coppess  1976 Jody Davis 1976 Michael Coppess 1975 George Milke 1975 Rick Sander 1975 Jackie Smith  1974 Keith Bodie 1974 James Eble 1973 Gary Nevinger 1973 Andrew Jackson 1973 Chris Lynch  1972 Craig Swan 1972 John Blue 1972 Roger Danson 1971 John Busco 1971 Michael McManus  1971 Paul Bagnasco 1971 Keith Buckingham 1971 Mardie Cornejo  1970 Michael Graham 1970 Ken Wamble  1970 Clarence Bass 1970 David Breshears 1969 Garnett Davis 1969 Larry Fritz 1969 Doug Britelle  1969 Greg Archer 1968 Bernie Boehmer  1968 Ray Peters  1968 Fred Kampf 1967 Gary Myers  1967 Gary Gentry 1967 Thomas Grubb 1967 Richard Carlson 1966 Donald Linehan 1966 Danny Frisella 1966 Mike Griffith 1966 Dewey Weaver 1965 Joe Moock

Mets – Willets Point Jan 30 2014 10:29 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ed Yarnall brought us Mike Piazza. Marty Barrett brought us the last out of the 1986 World Series.

Edgy MD Jan 30 2014 10:43 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Interesting that perhaps the three best players (for the Mets, anyhow) on that list were near-ace guys who got waylaid --- Swan and Gentry by injuries and Aguilera just not being able to prosper on a starter's workload and peaking only after becoming a full-time reliever.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 30 2014 11:21 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Ed Yarnall brought us Mike Piazza. Marty Barrett brought us the last out of the 1986 World Series. Yes, but Steve McQueen brought us Bullitt and The Thomas Crown Affair. And John Blue gave us edifying films of a different nature, I think, probably.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 03 2014 07:11 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Eight weeks until Opening Day. And what, three weeks until position players report to spring training? I would think that this has to be resolved fairly soon.

Nymr83 Feb 03 2014 07:59 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Eight weeks until Opening Day. And what, three weeks until position players report to spring training? I would think that this has to be resolved fairly soon. Resolved by reporting to st lucie.! How much does Tejada have to be sweating this out right now? Checking espn every hour just hopeing this guy signed elsewhere.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 03 2014 08:12 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'm pretty convinced the Mets shortstop won't be Drew (don't wanna spend the $$) and won't be Tejada (attitude & results terrible). Spring training trade involving Doodoo OR Ike and one of the pitching prospects lands a guy like Didi Gregorious with us or maybe even that other Dbaggs SS. WRITE IT DOWN

Zvon Feb 03 2014 01:41 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm pretty convinced the Mets shortstop won't be Drew (don't wanna spend the $$) and won't be Tejada (attitude & results terrible). Spring training trade involving Doodoo OR Ike and one of the pitching prospects lands a guy like Didi Gregorious with us or maybe even that other Dbaggs SS. WRITE IT DOWN Noted. I thought Tejada was on track to be in good shape and possibly out of the doghouse by seasons start. No? I'm pretty convinced the starting SS will be Tejada at this point. CARVE THAT ON A TREE or something..

Edgy MD Feb 03 2014 01:54 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

The Pirates, who can do better than Gaby Sanchez at first, went out and re-signed Clint Barmes, though he's currently listed as third on their depth chart behind Jody Mercer and Josh Harrison. Conclusion: the Mets will make a deal with the Pirates for a shortstop. Tie that to a brick and throw it through the window of the old abandoned tire factory. Scribble it in the margins of that copy of Stalag 17 before you return it to the library. Make a meme of it and upload it to Pinterest, because brother, this is what is going to come to pass.

smg58 Feb 03 2014 02:33 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

The Mets will deal for one of the four shortstops in the consensus list of top ten prospects in the game (or for Jurickson Profar, who still kind of counts as an elite shortstop prospect). Make a mental note that it was in this thread and then promptly forget it when something else happens.

Lefty Specialist Feb 03 2014 02:48 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Funny story. I was walking through the woods yesterday, and wouldn't you know it....

Zvon Feb 03 2014 04:26 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Tie that to a brick and throw it through the window of the old abandoned tire factory. Scribble it in the margins of that copy of Stalag 17 before you return it to the library. Make a meme of it and upload it to Pinterest, because brother, this is what is going to come to pass. Lefty Specialist wrote: Funny story. I was walking through the woods yesterday, and wouldn't you know it.... lol & ha!

Edgy MD Feb 04 2014 12:10 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Twitter just blew up with reports from King Cotton that the Mets have an offer to Drew on the table.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 04 2014 12:14 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I just checked Google News, and I see a lot of reports that the Red Sox are the team with the two-year deal on the table.

Edgy MD Feb 04 2014 12:16 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Are you doubting WFAN's leading broadcastuh?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 04 2014 12:19 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I guess I am!

Edgy MD Feb 04 2014 12:30 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Mets blog on Francesa report: http://metsblog.com/mets-rumors/stephen ... ear-offer/ Mets made an offer, as did Red Sox February 4th, 2014 2:25 pm The Mets made an offer to free-agent SS Stephen Drew and continue to negotiate over the length of the deal, WFAN’s Mike Francesa said on air Tuesday (Brender, Feb. 4). 5:00 am: MLB Network’s Peter Gammons said Tuesday that he believes Drew will eventually sign with the Mets. (What? Not Beirut?) Last week, Sandy Alderson said he’s continuing to monitor Drew’s situation, but signing the shortstop remains unlikely (DiComo, Jan. 29). It was reported late Tuesday that the Red Sox made a two-year offer to Drew (Bowden, Feb. 3). However, according to Gammons, Boston is asking Drew to essentially be a utility infielder, playing shortstop, third and second base. Matthew Cerrone, Lead Writer The way I understand it, Drew is still insisting on a three- or four-year deal, and no team (including the Mets) seems to want to go there. The Blue Jays, A’s and Twins are also reportedly interested (Martino, Jan. 27, Heyman, Jan. 28), so maybe he still feels he has leverage. He’s reportedly willing to play multiple positions, but I assume that is simply a way to get more teams involved. In the end, I have to think he’d prefer to be a starting shortstop, which is something the Mets can offer him that Boston cannot. The Blue Jays have Jose Reyes and Houston has a bright, up-and-coming prospect ready to take over. The A’s have Nick Punto and Jed Lowrie. So, again, like I said months ago, the Twins and Mets may end up Drew’s best option…

Benjamin Grimm Feb 04 2014 12:38 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'd be okay with a two-year deal for Drew. I find myself hoping it happens.

Edgy MD Feb 04 2014 12:52 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Kristie Ackert ?@AckertNYDN 4m #Mets source says no offer on the table for Stephen Drew at this time. I haven't heard the clip, but perhaps it's just poorly phrased wishful thinking/pot stirring by Francesa. It's the sort of thing he usually gets right, though.

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2014 02:37 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: ... However, according to Gammons, Boston is asking Drew to essentially be a utility infielder, playing shortstop, third and second base. [Drew is] reportedly willing to play multiple positions, but I assume that is simply a way to get more teams involved. In the end, I have to think he’d prefer to be a starting shortstop, which is something the Mets can offer him that Boston cannot. This is where I think the Mets' advantage has always been. It's why I never bought the (probably Boras planted) Yanqui stories and if I'm Boston I'm putting Sander Bogaerts* at SS and looking for an easier to find (and pay) 3B stick that can approximate what Drew gave them in 2013 while also getting an extra top-100 (70-ish) draft pick out of it all. Doesn't mean they wouldn't take Drew back, but that they can afford to do it on their terms and not Boras's. * Bogaerts seems to be emerging as the #2 prospect in all of baseball according to the lists this winter and certainly had an impressive (even if short) trial run late last season.

Edgy MD Feb 04 2014 03:19 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

It seems the Twinks are playing the game the same way the Mets are --- laying back and hoping Drew will fall into their laps, while playing it like they don't care one way or the other. Man, the modern MLB GM has to be a little like the Fonz.

Ashie62 Feb 04 2014 08:43 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Red Sox Xander Bogaerts Twins Miguel Sano Astro Charles Correa I'd be happy to have Drew...

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 04 2014 10:20 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Sano's a third baseman. Drew would be their starter in the hole.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2014 12:34 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Reports say that Boras is looking for a multi-year deal with a "opt out" after the first year. Which means that if he's good in 2014, you lose him, and if he sucks, you're stuck with him for multiple years. It doesn't seem like any rational team would go for that.

Edgy MD Feb 07 2014 12:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well, what's weird is that the prior reports said that the Mets wanted to go short. Now there's this notion of an out and reports say, NO, the Mets want to lock him up for three years. Sounds like both sides are grandstanding.

Ashie62 Feb 07 2014 12:44 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Being that spring training is almost upon us something with Drew should pop soon, to me it feels like real soon...

Ceetar Feb 07 2014 01:36 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Reports say that Boras is looking for a multi-year deal with a "opt out" after the first year. Which means that if he's good in 2014, you lose him, and if he sucks, you're stuck with him for multiple years. It doesn't seem like any rational team would go for that. Well, if you sign him for 2-3 you are stuck with him anyway. That works for me. Hope he's good this year, hope he opts out, get an extra draft pick to supplement the one that _hopefully_ won't be protected and you might lose by signing someone else. Gives you the freedom to pursue other free agents next year without giving up on having a first round pick.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2014 01:41 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, but if you sign him for three years and he's good, you only keep him for one. The only way you end up with him for three years is if he sucks. What kind of team would go for that?

Edgy MD Feb 07 2014 01:53 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

There are worse things than getting him for one good year though. Teams get escape clauses in the form of option years. So it's not unreasonable for players to ask for them, even if it's a tough sell. Compromise: sign him for two and split the risk. Or two plus an option. He can get the opt-out on the second year and the team can get the opt-in on the third. it's negotiating. It's actually coming closer to the Mets position and that's good.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2014 01:59 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If the opt out is after the second of three years, that's much more acceptable than if it's after the first year.

G-Fafif Feb 07 2014 02:06 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I believe there's the raw material for a negative advertising campaign here. V/O If Stephen Drew wants to be a Met, why is he so anxious to leave the team after only one year? If Stephen Drew is such a terrific shortstop, why isn't he signed to a contract yet? What is Stephen Drew hiding? And why does he want to keep hiding it from 30 prospective employers? CANDIDATE I'm Ruben Tejada, and you know I'll be in Port St. Lucie this week. Where will Stephen Drew be? I haven't seen him. Have you? Paid for by the Committee to Retain Ruben; Jeff Wilpon, chairman

Edgy MD Feb 07 2014 02:13 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

"Stephen Drew is represented by SCOTT BORAS, agent to such notorious figures as Alex Rodriguez, Francisco Rodríguez, and Kenny Rogers. Want Stephen Drew on the Mets? Better clean out that jail cell under the stands at Citi Field!"

G-Fafif Feb 07 2014 02:21 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Stephen Drew spent 2013 in RED socks. For most of the 20th century, America fought a red menace. After our brave military fought long and hard to tear down a wall, Stephen Drew was more than happy to play his games in the shadow of another foreboding wall...a MONSTER of a wall. Stephen Drew. Cold war nightmares. Why would we ever want to go back?

Centerfield Feb 07 2014 03:54 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I would hate to be Stephen Drew this week. "Hey any more offers come in?" Who fucking cares? Ralph Kiner just died. Show some respect. "Um. Ok."

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 07 2014 08:13 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

G-Fafif wrote: I believe there's the raw material for a negative advertising campaign here. V/O If Stephen Drew wants to be a Met, why is he so anxious to leave the team after only one year? If Stephen Drew is such a terrific shortstop, why isn't he signed to a contract yet? What is Stephen Drew hiding? And why does he want to keep hiding it from 30 prospective employers? CANDIDATE I'm Ruben Tejada, and you know I'll be in Port St. Lucie this week. Where will Stephen Drew be? I haven't seen him. Have you? Paid for by the Committee to Retain Ruben; Jeff Wilpon, chairman I'm Johnny Lunchbucket, and I approve this message.

Lefty Specialist Feb 08 2014 05:25 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm Omar Quintanilla, and I approve this message. Fixed that for you.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 08 2014 07:40 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Don't Be Hemmed In By Those Phonies Asking For More And More Years, Or Making The Same Old Empty Promises Of Leaving... Look To The Future... Go Green... Say It: With FLORES!

MFS62 Feb 08 2014 05:38 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Everybody is talking about Drew, but has anybody actually talked to him? Does he exist, or he some imaginary figure like a unicorn? Maybe we could ask Nancy Drew to solve the mystery. Later

Vic Sage Feb 09 2014 07:12 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

As long as its no more than a 2-3 year deal, i'm ok with him having an "opt out"; i've been hoping they wouldn't sign him for more than 1 year, so why should i be concerned if he opted out after only 1 year? If he has a great year, then great for him and for us. And if he stinks, well... if they are willing to sign him for 2+ years, they're running the risk of him stinking for the duration of the deal anyway, opt out or no, so they just have to sign him at a favorable price that doesn't prohibit them from dumping, dealing or living with it. And even if he sucks, he might opt out anyway just to get away from CitiField, the team and/or NYC. They're not BUILDING around Stephen Drew, so i don't care if he leaves. He's a short-term stopgap we could put in place to help the team not stink quite so much as we continue to develop our future SS options. Maybe a year in AAA or on the bench as a utility guy forces Tejada to grow up and work harder. Maybe one of the other prospects work out. Maybe other FAs or trade options become available.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 09 2014 08:02 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

An opt-out after the first year of a three-year deal means you end up paying him more money if he's bad than you do if he's good. It doesn't make any sense to me. My concern isn't with him leaving after one, it's with him having the second and third years guaranteed only if he's bad.

Nymr83 Feb 09 2014 09:26 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: An opt-out after the first year of a three-year deal means you end up paying him more money if he's bad than you do if he's good. It doesn't make any sense to me. My concern isn't with him leaving after one, it's with him having the second and third years guaranteed only if he's bad. I agree completely with the big orange guy, If Drew & his agent think the market for him will be better next offseason then we should be willing to offer a 1 year deal, no further risk to either side. If Drew wants the security of a multi-year deal, he should accept the risk that the Mets get a good price on him if he plays well.

Ceetar Feb 09 2014 09:32 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: An opt-out after the first year of a three-year deal means you end up paying him more money if he's bad than you do if he's good. It doesn't make any sense to me. My concern isn't with him leaving after one, it's with him having the second and third years guaranteed only if he's bad. What if he's not bad or good, merely pretty good. I don't really care if it's 1,2,3 or 17 years, if the Mets think he's not going to be useful they shouldn't sign him at all. And even if he's bad in the first year (or hurt) doesn't mean he will be the year after. Additionally, even if he's good and walks you get a draft pick AND you get a year of a good SS, which you know, is kinda the point.

Frayed Knot Feb 09 2014 10:25 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Remember that the team only gets a draft pick for a leaving player if they are willing to make him one of the top certain number of players in the league (forget the exact number) by offering him an arbitration amount that reaches that level. That minimum level this year was $14.1 million (it was something like $13.5 last year - the first year this particular system has been in effect - so it may be closer to $15 next off-season). IOW, gaining a pick for a leaving FA is hardly an automatic thing so it's not something a team can plan for when it originally signs him. If Drew, or someone in a similar situation, doesn't have a good year then his team is going to be less likely to make that qualifying offer, and if you do make it you have to be willing to use him at that price if he accepts.

Ceetar Feb 09 2014 12:45 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

well yes, but if it's a three year deal, (say 3/30 ) he's not opting out of 2/20 to accept 1/15. And he has to decline the 1/15 before fishing for better than 2/20.

Nymr83 Feb 09 2014 01:03 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ceetar wrote: well yes, but if it's a three year deal, (say 3/30 ) he's not opting out of 2/20 to accept 1/15. And he has to decline the 1/15 before fishing for better than 2/20. Why would he not? 1.15 is better than 2.20 for 95 % of players.

Ceetar Feb 09 2014 03:44 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Nymr83 wrote: Ceetar wrote: well yes, but if it's a three year deal, (say 3/30 ) he's not opting out of 2/20 to accept 1/15. And he has to decline the 1/15 before fishing for better than 2/20. Why would he not? 1.15 is better than 2.20 for 95 % of players. What if he gets hurt? what if it's 2/24? what if the Mets decide not to offer it?

MFS62 Feb 09 2014 04:02 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ralph Kiner told a story of when he was with the Pirates and asked GM Branch Rickey for a raise. Branch told him, "We finished last with you and we can finist last without you". Unless the Mets feel Drew would significantly improve where they finish, they might pass. Later

Edgy MD Feb 09 2014 07:30 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

They might pass indeed. They have so far. I'm sure they've coldly calculated what he'd be likely worth to the team and set their ceiling based on the expected financial value of that worth. But they didn't finish in last. And they didn't finish where they did with him. So that only applies so far.

Mex17 Feb 11 2014 06:34 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

The guy can either accept the reality of what he is worth and sign a contract to play baseball for millions of dollars (albiet a few millions less than what he wanted or what his silver-tongued agent "promised" him) or he can not and apply for a job at the nearest Wal-Mart. It's really that simple. Clock's ticking.

Nymr83 Feb 11 2014 07:22 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Theres a great insider article today about how valuable draft picks are based on the expectd career WAR of a pick and what you would pay for that in the open market... the vonclusion is that most of these free agents with draft picks attached have very little value. Signing Drew is actually a NEGATIVE VALUE proposition top any of the teams who lose a first rounder. For the Mets it's ok since they only lose a third, but not on what works out to a 1 year.

Frayed Knot Feb 11 2014 07:55 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, the draft pick associated with signing Drew can range anywhere from #11 overall to maybe 80th or so, so obviously the value is going to vary widely depending on which team does the inking. Also, by linking this process to [u:f77o4p95]Career[/u:f77o4p95] WAR assumes that the team that foregoes the FA to make keep that pick is going to get all that value, something that's not likely. IOW, your mileage may vary.

Nymr83 Feb 11 2014 09:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Frayed Knot wrote: Yeah, the draft pick associated with signing Drew can range anywhere from #11 overall to maybe 80th or so, so obviously the value is going to vary widely depending on which team does the inking. Also, by linking this process to Career WAR assumes that the team that foregoes the FA to make keep that pick is going to get all that value, something that's not likely. IOW, your mileage may vary. Sorry, they actually used the first x years of war covering the pick through arbitration, though most pf the value probably comes from pre arb superstars.

Ceetar Feb 12 2014 07:27 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I predicted/guessed/shotinthedark Drew would sign with the Mets by the time the snow finishes falling tomorrow.

Mex17 Feb 15 2014 03:51 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

No one is really speculating on this, but what are the chances of him actually going to the Twins or Astros?

Edgy MD Feb 15 2014 04:59 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

He's got to go somewhere.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 15 2014 05:11 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Opening Day just a little more than six weeks away. This can't drag on much longer.

Lefty Specialist Feb 15 2014 05:29 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If I'm Stephen Drew, I'm a little antsy right about now. I still don't think he comes to the Mets, but wherever he signs it'll probably be for less than he could have gotten a month ago.

Frayed Knot Feb 15 2014 06:06 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If so he wouldn't be the first guy who had to settle for less by following Boras's strategy of waiting for the big deal that never arrived. He could just wind up with a one-year deal (in which case he would have been better off taking the qualifying offer from the BoSox) and then try the FA thing again next year. On the other hand, it's possible that the Jeter announcement (have you heard that Jeter is planning on retiring after this season?) makes the Yanquis suddenly more interested either now--fill in at other positions now kid and we promise to let you play SS full-time next year--or for 2015

Nymr83 Feb 15 2014 11:59 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Frayed Knot wrote: If so he wouldn't be the first guy who had to settle for less by following Boras's strategy of waiting for the big deal that never arrived. He could just wind up with a one-year deal (in which case he would have been better off taking the qualifying offer from the BoSox) and then try the FA thing again next year. On the other hand, it's possible that the Jeter announcement (have you heard that Jeter is planning on retiring after this season?) makes the Yanquis suddenly more interested either now--fill in at other positions now kid and we promise to let you play SS full-time next year--or for 2015 if he accepted the qualifying offer he'd have been back in the same spot next year, no? what he really needs to do now, i think, is find a one year deal BUT with a team that agrees not to offer arbitration so that he wont have the draft pick attached to him again next offseason.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2014 01:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Nymr83 wrote: if he accepted the qualifying offer he'd have been back in the same spot next year, no? With $14 million more in his bank account, and possibly with a more appealing CV and a different market.

Nymr83 Feb 15 2014 04:02 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: if he accepted the qualifying offer he'd have been back in the same spot next year, no? With $14 million more in his bank account, and possibly with a more appealing CV and a different market. Well, I don't think that even a good year (or a repeat of the best year he's had in the last 3 lets say) improves his market too much because of the draft pick compensation attached to him. The compensation kills mid-level free agents because its just not worth losing a 1st round pick to get 2-3 years of a 2-3 WAR guy at a reasonable contract number. There are probably about a half dozen guys strongly affected by this each year and that wasn't enough for the union to make it a sticking point (or they really got outfoxed in the last CBA, either way its bad for Drew). There are only 2 ways to get rid of that draft pick: sign with a team that agrees not to make a qualifying offer (and take less as a result) or get traded mid-season (compensation doesn't attach to someone you acquired this year). Drew can't control the 2nd option. Now Drew's loss could really be the Mets' gain here, because they look to be the only team that 1) really needs a shortstop and 2) would lose only a 3rd round pick. The Red Sox are the only other team that wouldn't lose a higher pick but they have a prospect they feel is ready and they "lose out" on the compensation pick if they don't let him go elsewhere. The system is kinda dumb, but the Mets need to be smart here and take advantage.

d'Kong76 Feb 18 2014 07:56 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I predict ownership collusion allegations ... this should be done, somewhere. Someplace.

metsmarathon Feb 18 2014 08:06 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Nymr83 wrote: if he accepted the qualifying offer he'd have been back in the same spot next year, no? With $14 million more in his bank account, and possibly with a more appealing CV and a different market. and with a team that would not be quite so quick to make a qualifying offer knowing that the player just might go ahead and take it again.

Mets Guy in Michigan Feb 18 2014 08:33 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I wonder of Boras over-played his hand here.

Nymr83 Feb 18 2014 08:41 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

d'Kong76 wrote: I predict ownership collusion allegations ... this should be done, somewhere. Someplace. There are always allegations, but the CBA is to blame here, not collusion.

Edgy MD Feb 18 2014 09:09 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If they were going to collude, why him and apparently only him? Why not Peralta? There's usually somebody left over around now. Last year it was Bourn, this year it's him.

Nymr83 Feb 18 2014 10:33 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: If they were going to collude, why him and apparently only him? Why not Peralta? There's usually somebody left over around now. Last year it was Bourn, this year it's him. ESPN Ranked the Free Agents, of their top 50, 4 remain: 6- Ervin Santana 9- Stephen Drew 23- Nelson Cruz 25 - Kendry Morales All 4 have draft picks attached to them, which is no accident. Freddie Coupon has signed numbers 13, 15 and 34 on that list. the mets did not lose anyone on the list. not a bad offseason by most standards.

Edgy MD Feb 19 2014 06:33 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Listen, if you want to argue for fewer restrictions on the talent marketplace, and every last vestige of the reserve clause destroyed, you've got no greater ally than me. My only point is that he wasn't a particular victim of collusion, beyond the greater collusion that is the restrictions of free agent system itself.

metsmarathon Feb 19 2014 06:59 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

he's a victim of the current draft pick compensation. the latest CBA really fucked that shit up good.

Frayed Knot Feb 19 2014 07:14 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

metsmarathon wrote: he's a victim of the current draft pick compensation. the latest CBA really fucked that shit up good. Well, two ways to look at that I suppose. 1) there are far fewer players now who cost a signing team a compensation pick, fewer signing teams that have their picks protected, and the picks that the losing team gets aren't as high as they used to be. So by that measure the latest CBA improved things from the days when situational relievers who sometimes never even made a contribution to their new team (like say Pedro Feliciano ... heh, heh, heh) involved draft picks. 2) Now that there are so few FAs that warrant compensation, the signing teams are more cautious than ever about signing one of them

Ceetar Feb 19 2014 07:24 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

metsmarathon wrote: he's a victim of the current draft pick compensation. the latest CBA really fucked that shit up good. Maybe in part. But it's not like no one wants him. if he's still not coming down from 42/3 and an opt out clause he may just be overvaluing himself. Even with the lack of shortstops, it seems like teams are unwilling to commit to anyone that's not the best. maybe because it's usually not as difficult to play a no-offensive glove guy there out of an athletic minor leaguer?

metsmarathon Feb 19 2014 08:01 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Frayed Knot wrote: metsmarathon wrote: he's a victim of the current draft pick compensation. the latest CBA really fucked that shit up good. Well, two ways to look at that I suppose. 1) there are far fewer players now who cost a signing team a compensation pick, fewer signing teams that have their picks protected, and the picks that the losing team gets aren't as high as they used to be. So by that measure the latest CBA improved things from the days when situational relievers who sometimes never even made a contribution to their new team (like say Pedro Feliciano ... heh, heh, heh) involved draft picks. 2) Now that there are so few FAs that warrant compensation, the signing teams are more cautious than ever about signing one of them yes, the old system was rather wacky in how it determined the value of those eplayers. particularly for relievers, but really for all players. in the past, there were really so many compensation picks flying around that it didn't matter all that much for teams, especially in larger markets, to lose a pick for a player they wanted. and with the type-B players, the signing team didn't really lose anything anyway. the current problem is that there are players now who are, effectively, type B players who are costing their signing team type-A compensation. there's also the caution over losing a high draft pick that you mentioned, plus a new-found emphasis on the future value of those draft picks that teams are really finally coming around to realizing. this seems to have not been well-anticipated in the development of the current CBA. i felt the prior system was fairly robust, with tweaks really only needing to be made for the ranking system of type-A vs. type-B. i'm not sure if i like that in-season trades strip away the compensation pick. i always tended to like that feature as it boosted the trade market.

Ceetar Feb 19 2014 08:11 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

metsmarathon wrote: . i'm not sure if i like that in-season trades strip away the compensation pick. i always tended to like that feature as it boosted the trade market. I think it might have been suppressing the trade market a little actually, as teams started to realize it'd be better to hang on to those guys. Especially when those guys were on non-contending teams that probably wouldn't be able to afford them in FA. Unless you find a team that wants him and is willing to give you specific players/prospects that you really want, you'd often be more inclined to pick your poison in the draft. But on the other hand, the acquiring team knew they'd be getting a draft pick too so wouldn't be as worried about tossing a prospect maybe they weren't as thrilled with in trade.

Nymr83 Feb 19 2014 08:23 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Listen, if you want to argue for fewer restrictions on the talent marketplace, and every last vestige of the reserve clause destroyed, you've got no greater ally than me. My only point is that he wasn't a particular victim of collusion, beyond the greater collusion that is the restrictions of free agent system itself. Are you responding to me? I agree with you, when i said "no accident" i meant the cba was causing it,not collusion

Frayed Knot Feb 19 2014 10:09 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

metsmarathon wrote: the current problem is that there are players now who are, effectively, type B players who are costing their signing team type-A compensation. there's also the caution over losing a high draft pick that you mentioned, plus a new-found emphasis on the future value of those draft picks that teams are really finally coming around to realizing. Well, if teams are offering at least the qualifying minimum (top 1/6 of all salaries) to someone who is essentially a 'Type B' player then the player might be better off accepting the offer. I'm pretty sure all the players who have received the qualifying offer in the two years this system has been in place (about 10-12 each year) would have been 'Type A' under the old system, and that the old system would have produced more FAs due compensation with heavier compensation attached (two picks instead of one, higher picks, etc.) Players and agents, of course, would like to do away with the system entirely, but I think this is at least a step in that direction.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 19 2014 02:23 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Bill Madden speculating that Steve Boras may actually let Drew go unsigned past Opening Day.

Ceetar Feb 19 2014 02:35 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Bill Madden speculating that Steve Boras may actually let Drew go unsigned past Opening Day. bluff? It seems like he'd only _lose_ value (unless they're gambling on an injury) as teams get through Spring Training and make decisions and plans for the roster without him.

Edgy MD Feb 19 2014 02:42 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Bill Madden's a Hall of Famer, guys. This really underscores the need for us to buy up one of those abandoned spring training facilities, preferably the old Dodgertown, and create a camp for unsigned vets.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 19 2014 02:46 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ceetar wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: Bill Madden speculating that Steve Boras may actually let Drew go unsigned past Opening Day. bluff? It seems like he'd only _lose_ value (unless they're gambling on an injury) as teams get through Spring Training and make decisions and plans for the roster without him. Yeah, maybe Boras is figuring that if Ruben Tejada, for example, has an awful spring, the Mets may become more desperate. (Or the same with the Red Sox and their young phenom, whatever his name is.) And if that doesn't come to pass, then maybe some other team will discover a weakness at shortstop (or perhaps second or third base?) and suddenly become interested. It's definitely a gamble. But Boras has maneuvered his client into a bad spot.

Edgy MD Feb 19 2014 02:48 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I guess that "offer on the table" Mike Francesa broke was eyewash.

Nymr83 Feb 19 2014 09:32 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

This really underscores the need for us to buy up one of those abandoned spring training facilities, preferably the old Dodgertown, and create a camp for unsigned vets. I think they have this in Football and guys PAY you to show up and play, the business model is that you are promising your games (against the other guys in your facility) give these guys a higher level of competition to prove themselves against than they'd get anywhere else that isnt actually a major league camp. of course, if 2 or 3 super-agents were smart they'd band togther to do this themselves and be able to hold that out as one more reason to sign with them for fringe guys (and they hope one of these guy hits the lotto and pays for it all)

Edgy MD Feb 19 2014 09:37 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

WE'RE smart! Let's go!

Mets Guy in Michigan Feb 20 2014 10:50 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Don't want to thread jack, but it's horrible that Dodgertown isn't being used. What a wonderful place to see a spring game.

Ashie62 Feb 20 2014 04:13 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

If I am Stephen Drew I am so firing Scott Boras.

Lefty Specialist Feb 20 2014 05:20 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ashie62 wrote: If I am Stephen Drew I am so firing Scott Boras. Well, depends on what happens. If a contending team loses their SS in spring training and they overpay in desperation, Boras is a genius.

Frayed Knot Feb 20 2014 07:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Besides, it's not like these players get into bed with Boras not knowing how he operates - especially Drew he had his older brother (maybe both of them) work with Boras as well. Hell, this whole strategy could very well be at Drew's insistence.

smg58 Feb 20 2014 08:18 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Right. I'm withholding judgement on all interested parties until I see what kind of deal Drew signs.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 22 2014 01:21 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Jon Heyman checks in with Stephen Drew He's at a "Boras camp" working out with other still-unsigned free agents. Working at the camp is former Met Alex Ochoa!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 22 2014 03:26 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I'm guessing that when/if they play intrasquad games, both teams go unnamed.

Edgy MD Feb 24 2014 10:24 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Boras is suggesting that Drew and others might sit out until June, which would certainly cost the players munny and a part of their legacies, but could be a big blow against what's left of the compensation system.

Ceetar Feb 24 2014 10:33 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: Boras is suggesting that Drew and others might sit out until June, which would certainly cost the players munny and a part of their legacies, but could be a big blow against what's left of the compensation system. Sitting out may be beneficial to the labor agreements/compensation clauses, but I hope Drew and others realize they're mostly being used as pawns by the players association/agents for that cause. Sitting out will be detrimental to them personally I would think. They'll clearly get less (unless they're hoping to make a "you're desparate!" plea?) for less work. And I wonder how they'll be perceived in terms of teammates and work ethic for sitting out half the season, especially if they end up somewhere that just misses the playoffs.

metirish Feb 24 2014 10:38 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Yeah, looks like they are overplaying their hand here....

Ashie62 Feb 24 2014 04:30 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

How about 2/22 for Drew now?

Nymr83 Feb 24 2014 09:42 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Sitting out until June doesnt seem too smart for the player. It also doesnt really help the "players' cause". if a player who was employed by one team "held out" they'd care because they were counting on his services, but for a free agent to refuse to sign with anyone doesnt make anyone feel they are losing out. as for the team that eventually signs him, i cant see any fallout. the players will understand it as a business decision and the fans need to realize that if he'd signed sooner it might not have been with their team at all!

Edgy MD Feb 24 2014 09:57 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I think it does help the player's cause. It denies not one, but potentially two teams of compensatory draft picks, and it underscores an extreme situation that a handful of players found themselves to be in due to little fault of their own (possibly by being a little bit too good), therefore strengthening the resolve of the players union to push further against free agent compensation. And if multiple players shoot for that loophole together, well shoot, that's solidarity, and the teams can't ignore them all for long. I mean, once upon a time, you'd've thought that the guy that was needlessly shooting himself in the foot in a fit of obstinacy was Curt Flood.

Ceetar Feb 25 2014 07:35 AM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Edgy MD wrote: I think it does help the player's cause. It denies not one, but potentially two teams of compensatory draft picks, and it underscores an extreme situation that a handful of players found themselves to be in due to little fault of their own (possibly by being a little bit too good), therefore strengthening the resolve of the players union to push further against free agent compensation. . That maybe helps the cause in general but not the player who will now get less money for less work, and while the compensation pick (may) be hurting them, though we're not even sure Drew has any real suitors willing to give him what he's asking for, it could help to in that teams now they can hire a mercenary and if he's good and walks they get a pick back afterwards. And now look, perhaps Boras and Drew are looking to sign a one-year and try free agency again next year, but with the threat of staying out until June teams are going to be more wary whereas they might be willing to splurge on a one year deal figuring they get a pick out of it afterwards. Keep in mind the two main teams mentioned for Drew are the Red Sox, who wouldn't give up a pick, and the Mets who'd only give up a third rounder.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 26 2014 12:54 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Is this guy still alive? He must be seriously rethinking his strategy.

Frayed Knot Apr 26 2014 01:22 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Once you make the decision to go in with Scott Boras you pretty much know this is a strategy going in. Brother J.D. played independent league ball for a year after being drafted #2 overall because they were waiting for a better offer. So while I'm sure this path wasn't his first choice, it's not like he didn't go into this with his eyes wide open either. The next movement we'll probably see at this point will be after the next draft is over (about six weeks away now). At that point the draft pick compensation attachment goes away and money becomes the only obstacle to negotiate.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 26 2014 01:34 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

I find myself hoping he gets less than the $14.1 million (or whatever the number was) that he rejected.

Edgy MD Apr 26 2014 01:41 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

He'll almost have to, considering he's missing a chunk of the season.

dgwphotography Apr 26 2014 07:41 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I find myself hoping he gets less than the $14.1 million (or whatever the number was) that he rejected. Anything that makes Boras look bad makes me smile.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 20 2014 12:50 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Resigns with Red Sox for prorated portion of $14 M salary, Internet says.

Edgy MD May 20 2014 12:53 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Well, that was... long. What's next?

smg58 May 20 2014 02:12 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Ultimately he gets to negotiate next year without having to worry about the qualifying offer, so this may yet pay out for Drew. I'm shocked that he couldn't command more than that, draft pick or not, but I moved on a while ago.

themetfairy May 20 2014 02:16 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Mini Willets must be happy about the signing.

Mets – Willets Point May 20 2014 03:32 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Resigns with Red Sox for prorated portion of $14 M salary, Internet says. I know one person who will be really happy about this.

Edgy MD May 20 2014 03:40 PM Re: Has anybody mentioned Stephen Drew?

Seriously. Mrs. Drew is ECSTATIC.