Master Index of Archived Threads


General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

MFS62 Dec 07 2014 08:21 AM

How many deals do you think the Mets will announce by the end of the meetings? That includes the Rule V Draft. Later

bmfc1 Dec 07 2014 08:35 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Zero. Sandy doesn't have the ingenuity or the drive (and perhaps the money) to make a big trade for a SS. As a result, the remaining options are no better than what Wilmer Flores could be. If you want to counter this by saying that the big SS options (Andrus, Castro, Tulo aren't worth the price of depleting the system, go ahead). He'll say that they "laid the groundwork" to more talks... whatever that means. They'll lose someone in the Rule V. They might pick up someone in the minor league phase of the Rule V. Perhaps they'll sign a relief pitcher but I don't expect much except lots of boring press conferences.

Frayed Knot Dec 07 2014 09:05 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

MFS62 wrote: How many deals do you think the Mets will announce by the end of the meetings? That includes the Rule V Draft. Later 75

Edgy MD Dec 07 2014 02:20 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I am certain Alderson doesn't lack for ingenuity. I am almost equally certain that the team will experience some meaningful cradle-robbing during the Rule V draft --- possibly both in the major league and minor league portions. But they must be planning to reel in somebody because they're facing the draft with a spot open on their roster.

Lefty Specialist Dec 07 2014 02:40 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

One minor deal/signing which will have no impact in 2015.

d'Kong76 Dec 07 2014 02:59 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Frequent flyer miles, platinum card points, ball- rubbin'-yubba-dub-dub-dub in the hot tub. Other than that, not expecting much. Heck, we got Cuddyer... and QUICK. That's all folks!!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 07 2014 03:29 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

bmfc1 wrote: Zero. Sandy doesn't have the ingenuity or the drive (and perhaps the money) to make a big trade for a SS. As a result, the remaining options are no better than what Wilmer Flores could be. If you want to counter this by saying that the big SS options (Andrus, Castro, Tulo aren't worth the price of depleting the system, go ahead). Messrs. Herrera, Black, d'Arnaud, Syndergaard, Bucerra, and the Davis pair beg to differ with your opinion of Alderson's trading acumen/willingness. I think I see at least one mid-to-mid-plus-sized deal involving our big-leaguers (shot in the dark: Flores and Niese or Montero for something interesting) happening. I also think we're going to get stripped for at least three prospects during Rule V-ing.

bmfc1 Dec 07 2014 03:36 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

You omitted Zach Wheeler. However, I'd like him to finish over .500 at least once before deciding that he's done a good job. As of now, he's done a lousy job and I hope he proves me wrong this week by getting an all-star SS.

Edgy MD Dec 07 2014 03:42 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

If finishing over .500 is the measure of a not-lousy job being done, acquiring an all-star shortstop --- or any winter acquisition --- certainly won't prove anything.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 07 2014 04:19 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

bmfc1 wrote: You omitted Zach Wheeler. However, I'd like him to finish over .500 at least once before deciding that he's done a good job. As of now, he's done a lousy job and I hope he proves me wrong this week by getting an all-star SS. I think your version of a team-in-turnaround GM's job description is a little more, um, differently-focused than, say, Alderson's.

Ashie62 Dec 07 2014 04:39 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Surprise us Sandy, we aren't expecting much.

Rockin' Doc Dec 07 2014 07:31 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Ashie62 wrote: Surprise us Sandy, we aren't expecting much. We aren't expecting much....we're Mets fans.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 07 2014 08:11 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: bmfc1 wrote: You omitted Zach Wheeler. However, I'd like him to finish over .500 at least once before deciding that he's done a good job. As of now, he's done a lousy job and I hope he proves me wrong this week by getting an all-star SS. I think your version of a team-in-turnaround GM's job description is a little more, um, differently-focused than, say, Alderson's. Really. And it's not just a turnaround, it's a turnaround executed in an inflationary market while slashing the team's own expenses some 40%.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 08 2014 06:06 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I've been predicting they deal for a SS for a year now, I'm gonna be right eventually. If that happens I also think Muffy and Gee go away, but you figure the prize is some Montero level prospect, so if that's the case, I think they get involved in a big, multiplayer, multiteam deal.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 08 2014 06:45 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I don't think it's a turnaround as much as a total reinvention. They're rebuilding the organization and the way it goes about its business, based on building a solid farm system that will reap rewards for years, not just one year. They've tried the "buy the pennant" approach in the past, most recently under Omar. I'm not going to criticize Sandy for not throwing a stupid contract at players like Sin Soo Choo just because they're the best players available in a bad year. Doing it right, building a system that will generate long-term success, takes time.

Edgy MD Dec 08 2014 07:21 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Man, Shin Soo Choo. That's looking like a bullet dodged. Making Curtis Granderson look like a bargain so far.

Ceetar Dec 08 2014 07:29 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Rockin' Doc wrote: Ashie62 wrote: Surprise us Sandy, we aren't expecting much. We aren't expecting much....we're Mets fans. I'm expecting much over here.

Frayed Knot Dec 08 2014 07:31 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Some fans also get the idea into their heads that the conclusion of the winter meetings signals the end of the off-season to the point that whatever your team looks like come Friday is the one you're stuck with throughout 2015. Now I'm sure lots of chess pieces will get moved around this week but there'll still be lots of stuff going on afterward too.

Edgy MD Dec 08 2014 07:36 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Ceetar wrote: Rockin' Doc wrote: Ashie62 wrote: Surprise us Sandy, we aren't expecting much. We aren't expecting much....we're Mets fans. I'm expecting much over here. I'm so pregnant with expectation, I'm putting in for maternity leave.

MFS62 Dec 08 2014 08:49 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Told ya' so. A while ago (don't remember the thread) I predicted that around this time, some writer would drag out the Bobby Bonilla payoff and tie it to whether the Mets would have money for free agents. Let it be written. Let it be done. http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/78790 ... n-magazine Later

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 08 2014 08:53 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

The story was published 3 years ago.

Centerfield Dec 08 2014 09:01 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I don't think anything will happen. As far as I can remember, Sandy hasn't made any moves that caught us completely off guard. Maybe the Cuddyer move was the most surprising, but even that was rumored beforehand. All of his trades have materialized after a certain level of expectation had been established. I am not expecting anything this week. As to his job performance, I think Sandy has done a very good job. He has rebuilt the farm system, but he has had the luxury of being handed some very valuable assets in order to do so. People put a lot of blame on Minaya, but Harvey, Familia, Mejia, Murphy, Lagares, Duda and Davis were all Minaya products. Sandy was also given some very valuable pieces to unload to help build the system in Beltran, Dickey and Reyes. Two of them he turned into gold, one of them he badly muddled. Sandy's biggest strength, I feel, has been his patience, and his ability to wait out a trade market until the deal he is looking for develops. And as he did with Davis, to carry that player if that deal never materializes. I also think he did a great job with the Marlon Byrd sign and trade. We ended up with Dilson Herrera for almost nothing, which helps to soften the blow of losing Reyes. So, in general, I think he has missed a few opportunities, but is a bright guy. I trust his judgment.

d'Kong76 Dec 08 2014 09:39 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

MFS62 wrote: Told ya' so. A while ago (don't remember the thread) I predicted that around this time, some writer would... For my next trick... ;+)

Edgy MD Dec 08 2014 10:09 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets were the first out of the gate with the Cuddyer signing, after outlet after outlet explicitly reported that it wasn't going to happen because the Rockies gave him a qualifying offer. Bartolo Colon was signed a year ago at the meetings, not long after Alderson told the press the team was probably done with major acquisitions. His lieutenants were apparently putting finishing touches on the offer to Colon while he was out there doing his misdirect. Surprises happen, and it's certainly likely a starting pitcher will be dealt sooner or later.

Ceetar Dec 08 2014 02:27 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Sandy: "We like Bartolo Colon and aren't looking to trade him." Sandy: "We'll certainly listen to offers on any of our three veteran pitchers, not just Gee and Niese."

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 08 2014 09:11 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets fans setting themselves on fire wrt Sandy's predictable but somewhat depressing payroll forecast and acknowledgment that maybe nothing would happen at the meetings including moving Colon. Chatter in the meantime says Mets making Syndergaard available in the right deal.

metirish Dec 08 2014 09:21 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I love Alderson with these interviews, he talks a lot bit says nothing, and that I or other Mets fans expect something out of him is funny. Makes for good Twitter fun too.

Edgy MD Dec 08 2014 09:25 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

SNY's Rob Brender reporting that he's in the room as the Mets and Rangers are getting MIGHTY CHUMMY! Last deal between the Mets and Rangers? Jeff Francoeur for Joaquin Arias.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 09 2014 08:20 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Could it be they're discussing Roughned "Stinky" Odor? Great start last year as a 20-year-old but strictly a 2B. Would suggest that Muffy goes (or maybe Herrera?) and that Flores stays at SS. Others speculate they are after Jurickson Profar who is also a highly prized young middle infielder, but who missed all of last year with a shoulder injury. However this works out I have a hard time seeing where Muffy fits into the 2015 Mets.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 10 2014 12:00 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Notorious T.H.E.O. be all, "My key to stocking the Cubs? Mo' money, mo' Lester." (6 years/$155M, as per Jeff Passan.)

Vic Sage Dec 10 2014 08:07 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

He's an excellent pitcher, but he's on the wrong side of 30, with 7 straight 200IP seasons. a 6-year deal for that kind of pitcher is unlikely to go well. But i guess Theo knows that and figures they're 1 pitcher away from being in immediate contention? I don't see it, but he would know better than me.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 10 2014 08:09 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

There is some speculation that Lester was lucky to have become the object of a Big Dick contest between the arrogant Red Sox brass and I'll-show-you deposed leader Theo Epstein.

Edgy MD Dec 10 2014 08:18 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

The Cubs think they're a 200-inning pitcher away, they shoulda talked turkey with the Mets over Bartolo Colon.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 10 2014 12:09 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: There is some speculation that Lester was lucky to have become the object of a Big Dick contest between the arrogant Red Sox brass and I'll-show-you deposed leader Theo Epstein. Giants, too, no?

MFS62 Dec 11 2014 01:54 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Well, at least they made a few moves at the meetings. I was beginning to think I was going to celebrate Pass-over twice this year. Later

Frayed Knot Dec 11 2014 07:00 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Although I checked MLB's bylaws and it turns out that it IS possible to make trades, sign players, and make a myriad of other roster decisions even after the winter meetings are over.

d'Kong76 Dec 11 2014 07:15 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Quotes by team brass about starting season with Flores and Murphy and they were close on things but nothing materialized isn't very encouraging. Cuddyer was a hasty boondoggle or something.

Ashie62 Dec 11 2014 08:21 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I'm good until I hear management suggest Ruben Tejada could be in the SS mix.

Edgy MD Dec 11 2014 08:41 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I've got no problem with Tejada being in the shortstop mix. I hope he hits .450.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 11 2014 08:41 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: Quotes by team brass about starting season with Flores and Murphy and they were close on things but nothing materialized isn't very encouraging. Cuddyer was a hasty boondoggle or something. I disagree a bit. If they are saying things like "We really gotta move Flores and Murphy, these guys suck" the team appears desperate or the players they are looking to deal have no value. It's like saying, "This pudding tastes awful. Have a spoonful." They have to say that they are willing to start the season with those guys.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 11 2014 08:43 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Frayed Knot wrote: Although I checked MLB's bylaws and it turns out that it IS possible to make trades, sign players, and make a myriad of other roster decisions even after the winter meetings are over. I agree with this! Making deals at the winter meetings to appease columnists who will accuse you of not making moves is how you make bad trades or sign bad free agents.

Ashie62 Dec 11 2014 08:46 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Edgy MD wrote: I've got no problem with Tejada being in the shortstop mix. I hope he hits .450. Tejeda is a dicktease but without the dick.

Edgy MD Dec 11 2014 09:44 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I don't think we understand the meaning of dicktease the same way.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 11 2014 10:26 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Don't be so quick to dismiss that, Edge-- in certain penal contexts, that could be accurate.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 05:17 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: Quotes by team brass about starting season with Flores and Murphy and they were close on things but nothing materialized isn't very encouraging. Cuddyer was a hasty boondoggle or something. I disagree a bit. If they are saying things like "We really gotta move Flores and Murphy, these guys suck" the team appears desperate or the players they are looking to deal have no value. It's like saying, "This pudding tastes awful. Have a spoonful." They have to say that they are willing to start the season with those guys. I understand, really I do. We're getting pudding alright, and never mind a spoonful it's more like a 55 gallon drum of it, is this off-season has been big for all the big teams. Small teams settle for Cuddyer and Phillie send offs.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 05:43 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I think they'll be fine. And I don't think anybody's saying they got to move these guys who suck. And I think they'll even be fine if the end up not moving anybody and going to camp with six starters. Or eight or ten. Winning the off-season is always an illusion. Win the season.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 05:50 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Edgy MD wrote: I think they'll be fine. And I don't think anybody's saying they got to move these guys who suck. And I think they'll even be fine if the end up not moving anybody and going to camp with six starters. Or eight or ten. Winning the off-season is always an illusion. Win the season. I understand, really I do. Here, have some pudding.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 06:00 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mmmm... wait a minute... yuck! Cosby has totally ruined pudding for me.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 12 2014 06:50 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: Quotes by team brass about starting season with Flores and Murphy and they were close on things but nothing materialized isn't very encouraging. Cuddyer was a hasty boondoggle or something. I disagree a bit. If they are saying things like "We really gotta move Flores and Murphy, these guys suck" the team appears desperate or the players they are looking to deal have no value. It's like saying, "This pudding tastes awful. Have a spoonful." They have to say that they are willing to start the season with those guys. I understand, really I do. We're getting pudding alright, and never mind a spoonful it's more like a 55 gallon drum of it, is this off-season has been big for all the big teams. Small teams settle for Cuddyer and Phillie send offs. Boom! You fell right into the mindset trap! Don't care with the "big teams" did in December, unless spring training becomes winter training and we start playing in January. If there is nothing done to improve the team by April 1, it's a different conversation. Which free-agent signed so far did you want the Mets to sign? No need for Lester. Hanley's not the Hanley of old. We have no use for the Panda. I don't want to give Thor away for some Didi Gregourious type just because "the big teams" had a couple press conferences during the winter meetings.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 06:53 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Boom! You fell right into the mindset trap! Don't care with the "big teams" did in December I'm not trapped ... look, still running around mad. If the Mets can't afford to operate like a big market team they should sell the fucking team and be done with this five-year charade.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 12 2014 07:10 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Boom! You fell right into the mindset trap! Don't care with the "big teams" did in December I'm not trapped ... look, still running around mad. If the Mets can't afford to operate like a big market team they should sell the fucking team and be done with this five-year charade. That's exactly the trap! Just because the teams you perceive as big market teams hold press conferences during the winter meetings to sign contracts with players we had no interest in doesn't mean w're not acting like a big market team. We've been through the "Blow money on over-priced players we didn't need" phase. It causes long-term damage and depletes your farm system. It seems to me now they are building from the bottom up for the long haul. Which of the players signed during the winter meetings did you want them to sign? About the only one I think we had any use for would be Robertson. If the Red Sox want to blow up their infield for guys in decline, let them. Opening day roster> winter meetings roster.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 07:18 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Dude, I know all that. You eat your pudding, I prefer to throw mine up at their doorstep this morning. Hope they have a good first class flight home... and their pudding has worms in it.

Centerfield Dec 12 2014 07:41 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Boom! You fell right into the mindset trap! Don't care with the "big teams" did in December I'm not trapped ... look, still running around mad. If the Mets can't afford to operate like a big market team they should sell the fucking team and be done with this five-year charade. That's exactly the trap! Just because the teams you perceive as big market teams hold press conferences during the winter meetings to sign contracts with players we had no interest in doesn't mean w're not acting like a big market team. We've been through the "Blow money on over-priced players we didn't need" phase. It causes long-term damage and depletes your farm system. It seems to me now they are building from the bottom up for the long haul. Which of the players signed during the winter meetings did you want them to sign? About the only one I think we had any use for would be Robertson. If the Red Sox want to blow up their infield for guys in decline, let them. Opening day roster> winter meetings roster. If the Mets were acting like a big market team, they would have been in on the Cuban guy. He's young, got potential and costs less than Granderson. Take a flyer on him and eat the contract if it doesn't work out. Big market teams try out Matt Kemp, or Jose Reyes and scoff at the contracts they carry with them. They are big market teams. They can take the hit. Small market teams sign Michael Cuddyer, and forfeit a first rounder draft pick in the process.

Centerfield Dec 12 2014 07:46 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Put it this way, the Mets payroll was $88 million last year. If you raised their payroll to be in the top ten in baseball (Toronto was 10th with $118 million), you would automatically add $30 million to the budget. If you added $30 million to payroll, even Omar could have put a playoff contender on the field in 2013. Money doesn't ensure winning, but it makes it a hell of a lot easier.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 07:59 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Sure, but we now know all along that they were spending money they didn't have, drawing from an account of future windfalls that never came, because of Madoff's perfidy, certainly, but also because of the championships that never came between 2006 and 2009. So now they're forced to live within their means, and still try and produce an awesome team team that expands their means. Either they do it well or they don't. Whether the team is rich or poor, I can't help but view Tulowitzki with anything but suspicion. I bet he's the one who pushed Clint Barmes down the stairs.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 08:05 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Which free-agent signed so far did you want the Mets to sign? ... Hanley's not the Hanley of old. Hanley might not be what he used to be, but that's not the point and besides, who is? Hanley's about a gazillion times better than Tejada is -- he'll hit more HR's in two weeks than Ruben'll hit in five or six years. And Hanley's exactly the kind of FA a big boy franchise from a big market goes after if they think that SS is their biggest hole. I don't wanna beat a dead horse any more than I have to, but the idea that today's Mets would sign a quality SS FA that's as good as peak Hanley if only that SS were on the market is ludicrous.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 08:09 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Edgy MD wrote: Sure, but we now know all along that they were spending money they didn't have, drawing from an account of future windfalls that never came.... If it turns out that the Mets were spending beyond their means even before the Madoff scandal broke, then the owners are even more incompetent that I would have ever imagined. If the owners couldn't leverage their New Yorkness market advantages in order to compete financially with the Yanks and Red Sox and Phillies, then the Wilpons needed to get run out of town like 10 years ago.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 08:11 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I'm sure you've imagined the failures of the regime. It's all out there in black and white.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 12 2014 08:14 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

If the Mets were acting like a big market team, they would have been in on the Cuban guy. He's young, got potential and costs less than Granderson. Take a flyer on him and eat the contract if it doesn't work out. Big market teams try out Matt Kemp, or Jose Reyes and scoff at the contracts they carry with them. They are big market teams. They can take the hit. Small market teams sign Michael Cuddyer, and forfeit a first rounder draft pick in the process. With Granderson, you know what you are getting and we reasonably got what we expected, at least for some stretches of the season. The Cuban guy is a total crap shoot, and the Mets' track record with international players with no MLB experience has not been especially good. I'd be gun shy after Kaz Matsui, too. It doesn't make sense to me to throw gobs of money at a player who is a complete unknown or one that is in his declining years just to prove to sports writers that you are a big market team. MLB is littered with players who sports writers belittled the Mets for not signing who turned out to be a waste of money -- Bourne, Choo are two recent examples. Seriously did you want Matt Kemp at that salary? Or even Jose at what he's signed for? If the rotation led by Harvey, Wheeler, de Grom and friends is kicking butt and we're in contention, no one is going to care that we didn't feel big market in December.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 08:17 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I wonder if Alderson, et al fly home commercially or if they have use of a private jet flying into Westchester.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 08:23 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: If the Mets were acting like a big market team, they would have been in on the Cuban guy. He's young, got potential and costs less than Granderson. Take a flyer on him and eat the contract if it doesn't work out. Big market teams try out Matt Kemp, or Jose Reyes and scoff at the contracts they carry with them. They are big market teams. They can take the hit. Small market teams sign Michael Cuddyer, and forfeit a first rounder draft pick in the process. With Granderson, you know what you are getting and we reasonably got what we expected, at least for some stretches of the season. The Cuban guy is a total crap shoot, and the Mets' track record with international players with no MLB experience has not been especially good. I'd be gun shy after Kaz Matsui, too. It doesn't make sense to me to throw gobs of money at a player who is a complete unknown or one that is in his declining years just to prove to sports writers that you are a big market team. MLB is littered with players who sports writers belittled the Mets for not signing who turned out to be a waste of money -- Bourne, Choo are two recent examples. Seriously did you want Matt Kemp at that salary? Or even Jose at what he's signed for? If the rotation led by Harvey, Wheeler, de Grom and friends is kicking butt and we're in contention, no one is going to care that we didn't feel big market in December. What do I want? I want the Mets to act like they're from the city they're from. Humongous payrolls. Hanley signings, even though he might suck at the end of his contract. And when that happens, you just dump him and move on. 'Cause you're the NL franchise from New York City and that's what you do. Because you can. Because you're a fat cat and you don't just order the most expensive item on the menu of Manhattan's top restaurant. You order the three most expensive entrees on the menu even if you can't finish all that food on your plate.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 08:25 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Yeah, I don't want that.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 08:27 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 12 2014 08:29 AM

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: If the rotation led by Harvey, Wheeler, de Grom and friends is kicking butt and we're in contention, no one is going to care that we didn't feel big market in December. That's a different argument. If the team's good enough, then it's good enough and that's that. But if you think the Mets need a shortstop because their pitching won't be enough to carry that sinkhole, then defending the Mets financially because Hanley is past peak and there's no prime Ernie Banks on the market doesn't make sense to me.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 08:28 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: If the rotation led by Harvey, Wheeler, de Grom and friends is kicking butt and we're in contention Another peeve that's making me nuts this off-season. Would everyone please stop penciling in Harvey as a major contributor until he shows something? He's already been capped at 200 innings (he even acknowledged it, good for him) and is one pitch away from a setback and two pitches away from 2016.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 08:31 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Tommy John surgery has a pretty good success rate these days, but even pitchers that come back from the procedure usually need more than one whole season to do so. They typically struggle a bit and are inconsistent in their first season back. And those are the ones that do come back from the surgery.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 12 2014 08:43 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

What do I want? I want the Mets to act like they're from the city they're from. Humongous payrolls. Hanley signings, even though he might suck at the end of his contract. And when that happens, you just dump him and move on. 'Cause you're the NL franchise from New York City and that's what you do. Because you can. Because you're a fat cat and you don't just order the most expensive item on the menu of Manhattan's top restaurant. You order the three most expensive entrees on the menu even if you can't finish all that food on your plate. We used to do that stuff, and you get guys like Bobby Bonilla and Vince Coleman. And, to an extent, Pedro and Santana (though I'd argue that the Santana deal is in a different category.) The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within, and then finished off with the big trades or smaller deals. I'm sure none of the sports writers were swooning when they acquired Howard Johnson, Knight and Cone. And yes, that era was taken to the next level with the Carter trade, which is where I think Sandy is today.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 08:56 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within We can all sit around and post about that while watching the Cubs in the post-season.

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 09:28 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Boom! You fell right into the mindset trap! Don't care with the "big teams" did in December, unless spring training becomes winter training and we start playing in January. If there is nothing done to improve the team by April 1, it's a different conversation. I'm even okay if they wait until 4/6 this year!

Centerfield Dec 12 2014 09:33 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

What do I want? I want the Mets to act like they're from the city they're from. Humongous payrolls. Hanley signings, even though he might suck at the end of his contract. And when that happens, you just dump him and move on. 'Cause you're the NL franchise from New York City and that's what you do. Because you can. Because you're a fat cat and you don't just order the most expensive item on the menu of Manhattan's top restaurant. You order the three most expensive entrees on the menu even if you can't finish all that food on your plate. We used to do that stuff, and you get guys like Bobby Bonilla and Vince Coleman. And, to an extent, Pedro and Santana (though I'd argue that the Santana deal is in a different category.) The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within, and then finished off with the big trades or smaller deals. I'm sure none of the sports writers were swooning when they acquired Howard Johnson, Knight and Cone. And yes, that era was taken to the next level with the Carter trade, which is where I think Sandy is today. The difference being, Sandy won't make the equivalent of the Carter trade. I don't think the Bonilla/Omar situations apply. Those eras were characterized by spending money in a "win now" approach. You could say it was spending foolishly. Spending foolishly will not work. Basically, you have four options: 1. Don't spend money - Don't Develop Talent: Your team will suck 2. Don't spend money - Develop Talent: Possibly win, but it's much harder 3. Spend Money - Don't Develop Talent: Win maybe, but not for long. You will eventually suck. 4. Spend Money - Develop Talent: Best chance at sustained winning There have been periods of time where the Mets spent money, but it was often foolish spending, with no eye toward the future. For the first time since the Cashen era, the Mets now have a smart management team in place with a focus on developing talent. The problem is that the budget has been slashed. There are teams that spend money wisely and develop talent. Take a look at the Giants and Cardinals. It's possible. Every team should strive toward this. Some teams, as a result of their market, cannot spend money. The Mets are not one of those teams. Not only is it reasonable for Mets fans to want both, there is really no excuse why this shouldn't happen.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 12 2014 09:46 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Well, except the fact that ownership cannot afford to spend on the team. When they have spent, they did so thanks to the equivalent of a Magic ATM and usually with the primary goal of appearing to go all out, rather than actually going all out, which to the Wilpons are probably indistinguishable beyond one being easy for morons to pull off and the other being difficult for smart people to do correctly.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 12 2014 09:52 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: What do I want? I want the Mets to act like they're from the city they're from. Humongous payrolls. Hanley signings, even though he might suck at the end of his contract. And when that happens, you just dump him and move on. 'Cause you're the NL franchise from New York City and that's what you do. Because you can. Because you're a fat cat and you don't just order the most expensive item on the menu of Manhattan's top restaurant. You order the three most expensive entrees on the menu even if you can't finish all that food on your plate. We used to do that stuff, and you get guys like Bobby Bonilla and Vince Coleman. And, to an extent, Pedro and Santana (though I'd argue that the Santana deal is in a different category.) The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within, and then finished off with the big trades or smaller deals. I'm sure none of the sports writers were swooning when they acquired Howard Johnson, Knight and Cone. And yes, that era was taken to the next level with the Carter trade, which is where I think Sandy is today. I'm not saying the Mets entire starting lineup should be comprised of past-prime former superstars getting top dollar for what they did in the past. And besides, Bonilla wasn't a bad signing. It was one of the few times (Beltran maybe the other) the Mets signed an his prime superstar free agent. Things don't always work out and all that jazz about hindsight. But at the time, Bonilla made sense. Coleman sucked, though Fred W. thought otherwise. But the team from New York City should be able to get at least one of those guys, even if he's past peak, if they have a hole to fill. Hanley, by himself, shouldn't destroy a big market team's budget.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 09:53 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Basically, you have four options: 1. Don't spend money - Don't Develop Talent: Your team will suck 2. Don't spend money - Develop Talent: Possibly win, but it's much harder 3. Spend Money - Don't Develop Talent: Win maybe, but not for long. You will eventually suck. 4. Spend Money - Develop Talent: Best chance at sustained winning What about 4a: Develop Talent - Trade it for Established Expensive Players? Because that's sort of what's being proposed. With regard to Tulowitzki, certainly. I love my team walking away from teams holding expensive contracts. "You need to dump that contract? I'll bet you do. It got your predecessor fired. And you don't want to be the next victim and neither do I. That contract is like Greg Brady's tiki. You want me to take that, I'll open with Adam Kolarek, and you start telling me how many millions --- I'm sorry, how man tens of millions --- you're going to throw in. You don't like Kolarak... Kolarek, whatever... I might be persuaded to part with Xorge Carillo. Now, I'm going to leave this piece of paper here, and while you write a bunch of zeros on it, I'm going to go over and talk to my good friends from Seattle. I'm Sandy F. Alderson. I don't need this crap."

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 12 2014 10:07 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within We can all sit around and post about that while watching the Cubs in the post-season. Which player that the Cubs signed did you want the Mets to get?

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 10:13 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: The team's best period of prolonged success was built from within We can all sit around and post about that while watching the Cubs in the post-season. Which player that the Cubs signed did you want the Mets to get? ALL OF THEM.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 10:19 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Ceetar wrote: ALL OF THEM. Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Which player that the Cubs signed did you want the Mets to get? Look, don't play me like that. You make it sound like I'm some childish SNY poster that wants his babba NOW NOW NOW. I have historically been one of the most patient of patient Mets but I've grown tired of the yearly charade. If Flynn, Brogna and 1986 do it for you in the off-season... then bully for you.

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 10:33 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: Ceetar wrote: ALL OF THEM. Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Which player that the Cubs signed did you want the Mets to get? Look, don't play me like that. You make it sound like I'm some childish SNY poster that wants his babba NOW NOW NOW. I have historically been one of the most patient of patient Mets but I've grown tired of the yearly charade. If Flynn, Brogna and 1986 do it for you in the off-season... then bully for you. I'm not saying you shouldn't be frustrated with the last X years, but your frustration does not dictate policy, particularly mid-offseason. Why does the Cubs making some moves last week, or the Dodgers, change anything? All 29 other teams will do things, and so will the Mets. the order in which they do things doesn't matter. And the 'charade' is at least partially fan/media driven. The Mets aren't really saying much more than platitudes and evasions, and certainly they seem empty without anything to back them up, but let's not pretend because we know the Mets have had financial problems that we have any idea how much they will or won't spend for the right players. Plenty of people wrote that they couldn't afford Cuddyer either. Or Granderson. Maybe it's all a grand conspiracy to be 'sorta good' and 'kinda in contention' and have just enough players to 'kind of look like they're trying to win' while not really going that extra mile, but I'm not quite sure what the motivation for that is. It seems more likely that it's not simply 'have prospects, and spend money on guys with a high probability of being good'=victory and that building a good team, and a sustainable one, is hard. But the overall trends look good. wise spending of money, signing players that are good players, over a period of time correlating to success via prospects like Harvey and Wheeler and deGrom. There were plenty of other 'Chris Young' type players they could've gotten last year instead of Granderson to man the Outfield. They could've hyped Puello and promoted him. They didn't. That speaks to wanting Granderson as part of a longer plan, as does signing Cuddyer and sacrificing a draft pick. It's hard to see that the Mets are just gonna coast to Spring Training without attempting to address SS, but it's not the obvious answers is just sitting there waiting to throw money at.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 10:50 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

The biggest turnarounds in team history have been preceded by quiet off seasons. So have the biggest flops. I think it's important to distinguish the quality of moves from the volume of moves or the size of the moves.

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 10:51 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Edgy MD wrote: The biggest turnarounds in team history have been preceded by quiet off seasons. So have the biggest flops. I think it's important to distinguish the quality of moves from the volume of moves or the size of the moves. I think it's worth noting that the bench really sucked last year and so far it looks like it's going to be pretty decent.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 10:53 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

You guys believe what you want... I'm done thinking things will work out with this team. They never do.

Centerfield Dec 12 2014 11:05 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I think this is one of those threads that is getting muddled by multiple different perspectives. I'm not sure who I'm arguing with and who I'm supporting, though I think KC is somewhat in my corner. To clarify: Tulowitzki: I'm not at all endorsing this particular move. Long contract, hip surgery. Costs tons of good, young players. Gun to my head, I think I pass on this. Overall Philosophy: All I'm saying here is that I'd like the payroll to increase, while still keeping smart people at the wheel. Basically, do exactly what they are doing now but increase the budget by $30 million. This will lead to a better team. Sometimes it means passing on the big player to keep your prospects. Sometimes you have to let a few prospects go for the right guy. But an increased budget allows you to take risks without losing your minor leaguers (such as the Cuban guy). Can the Wilpons really sustain an increased budget? I have no idea, but I can't see why they couldn't. We are in NY. If they can't take a team in the largest market and figure out a way to generate revenue, it is inexcusable. Both LA teams, both Chicago teams, Philadelphia, Boston, even Toronto figures out a way to do this. I can't figure out why the Mets have to reside in the lower tier. Why are we accepting of this?

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 11:14 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I think the Jays are operating at a loss right now. I think increasing the budget by $30 million is great, but I don't have $30 million and neither do you and neither does the organization. Really, I think the idea is to build a good enough team to get in the black and start spending larger when the revenue tilts. That's all they can do. We've known all along (or since Omar Minaya got fired) that the team had to start over. Had to. They spent like drunk sailors, counted on returns from a world championship that never came and from a crook so cold that he stole from Elie Wiesel, and it all blew up. This is the reality. We certainly don't have to accept it. But it's not mystery either.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 12 2014 11:56 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Centerfield wrote: Can the Wilpons really sustain an increased budget? I have no idea, but I can't see why they couldn't. We are in NY. If they can't take a team in the largest market and figure out a way to generate revenue, it is inexcusable. Both LA teams, both Chicago teams, Philadelphia, Boston, even Toronto figures out a way to do this. I can't figure out why the Mets have to reside in the lower tier. Why are we accepting of this? That's just it-- I don't think even the most sanguine-minded of our fans here and "outside" like it. But as far as accepting it? Well, what's the alternative, really? I mean, hell, once the Wilpon regime ends, in all likelihood, I'll have a smile on my face for days. But if we're feeling trapped in a bad marriage, our options are basically to focus on and enjoy the good stuff, let it turn you into a curdled, knee-jerky so-and-so, or get the hell off this crazy thing, aren't they? Also... this offseason isn't over yet, and we're apparently in on a Korean (and maybe a Cuban or two).

Frayed Knot Dec 12 2014 12:04 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Not to change the subject or anything, but here's a Jim Callis (mlb.com, formerly of BA) rundown of the best prospects traded away (sometimes more than once) at these just concluded winter meetings - guys who, a few years from now, might fall into the category of: 'I can't believe they gave up HIM back in '14 for one year of that broken down old fart who never did anything for us!!' Or we may never hear from them again ... who knows.

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 12:24 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Tulowitzki: I'm not at all endorsing this particular move. Long contract, hip surgery. Costs tons of good, young players. Gun to my head, I think I pass on this. Overall Philosophy: All I'm saying here is that I'd like the payroll to increase, while still keeping smart people at the wheel. Basically, do exactly what they are doing now but increase the budget by $30 million. This will lead to a better team. Sometimes it means passing on the big player to keep your prospects. Sometimes you have to let a few prospects go for the right guy. But an increased budget allows you to take risks without losing your minor leaguers (such as the Cuban guy). Can the Wilpons really sustain an increased budget? I have no idea, but I can't see why they couldn't. We are in NY. If they can't take a team in the largest market and figure out a way to generate revenue, it is inexcusable. Both LA teams, both Chicago teams, Philadelphia, Boston, even Toronto figures out a way to do this. I can't figure out why the Mets have to reside in the lower tier. Why are we accepting of this? Tulo: I understand if they make this move, but I'm not sure the Mets are in the right place to make that gamble. Overall: Sure, 30 more is great, but right now they need to have a high confidence of ROI on that 30million. Also, targeting a higher payroll is not the same as having one and if you spend all 30 of the 'new cap' now you don't have as much for next year. That's the truth whether we're at 100 or 250. I highly doubt those teams are generating revenue at the rate they're spending it. Not the Cubs/Phillies/Blue Jays anyway. In almost every case, it's the winning that brings in the revenue, not the signings. And I guess, that's where the conspiracy stuff comes in. If the Mets win 88 games and grab the second wild card and lose, it'll suck. BUT, they'll presell a TON of season tickets and committed income for 2016 by linking it to 2015 postseason rights. And just via the excitement of a team on the rise. Granted, they'd make a lot more by hosting a ton of postseason games at an average ticket price of probably $100 plus ($4mill plus a game just in fans through the turnstile) but the boost in fanbase and base revenue from a wild card loss is certainly something.

Vic Sage Dec 12 2014 01:03 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I think increasing the budget by $30 million is great, but I don't have $30 million and neither do you and neither does the organization All i'm saying here is that an owner of a franchise in NYC that can't afford to spend enough to be in the top 1/3 of payrolls instead of the bottom 1/3 should be facing an outcry demanding he sell the team. There should be skywriting and billboards and photobombs and every other form of fan revolt conceivable. It should not be dismissed easily with "well, that's the way it is", and it especially shouldn't be lauded as a good strategy of wise restraint. And its not that spending more guarantees anything, but its supposed to be one of the competitive advantages a big-market team should have, and we as fans that pay the highest prices in the league for EVERYTHING have a right to expect. And when they don't, its entirely appropriate to call them on it, not excuse them for it. And not because fan protests will force a change of direction, much less a sale, but because it makes us feel better to call them on it. Let the truth be spoken for its own sake. It will help us sleep better at night.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 01:34 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Go ahead and protest. I just walk away from a product if I don't like it. You don't like it, you don't pay. (Prices will fall.) But skywriting is fine if you want to do that. I, again, think it's important to distinguish the quality of moves from the volume of moves or the size of the moves. Or we can just turn multiple threads into payroll protests for multiple years.

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 01:39 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

well.. does this make Jets fans feel better?

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 02:33 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

What players do we want that the Cubs got and does this make Jets' fans feel better are not the right questions. This is the winter meetings thread. The meetings are over. The Mets did nothing except start floating out the notion that they tried, they may stand pat, and they'll keep trying. Yay! We got Cuddyer and Philberry! Woo hoo! (don't want to Yay twice in the same post) Oh, and Sandy lives out in San Diego... no flight back, he's gonna swing by the ol' homestead and rest up from all the heavy lifting he did this week.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 02:45 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: The Mets did nothing except start floating out the notion that they tried, they may stand pat, and they'll keep trying. Yay! Well, they signed Mayberry. They got a guy in the Rule 5 draft. (And they lost five, which is a real compliment to... somebody.) We got Cuddyer and Philberry! Woo hoo! There you go. Philberry.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 12 2014 02:45 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Well look who's joined Wound Lickers Anonymous.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 02:46 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

You don't need to go to Winter Meetings to sign an FA that no one else was bidding on (that I know of).

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 02:47 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Good one, Johnny!

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 02:51 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

I never throw out anything ...

Ceetar Dec 12 2014 02:54 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

d'Kong76 wrote: You don't need to go to Winter Meetings to sign an FA that no one else was bidding on (that I know of). you don't need to got the winter meetings to sign anyone. Everyone has cellphones. These 4 days are not special. The Mets DID do more than many teams, in signing a guy to shore up the bench who fits the role they needed.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 02:55 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Well, you don't need to go to the Winter Meetings to sign anybubby, really. It's just a thing. A chance to eat peanuts, meet some folks face-to-face, and harass the Chinese-lookin' ones. I think the Cardinalia were sniffing around Big John Mayberry, but I didn't have my browser set to alert me to Mayberry rumors. (OE: beaten by Ceetar. Nice banner.)

Zvon Dec 12 2014 03:36 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Vic Sage wrote: There should be skywriting and billboards and photobombs and every other form of fan revolt conceivable. Edgy MD wrote: But skywriting is fine if you want to do that. We tried skywriting after they traded Seaver. [fimg=200]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-75A5SH8dzTk/VItsOPQEGHI/AAAAAAAAWHc/4UbY6p44nOE/s576/15629885378_b6cece0c1d_o.jpg[/fimg] It didn't work.

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 03:55 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Maybe it did. I picture Cashen taking in this scene and thinking, "The Reds need catching. Maybe I'll package Treviño into a deal for Seaver." d'Kong76 wrote: Oh, and Sandy lives out in San Diego... no flight back, he's gonna swing by the ol' homestead and rest up from all the heavy lifting he did this week. He should just change his last name to "Eggo." He's not fooling anybody.

Lefty Specialist Dec 12 2014 06:00 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Ceetar wrote: well.. does this make Jets fans feel better? Well, does this make Met fans feel better?

Ashie62 Dec 12 2014 06:06 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

There is plenty of time for any team to make the moves they want to. It is easy to feel left out for sure but that can change quickly.

d'Kong76 Dec 12 2014 06:19 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Yeah, Sandy's having discussions as we speak at the ol' homestead over bbq and fine wines with meaningful people that he told at the meetings to "stick around" for some action!

Edgy MD Dec 12 2014 07:10 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

HVAC Guy comes through with anudder scoop!

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 01:35 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Ceetar wrote: Sandy: "We like Bartolo Colon and aren't looking to trade him." Did Sandy say that? 'Cause if he did, it's probably a preemptive strike. I mean, who the hell would want to carry Colon's $11M 2015 contract? The Mets are probably stuck with Colon, unless he's fabulous going forward. And if Colon breaks down, well you know that the NL franchise from NYC won't have the moolah to replace him if it's a matter of money to get another starter. And why is a team that's in the poorhouse even paying so much money for just one player - a 40+ year old pitcher who could stand to lose 100 pounds, no less? Colon's scheduled to make more than 10 percent of the whole payroll, ferchrissakes -- and this is a team loaded with pitching hopefuls.

d'Kong76 Dec 13 2014 06:54 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

One of the good teams will take him for prospects in July for a playoff push while the Mets struggle to remain single digits below .500.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 02:19 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Can the Wilpons really sustain an increased budget? I have no idea, but I can't see why they couldn't. We are in NY. If they can't take a team in the largest market and figure out a way to generate revenue, it is inexcusable. Both LA teams, both Chicago teams, Philadelphia, Boston, even Toronto figures out a way to do this. I can't figure out why the Mets have to reside in the lower tier. Why are we accepting of this? That's just it-- I don't think even the most sanguine-minded of our fans here and "outside" like it. But as far as accepting it? Well, what's the alternative, really? I mean, hell, once the Wilpon regime ends, in all likelihood, I'll have a smile on my face for days. But if we're feeling trapped in a bad marriage, our options are basically to focus on and enjoy the good stuff, let it turn you into a curdled, knee-jerky so-and-so, or get the hell off this crazy thing, aren't they? Also... this offseason isn't over yet, and we're apparently in on a Korean (and maybe a Cuban or two). "... For the first time in franchise history, they’re thinking entirely in question marks. What do we do? How much longer? How do we stop this? When will this end? In general, fans are loyal as hell. We root for laundry and we know it — we don’t care. It’s part of our DNA. We’re always coming back. It’s just one of the things that makes human beings so freaking strange. We’ll divorce people before we divorce our favorite teams. But an irredeemable owner? That’s the only person who can nudge a fan base to a collective breaking point. When you support a pro team with an unspeakably awful owner, at some point you take a step back, do the math and mutter things like, 'I was 19 when he bought the team, I’m 34 right now, and I’m gonna be 54 in 2034 — AND WE ARE STILL GOING TO SUCK BECAUSE THIS GUY F-?-?-?-?-?-? SUCKS AND HE’S NEVER LEAVING AND WHAT THE HELL AM I GOING TO DO?'” http://grantland.com/the-triangle/danie ... -redskins/

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 02:25 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Vic Sage wrote: All i'm saying here is that an owner of a franchise in NYC that can't afford to spend enough to be in the top 1/3 of payrolls instead of the bottom 1/3 should be facing an outcry demanding he sell the team. There should be skywriting and billboards and photobombs and every other form of fan revolt conceivable. It should not be dismissed easily with "well, that's the way it is", and it especially shouldn't be lauded as a good strategy of wise restraint. I've been pleading this case for years here, to no avail. All I ever get is blah blah blah in defense of the Wilpons and more excuse mongering to the point that you'd think I'm the bad guy for the Mets woes. As if Megdal's the problem. And there should be a neverending unrelenting stream of skywriting and fireworks and photobombs because this is the most indefensible and despicable thing that anybody ever did to the Mets, and that includes trading Seaver to Cincy.

Edgy MD Dec 13 2014 05:00 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

All you ever get? Come on, don't be reduced to a straw man argument. Megdal isn't "the problem." Megdal's wrong when he's wrong.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 07:42 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

He may be wrong when he's wrong, but when is Megdal wrong? He writes long-view pieces about the Mets, and it's impossible to do so without referencing the team's financial predicament. The Mets poverty is so encompassing that it impacts every aspect of the organization. Megdal gets it; he's dead on, even if that comes off as repetitive to many here.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 13 2014 07:57 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

batmagadanleadoff wrote: All I ever get is blah blah blah in defense of the Wilpons Has ANYONE here ever defended the Wilpons? What forum are you reading? We may roll our eyes at how you keep pounding the same drum, but that's a far cry from "defending the Wilpons."

Edgy MD Dec 13 2014 09:10 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

batmagadanleadoff wrote: He may be wrong when he's wrong, but when is Megdal wrong? We've certainly been over this. You've acknowledged as much yourself.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 11:01 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Benjamin Grimm wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: All I ever get is blah blah blah in defense of the Wilpons Has ANYONE here ever defended the Wilpons? What forum are you reading? We may roll our eyes at how you keep pounding the same drum, but that's a far cry from "defending the Wilpons." I agree some, and not agree some. People here do defend the Wilpons. I'm not naming names or posting posts, 'cause if I did, this would turn into another shitstorm clusterfuck. But maybe I am repetitive. Especially in the context of this forum. It's a relatively small group of posters here, and most everybody here posts about daily or at least checks in about every day. So, yeah. In this fishbowl ...

batmagadanleadoff Dec 13 2014 11:05 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: He may be wrong when he's wrong, but when is Megdal wrong? We've certainly been over this. You've acknowledged as much yourself. He incorrectly predicted the outcome of the Picard suit against Sterling and the Mets. But I'm not about to dismiss his whole body of work going forward because of that. I'm not gonna cyber roll my eyes in sarcasm as soon as someone posts one of his pieces.

Edgy MD Dec 14 2014 05:03 AM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Great. There's one place Howard has been wrong.

d'Kong76 Dec 14 2014 02:35 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Sandy back to work tomorrow, or still hanging out at the ol' hacienda en So Cal?

d'Kong76 Jan 01 2015 06:58 PM Re: General Purpose Winter Meetings Thread

Back to work finally tomorrow, 01/02... or do they get off until Monday? Thank god they got Cuddyer, and quick!