Master Index of Archived Threads


Puma on 2018 payroll

41Forever Sep 06 2017 04:02 PM

Puma in the Post: Beware, Mets fans: Team looks ready to cut payroll in 2018 [url]http://nypost.com/2017/09/06/beware-mets-fans-team-looks-ready-to-cut-payroll-in-2018/ Consider the source, for sure. But I have an issue with his central point -- that if the payroll isn't at least as much next year as this year, the team isn't trying to win. (This is an issue with criticism of government spending, too, by the way. Except that in government, if you don't increase something as much as you originally considered increasing --but still increase -- it's called a cut by opponents. But I digress.) Anyway, it's not an issue of spending, it's about spending wisely. We know all about spending a lot and doing it unwisely. He's quoting Sandy: “So I’m certainly not sitting here and saying, ‘OK, [the payroll] is going to be at least as high this year as it was last year,’ ” Alderson said Tuesday. “We expect to be a competitive team next year. I know that is going to depend a lot on our pitching staff, particularly the health of our starting pitching and so forth, but the fact we have so many dollars coming off the books will be recognized and a good percentage of that — at this point undetermined — certainly will be reinvested in the payroll.” I don't think there's anything wrong with what Sandy said.

Ceetar Sep 06 2017 04:11 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

Right. The conversation needs to focus on "Did the Mets get better?" "Enough better?" "Did they build depth?" and not "did they spend as much?" This is a good benchmark for if you should read a story this winter though. If it focuses on payroll numbers and not on acquisitions, it's probably not worth reading. I mean, sure, you'd like Sandy to come out and say "We're going to be competitive, and acquire the players we feel we need to return to the playoffs. The payroll could be lower, the same, or even greater." I just find it hard to worry about all these private financial numbers I don't know about, and demand the Wilpons spent additional money beyond revenue, or projected revenue, or debt-to-income ratios, or whatever.

Edgy MD Sep 06 2017 04:14 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

I thought this thread was going to be about the Mets adding Mike Puma to their front office team. Exciting!

41Forever Sep 06 2017 04:28 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

Edgy MD wrote: I thought this thread was going to be about the Mets adding Mike Puma to their front office team. Exciting! I'd rather have Puma Man.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 06 2017 05:15 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

I don't have a problem with the Mets plan either. (At least, not at this point.) It sounds to me like Sandy is saying that they may not go to spring training with a $155 million payroll. Maybe they'll be at $140 million, with room to grow as the season progresses. I didn't read that particular article, so I don't know if Puma is to blame, or if it's just the headline writer who was being alarmist.

41Forever Sep 06 2017 06:30 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I don't have a problem with the Mets plan either. (At least, not at this point.) It sounds to me like Sandy is saying that they may not go to spring training with a $155 million payroll. Maybe they'll be at $140 million, with room to grow as the season progresses. I didn't read that particular article, so I don't know if Puma is to blame, or if it's just the headline writer who was being alarmist. I'd say there is some Puma-inciting here. Relevance in 2018 for the Mets will depend largely on the health of their tattered players, but the elephant in the room with this organization is always the payroll. Owners Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz did just enough last offseason to silence criticisms about thriftiness — giving Yoenis Cespedes a four-year contract worth $110 million was a good start — but now old questions are bound to arise, given the Mets’ dismal performance this season, empty seats at Citi Field and the general manager’s assessment next year’s payroll may decrease. The Mets have about $65 million coming off the books, all of which may not be reinvested in the team. Already, it has been alarming to hear general manager Sandy Alderson say the Mets’ Opening Day payroll of $155 million this season, which ranked 12th in the major leagues, was “beyond” what the organization expected to spend. “So I’m certainly not sitting here and saying, ‘OK, [the payroll] is going to be at least as high this year as it was last year,’ ” Alderson said Tuesday. “We expect to be a competitive team next year. I know that is going to depend a lot on our pitching staff, particularly the health of our starting pitching and so forth, but the fact we have so many dollars coming off the books will be recognized and a good percentage of that — at this point undetermined — certainly will be reinvested in the payroll.” The Mets have shed additional dollars by dumping Lucas Duda, Addison Reed, Jay Bruce, Neil Walker and Curtis Granderson in the past five weeks, but offset some of it with the addition of AJ Ramos from the Marlins. But it doesn’t change the fact the Mets have questions at three infield positions heading to next year — only shortstop is set — and probably could use another outfield bat. The Mets also need another proven reliever and probably a veteran starting pitcher. Filling some of those needs will be expensive. One item that likely won’t appear on Alderson’s shopping list is a new catcher. A bare market coupled with the front office’s acceptance of Travis d’Arnaud and Kevin Plawecki as suitable has pushed the idea of finding another catcher far to the back burner. “I think we feel pretty good about those two,” Alderson said, referring to d’Arnaud and Plawecki. “The other thing you have to do is evaluate what other options exist and at that position it would be difficult for us to find a pair that we like appreciably better, so I think we have been generally happy with our catching play.” For the rotation Alderson acknowledged the possibility of finding a “Bartolo-type” — a reference to Bartolo Colon — who can pitch 180-200 innings and stabilize a starting staff that will have enormous questions behind Jacob deGrom and Noah Syndergaard. The Mets need more than health to contend next season — they also need pieces. And pieces cost money. How about a commitment from the top to at least match this year’s payroll?

Centerfield Sep 06 2017 10:11 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

I have no problem with Sandy Alderson stating publicly that he is constrained in payroll, so long as he eventually spends. I don't see any benefit to announcing that you've got money to spend. Really no excuse for a NY team to not have a top tier payroll. Top 5 would be good. At least around 7-8. Go get Darvish and Wade Davis.

seawolf17 Sep 06 2017 10:35 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

We're potentially looking at minimum-payroll guys at (at least) three full-time spots in 2018: 1B, SS, and LF (if Conforto is healthy). So there's that.

d'Kong76 Sep 06 2017 10:50 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

The Mets are cheap and broke never gets old. Even when true. Or not. What team, GM, or anyone announces they have a big fat wallet going into anything? I didn't read the link, but screw guys that get paid to make Yankee fans smirk on the subway 'cause really that's all stuff like this is.

Edgy MD Sep 06 2017 11:19 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

The funny part of it is that the Yankees payroll has receded the last few years, too. Projected for seventh in the league, last I heard.

Frayed Knot Sep 06 2017 11:32 PM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

Yanx were at #2 to start the season - well behind the Dodgers and slightly ahead of Boston & Detroit Things change as the year goes on obviously but I don't recall the Yanx doing too much shedding during the season. Mets were 12th

Ashie62 Sep 07 2017 12:40 AM Re: Puma on 2018 payroll

We will know more when we find out if Sandy comes back and if the Mets incur large financial losses this season. I don't see a team selling their players for cash relief as one who will maintain or increase payroll. Thats just business.