Master Index of Archived Threads


Do we want Alex Rodriguez?

Should the Mets go for it or not?

Yes, even if it takes $300 million over ten years	1 votes
Yes, I'm willing to go up to ten years, but not for $30 million per.	2 votes
Yes, I'll pay the $30 million, but not for ten years.	14 votes
Yes, but only if it's for less than $30 million per and fewer than ten years.	9 votes
No. I simply don't want him on the team.	7 votes

Benjamin Grimm Oct 29 2007 02:12 PM

Vote for the most generous package you think the Mets should offer if it's necessary to sign Alex Rodriguez.

metirish Oct 29 2007 02:16 PM

I went with Yes, I'll pay the $30 million, but not for ten years. tough choices there.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 29 2007 02:19 PM

I'm kinda stuck between options 3 and 4. Fewer years, more $$, just not comfortable with specific figures 10 and 30.

Valadius Oct 29 2007 02:20 PM

No. Never. He's a prima donna and would screw up the clubhouse chemistry. His teammates in Texas once called him "The Cooler" because he has a tendency to throw water on his team's success and ruin positive momentum. He's not a team player.

Fman99 Oct 29 2007 02:23 PM

I'd hate to see him on the payroll at age 41 making 35 mil per year, assuming his contract is backloaded. That aside, I think the regular season contributions he does bring makes him a legitimate add. Of course I think he should move to 2B play for the Mets.

Kid Carsey Oct 29 2007 02:31 PM

I took no. The Mets don't need a 3b or a ss and everyone's gonna get their shorts in a knot over this pussy AGAIN??? Fuck him and Boras and their at- tention starved side show that is dominating the news on a day when the Sawx should be story number one. (holy crap, Valad and I agree on something)

metirish Oct 29 2007 02:38 PM

Found this online. ] Lost in the shuffle of Alex Rodriguez's opt-out media frenzy - the Yankees should be able to snag some nice draft picks for him. They'll undoubtedly offer him arbitration, and he'll decline that offer. If that does happen and he's signed by the Cubs, Tigers, Mets, Angels, or Red Sox, the Yankees will get that team's first-round pick. The Giants and Dodgers' first round picks are protected however.

TransMonk Oct 29 2007 03:11 PM

I think I would top out at 210,000,000 over 7 years. (I can't believe I just said that.) The dude's numbers are too good not to at least consider. He should break Bonds' record within 7 years, so I don't find much use for him after that.

Nymr83 Oct 29 2007 03:24 PM

...

MFS62 Oct 29 2007 03:26 PM

Having A-Rod lead the Mets to a World Series championship would sure peg the needle on the "Shove it up Boss George's Ass" o-meter. Later

martin Oct 29 2007 03:27 PM

i would be happy to have him, but only under circumstances he would never accept. and it unnerves me to shift people around defensively. it devalues players to play them at easier positions than they can handle. almost every other team has more of a place to put arod than the mets. unless arod can play second. then throw the money at him.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 29 2007 05:46 PM

Wow, five "no ways." I'm a little surprised at that. Here's my prediction: he'll eventually sign for $224 million for eight years. (Average annual value: $28 million.) I hope that the Mets will be in the hunt.

Kid Carsey Oct 29 2007 05:52 PM

I don't get the love affair with this guy -- especially since he plays two positions where we have our youngest and best players. One stud, and one stud in the making. So we're to spend a quarter of billion dollars on a guy who never seems to be able to finish out a stint with a team without some kind of drama and move our best player to another position to do so? The Mets aren't even on most of the lists of teams he may sign with. We need pitching. Pitching, pitching, and some more pitching. I'll be happiest if he lands with the Angels. Far away, not in the NL.

metirish Oct 29 2007 06:06 PM

For that money he'd better fucking pitch too.

Elster88 Oct 29 2007 06:08 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 29 2007 06:14 PM

Valadius wrote: No. Never. He's a prima donna and would screw up the clubhouse chemistry. His teammates in Texas once called him "The Cooler" because he has a tendency to throw water on his team's success and ruin positive momentum. He's not a team player. This is pure stupidity. The cooler you are referring singlehandedly took his team to the playoffs this year and shhould win his second MVP in four years. Even if he hadn't done those things it's pure stupidity. Maybe the money is too much or the years are too many but the reasons above bother me. This is one of the greatest players in the history of the game. I'll pay the 30 million per of Fred's money. He's got a tv station and a new ballpark. He can afford it. I don't want him for 10 years though, that'll cripple the budget too much in the later years.

Elster88 Oct 29 2007 06:10 PM

Kid Carsey wrote: I don't get the love affair with this guy -- especially since he plays two positions where we have our youngest and best players. One stud, and one stud in the making. I love our young studs too, but neither will ever be as good as Mr. Rod. Kid Carsey wrote: We need pitching. Pitching, pitching, and some more pitching. I think so too. If ARod does land in Queens Omar can't stop there.

Frayed Knot Oct 29 2007 08:07 PM

Do I want him? ... Sure -- even though he does have a habit of making himself a pain in the ass every now and then. It's like he's not sure whether he wants to try and make himself into the best-liked boy in the school ... something he's failing miserably at, or whether he doesn't care in the least if all the world thinks he's a jerk ... that one he's pulling off more successfully. Having said all that I don't buy the part about 'clubhouse cancer' or that his presence on the roster is the reason his teams haven't won. Not likable doesn't mean teh team gets worse on account of it. So I went with choice #4: only if it's for less than $30 million per and fewer than ten years - but even then it's got to be for a whole lot less than $30mil. Maybe I'm totally off here (wouldn't be the first time) but I'm having a hard time buying the notion that simply because his last contract ended with him making some $27/per that that needs to be the starting off point for the new negotiations. The team that signed him to that deal wanted out from under it almost immediately and paid lots of money to make it go away. And then the team that picked him up made it clear that they wanted no part of such a deal unless they could continue to get it at a generous discount. In the meantime, no one else in MLB is making more than $20 on a per/year basis and today's deals are actually a bit further away from the one he just opted out on as compared to when he signed it. One would think that Boras knows better than I do but I find it hard to see some team paying him more than 50% higher than the next highest players and doing so on a long term basis and just as he's heading into the decline years. I can't see anything like that as being a good deal for the team.

Nymr83 Oct 29 2007 08:33 PM

Elster88 wrote: ="Kid Carsey"]We need pitching. Pitching, pitching, and some more pitching. I think so too. If ARod does land in Queens Omar can't stop there. sign Rodriguez, trade Reyes for Santana. [/end wfan caller rant]

Rotblatt Oct 30 2007 06:04 AM

Fman99 wrote: I'd hate to see him on the payroll at age 41 making 35 mil per year, assuming his contract is backloaded. That aside, I think the regular season contributions he does bring makes him a legitimate add. Of course I think he should move to 2B play for the Mets. Agree 100%. Especially about the 2B part. The sportswriters seem to think it's unpossible but I have a hunch that A-Rod won't care, so long as it means he nets the best contract. I have to admit, A-Rod DOES look like a different player in the post-season, but after Mets 2007, I'd take just getting back to the playoffs. Plus, I still kind of have in the back of my mind that A-Rod's poor recent performance in the post-season is a fluke, and the possibility that he'd carry us through the World Series is delicious on a "Fuck the Yankees" level.

Rockin' Doc Oct 30 2007 06:21 AM

I would like to see ARod on the Mets, but not at the price tag he will likely command. So I voted no.

metirish Oct 30 2007 07:00 AM

] Klapisch: Mets may go for A-Rod Tuesday, October 30, 2007 By BOB KLAPISCH RECORD COLUMNIST While the Yankee hierarchy and Major League Baseball reacted with outrage at Alex Rodriguez's decision to opt out of his contract on the night of Game 4 of the World Series, the Mets didn't seem to have a problem with it. In fact, early indicators suggest the Mets are leaning toward a full metal jacket courtship of the slugger, pending David Wright's blessing. This is no small obstacle, since ownership is wary of offending Flushing's most marketable and loyal star. "We already have a third baseman," is what one high-ranking official said on Monday. That's the party line -- for now. But the Mets are well aware that Wright volunteered in spring training to switch positions if it meant luring A-Rod to Flushing. The story was first reported in The Record on March 4. Club officials plan to ask Wright if he still feels that way. As of Monday night, the Mets' third baseman was noncommittal, waiting to hear from ownership. "Nobody has talked to me about any free agents," Wright wrote in a text message. "I would want to speak with Jeff [Wilpon] and Omar [Minaya] first." Of course, there's no guarantee A-Rod would sign with the Mets, even if Wright moved to, say, second base. Could the Wilpon family write a big enough check? Apparently so. With free agents Tom Glavine ($10.5 million), Shawn Green ($3.7 million), Paul Lo Duca ($6.25 million) and Jose Valentin ($3.8 million) all likely to come off the books, Rodriguez's asking price of $30-something million isn't quite so prohibitive. "We can afford him," one Met insider said confidently. "It's going to be a baseball question more than a money question. Do we want him? Is he a good fit for one team? That's what we have to talk about." Wright seemed to feel Rodriguez was a perfect match -- and that was before A-Rod blasted through the greatest regular season of the last 50 years. Putting aside his insatiable appetite for money and ruthless negotiating tactics, the Mets ultimately will have to decide if A-Rod's 50-plus homers and 150 RBI are worth the tidal wave of controversy that would follow him into the clubhouse. Last March, this is what Wright had to say to reporters: "If Omar [Minaya] or someone from the front office approaches me and says, 'Hey, we're looking, Alex has an interest in coming to Queens,' I'd be the first one to offer to play anywhere they want me to because like I said, a guy like that just makes a team completely better from the get-go." What remains to be seen is whether the Mets' interest would tempt the Yankees to reenter negotiations. It's hard to know who's bluffing and who's not. Friends of Rodriguez believe he would have a sincere interest in playing for the Mets – at the right price, of course – regardless of how it would damage his Yankee legacy. It's worth noting that Rodriguez was house-hunting in Greenwich, Conn., in the last few months, and the idea of staying in New York was seconded by his wife, Cynthia. The other issue is where Wright actually would play. Second base is the obvious choice, but there's nothing that says he could learn the position quickly, if at all. And the wear and tear of turning double plays also might factor into the Mets' thinking. And then there's the dark cloud that seems to dog Rodriguez wherever he goes. You can now count the Yankees as part of the anti-A-Rod army. Despite general manager Brian Cashman's graciously worded statement that bid farewell to the third baseman, the organization's truer feelings were reflected in the comments of one high-ranking official, who was disgusted at the timing of Rodriguez's opt-out on Sunday. Not only did the announcement upstage the World Series, but, as the official said: "He had [agent Scott] Boras tell the media before he told us. That's not right." Asked if the Yankees would use the 15-day window during which they can negotiate exclusively with Rodriguez, the executive said: "No chance. Absolutely none. We're done with him. He'll never play here again" A-Rod and Boras didn't make any friends in the commissioner's office, either. Protocol says that no news is generated during the Series; the industry-wide blackout is observed in deference to the sport's premier event. But Rodriguez was the prime topic of discussion during Fox's broadcast Sunday night, trumping the Red Sox' sweep of the Rockies and their second world championship in four years. "There was no reason to make an announcement [Sunday] night other than to try to put his selfish interests and that of one individual player above the overall good of the game," Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "[Sunday] night and [Monday] belong to the Boston Red Sox, who should be celebrated for their achievement, and to the Colorado Rockies, who made such an unbelievable run to the World Series." One baseball official suggested A-Rod opted out on Sunday because he knew the Yankees were about to hire Joe Girardi, whom he didn't want to play for. So instead of bolting after Girardi's coronation and making it appear he was rejecting the new manager, A-Rod left hours before, under the guise of not having enough time to assess the direction of a team in transition. That ploy may have saved Girardi some embarrassment, but it didn't buy A-Rod good will anywhere else. Except, maybe, in Queens, where the fantasy lingers: just how would those 150 RBI look in the Met lineup, anyway? 7215004

Frayed Knot Oct 30 2007 07:10 AM

Citing David 'Golly Gee-Wiilickers' Wright's off-hand remark about being willing to change positions in order to accomadate Sir Alex of Rodrigia as some sort of meaningful statement is a waste of time. Does anyone who knows young David even a little bit expect that he would answer 'No way Man!' to a question like that?

Iubitul Oct 30 2007 07:11 AM

If it doesn't stop the Mets from getting more pitching, why not?

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2007 07:11 AM

I don't see second base as the obvious choice. I'd rather put him at first base. It's a more similar position to third base. You could leverage Wright's strength, which is his reaction time, and take the emphasis away from his weakness, which is his erratic throwing arm. The Mets would then have to trade Delgado. And no, they won't get full value for him in a trade, but it's looking likely that they won't get full value from him as a regular first baseman either.

soupcan Oct 30 2007 07:16 AM

Less than $30, less than 10. And after reading that article I don't think Wright would be to amenable to moving.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 07:17 AM

="Klap"]Wright seemed to feel Rodriguez was a perfect match -- and that was before A-Rod blasted through the greatest regular season of the last 50 years. How does he get away with this nonsense? I know he's trying to stir the pot, but from 2001-2004, Barry Bonds was tossing markedly better seasons off one after the other. He's got to be stopped.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 07:19 AM

Iubitul wrote: If it doesn't stop the Mets from getting more pitching, why not? The problem is that the guy that's displaced becomes the most marketable trading chip.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2007 07:24 AM

Edgy DC wrote: The problem is that the guy that's displaced becomes the most marketable trading chip. I'm not sure I see why that would be a problem. ="Bob Klapisch"]Friends of Rodriguez believe he would have a sincere interest in playing for the Mets – at the right price, of course – regardless of how it would damage his Yankee legacy. This is another stupid line from the column. Have we seen any indication that Rodriguez cares about his Yankee legacy? If he did, he would have at least listened to their offer.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 07:30 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: ="Edgy DC"]The problem is that the guy that's displaced becomes the most marketable trading chip. I'm not sure I see why that would be a problem. Sentiment aside, I think David Wright at 6 years/$55M is looking like too good a bargain to trade. Reyes too maybe.

metirish Oct 30 2007 07:44 AM

] "Nobody has talked to me about any free agents," Wright wrote in a text message. "I would want to speak with Jeff [Wilpon] and Omar [Minaya] first." I wonder if David 'Golly Gee-Wiilickers' Wright typed all that out or if he uses text speak like Edgy.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2007 07:46 AM

Oh. I don't see Rodriguez as displacing either one of those guys. (If that turns out to be the plan, then I certainly agree with you.) He's more likely to displace a Valentin or a Delgado. (Actually, he's more likely to displace a Dodger or a Cub, but that's another story.) And if Delgado, for example, becomes a trade chip, then that's not really a problem at all, unless, of course, you can't find a taker.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 07:53 AM

Well, signing Rodriguez as a first- or secondbaseman, or signing him and moving Wright to first or second, diminishes our return on the dollar relative to what other teams would be paying him.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 08:20 AM

Somewhat irrational phears in Philliedom.

metirish Oct 30 2007 08:49 AM

Not a bad take on things from the phillie blogger. Wally turns a yankee mess into a Mets mess in Wally's world. [url=http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spwally305438394oct30,0,180611.column]Wally Matthews[/url]

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 09:08 AM

Scanned it. Found nothing of substance.

metirish Oct 30 2007 09:32 AM

I guess my problem here with Wally is that he somehow thinks the Mets should pursue Rodriguez to fix a wrong when the Mets didn't sign him seven years ago. That and now with a club house that already has several diva type players the 24 + 1 rule shouldn't be a problem. His constant digs at the Mets are just silly, this is a different organization that it was seven years ago.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 30 2007 09:35 AM

I can't shake this feeling I have that the Mets are lying in the weeds in this story. Boras has to have somebody on the hook. Why not Omar?

Benjamin Grimm Oct 30 2007 09:43 AM

Yeah, it may very well be Omar. The Daily News this morning, in handicapping the Rodriguez Race, pretty much dismissed the Mets as not interested. That may be the case, but I'm not convinced.

metirish Oct 30 2007 09:43 AM

Oh I think the Mets could be players, how many teams can go for him really, can the Cubs current ownership continue to spend huge money when they are selling the team, are the Dodgers still pissed with Boras and would they want to deal with him.

Centerfield Oct 30 2007 09:46 AM

If they signed A-Rod, I would think the logical move would be to let him play shortstop and move Reyes to second. Jose has done it before and done it well.

DocTee Oct 30 2007 09:54 AM

If they signed A-Rod, I htink the logical move would be to deal Ryes to Minnesota for Santana!

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 30 2007 10:02 AM

="Yancy Street Gang"]Yeah, it may very well be Omar. The Daily News this morning, in handicapping the Rodriguez Race, pretty much dismissed the Mets as not interested. That may be the case, but I'm not convinced. They basically dismissed everyone. At least, they presented a point against just as compelling as "the Wilpons don't want that kinda nonsense" or whatever they said about the Mets.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2007 10:04 AM

Thanks for calling Mike and Mad Dog, DocTee. ="Centerfield"]If they signed A-Rod, I would think the logical move would be to let him play shortstop and move Reyes to second. Jose has done it before and done it well. The most logical, sure. But, by the same token, that was also the most logical thing for the Yankees to do with Jeter. Similar sensitivities would confront the Mets, and they'd have a Rodriguez four years removed from his shortstop years, while the Yankees had one immediately coming off two Gold Glove years, and one MVP one.

duan Oct 30 2007 10:52 AM

i'd see how willing Roderiguez was about moving to 2nd. He's proved he can move around the infield already. I'd have in my head that he might well move to first in 4-5 years. I'd be going up to 7 years at around the 30ish too.

Valadius Oct 30 2007 10:30 PM

Jeff Passan at Yahoo Sports listed his top 10 destinations for A-Rod. The Mets come in at #6. [url]http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AqYnAtyzq3EhP7N40Ucs9h8RvLYF?slug=jp-arod103007&prov=yhoo&type=lgn[/url] ]6. New York Mets Why? To stick it to the Yankees. And because with SportsNet New York turning into a television powerhouse, the Mets now rank third in total revenues behind the Yankees and Boston Red Sox, meaning they can afford him. Why not? Where does he play? David Wright moving to second base is laughable, and he and Jose Reyes' contracts are too good to move. And even though they could afford him, the Mets don't want their payroll rocketing into the Yankees-Red Sox stratosphere.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 31 2007 07:53 AM

"To stick it to the Yankees" isn't a very valid reason for spending almost $300 million.

metsmarathon Oct 31 2007 08:22 AM

yeah, that's just dumb. also dumb is the notion that, though they could afford to do so, the mets might not want to have a very high payroll. now, just having a high payroll in and of itself is no guarantee of success. but if you do it right, and make the wise decisions in building the team with that high payroll, it can certainly be an enabler or success. you should have a payroll commensurate with your ability to afford it, but also commensurate with the team's ability to perform. that is to say that if you can afford to pay the right players, you do. and just because you can afford to pay the wrong players does not mean that you do. arod is more of a right player than a wrong player, given that i think he could be a good first baseman, will produce like the dickens, and has a healthy-looking body that does not seem overly prone to breaking down (though that can always change at the drop of a hat). with him at first, we can afford to find a defensive second baseman, and grow a few corner outfielders. it also, dare i say, alleviates some of the pressure on the pitching staff. which is not to say that we don't need pitching desperately this offseason, only that a good offense is a pitchers good friend.

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 08:34 AM

Some doubts in there. 1) There's the "it's not the money but the years" conundrum. 2) There's the lack of return on the dollar that you get when you move guys to easier positions. 3) We spend about $6 million more this season alone gobbling up enough of Delgado's contract to move him.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 31 2007 08:37 AM

Point 1 is the one that resonates most with me. I understand Point 2, but I think the juice you get from 50 homers more than offsets the return on the dollar. And Points 2 and 3 would be negated under the scenario where Wright moves to second base and Delgado sticks around. (That's not my preference, though. I'd rather see Wright or Rodriguez at first base, and have an established second baseman like Castillo or someone else play second.)

G-Fafif Oct 31 2007 08:48 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 31 2007 08:59 AM

John Harper, as dim as they come: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/2007/10/31/2007-10-31_mets_must_opt_for_arod.html ]It seems obvious enough that the Mets need to do something splashy this winter to wash away the psychological stain from their historic collapse and give everyone from their fan base to their players a reason to look forward, not back. Suffice it to say that if Omar Minaya could find a way to pry Johan Santana away from the Twins, all would be forgiven. The Mets need an ace the way they need that new stadium of theirs to open and put dreary old Shea out of its misery. If it means trading Jose Reyes and a couple of their young pitchers, the Mets should jump at the chance. Josh Beckett's spectacular October was a reminder of just how much a true ace can do for a ballclub, and it's hard to imagine how Pedro Martinez will ever fit that description again. But there is no indication yet, much less a guarantee, that the Twins will trade Santana as he approaches free agency a year from now. And there's nothing in the way of front-line pitching available on the free-agent market. All of which is a way of saying: Why not A-Rod? It's not every day the opportunity comes along to sign the most talented player in the game and stick it to your intra-city rival all at once. The Mets can do that right now by bringing Alex Rodriguez to Queens, and the more you think about it, the more sense it makes. As an organization the Mets are forever feeling slighted because the Yankees make more headlines and get more coverage, win or lose. But the Yankees have lost considerable star power in Joe Torre and A-Rod, offering the Mets a chance to make themselves the glamour team in town for the first time in two decades, simply by signing A-Rod. So what if he's a 24-and-1 guy, to borrow Steve Phillips' famous description of Rodriguez seven years ago? So what if he looks more narcissistic than ever, thanks to the timing of his opt-out decision? It's not as if you can argue that A-Rod's arrival would upset some special chemistry the Mets have going, not after last year when they carried themselves with an air of entitlement that finally caught up with them. If anything, A-Rod's unmatched work ethic might do for Reyes what it did for Melky Cabrera last year, when Cabrera raised his game after he started shadowing A-Rod and his workout regimen on a daily basis. On his way out, Rodriguez made it easy for Yankee fans to hate him, sounding like a phony and failing them every October. Mets fans couldn't care less. The addition of Rodriguez would all but assure a playoff spot, and eventually he is bound to produce in October, the way Barry Bonds finally did after his early failures. Think that wouldn't be sweet to the Mets faithful? Maybe it wouldn't be fair to David Wright, who has become the face of the Mets, an All-Star for years to come and one of the real good guys in sports. On the other hand, Wright himself volunteered to move to second base when the A-Rod question was posed to him last spring. He is young and agile enough to play there for at least a few years, and then perhaps move to first if necessary. Most important, Wright would see the huge benefit of adding Rodriguez to a lineup that underachieved badly last year. Let's face it, Carlos Beltran doesn't seem to have the mental toughness to be a superstar in New York, and Carlos Delgado clearly showed signs of age last year, beaten all too often with inside fastballs. But put Rodriguez in the No.3 spot, while sliding Beltran to No.2 where he belongs, and suddenly the Mets have a lineup with firepower that could match any in the American League, never mind the National. The Mets would still need to beef up the bullpen, but assuming that Mike Pelfrey makes an expected leap forward, a Pedro-led starting rotation would look a whole lot better if it could count on five or six runs a night. This is a franchise that should be thinking bigger than it ever has, with its TV network in place and the new stadium opening in 2009, both of which mean gobs of money if the Wilpons put a star-driven, playoff team on the field. Those are reasons enough to forget what happened seven years ago, when Fred Wilpon didn't want to spend the money on A-Rod. Times have changed, especially now with the Yankees all but inviting the Mets to become the hot team in town. Would Rodriguez do it? Sure he would, for the highest offer. He loves the attention he receives in New York, good and bad. And he's always had a soft spot for the Mets, the team he loved as a kid. All it would take is $300million or so, and New Yorkers would barely remember the Mets choking away the playoffs. How's the line in the TV commercial go? Priceless. Where to begin? "It seems obvious enough that the Mets need to do something splashy this winter to wash away the psychological stain from their historic collapse and give everyone from their fan base to their players a reason to look forward, not back." --Well, no. It seems obvious they need to improve their bullpen, secure a catcher, tutor their young pitchers, give pep talks and physicals to those who need one or each. But splashy does not necessarily equal wise. Was 2002 really that long ago? "Suffice it to say that if Omar Minaya could find a way to pry Johan Santana away from the Twins, all would be forgiven. The Mets need an ace the way they need that new stadium of theirs to open and put dreary old Shea out of its misery." --Johan Santana's a great pitcher, no question. But shot at Shea is irrelevant and a sign that Harper's already in Mark Herrman "I don't have enough to fill out a column" territory. "If it means trading Jose Reyes and a couple of their young pitchers, the Mets should jump at the chance. Josh Beckett's spectacular October was a reminder of just how much a true ace can do for a ballclub, and it's hard to imagine how Pedro Martinez will ever fit that description again." --OK, we've passed Herrmann and we're speeding by Wally Matthews. Just like that, Harper has the Mets trading their franchise shortstop off a bad second half. They should "jump" to do so, along with those young pitchers who apparently aren't that good, otherwise we wouldn't have to engineer a trade for Santana. Beckett was wonderful in October. Pedro is older than he used to be. Unless Beckett's a free agent or the Mets are offering Pedro an extension, Harper continues to clog this column with nonfactors. "But there is no indication yet, much less a guarantee, that the Twins will trade Santana as he approaches free agency a year from now. And there's nothing in the way of front-line pitching available on the free-agent market." --So...you've just wasted your breath for a paragraph shooting down a strawman rumor. All of which is a way of saying: Why not A-Rod? --I could swear we were just told the Mets desperately need an ace. So why the most expensive player of all-time instead? Someone who plays positions the Mets have covered? "It's not every day the opportunity comes along to sign the most talented player in the game and stick it to your intra-city rival all at once. The Mets can do that right now by bringing Alex Rodriguez to Queens, and the more you think about it, the more sense it makes." --Are we to believe the Mets are (or should be) run by petulant 12-year-olds? Wouldn't sticking it to the Phillies and Braves be priority? "As an organization the Mets are forever feeling slighted because the Yankees make more headlines and get more coverage, win or lose. But the Yankees have lost considerable star power in Joe Torre and A-Rod, offering the Mets a chance to make themselves the glamour team in town for the first time in two decades, simply by signing A-Rod." --Whatever wounds the Mets lick as a result of not firing their manager or having their best player walk on them while their archrival won the World Series, why should this be indulged? Aren't the Mets continually criticized for worrying too much about what the Yankees do? Why should this be their motivation now? "So what if he's a 24-and-1 guy, to borrow Steve Phillips' famous description of Rodriguez seven years ago? So what if he looks more narcissistic than ever, thanks to the timing of his opt-out decision?" --So what, indeed. Except those aren't attractive qualities, are they? "It's not as if you can argue that A-Rod's arrival would upset some special chemistry the Mets have going, not after last year when they carried themselves with an air of entitlement that finally caught up with them." --So...he would help in that regard? "If anything, A-Rod's unmatched work ethic might do for Reyes what it did for Melky Cabrera last year, when Cabrera raised his game after he started shadowing A-Rod and his workout regimen on a daily basis." --So...he's actually a pretty good guy to have around? Make up your mind maybe? "On his way out, Rodriguez made it easy for Yankee fans to hate him, sounding like a phony and failing them every October." --So...he's not a good guy. And he didn't aid his team when push came to shove (though we know there are lots of factors for why a team doesn't win in the playoffs). "Mets fans couldn't care less. The addition of Rodriguez would all but assure a playoff spot, and eventually he is bound to produce in October, the way Barry Bonds finally did after his early failures. Think that wouldn't be sweet to the Mets faithful?" --How does Harper know we are that non-discerning? Does Harper actually know any Mets fans? And where's the guarantee? Does A-Rod get us in every year? It's one thing to speculate, it's another thing to print the unknowable as virtual fact. "Maybe it wouldn't be fair to David Wright, who has become the face of the Mets, an All-Star for years to come and one of the real good guys in sports." --Sounds like John is ready to shoot this one down. "On the other hand, Wright himself volunteered to move to second base when the A-Rod question was posed to him last spring. He is young and agile enough to play there for at least a few years, and then perhaps move to first if necessary." --How convenient. John knew the answer all along. This is also the first part of his column that is mildly useful. "Most important, Wright would see the huge benefit of adding Rodriguez to a lineup that underachieved badly last year." --As would the other members of the Met lineup, one assumes. "Let's face it, Carlos Beltran doesn't seem to have the mental toughness to be a superstar in New York, and Carlos Delgado clearly showed signs of age last year, beaten all too often with inside fastballs." --And with this graf, Harper's momentum becomes undone. Beltran has put up two top-notch offensive seasons. And even if you don't put him in A-Rod's class offensively, please define mental toughness and how it's holding Beltran back. Is Beltran mentally soft even as he's driving in more than a hundred runs and running into fences and being the best player on the team in September? As for Delgado, look what a long-term contract can turn into toward the end. A-Rod will require a long commitment. May look worth it now, but a commitment implies you are stuck for quite a while. Delgado you're stuck with for a lot of money this year, the year after he had his worst year to date. "But put Rodriguez in the No.3 spot, while sliding Beltran to No.2 where he belongs, and suddenly the Mets have a lineup with firepower that could match any in the American League, never mind the National." --Why does Beltran belong in the No. 2 spot? Beltran was incredibly effective in the No. 4 spot, actually. And haven't we heard about the Mets' American League lineup already? "The Mets would still need to beef up the bullpen, but assuming that Mike Pelfrey makes an expected leap forward, a Pedro-led starting rotation would look a whole lot better if it could count on five or six runs a night." --Who's expecting Pelfrey's leap forward? What did he do to inspire this expectation? I'm not writing him off, but beyond one terrific start against the Braves, Pelfrey did nothing to make a leap forward. And weren't we told earlier that Pedro's not really an ace anymore? By the way, the Mets were scoring plenty late in the year and it didn't excuse the rotation's shortcomings. "This is a franchise that should be thinking bigger than it ever has, with its TV network in place and the new stadium opening in 2009, both of which mean gobs of money if the Wilpons put a star-driven, playoff team on the field." --Have sportswriters ever taken a business class? No benefits need be held for the Wilpons, one assumes, but a theoretical $300 million contract is an astounding commitment. Citi Field will be sold out for several years anyway, SNY will generate commercial revenue anyway, how much more benefit will there be from A-Rod? It's probably good fodder for a column, not an "oh and another thing I just thought of to make my 800-word quota" paragraph. "Those are reasons enough to forget what happened seven years ago, when Fred Wilpon didn't want to spend the money on A-Rod. Times have changed, especially now with the Yankees all but inviting the Mets to become the hot team in town." --How hot do the Mets need to be? Winning two more games in 2007 would have helped a great deal, as would have winning five more in 2006. But the Mets aren't in 2004 disarray any longer. Yes, the Yankees were incredibly newsworthy this October. It had nothing to do with the Mets, just as whatever the Mets did or didn't do in September had no effect on that Yankee news. Joe Torre left as manager. It was a guaranteed soap opera thanks to the way papers like Harper's operate. This is one big begging of the question. And unless the Yankees start losing 90 games a year, they're not going away as a factor in the market. "Would Rodriguez do it? Sure he would, for the highest offer. He loves the attention he receives in New York, good and bad. And he's always had a soft spot for the Mets, the team he loved as a kid." --I almost think Harper is trying to be amusing here. If A-Rod just wants money, he wouldn't care that it's New York or that it's the team he loved as a kid. If he loved New York, why leave the allegedly hot team and all that? It's not like he didn't get lots of attention and drive in lots of runs. "All it would take is $300 million or so, and New Yorkers would barely remember the Mets choking away the playoffs." --Since A-Rod doesn't guarantee a world championship, the Mets not winning one with A-Rod would probably just create a convenient three-time loser storyline for hacks like Harper: they couldn't win in '06 or '07 or '08...but just wait! They'll go out and sign the big free agent of next winter and it will change everything! Dope. "How's the line in the TV commercial go? Priceless." --Editor to Harper: John, we need one more line. Maybe nine words.

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 08:58 AM

We need to build a blog to dissect these creeps every day. Bottom line: A-Rod to the Mets and my columns will write themselves.

Centerfield Oct 31 2007 09:14 AM

Scott Boras in Newsday: "You can't count Alex against payroll because he pays for himself. This is not a baseball decision, it's a business decision. The Mets are in a rare situation where they can add a player of Alex's performance and he doesn't cost them a thing. To me, this is an easy, easy call." Well jeez, if Alex is going to pick up his own salary, give him as much as he wants.

G-Fafif Oct 31 2007 09:19 AM

Remember how Alex Rodriguez made the Texas Rangers the most popular and profitable team in baseball?

sharpie Oct 31 2007 09:20 AM

I suppose that Boras is referring to his oft-quoted attendance rise at MFY Stadium during the A-Rod Era. The Mets have only one more year at Shea, however, before they move into a substantially smaller stadium (with a capacity that they exceeded, I think I read, 45 times last year). So -- the Mets shouldn't have too much trouble filling CitiField without A-Rod and with him they couldn't achieve the kinds of gains that Yankee Stadium absorbed. So he doesn't pay for himself, unless they sell a lot of A-Rod jerseys (does he stay at 13 or go back to his old 3?)

Benjamin Grimm Oct 31 2007 09:24 AM

When I read that column in the paper this morning I knew immediately it was the kind of thing that we'd jump all over. The only thing that might make us forget the 2007 collapse is a 2008 Worlds Championship. Nothing that happens between now and next October is going to erase that memory. Nothing.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 31 2007 09:24 AM

He would definitely wear No. 3 as a Met.

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 09:24 AM

They get higher ratings for their network, sell more advertising, get a bigger audience overseas, become the first team to crack into the untapped interplanetary market, and expand their publishing sideline with books and magazines inspired by A-Rod. Watching Alex on SNY cures cancer. There's money there also.

G-Fafif Oct 31 2007 09:32 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: He would definitely wear No. 3 as a Met. His youthful admiration for Dale Murphy would morph into youthful admiration for Rafael Santana.

holychicken Oct 31 2007 10:05 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: When I read that column in the paper this morning I knew immediately it was the kind of thing that we'd jump all over. The only thing that might make us forget the 2007 collapse is a 2008 Worlds Championship. Nothing that happens between now and next October is going to erase that memory. Nothing. Exactly. There is no way I watch baseball next year like a normal person. Not that my watching habits were very normal last year, but they will be significantly further removed from normal that you will be able to consider last year's habits as normal.

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 10:35 AM

It's all speculation, but it's fun to imagine what a machine the Red Sox lineup would be with him in it.

Iubitul Oct 31 2007 11:22 AM

G-Fafif wrote: ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]He would definitely wear No. 3 as a Met. His youthful admiration for Dale Murphy would morph into youthful admiration for Rafael Santana. Not Buddy Harrelson?

smg58 Oct 31 2007 12:00 PM

Valadius wrote: Jeff Passan at Yahoo Sports listed his top 10 destinations for A-Rod. The Mets come in at #6. ]6. New York Mets Why? To stick it to the Yankees. I'm already really, really sick of seeing this reason thrown about. When the Yankees traded for A-Rod after the Red Sox balked, they were supposedly "sticking it" to the Sox. And we can all see how that worked out. You can justify an interest in A-Rod for other reasons, but please, stop with this one.

Nymr83 Oct 31 2007 12:10 PM

it worked out pretty well, he was the MVP twice in 4 years.

Valadius Oct 31 2007 02:04 PM

Baseball Prospectus ranks all 30 teams for their chance at A-Rod: [url]http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=651[/url] We're at #5.

metsmarathon Oct 31 2007 02:12 PM

"11. Red Sox – They’ll be great with or without him, and odds went way down after Boras’ F.U. to the Red Sox on Sunday." what did i miss here?

G-Fafif Oct 31 2007 02:18 PM

Refers to superagent leaking A-Rod's opt-out Sunday night and generating conversation away from Red Sox victory (which the Sox have made clear they did not appreciate).

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 02:18 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 31 2007 09:20 PM

He interrupted the World Series to text message A-rod's opt-out to Brian Cashman. Big whoop. They don't even know that the team isn't called the Devil Rays anymore.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 31 2007 02:37 PM

I'll take my Yankee bad news whenever I can get it but that was a douchy thing to do by Boras. He issued an apology that seemed sincere but at the same time was unbelieveable. He wants us to think he didn't know that the timing of his announcement would interfere with the series.

metirish Oct 31 2007 02:58 PM

Lots of talk about Rodriguez going to the Dodgers because him and Torre have this wonderful relationship.

smg58 Oct 31 2007 03:19 PM

But the Dodgers and Boras aren't on speaking terms because of J. D. Drew opting out. It would be kind of ironic if, after all their whining last year, they grab A-Rod.

Kid Carsey Oct 31 2007 07:26 PM

EDC: >>>We need to build a blog to dissect these creeps every day<<< Let me remind you of the conflict of interest clause in your contract and the eighteen month (in the fine print) should you explore other avenues agreement in the non-compete clause.

Edgy DC Oct 31 2007 09:21 PM

Fuck, there it is right there.

metirish Nov 01 2007 08:15 AM

Wright was on with Jon Stewart last night. ] Wright, who made an appearance last night on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart." As of late yesterday, Wright said he hadn't yet touched base with Minaya, but Stewart raised the touchy issue with him on the show, saying, "This has got to be hard. He's a third baseman. They say, 'Oh, maybe the Mets will go after him. You're the Mets third baseman. Do you call them up and go helllloooo?" The smiling Wright replied, "Just seeing the way that Boston celebrated, seeing the winners of the World Series. First and foremost I want to win. So am I saying that I would change positions for a guy like Alex Rodriguez? "If the front office called me, and said, 'Hey look, we want to make this team better and you're involved, I would absolutely want to sit down and listen. But for right now, I am the third baseman of the New York Mets. I am going into the 2008 season prepared to be the third baseman of the New York Mets." Stewart, a Mets fan himself, argued against getting A-Rod, calling him "bad medicine," the "Dick Cheney of baseball" and "a bad chemistry guy." When Stewart asked Wright if chemistry was important, Wright grinned, "[Fifty-four] home runs are important, too, last time I checked." As for offseason trades, Wright added, "I love my job here, I don't want to go anywhere, so no trades for me hopefully. I hope we go out and make some improvements. I think, the pitching side obviously, that kind of fell apart down the stretch. We could use another big bat, maybe in the outfield."

metsguyinmichigan Nov 01 2007 08:28 AM

I thought Wright did a good job. I liked the part when he said they need to upgrade the pitching, then showed the clip of Stewart throwing out the first pitch from a game last year.

Valadius Nov 01 2007 03:27 PM

The Toledo Mud Hens (you heard me right) have seized on Hank Steinbrenner's comment and made an "offer" to A-Rod: [url]http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AgC9U.G7Ej2bNETxseRxC_M5nYcB?slug=ap-a-rod-mudhens&prov=ap&type=lgns[/url] ]A-Rod a Mud Hen? Triple-A Toledo makes a playful offer November 1, 2007 TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) -- Alex Rodriguez a Mud Hen? Spurred by an offhand remark from George Steinbrenner's son, the Triple-A Toledo Mud Hens want in on the A-Rod sweepstakes. The Mud Hens playfully offered the prize free agent a deal Thursday -- a contract proposal that includes a bonus for hitting 75 home runs next year and leading them to 10 straight International League titles. Rodriguez recently opted out of his $252 million, 10-year contract with the New York Yankees. That prompted Hank Steinbrenner, son of the Yankees owner, to tell the New York Times: "Does he want to go into the Hall of Fame as a Yankee, or a Toledo Mud Hen?" The Mud Hens conjured up an offer to find out, said Jason Griffin, a spokesman for the Detroit Tigers' top farm team. Toledo created a Hall of Fame plaque of Rodriguez wearing a Mud Hens hat and sent a letter to his agent, Scott Boras. The deal stipulates that Rodriguez will have to compete for a spot with Toledo third basemen Mike Hessman, the league's most valuable player last season. "Would your client be willing to play a different position?" the letter asked.

metirish Nov 14 2007 10:41 AM

Daily Snooze reporting that Rodriguez and MFY's in talks without Boras, I don't believe that.

Valadius Nov 14 2007 11:49 AM

I believe that. I'm hoping that Rodriguez woke up and realized that Boras was hurting him.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 14 2007 11:52 AM

Hurting him? He had 3 years/75 guaranteeed and he's going to wind up with 10 years/200-something guaranteed. Hurt me like that

Valadius Nov 14 2007 11:58 AM

Yeah, but Boras making him look like an ass in front of America during Game 4 of the WS and then finding that no one outside of perhaps the team he was playing for before can pay him $35 million a year but even they might draw the line could make him rethink his relationship with Boras.

metirish Nov 14 2007 12:02 PM

Considering the dismal ratings for the world series not many people in America know Rodriguez is an asshole.

Edgy DC Nov 14 2007 12:03 PM

Don't believe the hype. Who really cares about what day Boras phoned in his opt-out? I sure don't. The only press Rodriguez needs is the one printing his checks.

Elster88 Nov 14 2007 06:45 PM

Seems like ARod is staying with the Yanks. I guess the Snooze was right.

metirish Nov 14 2007 06:49 PM

I don't know about this gay, it's like he has to start over again except it's worse than that. http://arod.mlb.com/players/rodriguez_alex/article.jsp?story=111407

seawolf17 Nov 14 2007 07:29 PM

="metirish"]I don't know about this gay, it's like he has to start over again except it's worse than that. http://arod.mlb.com/players/rodriguez_alex/article.jsp?story=111407 I know that's a typo, but it's a funny typo. A-Rod is a loser and I don't want him on my team. There, I said it. Go to hell, Yankees, and take Alex Rodriguez with you.

Elster88 Nov 14 2007 07:36 PM

Brilliantly informative. But I shouldn't complain, that's my exact argument whenever someone would ask if it would bother me if Clemens went to the Mets.

metirish Nov 14 2007 08:26 PM

Of course all this could be just to use the Yankees as a negotiating ploy, if Hank or Hal stick to what they said then they won't be fooled by that.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 15 2007 05:32 AM

That would be great, with Boras playing the devil who's convinced us he doesn't exist. I mean, it sounds like it makes sense and all but then you think: A-Rod is going negotiate his own deal?!? To make the MFYs want you is a good way to get another club to up their offer.

Farmer Ted Nov 15 2007 07:30 AM

What I find a bit unusual is that A-Rod's website is actually under the MLB domain, arod.mlb.com. Do any other players have the luxury of leaching off the commissioner for a personal site?

Benjamin Grimm Nov 15 2007 07:32 AM

Just another example of that 749 and 1 scenario that Steve Phillips worried about.

metirish Nov 15 2007 07:40 AM

It's all about their foundation and that's just great to hear.

Centerfield Nov 15 2007 09:05 AM

="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]That would be great, with Boras playing the devil who's convinced us he doesn't exist. I mean, it sounds like it makes sense and all but then you think: A-Rod is going negotiate his own deal?!? To make the MFYs want you is a good way to get another club to up their offer. It doesn't make sense does it? If A-Rod were unhappy with Boras, wouldn't he just fire him and hire another agent? I get the feeling this is just a way for both sides to re-open negotiations without egg on their face.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 15 2007 09:13 AM

I also don';t iunderstand how the Yankees are hailed as geniuses here where A-rod "crawls back" to take 10 years at 275 M where he had a subsized 3 years/75M coming. Yeah, really sounds like Arod is the one taking it from behind, not Hank and Hal.

Edgy DC Nov 15 2007 09:16 AM

The geniuses are the puppetmasters in Texas.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 15 2007 09:19 AM

What's also worth mentioning is that this is a more expensive contract than the one Rodriguez got from Texas, the one that everyone thought was insane. What's worse, giving a 25-year-old ten years and $252 million, or a 32-year-old ten years and $275 million? They're paying him more money and the contract, instead of running through his prime years like the Texas contract did, runs through his declining years. What if he pulls a Roberto Alomar and suddenly fizzles in his mid-thirties? (That, naturally, is what I'd hope for from him as a Yankee.)

Rockin' Doc Nov 15 2007 05:01 PM

I have truly grown tired of Pay-Rod, but I'm pulling for him to milk as much money and as many guaranteed years as possible out of the Steinbrenner's. Go, ARod go!

SteveJRogers Nov 15 2007 05:12 PM

What I love is the fact that not only were tons of Yankee fans overjoyed when he officially optioned out, basically relieved to be rid of all that came with ARod, but Derek Jeter must have felt the same way as well! HEHEHEHE!

DocTee Nov 15 2007 06:29 PM

First he shows up the WS by opting out, now he one ups NL Cy Young winner Jake Peavy. Sheesh.

Centerfield Nov 15 2007 07:56 PM

Actual quote from Hank Steinbrenner: "If he opts out, that's the end. Unless he says he's sorry and promises not to do it again. Then we'll offer him a bigger deal than we were offering in the first place and try to play it off like it's a discount."

Valadius Nov 17 2007 12:52 PM

This is interesting: ]NEW YORK -- Warren Buffett advised Alex Rodriguez to approach the New York Yankees and go around agent Scott Boras, The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday. The newspaper cited a person familiar with the matter, whom it did not identify. "A-Rod really loves being a Yankee," Buffett was quoted as saying. He wouldn't comment on the substance of any discussions with the player. The two became friends several years ago. Rodriguez, on Boras' advise, opted out of the final three seasons of his record $252 million, 10-year contract on Oct. 28. The Yankees had said many times that if he opted out, they wouldn't negotiate because they would lose $21.3 million from Texas for the final three seasons that was agreed to at the time of the 2004 trade, money to offset the $72 million New York owed from 2008-10. Upset with developments after he opted out, Rodriguez contacted Buffett, and the investor told him to approach the Yankees without his agent, the Journal said. After speaking with the investor, Rodriguez contacted a managing director at Goldman Sachs that he knew, John Mallory, who then got in touch with Gerald Cardinale, a Goldman Sachs managing director who has worked with the Yankees and their YES Network. With the assistance of the two Goldman executives, Rodriguez and the Yankees negotiated a $275 million, 10-year contract that is in the process of being finalized. I'll have to ask my dad if he knows the two guys at Goldman.

Elster88 Nov 19 2007 05:45 AM

Centerfield wrote: Actual quote from Hank Steinbrenner: "If he opts out, that's the end. Unless he says he's sorry and promises not to do it again. Then we'll offer him a bigger deal than we were offering in the first place and try to play it off like it's a discount." I thought they offered him more the first time? OE: Yes I realize this is not an actual quote.

Frayed Knot Nov 19 2007 07:27 AM

]I thought they offered him more the first time? The deal the Yanx were reportedly going to offer but never did (since ARod/Boras refused to talk to them before opting out) was a 5-year extension (so 8 years altogether) at something in the $220-240 range - but of course about $20-some mil of that was being footed by the Rangers. That this new $275/10 deal (w/incentives that could take it over $300) is being spun as an ARod/Boras concession and one that "makes up for" the lost Texas money sounds like one big P.R. job to me.

metirish Nov 19 2007 07:54 AM

Only the Yankees could spin this deal as a bargain, Michael Kay was on the "Sports Reporters " yesterday and wasn't buying the spin that Boras was nowhere near this deal.

Edgy DC Nov 19 2007 08:48 AM

I'm not sure I buy it either. But I do believe that back channels were involved to save some face, if only to be able to say back channels were involved.

Centerfield Nov 19 2007 09:52 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I'm not sure I buy it either. But I do believe that back channels were involved to save some face, if only to be able to say back channels were involved. Yup (c).

Valadius Nov 19 2007 10:00 AM

I talked to my dad. He's met one of the Goldman guys before, and has heard of the other one. My dad works in a different department though.