Master Index of Archived Threads


What's taking so long?

KC Jan 30 2008 03:01 PM

I haven't read or heard anything so I'm just asking. Was there a physical today? Conference calls? Expensive lunch with high priced hookers? If this goes down to Friday afternoon I may have a freakin' stroke.

TransMonk Jan 30 2008 03:54 PM

With 72 hours, I can't imagine one side or the other not saying "Let me sleep on it."

KC Jan 30 2008 04:11 PM

I'm just being a dick. The Giants coverage here is maddening beyond belief (for me) and I want some baseball news to shut them up. I'm predicting a 4:00 pm news conference tomorrow afternoon.

seawolf17 Jan 30 2008 05:24 PM

Maybe they'll announce it midway through the third quarter Sunday night.

metirish Jan 30 2008 05:28 PM

I heard on Wfuv today during the sports rap that Santana wanted the Mets all along......make of that what you will

Benjamin Grimm Jan 30 2008 06:32 PM

The Associated Press wrote: Mets officials met with Santana's agent, Peter Greenberg, in Manhattan on Wednesday. If the sides reach an agreement before Friday's deadline, the only obstacle left would be Santana passing a physical.

Frayed Knot Jan 30 2008 06:43 PM

Anyone know the exact deadline - or do these things tend to be a bit flexible? We need like a count-down clock up top or something. tick .. tick .. tick ..

KC Jan 30 2008 06:48 PM

I heard Friday at 5 pm somewhere today. I also heard that Eli used Chapstick more often the last couple of days than normal but the coaching staff isn't overly concerned.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 30 2008 06:48 PM

The snooze mentuioned the contract talks were to begin last night. So I think that means were at 48 hours now.

metirish Jan 30 2008 06:55 PM

Customized Count-down Clock. http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?month=02&day=01&year=2008&hour=05PM&min=00&sec=00&p0=179

Valadius Jan 30 2008 10:04 PM

I thought this thread would be about why the parody contest is taking so long.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 31 2008 06:06 AM

Shooter Charley Walters, of the Pioneer Press, a Twin Cities paper, had this nugget of information: SHOOTER CHARLEY WALTERS wrote: The money was flowing Wednesday during negotiations for a contract extension between pitcher Johan Santana and the New York Mets. With details still to be worked out, including a $7 million signing bonus and performance incentives, the parties were talking about a six-year deal worth more than $150 million.

metirish Jan 31 2008 07:19 AM

Great name Shooter, yeah it's a lot of loot to boot.

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2008 07:23 AM

KC wrote: I heard Friday at 5 pm somewhere today. That's what I've heard as well. So we're just under 32 hours and counting ... tick .. tick .. tick

KC Jan 31 2008 07:24 AM

Eli's lips are better, but they're still questionable.

AG/DC Jan 31 2008 07:28 AM

It is 1 day, 7 hours, 31 minutes, and 36 seconds, says the clock.

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2008 08:12 AM

31 hours Someone should check in near the top of every hour and keep this current. You west coast guys have the 3AM EST shift.

Centerfield Jan 31 2008 10:37 AM

I'd hate to be Minaya in these negotiations...what leverage can he possibly have? What's to stop Johan from asking for 8 years, $200 million?

smg58 Jan 31 2008 10:46 AM

Well Santana did ask the Twins to resolve the situation quickly or he'd invoke the no-trade clause for the rest of the year. He would have to go back to Minnesota and face a year with an organization and fans that couldn't be too happy with him.

AG/DC Jan 31 2008 10:48 AM

I don't know. He can walk away and take his Humber/Go-Go/Mulvey/Guerra batch back. He may not want to, but his leverage comes from convincing the agent that he's willing to if he doesn't start jettisoning his ridiculous demands and negotiating honestly. And if it collapses and the media asks him why, he can say, "The nutcase was asking 8 years and $200 million." "And a fucking tent!"

Mr. Zero Jan 31 2008 10:48 AM

Little to no leverage. Wasn't the original request something like 7 years for 140 million? Now its 6 years for 150. Or so they say.

seawolf17 Jan 31 2008 10:55 AM

Give him eight years, $200 million. I don't care, Omar, just get it the fuck done.

metirish Jan 31 2008 11:01 AM

Well it was never going to be easy....from espn. ] It appears the Mets' negotiations with the agents for Johan Santana won't be over quickly. Sources familiar with those discussions said Thursday that while the talks may not go right to Friday's 5 p.m. ET deadline, the two sides were still far enough apart that it was unlikely any deal could be reached before Friday morning at the earliest. The sources also left open the possibility that the talks could collapse without an agreement, though the odds of that appear remote. Santana's agents, Peter and Ed Greenberg, are believed to be looking for a six-year extension in the range of $150 million -- a figure that would include an upfront payment that would boost Santana's 2008 salary ($13.25 million) to beyond $20 million. The Mets, not surprisingly, differ on the dollars. But the biggest obstacle appears to be the length of the deal. Indications are that the Mets want to limit the guaranteed portion of the extension to five years, not including Santana's current contract, which expires after 2008. So if Santana's side is adamant that the deal extend beyond 2013, it's believed the Mets would insist that the back end of the contract not be guaranteed, but could include at least one vesting option year. In the meantime, there are signs that the Mets continue to express interest in free-agent pitcher Kyle Lohse. Lohse was viewed, essentially, as the Mets' backup plan in case they weren't able to trade for Santana. But when one baseball man who had spoken with Mets GM Omar Minaya was asked if the club could end up with both Santana and Lohse, the reply was: "Absolutely."

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2008 11:02 AM

There is *ALWAYS* a price at which you should walk away. There may be a disagreement over where that line is, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The 'just give him a blank check' attitude is the same one that would have willingly coughed up the existing package along with Martinez & Pelfrey and maybe Reyes. I still can't imagine that this isn't going to get done. Santa Anna's incentive for not making insane demands is the one where he gives up mega-money now in exchange for maybe making more a year from now ... if he doesn't get hurt ... and if the market doesn't change. 30 hours.

metirish Jan 31 2008 11:04 AM

Time until Friday, February 1, 2008 at 5:00:00 PM (New York time) 1 day 27 hours 1676 minutes 100575 seconds

metsmarathon Jan 31 2008 11:05 AM

well, its a (fairly) smart contract that hte mets want to sign him to. i like the idea of a vesting option year or two. i figure it'll take some smart negotiating and some sizeable concessions to get it done that way though. like, lots of signing bonus and the like, and much more front-loading than we're used to. and to be honest, i really like the idea of front-loading a contract as opposed to the more customary backloading idea... i just really hope they get something done. clearly, the mets cannot let it fall through.

themetfairy Jan 31 2008 11:08 AM

Santana's agent is Peter Greenberg. IIRC, he's the one who misplayed the Mets during Edgardo Alfonzo's free agency.

Centerfield Jan 31 2008 11:23 AM

As an aside, I sure as hell hope we are keeping Guerra, Mulvey, Gomez and Humber completely covered in bubble-wrap during these 72 hours. We certainly can't have them taking any cabs.

metsmarathon Jan 31 2008 11:26 AM

i would suggest, at a minimum, an air hole. another opening or two might be good, too, for keeping things unmessy.

AG/DC Jan 31 2008 11:55 AM

I can sense this getting closer. Carlos Santana has come to an agreement. So close.

KC Jan 31 2008 02:48 PM

Approaching the hour 24. I care about this shit way too much.

Rotblatt Jan 31 2008 02:54 PM

I'm starting to get a little nervous. Silly, probably, but I just don't trust it yet. Incidentally, I'm down with signing [url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/l/lohseky01.shtml]Lohse[/url]. He's a pretty decent control pitcher, and he's had experience working from the pen. He could be our long man, and jump in the rotation when Petey and/or El Duque have to spend time on the DL. Plus, he's only 28. Oh, and his career ERA+ is 95, and he posted a perfect 100 last year while pitching 192.7 innings. A fine insurance option, if you ask me.

Elster88 Jan 31 2008 03:53 PM

I'm nervous. I thought it was only me.

themetfairy Jan 31 2008 03:56 PM

Scared shitless

KC Jan 31 2008 04:15 PM

SNY has "good news" re: this after commercials ....

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2008 04:53 PM

ESPN is reporting that they're still apart on years, structure & money. Jon Heyman (SI.com/WFAN) says they're closer; agreement on years (the one remaining plus 6 more) but still haggling over the total amount of dollars and how they're to be distributed. 22 Hours

Benjamin Grimm Jan 31 2008 05:20 PM

If this deal falls apart it will be the Second Collapse. And spring training will start with a big stink hovering over the team.

seawolf17 Jan 31 2008 05:53 PM

Omar, just GIVE HIM THE FREAKING MONEY.

AG/DC Jan 31 2008 06:00 PM

Options. That's the compromise.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 31 2008 06:26 PM

Bob Nightengale, USA Today wrote: The Mets, according to a high-ranking official privy to the negotiations, are close to agreeing to a five- or six-year contract extension with Santana that will average about $21.5 million a year. The two sides have until 5 p.m. ET Friday to reach an agreement.

Fman99 Jan 31 2008 06:43 PM

themetfairy wrote: Scared shitless I am not scared but I am definitely unsettled. Until he's got the hat on and the jersey over top of the suit coat and tie, I will not relax.

KC Feb 01 2008 04:00 AM

11

metirish Feb 01 2008 04:47 AM

It is 0 days, 10 hours, 15 minutes and 29 seconds until Friday, February 1, 2008 at 5:00:00 PM (New York time) From Newsday ] Within the baseball industry, there is near unanimity on these two predictions when it comes to the Mets and Johan Santana: 1. They will come to an agreement on Santana's contract extension by Friday afternoon's 5 o'clock deadline. 2. They won't complete that agreement until 4:59. "[Santana's agent Peter Greenberg] is going to take [the Mets] to the last minute," a person familiar with the situation said Thursday night, on the condition of anonymity. Greenberg met with the Mets' brass in Manhattan for a second straight day, and the two sides are slowly finding common ground. According to the source, Santana will likely wind up with a six-year extension for an average annual value of about $23 million a year, on top of the $13.25 million owed to him this season. A signing bonus could be included that would take the total to just over $150 million.

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2008 08:37 AM

You wonder if [u:3c5a383df4]either side[/u:3c5a383df4] is willing not only take things to that last minute but also to walk away if they don't get what they want. I suspect not, both ways. There's also some mechanism - requiring league approval and such - for extending the deadline. If it came to that they'd probably have to show MLB brass that they're within reach and just need more time to work out the details, as opposed to being hopelessly stuck in the mud and want more time only so they can try to out-bluff the other side.

soupcan Feb 01 2008 08:43 AM

How about if the Mets say to the Twins 'We're close but we need more time" Could the Twins then say - "you know what, we've been roundly ridiculed for this deal and other teams have since basically indicated that if they knew this was all it would've taken to get Johan that they would have ponied up a better package. With this in mind, we think we can now make a better deal so, no Mets, we're not going to grant you any negotiating extension. Deal is now off." 'zat possible?

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2008 08:50 AM

Hey, either side can back out for any reason at any time - including using the deadline as a way to kill it while trying to make it look like the other side didn't want to "do what it takes". I just don't know that Mini-soda wants to re-jump through all those hoops again just to make one of the deals they've already rejected. It's not like someone's going to UP their offer at this point and THEN pay the ransom that the rich and desperate Mets found too steep.

metsmarathon Feb 01 2008 08:52 AM

soupcan wrote: How about if the Mets say to the Twins 'We're close but we need more time" Could the Twins then say - "you know what, we've been roundly ridiculed for this deal and other teams have since basically indicated that if they knew this was all it would've taken to get Johan that they would have ponied up a better package. With this in mind, we think we can now make a better deal so, no Mets, we're not going to grant you any negotiating extension. Deal is now off." 'zat possible? i don't think it's up to the twins, but rather to mlb.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 01 2008 09:23 AM

Ken Rosenthal, Fox Sports, 11:09 AM wrote: The Mets are offering Johan Santana by far the highest salary ever for a pitcher under a multiyear contract. However, the structure of the deal remains an issue only hours away from today's 5 p.m. ET deadline to strike a deal, according to major league sources. The Mets' offer is in the range of $22 million per season. The hang-up is that the Mets want the guarantee to be for five years, with vesting options that could extend the deal, sources say. Santana's agents, Peter and Ed Greenberg,, want a guarantee of six or seven years. "We've still got a ways to go, but we're in a lot better position than we were a few days ago," said a source close to the negotiations. There are several ways the two sides could bridge the remaining gap. The Mets could increase their financial offer by giving Santana a signing bonus on top of his $13.25 million salary for next season. The two sides also could adjust the innings threshold on vesting options to make them more easily attainable for Santana. In the end, the Mets simply might guarantee a sixth year. "22.5 times six will get it done," one prominent agent predicted. The total value of such a package would be $135 million.

Vic Sage Feb 01 2008 09:54 AM

I think they'll end up in the 7-year / 150M range (including 2008), with the 7th year as an option. Somthing like: 2008 = 13.5M (current contract) + $7.5m bonus 2009 = 21.5M 2010 = 21.5M 2011 = 21.5M 2012 = 21.5M 2013 = 21.5M 2014 = 21.5M (vesting based on IP)

KC Feb 01 2008 09:54 AM

Just for the sake of discussion ... does a deal have to be "announced" before the new team can sit down and talk turkey? Or can (or have) deals been made quietly and then new terms discussed and agreed to and then it goes public? I suppose I should know the answer, but I don't.

Vic Sage Feb 01 2008 10:00 AM

if you talk contract with a player who is under contract with another team, that is "tampering", i believe. Mets couldn't officially negotiate until Twins OKed a trade. There was likely some unofficial, carefully worded, backchannel discussions however, for the Mets to assess whether Santana was signable before they made the trade.

KC Feb 01 2008 11:15 AM

I'm more focusing on the keeping hush hush and not going public until it's a done thing on all sides. I'm not saying this is the case here, but if difficult negotiations are an issue it would kinda behoove the Twins not to get slammed for three days for not getting enough if the whole thing never takes place or if the Mets fail they don't have to explain themselves for not "doing what it takes". No biggie, probably over wondering.

metirish Feb 01 2008 11:36 AM

At first this clock was a gimmick, now it's starting to look scary. Customized counter Time until Friday, February 1, 2008 at 5:00:00 PM (New York time) 0 days 3 hours 203 minutes 12208 seconds Alternative version It is 0 days, 3 hours, 23 minutes and 28 seconds until Friday, February 1, 2008 at 5:00:00 PM (New York time)

AG/DC Feb 01 2008 12:09 PM

KC wrote: No biggie, probably over wondering. I wondered the same thing. Frayed Knot portrayed a scenario where a big trade is kept on the QT for three days as rather unlikely.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 01 2008 12:47 PM

Jon Heyman, 2:07 p.m. wrote: Johan Santana and the Mets continue to make progress on a record-setting contract that is expected to make the two-time Cy Young winner a $150-million man, SI.com has learned. People with knowledge of the talks say they expect a deal to be completed by the 5 p.m. EST deadline. Santana and the Mets are discussing a contract extension for six years that is expected to pay Santana close to $22 million a year, according to sources familiar with the talks. In addition, it is believed the Mets may add about $7 million to Santana's $13.25 million salary for 2008.

RealityChuck Feb 01 2008 01:29 PM

Technically, the only thing they need to agree on is that Santana waive his no-trade clause. If he didn't have one, there wouldn't be an issue. Santana would be in orange and blue. But Santana is not going to waive the clause without something from the Mets, and at this point he's in as strong a negotiating position as he's ever going to be in. After 5:00 he's dependent on the Twins, and he doesn't like that, especially since the Mets are willing to pay a signing bonus that much more than he will get in Minneapolis*. But there are beginning to be signs that it's done. *Why are they the Minnesota Twins, and not the Minneapolis Twins (as Newsday used to bill them in the early 60s)? Because if they were the Minneapolis Twins, the entire St. Paul market would have been closed to them. If you think Mets vs. Yankees fans have a rivalry, it's nothing compared to the Minneapolis Millers and St. Paul Saints. And the rivalry spilled over elsewhere: there's the story of the congregation of a Minneapolis church walking out on the minister because he was reading from St. Paul.

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2008 02:03 PM

RealityChuck wrote: Technically, the only thing they need to agree on is that Santana waive his no-trade clause. If he didn't have one, there wouldn't be an issue. Santana would be in orange and blue. The N-T clause is pretty much irrelevent by this point. The Twins wouldn't get much back unless they agreed to allow this "window" for contract talks, the Mets weren't going to give up all that talent without getting him to sign long-term, and Santa Anna himself (by all reports) also wanted this to be a permanent move rather than one-year stopover. Once those parameters were in the mix, virtually any player has himself a no-trade deal since he can just kill the trade by making demands he know can't/won't be met. Supposedly Andrew Marchand on ESPN-1050 is saying that the Santana camp is willing to make concessions off their initial demand of 7 years because he "really wants to be a Met". One Hour.

AG/DC Feb 01 2008 02:10 PM

That's class. I want the media to know that I, too, am willing to go for a deal of less than seven years because I, too, really want to be a Met.

seawolf17 Feb 01 2008 02:24 PM

Fred, just GIVE HIM THE FUCKING MONEY. Thanks.

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2008 02:45 PM

WFAN (via Jon Heyman): MLB "likely to grant an extension" if no agreement reached by the deadline.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 01 2008 02:47 PM

Let's hope it doesn't come to that. They have fourteen whole minutes remaining. You wouldn't need half that time to convince ME to take $130 million dollars.

A Boy Named Seo Feb 01 2008 02:49 PM

I'm listening to Mike and the Mad Dog for the first time in I don't know when. Francessa sez Mets have offered a total of $152M and Johan wants around $10M more. Also says Mets don't want to guarantee the last year.

Fman99 Feb 01 2008 02:52 PM

Fuck. I'm getting shpilkes here.

AG/DC Feb 01 2008 02:59 PM

This just in... fuck! We'll have further details as they come become available.

Willets Point Feb 01 2008 03:00 PM

Relax worryworts: ]Major League Baseball almost certainly would approve a request to extend the deadline if the two sides are unable to reach an agreement by 5 p.m. Source

Mr. Zero Feb 01 2008 03:03 PM

2 hour extension granted. I can't possibly listen to M&MD for two more hours. Seems like good news though.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 01 2008 03:03 PM

SNY's Daily News Live is reporting that MLB has granted a two-hour extension.

themetfairy Feb 01 2008 03:04 PM

Here's a sure fire prediction - in two hours I'm going to have a friggin' ulcer!

KC Feb 01 2008 03:16 PM

If I can avert a stroke, you can avert an ulcer. Start drinking. Have a glass of wine. A scotch. Couple of beers. Hell, have all three .... it's FRIDAY!!!

themetfairy Feb 01 2008 03:26 PM

You know, I was just opening up a bottle of wine for dinner, and was seriously considering having a glass before D-Dad gets home. If he comes home and I'm drunk, I'm telling him it's your fault ;)

bmfc1 Feb 01 2008 04:03 PM

Metsblog reports that "supper" has been delivered. Chinese?

Fman99 Feb 01 2008 04:26 PM

bmfc1 wrote: Metsblog reports that "supper" has been delivered. Chinese? No, he's from Venezuela I think.

RealityChuck Feb 01 2008 06:04 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: ="RealityChuck"]Technically, the only thing they need to agree on is that Santana waive his no-trade clause. If he didn't have one, there wouldn't be an issue. Santana would be in orange and blue. The N-T clause is pretty much irrelevent by this point. Well, at this point, yes. But when you made the point, not at all. The no-trade clause is the reason why the Mets needed to negotiate with Santana. Until Santana says he's going to waive it, there is no deal. Now, he used that to get a monster contract. But without the no-trade clause, he has far less leverage with the Mets (without the clause, they could use him as a one-year rental and see if they could resign in September). ]The Twins wouldn't get much back unless they agreed to allow this "window" for contract talks, the Mets weren't going to give up all that talent without getting him to sign long-term, and Santa Anna himself (by all reports) also wanted this to be a permanent move rather than one-year stopover. All true, but the clause allows Santana to demand a long-term contract, and also requires that the Mets negotiate with him to agree to be traded. ]Once those parameters were in the mix, virtually any player has himself a no-trade deal since he can just kill the trade by making demands he know can't/won't be met. Not without no-trade. Oh, he can say he wants a long-term contract, but the team getting him doesn't have to listen to him, and can factor the possibility that he may walk when offering prospects.

Frayed Knot Feb 02 2008 06:38 AM

Well of course it's all moot now -- but let's speculate for a moment as to how this might have played out ift Santana did NOT have a no-trade clause: - he could still make an 'extend me NOW!!!! or I'm going FA next year' demand to Minni mgmt, which is what got the ball rolling in the first place - Said mgmt would, once he rejected their 5 x $20 attempt at getting him to stay, decide that they preferred dealing him to going play out the string and taking draft picks route - they'd also still realize that they can get more for him if they grant the trading partner a negotiating window ... particularly since Johan himself made it known that he wanted a L-T contract now rather than later - once that's all done, he effectively has N-T power simply by being able to reject any contract offer from a team he doesn't want. The process is slightly different than having a veto stamp but the result would be essentially the same. Yeah the Mets could have kept him against his will without the veto power, but once they emptied the farm system for him they weren't going to finalize the deal unless they could keep him past the one year and he had the ability to make or break that whether he had veto power or not. The only thing that N-T clause gave him was the ability to "pre-reject" teams by telling Minni, in advance, not to even bother talking to them. Reportedly he didn't want to go west which is why Seattle is neck-deep in Bedard talks but never even sniffed around Santana. Maybe Arizona went for Haren early (and gave up even more) for the same reason, although I suspect money probably had a lot to do with that too.

RealityChuck Feb 02 2008 08:35 AM

But, ultimately, without a no-trade clause, he would have been a Met on Tuesday. He could make demands, but the Mets would still have him on the roster whether he liked it or not. The team could have said "We just need you for a year and wi'll see about working things out afterwards." Now the Mets may have chosen to negotiate a new contract before the trade went through; that was the team's right and certainly it made sense. At the same time, they could have gotten Santana, then started negotiating an extension afterwards. But the no-trade clause made it essential that they come to an agreement with Santana.

Frayed Knot Feb 02 2008 09:07 AM

My point is that I don't think the Mets & Twins were going to ever reach an agreement except as a conditional one based on striking a long-term deal -- it seemed to be what all three sides wanted. Then, once the deal was in place, ANY player could kill the deal just by making outrageous demands. IOW, the existence of a N-T clause may have been partly responsible for directing him towards the Mets but once a deal was reached the N-T became irrelevant.