It's a sacrifice that must be made Mets faithfuls
by BLieve on Jun 6, 2011 9:39 PM EDT
Email
PrintThe Mets are stuck at a crossroad, one trail revealing additional years of mediocrity with the other a game of chance into the unknown. Through the last decade of struggles in Flushing, two teenagers have grown and fought in the blue and orange battalion to become the most admired warriors in the not as famous part of New York. They are young and in their primes. They keep the clubhouse intact and alive. They are perennial all-stars...and they must be let go.
Every year, I hear our fans demanding the same thing. They want change. Well, clarify for me. Do you want a change in personnel or a change in philosophy? The Mets transitioned from shipping rookies out at the first glimpse of potential in the Steve Phillips era to actually developing them in the Minaya era. Given the circumstances, I believe we should continue in that direction and make the farm system our priority.
Last year I would have opted for a re-tool instead of a rebuild. But last year, Santana and top prospect Jenry Mejia were not recovering from surgery, Mike Pelfrey was reliable, Brad Holt had potential and there was hope that Jason Bay can turn things around. Now, we have no ace, no potential top of the rotation starters and no major help coming any time soon from the farm system.
But this is not the reason I believe we must let go of our stars. The reason is because Reyes is overperforming and we have fallen in love with his play. If Reyes finishes the year hitting .275 and stealing 40 bases, this decision would have been much harder. But as he races around the bases as the most exciting player in the league, his price rises to other teams willing to trade for him, and so does the Mets risk in re-signing him.
Let's evaluate a good case scenario vs a bad case scenario should the Mets re-sign him to a modest 6 year/105 million dollar deal ($17.5 million per year). In an optimistic scenario, Reyes will average 150 games a year, bat .275-.300 and swipe 40-50 bases a year playing good defense. In a pessimistic scenario, Reyes will average 120 games a year, bat .275 and steal 30 bases a year playing mediocre defense. While, these are not the best and worst case scenarios, I would like Mets fans to evaluate this and answer the question, can we really afford the chance of a $105 million bad case scenario?
For those that play poker, this would be a tough but decisive call that the pot odds do not justify such a push. Trade Reyes, get a few pieces to work with and invest in amateur ball.
This leaves David Wright as the last hero standing. I say trade him too, when his value is higher. There is no point in trading him if his value is low but if he should ever show flashes of hitting .300/25/100 again and the Mets still have no sign of life in the farm system at that point, then he too, must be moved for the betterment of the future. On the contrary, if Wright's struggles continue to say middle or late 2012 and Santana is back in business, Davis/Niese/Martinez/Tejada continue to/are establishing themselves and the then A+/AA players are making noise, then hell to the effing yea, lock #5 up for the rest of his career.
As a man with no (little emotion), I refuse to fall in love with Reyes and his last month of hitting and running. The Mets were here before these two and will continue to be here after. They are not our first and last loves, so move the duff on!
If I come across two roads diverged in the woods then I will gladly take the one less traveled by.
TLDR; Trade Reyes, trade Wright because Robert Frost would do it.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Babes love poets
Where the babes go, the gentlemen shall follow.
Where do I begin with everything that's wrong with this?
You know what? Forget it…I don’t have the strength.
Chamption of the R.A. Dickey Face contest and "Cromulent Photoshopper Extraordinaire" of Amazin' Avenue!
by Steve Schreiber on Jun 7, 2011 12:05 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
No
The only reason you trade away Wright or Reyes is if you have an offer on the table from an actual GM of an actual team who’s offering you players you can’t pass up. You can’t just say “I want to trade away Jose Reyes for all your top prospects” and then magically get your way.
And the only reason you don’t re-sign Reyes is if you have a better use for that money. Who is the superior player who’s going to be available on the free agent market for cheaper? Who is going to replace him at shortstop? How does replacing an All-Star with nothing lead to future success?
by psiogen on Jun 7, 2011 12:10 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Surrender is not a plan
It makes no sense to trade anyone, unless you have an offer that actually makes a team better in the long run. There is no reason to expect such an offer in the case of either Reyes or Wright.
The Mets can easily afford to keep both, and really should be looking to sign or acquire more guys just like this, who are 27-28 years old and well above average players. The Mets aren’t paying any money anywhere else on that team going forward, they aren’t paying a 1B, they aren’t paying a 2B, they aren’t paying a CA, and aren’t paying for a pitching staff. They are paying one OF and one SP. It’s just normally dumb to sell off young star players on a big market, high revenue team in that situation.
So unless you have some kind of concrete plan, the obvious best option going forward is to trade neither.
Now come up with a specific offer for a guy who can help the team even more, and then maybe you can think about it. For example, if the Tigers are willing to part with Jacob Turner for Wright, maybe that gives you a guy who will step into the rotation very soon, and then you save $15M as well, and maybe you can get away with playing Murphy, Turner, Havens, Lutz, Evans, or someone else at 3B and spend that money elsewhere (like on even more pitching), and maybe you at least have a chance to end up with a better team. But a lot has to happen for that to work, and the point of the discussion ought to be the player you really want to acquire, and if the price is one of your best young players, you ought to agree to that reluctantly.
The point is you would need a pretty favorable trade from the Mets point of view to make trading either Reyes or Wright worth discussing. Maybe there’s a team out there in a pennant race who would be willing to pay a high price for one of these guys. But unless there is a concrete offer there that actually makes some sense, it’s very hard to say that trading either of those guys is going to help the Mets future at all.
All this talk of trading those guys just for the sake of trading them, or to save money, is just foolish. Trade Reyes to “invest in amateur ball”? No way. Reyes at 6/$105M would be one of the best FA bargains in baseball. When you right a post like this, which talks only about wanting to trade your two best players, it doesn’t sound at all like you are interested in seeing the Mets have a better team or a better future. It sounds like you are doing your damnedest to figure out ways to ensure they get worse and have less of a future.
by acerimusdux on Jun 7, 2011 12:12 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
To be fair
They are paying like $22mil to guys that arent on the team any more.
If the highway is congested
And the service road is moving at a good pace? Are you going backwards by exiting?
I need a reasonable package to move either one. What is reasonable? Now this is up for debate.
What should not be debated is that the Mets should be OPEN and explore their options instead of letting a few dozen “Keep Jose” block their exit sign.
This highway is moving 100 mph
Come on, 27 year old, playing at an all-star level. Apparently the highway is moving too fast for you, so you want to take the scenic route.
I don’t see the point in trading for a reasonable package. I would consider trading for an unreasonable one.
by acerimusdux on Jun 7, 2011 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Team game buddy
The whole team needs to cross the finish line together.
The Mets need more than two players to build off. And certainly more than two players with injury potential to build off.
brace yourselves Mets' fans
Its gonna be a painful few years at least.
by John Black on Jun 7, 2011 2:26 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Have we really sunk this low?
People are ripping the OP for suggesting trading the present for the future. Words are bandied about like actual GM, actual team, concrete offer, etc.
Does anyone here think the OP was suggesting the Mets trade Reyes to a fake GM of a fake team based on a non-concrete offer? Really?
Every GM in baseball that has a star on their final contract year must do their due diligence on whether the player can be resigned and at what cost, are they better off trading said player, etc. Alderson wouldn’t be doing his job if he didn’t investigate this and see what the market is for Reyes.
For years the Mets spent big money on risky players. They have Beltran with his knees, KRod who had been decking velocity wise, Santana that other teams flinched at his health, etc. They spent money on these high risks and didn’t put their money in the draft like Boston, Anaheim, TB, etc. And now you want them to not get value for injury prone Reyes, hope you can sign him to a long term contract, and add to the number of overpaid hurt players on the roster?
The Mets have to take a different approach. That means developing from within. Spending heavily on the draft. Getting what they can from Reyes. Keeping Wright unless they get a huge package. Trading intelligently and not assuming they are in the hunt when their team overachieves for a month or two. You know, not acting like a bunch of knee-jerk reaction fans.
Well, clearly you have to have an actual team and a concrete offer to trade a guy
I was referring to the fact that a lot of the fans and commentators who are proposing trading Reyes (and trading players more generally) gloss over whether it’s actually realistic to get the kind of prospect package that they’re fantasizing about.
Just because the Mets should spend more/better in the draft doesn’t mean they need to stop being a big market team. If they have the financial resources to keep Reyes, they should, because there is clearly no better way for the Mets to man shortstop. What does losing Reyes get you? A bonus draft pick and the satisfaction of feeling thrifty? It’s one thing to refuse to spend on marginal, overrated players like K-Rod and Bay, but if you can have franchise stars like Reyes and Beltran, you do it.
Point taken
While I would personally invest all money not spent on Reyes into the farm, this is just not standard in MLB practices for one reason or another. (Anyone know why teams dont drop $20 million a year on the farm?)
I believe not signing is not only thrifty, it is also avoiding a big risk. There is no one better…right now but why lock yourself up long term? Maybe in two years, the Mets have a $60 million payroll and they are on the verge of contending. The point is to get your ingredients straight and bake the cake first before you throw the pretty stuff on top.
Supply and Demand
There is a very limited pool of actual good amateur prospects in any given year. If there are only 30-50 guys worth spending at least $1M on, what happens if every team increases their budget by $20M?
Well, the supply doesn’t change, only the demand increases. So the price goes up. Add $600M in demand, maybe that gets spread over 100 players, and you will see bonuses inflating quickly.
Still, maybe they should inflate some. It seems clear to me that there is more talent coming out of the draft every year, than out of free agency. And yet many teams spend more on free agents every year. Drafting and developing seems like a relative bargain. Even with average drafting and development, you get maybe 15 WAR out of each draft. And it doesn’t seem anyone is really spending $30M total on bonuses, scouting, minor league operations and player development. So you are paying less than $2M per win there, before player salaries. The average is probably more like $1.5M per win. And player salaries tend to be well below market for most of those productive years.
So long as that is the case, teams in general should be spending more on the draft and less on free agency. But that doesn’t mean that a big market team shouldn’t still spend on good free agents. The Boston Red Sox manage to spend a lot on the draft, and still spent $142M for Carl Crawford.
The Mets mistakes in free agency haven’t been in spending on good young position players in their prime, like Reyes and Wright (or Beltran when they signed him), they have been in spending absurd sums for bad and old players like Perez and Castillo. And most of that money is already off the books after this season. Wright is already at $14M and Reyes already at $11M in salary. It costs maybe $7M in annual raises to keep both. You have at least $40M and probably over $50M coming off the books (assuming they are competent enough to not let K-Rod vest).
The Mets could easily spend $40M a year going forward on drafting and development, while keeping Reyes and Wright, and still have the payroll under $100M if they wanted (and with even a modicum of foresight they could have even had it under $80M while keeping both; they signed Bay after they already knew about their Madoff losses). If the Mets could be on the verge of contending in two years without those two guys, they would actually be winning something with them.
If the pool of draftees worth spending big money on is limited, the pool of good young players in their prime worth signing as free agents is even smaller. Jose Reyes is at the top of a very small list of guys worth actually signing in free agency over the next few years. Few teams win only with farm talent. Even if you got to where you were near to contending on a lower payroll, you might have to wait 3-4 years for the players to be available in free agency that you would need to put you over the top.
You don’t throw away the most critical ingredients for your cake, while they are still fresh, and plan on replacing them later, when you know fresh ingredients of equal quality are never available in the market. If you are trying to create an exquisite strawberry shortcake, you don’t trade rare exotic fresh strawberries for a package of coupons that will save money on future purchases of sugar and flour.
by acerimusdux on Jun 8, 2011 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
This.
This is a better version of whatever I was going to say. THIS.
Keeping Reyes and Wright is compatible with long term deficit reduction. There’s no pressing need, especially following Einhorn’s liquidity injection, for austerity now and forever for the Mets.
Precisely Supply And Demand
If the demand for Wright and Reyes is indeed high, then the price that others pay will rise accordingly.
The Mets need more than two stars to build a team off. Every team that has went deep into the playoffs started with a strong farm system before making their big splashes, whether internally or via free agency or trading their prospects for stars. How can you tell me the system doesn’t work when Minnesota, Colorado, Texas, Florida, Tampa have been doing it?
Let’s not forget value is value and it can always be converted. We are simply trading dollars for let’s say Peruvian Soles at the moment. We can always trade back later.
Alas, without sugar and flour, your cake never gets baked and your strawberries sit to rot.
Supply and demand in an ILLIQUID market for assets with EXPIRING contracts
That’s why trading Reyes and/or Wright will probably leave the Mets far worse off.
Wright and Reyes produce 10+ fWAR/ season between them. The chances of getting that production back is slim to none, which makes the handful of prospects that you might get for them simply not worth it. A far more effective way for the Mets to rebuild is to go over-slot in the draft, and to increase the IFA budget. Once the farm system is stocked, the Mets can trade prospects to teams for the missing pieces needed to contend.
__________________________________________________
"He who gets the best players usually wins" - Bobby Bowden
A 10 war value in 2011 doesn't help them in 2014
There is no absolute answer. Saying trading them will make the Mets worse off is as ridiculous as saying they must trade them. It all comes down to can they get more value moving them then they currently provide.
Also, can you guarantee Reyes will stay? He is a free agent and can sign anywhere.
If the Mets make a competitive offer, Reyes will probably stay
Why do I believe this? Because Reyes has said that he wants to stay, and with his family on Long Island, I’m inclined to believe him.
Having 10+ fWAR in place makes it easier to build moving forward. That’s especially true when 5+ of that value comes from shortstop. There is little chance that the Mets will be able to replace that kind of production at that position. Will the return that the Mets get for Reyes equal his production, and if so, over how many positions will that be spread? That dilutes the Mets, and it makes it harder for them to build into a contender.
__________________________________________________
"He who gets the best players usually wins" - Bobby Bowden
Multiple factors
While the prospects may or may not fetch the production that Wright and Reyes are producing, don’t forget to add in the production they will add when they do sign a FA or make a trade with the money/prospects they have that wouldn’t be there with Wright and/or Reyes.
I think we can all agree on one thing and that is the Mets need to start spending heavily on the draft.
They won't be able to replace that production in the FA market at SS or 3B
Also, counting on prospects acquired in a prospective trade to reacquire equivalent replacements for Reyes and/or Wright is almost impossible. This is because both Reyes and Wright are currently devalued in the trade market due their contracts.
Trading either is a losing proposition.
__________________________________________________
"He who gets the best players usually wins" - Bobby Bowden
Wright is more a case of his back injury and 2011 performance
No one will give the Mets a decent package for a player with a back injury who is underperforming. He is not expected back until mid-July, which means that he likely won’t be able to reestablish himself until after the trade deadline. At that point, his expiring contract will diminish his trade value. Again, a losing proposition for the Mets.
__________________________________________________
"He who gets the best players usually wins" - Bobby Bowden
Half Agree
This is what I mentioned about Wright from OP.
“There is no point in trading him if his value is low but if he should ever show flashes of hitting .300/25/100 again and the Mets still have no sign of life in the farm system at that point, then he too, must be moved for the betterment of the future. On the contrary, if Wright’s struggles continue to say middle or late 2012 and Santana is back in business, Davis/Niese/Martinez/Tejada continue to/are establishing themselves and the then A+/AA players are making noise, then hell to the effing yea, lock #5 up for the rest of his career.”
As for Reyes, his trade value is as high as it ever will be. The man is having his best hitting season and is healthy (right now). Most trades involving stars usually happen when the star is nearing the end of their contract and the current team either cannot or in my case does not want to re-sign the player. I am not sure what your concern is here.
It is very likely that the team attempting to acquire Reyes will only go through with it if they get a window to re-sign him and successfully does so but we have certainly seen teams trade for stars at the deadline without such criteria.
Don't bother
Reyes will be a fantastic sign for someone bringing great value at a key position. But he is a high risk guy that is likely to be a contract albatross for the second half of his contract – right around when the Mets would start being relevant.
God bless you with a wife with firm knockers for logical reasoning
The key takeaway here is the Mets should listen to offers and not be emotionally attached the Wright and Reyes if a reasonable offer presents itself.
The bottom line is this…..the Mets are a better baseball team with Jose Reyes and David Wright then without them, and if history is any judge it’s that the team selling the star players traditionally loses said deal, so it’s extremely dubious (and probably wrong) to imply that they’d be better off long-term by dealing those two. If it’s at all possible for them to keep those two, they need to do EVERYTHING in their power to do so.
The only reason you trade a 27 or 28 year old player who is within the top couple players at their position is if you can no longer afford them. Nobody trades their stars thinking it’s a good baseball move, because it’s not. They trade their stars because it’s the financial move they have to make. And while the Madoff stuff is still clearly a huge issue, you can’t suddenly stop being a large market team. This is New York, people aren’t going to just accept a Sub 100 million dollar payroll while the Wilpons re-fill their greedy pockets at the fans expense…..and if you can’t afford more then that, then sell the damn team.
by adropofvenom on Jun 7, 2011 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Can it not be done or has it not been done?
The Mets have been well criticized over the last decade, if the criticism continue then let it be something other then the poor free agent investments and trades. There is no reason the Mets can’t be a mid market team for the next year and a half and wait for the right moment to splurge like a big city team again.
The Mets have leverage that small and mid market teams do not. When they negotiate a trade, they don’t have to worry about not being able to sign them and lose Wright and Reyes, they have the money. This gives the Mets a further edge when the hot stove heats up.
Really?
You hear about the trade texas made trading teixeira? Or Toronto moving halladay when everyone knew there was 0 percent chance henre signs with TO? Or the Santana trade? minny got nothing but they didn’t commit 22 million per year on an injured pitcher and cripple their team. Or Texas trading Arod in his prime and starting their turnaround.
Of course players in their prime are traded. If the risk reward is worth it.
It seems to me you want the GM to keep on keeping on. We saw where that got them. Any quality gm knows no one is untouchable and will always listen to offers
I can't resist
1) history is any judge? Please list a bunch of deals gone bad. I already listed a bunch of very good deals in the past
2) doing EVERYTHING is almost always a recipe for disaster. Heck, signing Mauer was universally regarded as both doing everything and as a great move. It also looks like a mistake already.
3) if the players contract is up he is not part of your team. It doesn’t matter if you can afford them, they can go elsewhere.
4) many teams do in fact believe trading young stars is a good move. Please see the various examples.
5) it’s not always a financial move. For example Halladay told them he was not staying in Toronto. Theynwere not cheap. They justmwere not stupid.
6) Why can’t they line their pockets? Is there something to stop them? Your obvious anger won’t change a thing. They will do whatever they feel like.
7) when did a discussion about the best move for the Mets become “they better spend or they are cheap”.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
