I figured the Mets were perhaps going to save money on this but Jon Heyman says they are paying him what he was owed.
Edited by nmigliore, 07 November 2012 - 01:57 PM.
Posted 07 November 2012 - 01:45 PM
Edited by nmigliore, 07 November 2012 - 01:57 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 07 November 2012 - 02:16 PM
Edited by nmigliore, 07 November 2012 - 02:46 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 07 November 2012 - 02:51 PM
Joel Sherman also confirmed the Mets are paying Bay fully what he's owed. However, they are deferring some portion of the money he was set to be paid in 2013, which creates a little more flexibility for this offseason.
Edit: Eno Sarris, who is a well-respected writer for Fangraphs and Amazin' Avenue (a Mets blog), thinks if the Mets deferred all or a significant portion of Bay's salary then that could open an additional $10-15M to spend right now.
Edit 2: Joel Sherman agrees:
Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1#Mets say wouldn't have done Bay buyout if didn't give ability to spend more in '13, would just have tried again with Bay if that were case
Posted 07 November 2012 - 02:55 PM
Edited by nmigliore, 07 November 2012 - 02:59 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 07 November 2012 - 03:37 PM
Although they would've had to pay him the money either way, this is really great news. It not only opens up a roster spot but the deferrals also could give the team some significant money to play with for 2013. Although the current outlook of next season isn't pretty, they could add a couple of mid-tier outfielders and have a puncher's chance at a wild card spot; the starting pitching staff certainly has the upside to lead them. That is, of course, if they do not trade Wright or Dickey, which very well may happen yet.
Posted 14 November 2012 - 06:53 PM
Edited by nmigliore, 14 November 2012 - 07:11 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 14 November 2012 - 07:36 PM
Posted 14 November 2012 - 08:04 PM
Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976, 14 November 2012 - 08:08 PM.
Posted 14 November 2012 - 11:11 PM
Posted 27 November 2012 - 02:08 PM
NEW YORK -- The New York Mets have offered a contract extension to David Wright that would keep the All-Star third baseman with the club at least through 2020, a major league source told ESPNNewYork.com.
The source said Wright had been offered at least a seven-year extension by the Mets, on top of the $16 million he is owed for 2013.
http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/A source who has communicated with Mets officials said the organization strongly believesDavid Wright will sign an extension with the club.
"They've been really optimistic," the source told ESPNNewYork.com.
Edited by nmigliore, 27 November 2012 - 02:09 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 27 November 2012 - 02:50 PM
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:05 PM
Edited by nmigliore, 27 November 2012 - 04:12 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:12 PM
The big media guys are chiming in now. Ken Rosenthal says Mets are offering 7/135-150, Jon Heyman says 7/135-140. I can only hope that includes his 2013 option otherwise, oof. 7/135 is still rich for me but it's not that bad. 8/155ish has the potential to be really terrible.
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:17 PM
If it included his 2013 option, that's not so bad. It's like valuing him as a 4.5- to 5-win player next year with standard aging and 5% inflation each year. I still find that to be too optimistic (which is what I said it's still rich for me), but it adds up to $130M-ish in value over the next 7 years. He'd basically be paid market rates for what he is and even if the Mets end up overpaying by $1.5M each year it's not going to kill them. Giving him another year and $15M or whatever on top of that would be pretty hard to defend, though.How can you possibly justify 7 years and $135 million for David Wright?
Edited by nmigliore, 27 November 2012 - 04:19 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:21 PM
How can you possibly justify 7 years and $135 million for David Wright?
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:30 PM
If it included his 2013 option, that's not so bad. It's like valuing him as a 4.5- to 5-win player next year with standard aging and 5% inflation each year. I still find that to be too optimistic (which is what I said it's still rich for me), but it adds up to $130M-ish in value over the next 7 years. If the Mets end up overpaying by $1.5M each year it's not going to kill them.
Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976, 27 November 2012 - 04:31 PM.
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:30 PM
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:39 PM
Why? I thought we went over this. The Mets have little-to-no payroll commitments beyond 2013. As of right now, Jon Niese's team-friendly deal is the only guarantee, and he never tops more than $9M in a guaranteed season. Even if they resign Dickey and Wright they'll likely have less than $40M in committed money for 2014. Even when accounting for arbitration-eligible players like Davis, Gee, and Murphy, it's hard to envision them not having a good chunk of coin to play with.team that doesn't look like they're going to be big spenders anytime soon.
Edited by nmigliore, 27 November 2012 - 04:40 PM.
- Jim Leyland"Take all that clubhouse [expletive] and all that, throw it out the window. Every writer in the country has been writing about that [expletive] for years. Chemistry don't mean [expletive]."
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:45 PM
Why? I thought we went over this. The Mets have little-to-no payroll commitments beyond 2013. As of right now, Jon Niese's team-friendly deal is the only guarantee, and he never tops more than $9M in a guaranteed season. Even if they resign Dickey and Wright they'll likely have less than $40M in committed money for 2014. Even when accounting for arbitration-eligible players like Davis, Gee, and Murphy, it's hard to envision them not having a good chunk of coin to play with.
Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:51 PM
Why? I thought we went over this. The Mets have little-to-no payroll commitments beyond 2013. As of right now, Jon Niese's team-friendly deal is the only guarantee, and he never tops more than $9M in a guaranteed season. Even if they resign Dickey and Wright they'll likely have less than $40M in committed money for 2014. Even when accounting for arbitration-eligible players like Davis, Gee, and Murphy, it's hard to envision them not having a good chunk of coin to play with.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users