Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
The $320 million owed against the team, due in 2014, still looms, as does the even larger debt, which had been $450 million prior to the additional borrowing against S.N.Y., due in 2015. These are the numbers that will dictate whether ownership can spend on players, or even hold onto the team. Nothing else.
Howard, you used to be my favorite Mets blogger. But since the dust-up with the team, I cannot recall the last article linked here that wasn't a complete hit-piece on the Mets. We know their financial situation sucks. You don't have to copy and paste their debt obligations into every article.
More to the point, the linked Adam Rubin article does not make the Mets decision to hesitate to engage the arbitrator an unreasonable one. Further, you know that the fangraphs value for Bourn is tied up in his defense (unreliable) and that he'll be in his mid-30's by the time this deal is done. Not going after Bourn more aggressively is entirely defensible.
Edit: I'd take Bourn at 4/48, but that's not really what we're taking about.
or outright liars using the arbiter delay as a fig leave to hide the fact they never wanted to sign Bourne and planned all along to keep send out the super cheap, super bad outfield they have now in 2013.
I think they are outright liars and incompetent morons.
Btw, if I'm reading that right, it means the Wilpons have to come up with some combination of cash and loans in the amount of $770m by some time in 2015. Any idea how much equity they have left (I assume they're all but out of cash)?
Bourn was no different. The Mets worked overtime the moment he signed elsewhere to declare that they, too, had offered four years, $48 million to Bourn.
Ah, but. The Mets offer was conditional upon an independent arbitrator interpreting the collective bargaining agreement to mean that the Mets could keep their first-round draft pick.
That process could have taken weeks. Spring training has begun. Bourn needed a team. And he certainly didn't need to wait weeks to find out if the Mets' offer really was an offer.
The Mets offer was not a real one. At this stage of the offseason, it is entirely unreasonable to make an offer that can't become guaranteed before March.
The Mets' offer to Bourn, as Howard and MCoA both note, is no offer at all if it's contingent on a decision from an independent arbitrator that in all actually seemed likely to go against the Mets.
Probably the best argument against Alderson conspiracy theory in this case is that no casual fan on the planet gives a crap whether or not the Mets are making offers to Michael Bourn.
I think Occam's Razor makes sense here: they evaluated Bourn as being worth $48M over four years, but if it involved a vesting option and/or giving up a draft pick, they didn't think he was worth that much.
"It's all in the rearview mirror," Wilpon said about past financial woes Wednesday after arriving at the team's spring training complex. "... The family is in great shape. The family really is in great shape. Sometimes luck is the residue of design."
. They made (or were reported to be willing to make, I forget which) Reyes a reasonable offer -- he probably wasn't going to take it, but it wasn't an insult. Same thing with Dickey (and in that case, they at least got pretty good talent back for him)
They reportedly offered Dickey a 2/$20 extension. He signed with Toronto for 2/$24 plus a $12 M team option ($1 M buyout). 2/$20 and 2/$25 are not so far apart as to make 2/$20 "unreasonable."
I don't understand how no one recognized the issue when writing the CBA. 10 teams are supposed to have their picks protected. Now only 9 do.
The new CBA literally had the relevant language removed from the old CBA. Calcaterra does an excellent job of explaining it here. Everybody recognized the issue and made pretty much what had to've been an explicit decision to change the rules.
And of course they don't have to wait until their scouts come up with one. They can sign the next FA CF or trade for a CF.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (4 members)
Page rendered in 0.6117 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed