The interest rate of 8% is why it is a bad deal. With inflation at 2% (roughly) an 8% guaranteed return is an amazing rate. Basically a $5.9 million investment in 2000 is returning him $1.19 million a year 11 years later - that is a rate most investors would kill for.

Ah. OK. Thanks.

They can't be toppled, and they get worse and worse.

They said that about the Romanovs, too.

They can't be toppled, and they get worse and worse.

They said that about the Romanovs, too.

Just so I'm clear, you're advocating the Wilpons be shot in a mine?

I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Well, maybe Selig.

I first read that as "be shot in a mime."

Which creates all sorts of disturbing questions in my mind.

Again, you guys are seriously missing the boat. Yes, $26 million in 2014 and 2015 for Dickey is not unreasonable, but the Mets have him completely over a barrel because it is a huge risk for him to pitch in 2013 at age 38 with just 1/5m in the bank.

Again, you guys are seriously missing the boat. Yes, $26 million in 2014 and 2015 for Dickey is not unreasonable, but the Mets have him completely over a barrel because it is a huge risk for him to pitch in 2013 at age 38 with just 1/5m in the bank.

He's made $8M the last 2 years(not counting outside activities), about $10M in his career.

What if he gambles and loses? According to FanGraphs his worst year of the last three (2011) has been worth $11.1M, and FIP undervalues knucklers, BBref has his 2011 about 10% more valuable, so $12M and at the expected market range for WAR in 2014 would likely be worth $16M-$20M (an average starter should soon be worth $12M+ year)..

Obviously injury is the worst risk, so if he has TJ in 2013 what could he make in 2014-2015? It's not unreasonable to think someone will take a flyer on him at least for $5M covering both seasons (probably something like $3M with $10M option and $2M buyout). So one of his absolute worst case scenarios is to end with gross career earnings of about $19M,.

If he just has a mediocre year next year, say a 105 ERA+ over 210 innings, the Mets are in a really tough spot. They either lose him with no compensation, or make a qualifying offer, which means he could make another $13M in 2014 if he accepts. In fact a lot of his downside is making only $18M over the next 2 years, so what's so great about making $25M over 3 years?

What could he win by gambling? His last three years have been worth $43M, or $14M per year according to Fangraphs knuckler devaluing formula. BBRef puts him over 20% higher in WAR, so $17M/year. In the new spending era those years may be worth as much as $25M on average (and 2012 worth $35M). And this is a guy with some potential upside left, who has over the last 4 years made a steady progression of improvement, as if he's finally "figured it out", and with a style famous for the career longevity of its practitioners.

If he puts together another solid season, say midway between 2011 and 2012, maybea 3.3 ERA over 220 innings, he could very easily get a 2 year $45M deal or a 3 year $60M deal. So the upside of his gamble is to make an extra $25M over the next three years.

The mets are offering to fix hs worst case career earnings at the end of 2015 at $35M, but if he gambles he's still nearly a lock for $20M in career earnings (and that happens probably less than one time in ten, certainly less than the 2 year $18M downside scenario) and he could make $60M in career earnings by the end of 2015 maybe 1 in 4 times.

It seems like Dickey would be foolish not to gamble. First, he doesn't seem like a big spender, so 2013 alone is probably enough to retire on (given the lucrative pension he's in line for too). Secondly the utility between the after tax of $35M (maybe $14M) and $20M (maybe $8M) isnt that great a risk, esp. with a six figure pension. Thirdly, it's unlikely he'll ever have an opportunity ever again to get a significant multiyear deal,, by 2015 he may be back to 1 year deals and a league average pitcher. He only needs one more solid year to cash in.

And most importantly of all, he can stick it to those dirty Wilpons and get himself to a much better team.That has a psychic utility that must be huge after the whiny backstabbing character assassination they just attempted..

The Mets have more risk here and they just made it worse.

He cannot have a TJ injury....he was born without that ligament in his elbow, so that is not even a risk. I hope that he needs to play out his option and become a FA after this year...screw the Wilponzis...they are idiots

Secondly the utility between the after tax of $35M (maybe $14M) and $20M (maybe $8M)

The GOP is going to cave so hard in negotiations the top tax rate goes up to 60%?

Someone oughta sic the Reds and Indians on the Wilpons. They'll take care of the Met's Dickey problem, the same way they did for the DBacks and their Bauer problem.

Only the Mets. Okay, maybe not only the Mets, but if you were to describe the situation, the Mets would be the first to pop into my mind.

I don't see an actual quote where anyone says anything close to that. Just sportwriter story creation.

#62. Just another Wilpon fanboy.

(I kid because I love)

heh. That sounds like an offhand remark that someone makes they don't rellay believe. Running with that is just junk.

#64 I'm crushed.

To be clear, I totally agree. Based on what's actually provided we have a sportswriter who's jumped ahead of the actual data. I like Howard, but he doesn't have much in the article to back up his claim.

I am of course predisposed to believe that the Mets are doing something crass and stupid. (but I'm closer to Ray on the actual situation than most people here. Failing to extend Dickey could make objective sense)

The Bonilla deal was a direct consequence of the Madoff association. Wilpon paid Bonilla an extremely generous level of interest because he was confident that his other investments would beat that rate. He was astoundingly wrong.

It's not only Madoff (as you do mention) - in 2000, people had gotten used to the idea that merely by investing in the broad stock market one was guaranteed ~10% a year. 10% for Madoff actually would have been an off year. The Wilpons, like a lot of other people, simply assumed blue skies were going to last forever. They were indeed astoundingly wrong.

The GOP is going to cave so hard in negotiations the top tax rate goes up to 60%?

Clinton era top rates plus NYC top rate is roughly 47%. Then you have agents fees/commissions.

And you have to spend something on living expenses, my guess was Dickey couldnt save more than 40% of his gross salary.

Clinton era top rates plus NYC top rate is roughly 47%.

I seem to remember that MLB players pays taxes where the games are played (which must be an accountant's wet dream/nightmare), so they don't have to pay NYC taxes for half the salary.

To be clear, I totally agree. Based on what's actually provided we have a sportswriter who's jumped ahead of the actual data. I like Howard, but he doesn't have much in the article to back up his claim.

I'm confused. What claim?

in 2000, people had gotten used to the idea that merely by investing in the broad stock market one was guaranteed ~10% a year

April 14, 2000 was the NASDAQ tech crash. A lot of people took that as a sign to back off a bit.

The mets are offering to fix hs worst case career earnings at the end of 2015 at $35M

This math seems kind of off. The Mets offer is 2/16 for 2014/2015. It would mean a total of $21 million for the next 3 years. He's made 7.8 MM so far on his current contract, so that would put him at just under $30 MM for his career.

What people are losing sight of is that he's been worth at least 15 MM per season for the last 3 years. The Mets have and will be getting a deep, deep discount on his services. It's a little insulting to turn around and try to lowball him after all of the contributions he made over the past 3 seasons.

This is a pretty humble guy, he's not making any ridiculous demands for either money or contract length. But if he pitches well next year someone is going to offer him a lot more than 2 years for 26 MM.

This math seems kind of off. The Mets offer is 2/16 for 2014/2015. It would mean a total of $21 million for the next 3 years. He's made 7.8 MM so far on his current contract, so that would put him at just under $30 MM for his career.

According to Cots his career earnings are about $10M, including this year, because of a bunch of minimum wage MLB seasons.

If the Mets really are only offering a 2/$16M extension after the $5M option for next year, it's completely ludicrous. If he's just decent next year he'll make $16M a year or more as a free agent, and again the Mets have to make him 1 year/$13M qualifying offer (or $14M-$15M given rising ave. salaries) just to get any compensation when he leaves. He only has to gamble for a single season, and likely less (when he's traded the acquiring team will likely snap offer a 2/$30M extension to lock him down).

The Mets were clearly afraid if they offer anything that's even close to a reasonable home team discount Dickey would have taken it, so they lowballed him far below that as a PR ploy to the fans while they focus on their number one plan, trading him.

When one of the best people in baseball works for two of the worst people in baseball, a parting of the ways is as far from a tragedy as possible

It's not even a good PR ploy. I really struggle to think of many, if any, Mets fans who are taking Fred and Jeff Wilpon's side over Dickey's. I know there are some people who hate the players for being better and in more demand at something than they are but...it's the freakin' Wilpons.

I've only read the Mets are offering 2/20 versus the 2/26 Dickey wants. Where is the 2/16 offer being reported?

Posted elsewhere, but if your pitching is as thin as just about any team in the majors, and you're trading a Cy Young winner willing to sign at worst a reasonable extension in order to get an OF hitting prospect, your organization is probably screwed whether you keep Dickey or not.

In which case, pay him.

I don't give a #### about the Wilpons' pocketbook, but isn't there probably a point at which your team is so uninteresting that it gets little coverage, people stop thinking of your .450 team's Thursday game at least as kind of a fun place to take the kids? Dickey's brought the team a lot of good publicity. With his book, his story, his hike on Kilimanjaro, he's brought them more pub than Wright, and will probably continue to do so. Shouldn't that translate into dollars (Howard certainly has a better sense of how many dollars than I would), and shouldn't that add at least a little to what the Mets are willing to offer Dickey?

This isn't a case where your best player, more of less, wants 6/108 and you really, really think 5/75 is what he's worth. Losing your ace and most popular player over a utility infielder's salary because "you've got him over a barrel" is fantastically shortsighted.

It's not even a good PR ploy.

Yup. The Cardinals handling of Pujols in his walk year was an example of good PR. The Wilpon's lowball offer to Dickey is no more convincing than their silly offer last year to Reyes. It's not credible to anyone paying any attention to the situation.

edit: Metsblog has the offer as 2/16 at the Winter Meetings, boosted to 2/20.

http://metsblog.com/rumors/ra-dickey/mets-increase-contract-offer-to-dickey-trade-to-texas-unlikely/

NY Post, December 13th

According to an industry source, the Mets consider four teams as “serious” potential trade partners. What defines “serious” at this point? A willingness to include one top prospect in a deal for Dickey. Nevertheless, the Mets aren’t budging from their position of seeking multiple highly rated prospects in any trade for the Cy Young Award winner, and haven’t yet found a team willing to make such a deal.

The Mets have not spoken to the Rangers since the Winter Meetings, according to sources, but Texas and Toronto remain the most logical destinations if Dickey is traded. The Mets have asked the Rangers for stud prospect Mike Olt as part of a deal for Dickey. The Mets are believed to have asked the Blue Jays for highly regarded catcher Travis d’Arnaud as part of a package.

The latest contract offer the Mets have extended Dickey is for two years and $20 million, beginning in 2014. The 38-year-old knuckleballer is signed for $5 million next season.

How would you structure an option year in an offer to Dickey? The Mets are afraid of Dickey's being bad, or out of the game by 2016, not that he's going to be chugging along at his 2012 level and they won't be able to sign him after the 2015 season.

Am I missing something with Olt? Hit well in the Texas League as a 23 year-old, albeit with a ton of strikeouts, primarily a 3B/1B, the 2 positions where the Mets have quality hitters already in place. If that's the top prospect the Mets could get back in a Dickey deal, they should hold him.

They don't have Dickey over a barrel. Even if he missed the entire season, or put up a 6 ERA, he'd still get a multi-million dollar contract offer next year.

@77--agreed, but Ray thinks they do.

The Mets are believed to have asked the Blue Jays for highly regarded catcher Travis d’Arnaud as part of a package.

While this is most certainly a reasonable request from the Mets, it would leave the Jays with either Arencibia or Buck trying to catch a knuckler. That's not something I particularly want to see.

I'd increase the offer to:

2m signing bonus
10m ea for 2014 and 2015
6m 2016 option or 2m buyout

That's not something I particularly want to see.

How is d'Arnaud's defensive rep? I have a "good hit catchers can't field" stereotype floating around for the Piazza years...

Arnaud's a hell of a hitter, but 19BBs in 303 PAs isn't so hot. 23 for a catcher in AAA is perfectly fine.

Why was he limited to 67 games in 2012?

I'd increase the offer to:

2m signing bonus
10m ea for 2014 and 2015
6m 2016 option or 2m buyout

So you're going 2/3 of the way to Dickey's asking price of 2/26, with the possibility of a great deal for the Mets in 2016?

Seems not unreasonable, but I'm not sure how to evaluate the option. It probably tilts the offer to the point where the Mets aren't going halfway.

79 - you guys can have Nickeas.

Why was he limited to 67 games in 2012?

He tore his PCL in June.

79 - you guys can have Nickeas.

What sort of horrible thing have I done to you to deserve such hatred?

What sort of horrible thing have I done to you to deserve such hatred?

Would you prefer Rob Johnson?

Per Metsblog:

“The Mets are telling clubs that they have an acceptable trade offer for R.A. Dickey, but they are trying to get an even better package,” a source told Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com.

#87: I don't like the sound of "acceptable".

#82: If you were hitting at Las Vegas, you probably wouldn't take very many pitches either. Following Blue Jay hitting/pitching prospects since they relocated the AAA team to Vegas has been really tricky-- Arencibia put up a .624 slugging percentage there in 2010, with 32 homers. They can't get out of that league fast enough.

What sort of horrible thing have I done to you to deserve such hatred?

Nickeas really is a far better player than his numbers indicate. I promise.

Nickeas really is a far better player than his numbers indicate. I promise.

I would hope so, as it's damn hard to imagine he could be worse.

Also, you're right about the Las Vegas issue. The Jays have moved their AAA team to Buffalo for next year, which should make it a lot easier to figure out whether or not these hitting (and pitching) prospects are actually any good, or just products of a completely unbalanced hitting environment.

#87: I don't like the sound of "acceptable".

Come on - read the context. It's not a comment on the quality of the offer. They've made it known they're looking for 2 top prospects. They have an offer they would do, but are looking for an "even better" one. What actually materializes remains to be seen. It does sound like RA is as good as gone though.

Even though I think this is the right move, I find myself kind of sad at the thought of trading Dickey.

Even though I think this is the right move, I find myself kind of sad at the thought of trading Dickey.

Prepare to be sad. Robothal is reporting an agreement with Toronto. It's just being held up, as Dickey doesn't want to agree to an extension.

Also, I understand the sadness. I was extremely unhappy when the Jays traded Halladay, even if they felt they had to do it. The same applied when the Jays let Delgado go in FA.

EDIT: You know what, not today.

BTW, this is ###### up.

The same applied when the Jays let Delgado go in FA.

As I recall they didn't even offer him arbitration, which was also sad.

It's just being held up, as Dickey doesn't want to agree to an extension.

That sounds like a pretty significant hold-up.

Rumor - Olt/Buckel from Texas...

EDIT: And, now that one's being denied.

I'm going to be really pissed if it's Gose/Arencibia.

Prepare to be sad. Robothal is reporting an agreement with Toronto. It's just being held up, as Dickey doesn't want to agree to an extension.

I'm sorry Mets fans.... but your organization is utterly ###### up if they trade Dickey, even if they get what they want. This should never have gotten to this point, and it's ridiculous that it has. I just wished the Cardinals would have said "We'll give you two of the following Garcia, Taveras, Rosenthal, Martinez or Miller"... or maybe just Taveras straight up or something. And we don't even really need a pitcher.

Gosh, Toronto gets everyone.