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 a smart guy with a great story and doesn't seem obsessed with money. I think Dickey feels like he is anything BUT over a barrel.

I would love to see the Pirates dump a non-Taillon/non-Cole propect or two for Dickey and then sign him to a 3-year deal for $33 million.

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.

This is true to an extent. But I think the Mets would have been spared criticism if they had simply either decided to have him play out the contract as it existed or decided to trade him this offseason. Instead, it appears they initiated extension discussions but weren't committed to realistic numbers and/or were just trying to create a situation where they could publicly say that they were "forced" to trade him because his contract demands were unreasonable.

Furthermore, I think Mets fans are mad because 2/$26m seems like a good deal for the team even factoring in the leverage that the Mets have; when he goes out there and puts up 195 innings with a 120 ERA+, he won't be available at that price anymore.

And I don't think the risk is 'huge' that he plays out 2013 at 1/5. Even if he throws 100 mediocre innings in an injury-plagued season, he will still be able to earn millions after that - pitching is always needed.

I think the Mets are trying to trade him because they see either him or Niese as the best bet to add a bat, or multiple bats, to the team. If they can't then I'm pretty sure they will sign him to an extension.

Which isn't to say I agree with exactly how they have handled the situation; blasting him in the press was very stupid. and I love Dickey and would like nothing more than to see the Mets sign him to an extension, but I can see where they are coming from.

@104--they sure as shite can't develop their own OF bats. If you discount Pagan as homegrown since the Mets sold him to the Cubs for a couple of years before he blossomed, I think the last OFer to come up with the team who put up a career OPS+ of 100 while with them might have been Daryl F. Strawberry.

Still, if your pitching is thin 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 either way.

In which case, pay him.

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. Even if Ray's right, he's wrong, especially for the Mets. The Wilpons are going dirt cheap for the forseeable future. Losing your ace and most popular player over a utility infielder's salary because "you've got him over a barrel" is fantastically... shortisghted.

I think the last OFer to come up with the team who put up a career OPS+ of 100 while with them might have been Daryl F. Strawberry.

Not quite.

Nails came up after Straw as well.

I was thinking Benny as well.

I'm not sure I'd say the Mets pitching is thin. Niese is 26 and finally had a season that matched up to his peripherals. Gee seems like he can at least be a back of the rotation guy. Then you have 2 really good prospects who are either big league ready (Harvey) or probably pretty close (Wheeler). There's no such thing as a pitching prospect and all that, but you can see a good rotation being formed with those 4 guys involved in some capacity.

Obviously your pitching is going to take a hit when you trade away the Cy Young winner, but I can't see the argument that the Mets need to add some bats to the system, and trading one of their pitchers might be the best way to do it. And I agree that it doesn't exactly speak well to their chances that this is a decision they may need to make, but unfortunately it's probably reality.(IF we're assuming they don't want to sign Josh Hamilton or something like that)

Not quite.

I know what you mean, but BBRef has Benny's bWAR dWAR as -2.5, while his oWAR is 1.9. Which makes him a negative OFer. But, fair enough.

Straw was with the Mets after Dykstra left.

There's no such thing as a pitching prospect and all that, but you can see a good rotation being formed with those 4 guys involved in some capacity.

That's THE definition of a thin system. You've got one guy with one good year, one guy whose a solid 4/5 at best, and prospects. And not a lot of those. That's not 'thin'? Without Dickey is there a staff LESS promising?

Sure, it would be nice if the Mets can trade Dickey for a bat who will man RF for a decade, but given whom they're giving up, unless you find a minor leaguer whose going to jump into the job and immediately give you four wins, the likeliest scenario is they'd be trading improvement in 2016 for a worse team until then.

Sure, it would be nice if the Mets can trade Dickey for a bat who will man RF for a decade, but given whom they're giving up, unless you find a minor leaguer whose going to jump into the job and immediately give you four wins, the likeliest scenario is they'd be trading improvement in 2016 for a worse team until then.

I don't know if the 2016 timeframe is correct, but in general I agree. They aren't likely to get talent back who is going to make them better than Dickey would this year or probably next year either.

That's THE definition of a thin system. You've got one guy with one good year, one guy whose a solid 4/5 at best, and prospects. And not a lot of those. That's not 'thin'? Without Dickey is there a staff LESS promising?

I'm sure there are less promising staffs. (Like most of the Met staffs from the last 4-5 years) It would look a lot better with Dickey, of course.


Do you mean promising for 2013 or for the future?

Do you mean promising for 2013 or for the future?

Both, though things are brighter for, say, 2015 than next season.

I haven't followed the team closely in the last year, but from what I've noted it seems the Mets' minor league system has improved a little, but is still in the middle of the pack, probably in the 16-20 range, with the pitching being better than the hitting.

Where do you rank them?