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.
One team executive said they believe Niese would net a higher return in a trade, because of his age (26), performance (3.40 ERA this year) and the fact that his contract will keep him under team control at least through 2016.
To stomp every last bit of remaining joy out of Mets fans?
In this market, you should never be more than 4 years away from being competitive. If they don't think they can be, just blow the whole thing up already.
I absolutely don't want to trade Dickey, but what would you even be able to get for him?
Wouldn't they be able to get as much (or more) than teams have gotten recently for mid-season trades of aces in their final year of team control (Greinke, CC, Lee)?
I'd rather not have the next Matt LaPorta or Justin Smoak. The returns for each of those look like one good hitting prospect and a few C+ level guys. No way you're getting a real top Taveras or Myers level talent.
If I were running the Mets, I would probably neither trade nor extend him this offseason.
As a Met fan, this would be the worst possible outcome to me. The Mets have leverage in signing Dickey right now because they have the $5 million option on him.
Do you think he would be so eager to get the one big guaranteed pay-day of his career, that he would sign (relatively) cheaply now? If so, it makes sense. Otherwise, I think he actually has the leverage, in that he is coming off his masterful 2012 season. He might want to bet on himself and play out 2013 when he sees the big guaranteed contracts that worse pitchers are going to sign in the next few weeks/months.
It's worth pointing out that Dickey isn't a typical older ace pitcher in the sense that he hasn't been making money for a long while. Baseball Reference has him as making about $8 million in his career.
If the payroll is going to be tight for the next few years I don't think they can afford to get in a bidding war for Dickey and run the risk of getting nothing for him other than the 2013 season.
A year from now, he's going to be 39. I don't think there's much if any precedent for a pitcher that age getting a better deal than what I suggested.
But there is a decent chance that the price to win a bidding war next offseason is lower than the price of any extension signed now. I.E., if he goes out and throws 190 innings with a 3.50 ERA, he won't be getting a huge deal at his age.
If he is pitching amazing again, and by July the Mets are out of it, they can still trade him.
Well that's a pretty good reason.
Technically, performance doesn't belong on this list. Dickey's beaten him in that department. It's really all about age and cost/team control.
I'd guess I'd rather have Dickey at $13 million per year than a draft pick, so if there's a way to lock that in now I don't see why you wouldn't.
Plus, I'm basing my posts on what Darren said in #1, that Dickey was looking for 3-4 years at $13 per year. That isn't that cheap for a 38-year-old pitcher, regardless of whether he's a knuckleballer, but it's reasonable and something that a big-market team like the Mets can totally afford.
i'm calling it now:
jon niese will be out of baseball within 2 years, and ra dickey will continue to pitch like an ace into his mid-late 40s.
Er, what? By offering him a low figure, so he left? I'm lost on the sentiment and the cost.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (4 members)
Page rendered in 0.5309 seconds, 42 querie(s) executed