They have him under contract for next year, why would their effort to re-sign him be urgent right now?

Because somone needed to write a story?

Nope, because they themselves spoke of the urgency, and set an artificial timeline for either retaining Wright/Dickey or trading them. You probably ought to read the article to see what they were saying earlier this month.
Artificially limiting their own bargaining leverage was probably the tell that it was all for show, but we'll have to see.

They have him under contract for next year, why would their effort to re-sign him be urgent right now?

When a player is in the last year of his contract, he will be asked about his contract status repeatedly every day until the situation is resolved, and it creates a distracting environment for everyone involved. Thus, teams prefer not to have such "lame duck" players. They'd prefer a resolution where the player is either extended or traded. (Sometimes teams that feel that they need the player in order to win something significant in the upcoming year will deal with just having him stick around for that year, but that is not the Mets.)

And if the Mets do determine that Dickey can't be re-signed and thus should be traded, they'll get more for him if they trade him in the off-season than they would if they did so mid-season. So it's better to figure that out in the off-season.

I think those points were a little obvious, honestly.

Artificially limiting their own bargaining leverage was probably the tell that it was all for show, but we'll have to see.

Do you think they are pre-shaping the narrative of: oh, we tried hard to sign these guys but they wouldn't accept our huge offers so now we are "forced" to trade them?

I think those points were a little obvious, honestly.

But they have 5 weeks until the GM meetings. There's no reason to have anything done at this point.

re: 4, I understand those things in general, and I think urgency for a resolution is somewhat warranted in the Wright case, but not at all for the Dickey situation. In fact, I think it would be to the Mets' disadvantage to force the issue of an Dickey extension unnecessarily.

The concern about 'lame-duck' players should be reserved for superstars, franchise players, living legends etc.. At any given point, 1/2 of any team might not be contracted down into the future for years.

There's no reason to have anything done at this point.

No reason to still be paying Bobby Bonilla, either. It's the Mets.

Do you think they are pre-shaping the narrative of: oh, we tried hard to sign these guys but they wouldn't accept our huge offers so now we are "forced" to trade them?

Well, they really pushed the urgency of getting things resolved in October. As JJ1986 points out, they have five weeks until the GM meetings. So what reason do they have for artificially limiting their timeline for negotiation, if not to pass some preset deadline and use that as reason for a trade?

I'm not asking this rhetorically. I'd love to know if anyone has any other ideas.

My reporting on this hasn't been conclusive. I do, however, have a fair amount of skepticism in both cases, given their approach and the likelihood that even a fair market deal would keep Wright/Dickey around, knowing that whoever trades for them is probably better set up to win in 2013, and isn't likely to offer them less to stick around.

Maybe they want to trade Dickey before he wins the Cy Young and the headlines scream "METS TRADE CY YOUNG WINNER" - of course then you just get that same reaction if he does win the Cy Young.

Baffles me as to why they'd trade Dickey, maybe they're just further apart than originally expected. But with him they have a pretty good starting rotation for next year.

Baffles me as to why they'd trade Dickey, maybe they're just further apart than originally expected. But with him they have a pretty good starting rotation for next year.

Yeah, I don't get it unless they've decided to just totally mail it in for the next few years (EDIT - or they get something really great in return). Dickey is awesome, he seems like a good guy, he's extremely popular, and given his age he should be easy for the Mets to re-sign to a reasonable deal.

If I were the Mets, I wouldn't do anything regarding Dickey this off-season unless either (A) he is eager to sign an extension and would take less than it normally costs to extend a pitcher coming off a year like his '12 or (B) some other team gets desperate to make a big move after being stymied by free agent pursuits and offers them a swollen trade bounty.

(A) seems more likely than (B).

Baffles me as to why they'd trade Dickey

Possibilities, not certainties:

a) they don't think they can compete in 2013, maybe not even 2014.

b) he'll be 38 years old. Sure he's a knuckleballer but they're not immortal ... maybe his 38 is like another pitcher's 34 or 35 but that's still old ... you want a pitcher's late 30s at big money?

c) He's coming off a career year. Sell high, don't buy high.

It largely comes down to the years and money that Dickey is looking for. And the current balance in Wilpon's checking account.

c) He's coming off a career year. Sell high, don't buy high.

It largely comes down to the years and money that Dickey is looking for. And the current balance in Wilpon's checking account.

Yeah. These things kind of scare me. There is not that much data on the hypothesis "knuckleballers have longer careers than non-knuckleballers". For any team on the brink of a pennant (Yankees, Braves, A's, O's,..all of them), now is the time to acquire Dickey, not next year. The Mets could get an "A" prospect and a good MLB player, maybe more. I'd rather the Mets resign him, but I don't know what his demand are and it ain't my money.

Nope, because they themselves spoke of the urgency, and set an artificial timeline for either retaining Wright/Dickey or trading them. You probably ought to read the article to see what they were saying earlier this month.
Artificially limiting their own bargaining leverage was probably the tell that it was all for show, but we'll have to see.

There was an earlier story somewhere where it was claimed that both Wright and Dickey said that they intend to test the FA market if they do not sign extensions, and also that they will not discuss a contract extension during the season. I don't know if either of those things are true, but if they are, then the timeline isn't artificial.

The Mets could get an "A" prospect and a good MLB player, maybe more.

An A prospect and a good MLB player? No way.

Maybe you get an A prospect, but probably more like a B+, a B and a couple of C's

There was an earlier story somewhere where it was claimed that both Wright and Dickey said that they intend to test the FA market if they do not sign extensions, and also that they will not discuss a contract extension during the season. I don't know if either of those things are true, but if they are, then the timeline isn't artificial.

This "I won't negotiate during the season" thing is also garbage. It's a negotiating ploy to get teams to the table earlier, and reduce the risk that a player get injured or underperforms during his walk year.

I cannot imagine a player turning down a decent in-season offer from their current team if they truly want to stay put. It's a bad bet to take on all of that extra risk to squeeze out a few extra % on their next contract.

Do the Yankees have any good prospects at this point? My crazy trade idea if the Mets can't re-sign Wright is: Wright for A-Rod + a truckload of money + prospect(s), even though it makes me feel dirty to even think about it and I have no idea if the Yankees have the pieces to offer.

Maybe they earnestly want to get things squared away before the meetings, so they're going to put their best offers out there and, if those don't do the trick, trade these guys (for Middlebrooks and Doubront!).

An A prospect and a good MLB player? No way.

Maybe you get an A prospect, but probably more like a B+, a B and a couple of C's

It's all speculation, of course, but I use the example of Carlos Beltran: who was a half season rental and brought back a supposed "A" prospect. Dickey has got to be as valuable as Beltran, not all teams need corner outfielders but all need a great starter. And you get a whole season of Dickey at a much cheaper price than Beltran.

Rumors I have read is that Dickey is looking at Ollie Perez's 3yr/$36M deal as in the neighborhood. Realistically as a 37-year-old that would be the high end. I know he has said he wants to stay, and I know for a fact that he loves NYC, but there are more than a few things working against the Mets. 1) After bouncing around professional baseball for 15 years or so, this is Dickey's last shot at a payday after making maybe a total of $13M for his career (including the $5M in '13). After reading his book I would conclude that this is the last guy who is all about money, but he is a very smart, thoughtful guy and I imagine he has given a lot of thought to life after baseball. He really should take the best possible deal out there. 2) The Mets suck and are likely to suck in the immediate future, especially with a question mark over's Wright's future. Playing on a winning team probably means something to him at this point in his career. 3) This is also the first time in Dickey's career where he has some real control over where he plays. That leverage has to feel awfully good for a guy who spent most of his career wondering where his next stop would be. 4) Dickey is very active in the MLBPA and I doubt he would take a contract well under market value on principle.

I think the Mets really, really need to trade both Wright and Dickey. For the past two years, the Mets team has essentially been the detritus of the Omar Minaya administration together with assorted scraps picked up in the discount aisle. There hasn't been enough young talent to call it a young team and there hasn't been enough talent for it to be a good team, so its just been a team comprised of a random assortment of mostly spare parts who came from nowhere and are mostly going nowhere. Re-signing Wright and Dickey just ensures that next year will be as good as last, which would make sense if last year didn't kind of suck. Sure the Mets have very promising young pitchers to add to the mix, but they are still left with a whole lot in uncertainty in position players. Let's reload with a young, exciting, cheap core. Then the Mets can add to it in the FA market when they have some idea what they have, and when the Wilpons' financial situation may have improved. I really like Wright and Dickey, bt I'd rather see the Mets be good again than see Wright and Dickey on the Mets for a few more years.

If 3/$36 is all he's asking for the Mets should just sign him and get it over with already.

3) This is also the first time in Dickey's career where he has some real control over where he plays. That leverage has to feel awfully good for a guy who spent most of his career wondering where his next stop would be.

But we haven't even reached that point yet; it's a year away.

If 3/$36 is all he's asking for the Mets should just sign him and get it over with already.

Yeah, I'd have to get back to worrying about the financial state of ownership if they don't think they can pay that.

But we haven't even reached that point yet; it's a year away.

I realize that, my clumsy point was I think finally having a chance to test the market might persuade him not to sign an extension.

My brain says they should trade Dickey while his value is high. My heart doesn't want Dickey to go anywhere.

15. Even if you take them at their word (Wright was ironclad, Dickey less so), there's still plenty of time to negotiate between early November and when pitchers and catchers report, let alone Opening Day.