Say no to NYC kid!!
Posted by metro on 2:25pm, Friday October 16th 2009
First lets kill the fantasy…. Jason Marquis grew up a HUGE…. YANKEE fan, so this cinderella story of a NYC “coming home” is really utter BS. Who cares what city he grew up in anyway? More importantly, Jason Marquis used to play for the Mets… he used to go by the name “Steve Trachsel”. Don’t get me wrong, Trachsel is unfairly maligned by Mets fans and is actually our winningest pitcher for the 2000’s. Trachsel was one of Steve Phillips best moves giving the journeyman righthander 2 years 7 million (3.5 per). Jason Marquis made 9.8 million this year and is looking to match if not surpass that number in the upcoming season. Lets compare the 2 players
Jason Marquis- ERA+- 99, era- 4.48, whip 1.42, 200 innings 3 times, 14+ wins 3 times
Steve Trachsel- ERA+-99 era- 4.39, whip 1.41 200 innings 7 times, 14+ wins 3 times
Look at every other “good” teams in baseball
The Yankees have 2 starting pitchers making 10+ on multi-year deals…. CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett, aka their #1 and #2 starters
The Red Sox have Beckett and Dice-K (Dice-K obviously has disappointed but the intention was that he would be one of their top 2 starters) luckily for them Lester has emerged
Dodgers- Dodgers happen to be lucky to have young pitching and with Schmidt coming off the books (a player they signed expecting to be their “ace”) they will have 0 starting pitchers making big money with Kuroda being the highest paid.
Phillies- Brett Myers made 12 million in the final year of his 3 year 25.75 million dollar deal, ended up being a bad deal but at the time they saw Myers as a potential stud, not a back end guy, none of their other pitchers making a lot of money
Angels- Escobar makes 8.5 per, gave them 2 VERY good years, hurt this year, Lackey will be expensive if they resign him, Kazmir will replace Escobar or Lackey’s contract.
Where are the examples of these good teams forking over multi-year 10+ million dollar deals on 31 year old guys who realistically will be a good #4 or a below average #3? Not many examples of this. Teams realize you can get “Marquis-production” for far cheaper prices. People seem to believe that payrolls are inflated by stars, this of course is true but payrolls are mostly inflated to do overspending for production.
Metro after the news conference explaining why we signed that stud ( Marquis - sarcasm) they will say he was the best pitcher available at the time and that they were a close second to Lackey - who will end up with the yanks while prince Fielder will be traded to the Pirates for the entire team and a Piameta Brothers sandwhich - doncha know Metro it is the 200 off season all over again lol
That IS one delicious sandwich though:)
btw i predict nady will be our everyday left fielder
maybe, but isn’t he coming off of major surgery?
when has that ever stopped the mets ? - see vaughn, mo
I agree with the overall sentiment of the piece. My only quibble would be with the use of the word “lucky.” Did the Dodgers and Red Sox simply get lucky with good young pitchers, or were they smart in drafting and development?
If it was simply luck then the Mets finding some luck with young, cheap pitchers seems entirely reasonable.
If it was smart drafting and development, sign Marquis for whatever he wants because the Mets have not demonstrated smart drafting and development of pitchers since, say, the late ’60s (Ok, that’s harsh, the late ’80s) and expecting them to suddenly do so will lead to more 70 win seasons.
Also noteworthy, Marquis’ ERA + of 99 beats Pelfrey (83), Maine (95), Perez (62) & Redding (82) so while he may not be cost effective he would be an upgrade (lemme lemme lemme upgrade you).
I really meant to put “quotes” around lucky to be perfectly honest, but I meant lucky more in the sense that this is why they don’t have to pay through the nose for “Jason Marquis”. Guys like Lester, Kershaw, Billingsley etc eventually WILL be 10+ million dollar guys, but that’s on Omar and the scouting staff to find them…. hey at least we found Bobby Jones 10+ years ago and yes Marquis ERA+ of 99 beats much of our rotation but Tim Redding gave us a 4.97 era and a 1.34 whip as a starter and while he is NOT very good for his price and risk, his 1 year 2.5 million dollars actually turned out to be a very worthwhile gamble. An era+ of 99 is a pitcher who can be found all around baseball. Chad Gaudin for the league minimum-type of deals are the ones good teams make, or signing a Kevin Correia, it is very tough to find a Jon Lester but a 4.48 era pitcher with a career era+ of 99 should NEVER cost a good gm 10+ million a year.
Thank you for expounding, I better understand the concept now and agree with it even more than I thought I did initially.
Considering the Mets already have Santana and Ollie, I guess Lackey should be out of the question.
hate to be negative case but i seriously think jeff and omar are gonna pull a hot stove of late 2000 when they said they were gonna be players - i.e a-rod mussina and instead got crap - appier, trashel
hey, I’m hoping they make slight adjustments that won’t hurt the future.
I want them to be able to go after real superstars like Mauer, Pujols and King Felix (if they ever become available).
King Felix.
+10
lol, do you have an alert set-up for anytime a Mariner is mentioned?
I have a SPECIAL alert for King Felix mentions!
Actually I came by for the first time since this morning and saw this….damn, they will never trade him after the year he just had.
And Grandpa has what, 8 RBI in 5 playoff games so far?
Thanks for this ost. my sentiments exactly.
Like I said in the earlier thread, the Mets need to stop spending 10mill+ on medicrity. Good teams don’t have a high payroll, but no money in the budget to plug holes. They do have crap like Marquis at 10mill though.
And the Mets aren’t even the biggest culprits right now (and Omar has a chance to avoid more mistakes). The Tigers and Cubs are riddles with albatross deals, and not all of them were studs that fell apart.
Last 3 seasons of Jason Marquis by half-
2007
pre-allstar break- 3.67 era 1.26 whip
post-allstar break- 5.73 era 1.54 whip
2008
pre-allstar break- 4.44 era 1.43 whip
post-allstar break 4.66 era 1.48 whip
2009
pre-allstar break- 3.65 era, 1.30 whip
post-allstar break- 4.56 era 1.48 whip
I see a guy who is being “promoted” as an innings eater yet CLEARLY is a guy sho second half is a FAR inferior pitcher thus this “he throws 200 innings” isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. 2 strong first half in conjunction with 1 AWFUL second half and 2 poor ones, the trend is a pitcher who wears down when you need him most.
hmm,looks like Marquis went to the Livan school of pitching
Related to your point also is that while he has been a starting pitcher for 5 teams that made the post season (’01 Braves, ‘04 & ‘05 Cards, ‘08 Cubs & ‘09 Rox), he has only made 3 post season starts in 11 appearances and none since 2004. The ‘05 Cards, ‘08 Cubs and ‘09 Rox all looked to someone else to fill out their post season starting rotations.
another thing that bugs me about the whole “inning eater” concept (up there with the requirement to “slot” SPs as a 1-5).
Why is the ability to pitch say 200 innings so wonderful, if they are all mediocre at best? It really just means you can make your 33 starts, and don’t get blown out too often. IOW, Jason Marquis.
I would rather have better quality, even if they might need a little vacation. Hey, it worked for the fan favorite of this off season, Lackey.
eating innings is probably more valuable if it comes through giong deeper into games, while pitching well. That takes away innings from the underbelly of the bullpen.
I actually don’t mind seeing a guy like Harden on a ST deal, even if I expect he will need a couple of breaks.
(24 starts by harden + 8 starts by Misch/neive/neise) is > 32 starts by Marquis. Especially if they cost less!
That, and they should have more long men (and long can be as little as 2-3 innings if you want) in the pen, and way fewer OOGYs and 1 inning guys.
I think they got rid of the OOGY thing, except for Pedro to a small extent.
Has there been one word or quote from anyone in actual Metdom suggesting that the Mets are even remotely interested in this guy?
Why would anyone think there is the remotest chance that the Mets would give him 10-mil plus per year? And before the Ollie whiners come out of the woodwork, Ollie’s 2004 AND 2007 are better than anything Marquis has ever done.
And Trachsel wasn’t all that good….especially in 2006 when he had a good record with horrible stats and we scored about 8 runs every time he won.
Halladay and Lackey surely have to be Omar’s very top targets right now.
King Felix or would Erik Bedard suffice your Ex-Mariner in Queens Appetite?
Bedard, if he came VERY cheap and after we got our number 2 starter, would be a very interesting idea. And after losing Grandpa, and now that they will never trade the King or Ichiro, he would have to do.
I sure DON’T want to see Branyan or Johjima.
I’d take Brandon Morrow if they are ready to give up on him…they drafted him ahead of hometown boy Lincecum! Yikes!
no Branyan? I thought he was a poor man’s Dunn.
Actually, revisiting Branyan is interesting. This year was probably the most he has ever played as a regular, and he did produce. He might be really cheap and decent, But as he is a lefty hitting 1B, only if Murph is gone.
Problem is that after coming off his best season he may be too expensive. I think I would rather have Garko if he is out there.
After 1 good yr he’s gonna be too expensive? He only made $1.4M this year. What, he gets $5M tops? I’d rather go with Branyan. Much more power.
What do you do with Murphy then let him ride the bench? Suppose Branyan reverts back? I am willing to bet a platoon of Murphy and Garko does better than Branyan for MUCH less in cost.
This is coming from a guy who you know is NOT a Murphy jock guy. However, if we are going to replace him it needs to be someone better than Branyan.
didn’t he have a dismal and imjured 2nd half after a career year 1st half?
project the future baby. Don’t live in the past!
Yup, something like in the .100’s right?
I will take Garko, plays OF and 1B and is RH. Seems perfect.
Here is my problem with all of the comments I continually see on here. What is our plan if we can’t get Lackey or Halladay? Do you honestly think it’s Omar’s fault if we don’t wind up with at least one of them? So you are willing to go 5 years 18.5 on Lackey IF it comes to that? Or trade our top prospects for Halladay, IF it comes to that?
What if we make our best offer on Lackey and someone comes in blows him away with an incredible overpay like the Braves did Lowe? The Braves are already rumored to be in the market trying to get rid of Lowe. What if we make our best offer for Halladay and they want more than just Niese and or Fmart and start naming Ike Davis, Mejia, etc or they just like the uhm Angels package better?
So at that point should we just say the hell with it only those two will do?
I am not saying just Marquis will do but I am saying that we have to have back up plans.
don’t worry, I start long tossing next week.
There’s plenty of guys out there, just have to find the right one at the right price.
Agreed and the more and more I read I grow more and more against Lackey. Now as I said, I will welcome him to the Mets. But if he gets ANYTHING more than Lowe and I start to worry. His numbers are good, but can we go 5 years on another 30+ year old pitcher and hope for the best at 18.5M a year?
And now I am over at MC blog reading them trash Piniero and comment how we need to sign Lackey AND Harden or trade for Halladay and HAREN!
Seriously, you get me Piniero and Garland and I will be happy. Not as happy as I would be with Lackey but I am easy to please.
What about Roy Oswalt? I feel like he might be available this offseason.
I don’t think Houston will EVER trade Oswalt. Last rumored they were in the market for a Marquis type starter because they feel they have a good enough rotation to compete in the central.
I can’t speak for Metro but the way I, after a quick Q & A with him in the comments above took it, is that he’s saying “don’t overpay for mediocrity.”
I am not the one controlling the wallet, but if I had my druthers I would rather the Mets overpaid for someone at Lackey or Halladay’s production level than they overpay for someone of Marquis’ production level. High 8 figures for either of the former makes more sense to me than low 8 figures for the latter.
Ultimately if the Mets do try but fail to acquire Lackey or Halladay, as Metro responded to me above they could reasonably expect to get production near enough to that of Marquis for significantly fewer dollars from someone else.
Is it really even overpaying that much? Think about how big of a force we can be if we added halliday or lackey? You’re talking two top 15 pitchers in the game in the best park to pitch, with a pretty good line-up (assuming a healthy bell-tron and reyes).
Nevermind. So you really want to pay Lackey 18.5M for 5 years? Seriously? And if he says no I want 19, 20, 21?
a luxury we have as a rich team is that we can give him a 5 year deal and take 3 good years and not be financially crippled. I’d give himt he 5 years, not my first choice. I’d rather get a 3 year deal, but i’d much rather overpay than to get a bunch of “eh” pitchers. C’mon, do you really want to put our future int he hands of Joel Pineiro and Randy Wolf? We need another ace to re-establish ourselves as a superpower. Lackey has gotten it done consistently in a big market, on a team that is always in the playoffs. He’s not a flamboyant personality or a huge ego. I’d taker a shot on him.
I’d rather have Halliday though, as I’m sure you all would too.
We are not a rich team RIGHT now. We have spent a lot of money so all of our assets are tied up. So if you go 5 years you have no money to spend the following year or money to give to Beltran or Reyes when their contracts expire. 3 years and an option is plenty after that I am looking short term pitchers.
Grave I don’t like that game. Such as who? Wins are about like ERA as far as things to use to measure a pitcher (I don’t like either one) but who out there will come at a cheaper price and basically guarantee back-end production.
I am not saying it should or should not be Marquis. I am saying I am not sure the Mets can just throw money and fix it. There is nothing saying that Lackey will take our offer and I am scared of what it might take. Perez was a bad deal, but Lowe’s maybe even worse.
It’s Metro’s article so I’ll start with his suggestions to me above: Tim Redding, Chad Gaudin, Kevin Correia.
I’m not saying those guys are “guaranteed” to provide what Marquis does. I am saying those guys could reasonably be expected to provide near what Marquis does at FAR less expense, freeing money for the further improvement I think you agree this club needs.
I think failing to get either of the big two guys would be bad, but settling for Marquis instead would be even worse.
What I missed initially about this post but gradually gathered is that the idea is to not spend 8 figures annually for Marquis level production.
I don’t care what team he is on right now, watching Pedro still doing his thing is awesome. I can’t help but find myself rooting for him right now.
You go ahead, Pedro is just another former pitcher for the Mets to me. I would react the same way as if Glavine or Hampton were pitching.
Hampton probably did more for us in that one year than Glavine and Pedro combined.
I don’t think we give Glavine enough credit. I will duck now. But the guy basically pitched out of place as our ace and performed well enough. Glavine’s 2004, 2005, 2006 were basically what we would expect out of Lackey. Mid 3’s ERA with 200 innings and double digit wins.
Yeah, after I wrote that I looked up Glavine’s stats, and you are right.
He also pitched better than I remember in 3 postseason starts in 2006.
Pretty unreal.
As is the fact that Orlando Hudson has one at bat in the postseason thus far. And struck out.
He was not GRITTING his teeth enough.
I can’t see a justified argument in MY mind except for the playoff rotation, if we ever get there, that says we would be a better team with Johan, Lackey, Pelfrey, Perez, Maine over Johan, Piniero, Pelfrey, Garland/Marquis, Perez/Maine.
I must disagree, and the disagreement would be gigantic if it were Johan/Halladay in choice A above.
I am not saying we should give Lackey 5/90. But 4/60 or 5/75? Yeah, probably have to.
Piniero as number 2 does not instill confidence, especially wuth Dan the Man as his new coach.
Johan and Lackey means two games with the advantage [itching wise. That is huge! It’s not like you’re plan B gives us 4 really good pitchers. I still don’t trust Pelf, and I still think of Maine as a potential 3 pitcher. Plus who knows where Neise will be in the picture, and if Ollie will have a bounce back year. I like having 2 sure things and then pelfrey against their #3 in a series very much.
and then the next series you have Perez and Maine to lead it off.
I’m assuming that if the mets established themselves a s a contendor and we really didn’t have any kind of back of the rotation stability a move would be made.
Uh, ok. So lets just assume to hope that by the trading deadline we are in contention and those guys have not hurt us too much and someone is willing to trade a mid-rotation starter.
Look, I can see both sides and would be happy to welcome Lackey in at the right price. However, I think both ways can work.
I think the entire #2, #3 whatever stuff is overrated. Look at wins during the season.
Johan-18
Lackey-16
Pelfrey-12
Perez- who the hell knows? 8
Maine- who the hell knows 10?
Other
Johan-18
Piniero-13
Pelfrey-12
Marquis-11
Maine/Perez/whoever 8-10
Both look like 64 but the difference in my mind is the question marks. If you sign Lackey you have 2 certains 3 question marks. If you sign Piniero and Marquis you have 2 question marks. Again, I can deal with Lackey for sure but I am not willing to say we need to pay 5/75 for Lackey. Anything more than 3 years with an option is a mistake in my opinion.
Pelfrey is much less of a question mark out of the 3 spot. I know you’re not into spots, but theres a huge difference between him going against another reams two and another teams 3. The problem was as our two we expected so much, and yes he did have a bad year even if he was a three, but i feel moving him down a slot will make a huge difference. Maine if healthy is a good pitcher.
Why don’t you go back and look and see how many times Pelfrey actually faced the other team’s #2?
Perez if not crazy is a good pitcher, Maine if healthy is a good pitcher, Pelfrey if he rebounds is a good pitcher….
I am all for taking one more question mark out of the rotation. To me getting 1 more of Maine or Perez out of a lock for the rotation is just as important as getting Lackey.
I don’t look at Maruis or Peneiro as sure things though! Look at Peneiro’s stats. Outside of his ‘09 season he’s been pretty bad in the last 5 or 6 years. I don’t understand why you assume he’s a solid 2 that you can pencil in for 13 wins. And Jason Marquis is pretty much the posterboy for mediocre.
And yes marquis as my 4 is perfect. I’d take that in a second. But i wouldn’t let that get in the way of signing a solid 2
NOT A SOLID 2 not even a sure 3. He’s a mid-rotation starter. I agree they are both average but to me they are both an improvement over Perez and Maine.
Again, it’s the price and years. 18M gets you 2 of the average pitchers and to me I think that can work too. Especially considering they are only tied up for 2 years instead of 5.
I’d much rather take a chance on Maine and Pelf in the 3 and 4 spots as apposed to going another year with 1 solid pitcher.
That’s where we disagree. I can see both points but you negate the sure thing when you add such large question marks as Maine and Perez.
How about Harden and Garland. I could do that instead.
I think you put way too much stock in Pineiro. He is like Ollie in some ways and just had his best year in ages.
Also, in short postseason series, I think having Lackey/Pelf follow Johan is far better than Pineiro/Pelf.
LOL, we have to get to the postseason first.
I think you guys are putting way too much stock in Lackey. Lackey at 5/75+ (and rumored to be 85) is a HUGE mistake in my opinion.
If Piniero is 2/18 like rumored? I think I would still rather have 2 guys like that.
When you use Pineiro instead of Marquis you make a better argument in my opinion.
Pineiro made $2.3mil less than Marquis in ‘09. I think based on that starting point it would be more likely to be able to bring in Pineiro on a friendlier contract.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to consider overpaying for Lackey to be a much greater sin than overpaying for Marquis. I see it the other way.
It’s the amount you are overpaying and the years. To me Marquis and Piniero are worth about 2/16. I am not saying go 3/36. I am saying I am ok with 2/20. So to me that’s overpaying by 4M (2M a year)
Lackey to me is worth 3/45 and if he signs for 5/90 that’s overpaying him by 3M a year but 45M over the life of the contract.
so your argument essentially is that you’d like to patch 2 holes as opposed to our plan of suring up the front end of the rotation and leaving the bottom with some question marks. I understand your point, but I just think its better to be able to have 2 very good pitchers. I think Pelf is a good enough 3, and while it’s not ideal, and I could live with Maine and ollie/neise in the 5 hole. Either way both these scenarios aren’t that great.
That’s fair.
But the concept that I believe I understand Metro was putting forth in his post is: paying roughly $10 mil annually for pitchers the ilk of Marquis is a bad thing and should be avoided.
Yes I’m overpaying less for Marquis than I would be for Lackey but I’m also getting less production and I’m leaving a bigger production gap in my rotation from Johan to whoever follows him.
I guess until the postseason, I look at the rotation as an average. 1, 3, 3, 4, 4 to me is as good or better than 1, 2, 4, 4, 5.
Peneiro has had 1 good year since 2003!
Right and that’s why he only gets 2 years at 8-9 M instead of paying 5 years 90M for a guy who has been injured to start the last 2 seasons.
And then your giving 9 mil to a guy who’s ad 1 good year out of 7
Why are you giving 5 years to a guy who has been injured to start the season for the last 2 years and who’s ERA+ the last 2 years was the same as Oliver Perez in 2007 and has not pitched 200 innings since 2007.
I’d rather overpay and still have a solid pitcher than to spend 9 mil on a guy who is incredibly likely to be another leech to our team. I consider it a very real likelyhood for him to start 5 games get shelled in 4 of them and spend the rest of the season bouncing back and forth between AAA and the bigs.
And then you release him or eat a lot and trade him. What happens if Lackey gets injured at you are on the hook for 5 years?
Anyone can get hurt so no point dipping into that argument. What happens if holliday gets hurt? what happens if you trade for puljos and he’s hurt? Its not like Lackey has missed 2 of the last 4 seasons. Fine he’s been a little banged up but nothing huge. From a talent standpoint I think, especially going from the AL to the NL you can expect Lackey to be good at least for a couple of years here. However, there is nothing that would insinuate that Peneiro would be good for as much as 1 season, in fact the evidence points towards the contrary.
Of course anyone can get injured, but I am not signing just anyone to a 5 year 18M contract. Also, when was the last time a pitcher from the AL West numbers improved on moving to the AL? Did not work too well for Krod or Zito. I am beginning to think that is a myth. Maybe if you move from the AL East. Has Johan seen an improvement in his numbers?
Or you go:
Johan, Lackey, Pelfrey, Perez, Maine, Livan and Pedro.
Livan for the first half and Pedro for the 2nd half.
Uh, NO.
I am hoping you were joking anyway so I take back my comment.
Gotta go to dinner, but the main thing I am saying is that it’s not Armageddon or the end of the world if we don’t get Lackey or Halladay and we should not overpay to get either.
Thats true for Lackey, but to have a front end of Halliday and Johan i’d be willing to overpay alot. You’re talking about arguably the best lefty and righty in the game in 1 rotation.
Depends, can we afford to in a slim farm system to over pay for Halladay either? I like that option better than Lackey because it’s only on 1 year contract.
I agree that it’s not Armageddon if we don’t get either, but I think it’s a worse thing to overpay for back of the rotation starters than it is to overpay for front of the rotation starters.
In theory you are correct and I understand. But to me if we overpay for Piniero on a 2 year contract then we cut our losses and move on. Say we do the 2/18 and he stinks. We eat 6M and it’s done. Lackey if it does not work out you are stuck with him. Imagine how hard it would be to move Johan even now, much less if he was not good.
I can’t prevent myself from reaching for the better more expensive product on the shelf for fear of what will happen if it turns out to be defective later. It’s the better more expensive product for a reason. Sometimes things don’t work out. I can’t let fear of a possible negative outcome rule my every move or I would be paralyzed.
Now if you can demonstrate reasonably that it isn’t just a possible negative outcome but in fact a probable one, then you’re on to something.
It’s the 5 years. I can’t get past 18M or more for 5 years. Lackey is not an ace and I don’t see any way I would sign a pitcher that has been injured enough to miss 200 innings the last 2 years to a 5 year contract.
Miss 200 innings? I’m not sure from what you derived that number.
2008 - 163.1 IP
2009 - 176.1 IP
Unless you were expecting him to have pitched 270 innings each of the last 2 years.
Starting with his first full season of 2003 he has made 33, 32, 33, 33, 33, 24 & 27 starts, and as you pointed out somewhere above the time he missed was “at the start of the season” not down the stretch.
Yes a win is a win no matter April or September, but he can’t win a game in September if he’s not active and he has been active every September since 2002.
You mention Harden below. Certainly a much “sexier” pitcher than Marquis or Pineiro. And logical to expect him to be cheaper than Lackey. But you fear Lackey due to time missed yet you suggest Harden?
Harden’s first full season was 2003 in which he made 31 starts. Since then, 19, 9, 4, 25 & 26. This guy has a MUCH scarier track record of missing starts than Lackey.
Miss the mark of 200 innings. LOL. As in he has missed getting to 200 innings both seasons. LOL.
Grave surely you can understand why I would chose 3/30 for Harden over 5/90 for Lackey?
I’m not sure that I do, no, but as best as I can guess you are much more wary of “tying up money” than I am, and in my subjective and non-medically trained opinion you are far too worried specifically about Lackey’s health in that regard.
Harden has demonstrated a far inferior ability to make it to the mound regularly in his career than Lackey has.
I don’t have a specific or rigid cutoff # of starts or innings in mind when I consider these things, but in looking at these 2 pitchers career numbers side-by-side 1 of them stands out as a huge injury risk and it’s not Lackey.
It’s not just the cash or just the year’s it’s both. For what we pay for Lackey we can very well have Harden AND Wolf on shorter deals.
There is 60M dollars difference there.
As far as “Lackey is not an ace” I won’t argue that point with you. Neither is AJ Burnett who makes that cash and who I recall comparing unfavorably to Ben Sheets last off season in terms of overall career time missed.
Again for me it comes back to, you’re going to overpay either way, you might as well overpay for talent instead of mediocrity.
If money was not an issue for the Mets I could agree 100%. But that money that you are overpaying is going to keep them from getting any thing else of significance for multiple years at least, unless the Mets drastically increase payroll. I also see no reason to say it’s ok to pay Lackey 5 years because Burnett got it. Should we pay a #5 pitcher 12M because Perez and Silva got it?
No you shouldn’t but then you run the risk of all the talented FAs going elsewhere to the clubs that will.
You know darn well their agent is going to bring up these other contracts in the negotiations, and unless you are willing to let ALL the talent go elsewhere you are going to have to spend more than you want to/think you should sometimes to acquire it.
Principles are great things to have. They don’t put on uniforms and take the field, overpaid players do.
When a team has as many holes as the Mets, can they afford to overpay for one of the holes and back fill the others? I don’t know.
Also, to what extent Grave? How much do you overpay? Are you saying you would go 5/90? 18 Million a year for Lackey for 5 years? Would you go 5/100?
No matter what, I think we are focusing too much on Lackey and how he is our only option. I think that is when you get backed into a corner and miss other options that can lead to just as much success. It also forces gut moves when you don’t get the guy you want and you panic into the next one. I hope they have a plan that includes someone overpaying for Lackey or Lackey choosing someone else and what do we do know.
Like NFL on draft day. I want this guy, we are prepared to pay him this much. First see if he will play for us. OK now see if he will take that type of money before we draft him. OK now uh crap the team ahead of us took him, ah the hell with it call off the draft.
That performance by the phils BP and defense seems vaguely familiar. Just can’t seem to put my finger on it…
Anyway, a shocking # of posts for a Friday evening. A key point, often overlooked, is that we are talking about what is effectively a zero sum game.
That is, with the budget, you can’t get everything.
So while Lackey is measureably better than Marquis, how much is he worth $$ wise, keeping in mind that money wil be tied up.
Always going to come donw to an either/or. Lackey + meiocre LF or Marquis + Abreu or Maine + Holliday.
Endless permutations of course, including the dilema of adding 2 big names + crap to fill, or maybe 1 biggee + 4 solid upgrade guys?
I am fully on board with the concept of not wildly overpaying for mediocrity that can pretty much be replaced for 1/10th the cost.
Agreed, but it’s a myth that you can get #4 numbers on the FA market for less than 8M unless you get incredibly lucky.
To me, regardless of Lackey or not, we need 2 SP and a decent LF. I am afraid the Mets will say, you got your #2 now go win. It will be another disappointment. Personally I hope we pony up for a Halladay Overbay trade and try and get a young LF with potential and a Mike Gonzalez type for the pen. (LH setup guy).
It’s not only the ?? on this team that’s a problem, it’s the ?? out there on FA that’s a problem as well. Some of these pitchers injured, don’t know what you’re going to get - have had a down year or years, don’t know what 2010 will bring, etc. etc.
It’s like one big question mark. Throw a dart, see which one is closer to the center.
Going to be a interesting off season, that’s for sure. Let’s see how good Omar REALLY is…
Well, you know it makes me extremely happy to see the Dodgers pull that game out of the hat.
Yeah, it basically was on the Philly defense there in that 8th inning, but even with that misplayed bunt and the botched DP by Utley, you would think one reliever in 5 could get the outs needed before the Dodgers score two runs.
Very nice that the Phillies have 5 guys with 30+ HRs. But if their starters can’t go 9, that BP isn’t going to get it done. In hindsight, Charlie should have let Pedro start the 8th.
Go Dodger Blue!
Go Angels!
OK How about Harden? He should not get more than 2-3 years right? 3/30?
Regarding Lackey, I think it’s important for me to say something. There are some major league players that as a fan you just like more than others. I’ve always liked Lackey, ever since his rookie year, I’ve been a fan. I like the way he pitches and I enjoy watching him do it. So I most certainly do have a personal bias favoring him.
Do I think 5 years is too long and $18.5 mil annually is too much? Yes and yes. But I like the guy, and though I would love to set limits on any potential FA acquisition in the context of annual dollars or total years, I can’t just ignore the market in doing so, and sometimes when I both like a player AND think they are talented enough to make a noticeable positive impact on my favorite team, I just have to suck it up and recommend overpaying to get them.
Though I like Derek Lowe, IMO he’s not one of THOSE players. Lackey is, he “misses more bats” than Lowe and he happens to be available, and the Mets happen to need to improve their starting pitching. For me, the stars have aligned.
I just can’t agree yet but I see your point.
I just don’t think the Mets are in a position where they can vastly overpay anyone right now. To me, they should set their price based on what they think Lackey is worth and then let him know that is our basic offer with a little room. If he does not take it, move on. There are other options. To me, 4/60 is MORE than fair and quite dangerous enough.
That’s fair, but where does it end?
The Mets establish their max of what they are willing to pay Lackey, and Lackey gets more elsewhere.
Based on the same system they use to establish Lackey’s value, they do so with Pineiro. He gets more elsewhere. Marquis. More elsewhere. Suddenly I’m overpaying Brandon Backe (insert whatever name suits you if you prefer) because I’ve stuck to my principles of not overpaying the other arguably more coveted and more talented pitchers, and I am desperate with spring training approaching.
I think all of them are reasonably likely to be overpaid in 2010. Since I believe that, I only wish to overpay the one I think is very good.
I absolutely understand your desire for fiscal responsibility especially in light of what can fairly be expected to be spent by the Mets.
I also understand that Omar Minaya seems to be much inclined toward top dollar and bottom dollar acquisitions than he does toward middle dollar acquisitions, and the plan you’re espousing requires him to succeed using mostly middle dollar acquisitions.
Then I start looking for trades Grave or worst case go with what I got. Look how many bargains there were for those who waited last year. Wolf had an incredible year for almost nothing.
Also, I am not saying NEVER overpay. However, the Mets have already overpaid and it has determined a lot of their future already. They have already overpaid Santana, as much as I love him. Overpaid Krod, overpaid Beltran, overpaid Castillo, and Perez. Now all of these are different levels of overpaying. They have to set a top mark and not go over it. Should they have matched the Giants on Zito? Take a look at his numbers before coming over.
Fair part on the Omar part but we are both also expecting Omar to change up and actually produce a team that a complete team, something he has not done a good job of either.
I think I would still much rather have Halladay. Yes he will cost prospects. However, as far as next year, he will be cheaper than Lackey and only on a 1 year contract unless he forces an extension.
plus he’s alot better than lackey. Honestly, especially since they now must get rid of him, i’m willing to give them a good 3 or 4 prospects. I don’t trust our scouts anyway. Pitchers like halliday are available once in a blue moon, and if you got a shot to have Johan Santana as your #2 pitcher, you pull the trigger.
Halladay I agree. If somehow it would lessen the blow by taking Overbay, I like him for 1B. Good defender, decent stats, one year deal.
But back to Halladay,
What will it take? Obviously I am fine dealing Fmart now. Murphy might be attractive to them if we took Overbay. Most likely 1 of Holt/Mejia. Would they be interested in Maine? Cheap upside pitcher if healthy?
Something like Fmart, Murphy and Maine to build a package around?
Metro, How about the Yankee’s and Pavano?
Braves and Lowe, Braves paid a #3 to be a #2 and got a #4. How’s a 3/45 year contract (what’s left for Lowe) look now for a guy who will be 37 and posted a 4.67 ERA last year?
M’s who were looking for a mid-rotation guy wand signed Silva to 4/48 (Marquis looks like a stud to Silva).
Rangers with Padilla 3/34.
There are others. None of them make Marquis justified nor does the Burnett deal justify overpaying Lackey.
TRS I have to stop for the night. Thank you for participating in this very respectful difference of opinion with me. We both have demonstrated in our mutual time at Met related blogs that we can see different sides to an argument without necessarily agreeing with or supporting them. This has been fun, engaging and eye opening, but I must retire. I’ll check in tomorrow so see what may have been added. Good night.
Agreed, my parting comment is do you think the Mets should have signed CC last year or AJ? They could have topped the Yankee’s and had the #2 we need. If Lackey is worth 18M over 5 years, isn’t CC worth 23 over 7? Why overpay for a lesser player when you can overpay for a better one?
And by the way, it was a lot of fun.
And you know I love playing devil’s advocate. By tomorrow I will have changed my mind and Wanny will be on here ripping me for it.
Here’s one for the morning crowd. Kingman will hate me for this one.
Let me say I am not commenting about this from a Mets perspective.
Do you guys think there is a good chance Manny opts out of his contract? Manny has 1 year 20M left on his deal, but look at how it is structured. (no interest)
* if Ramirez does not opt out, he receives $5M in 2010 and $15M in 3 installments of $3,333,333 each on June 30, 2011 and 2012, and $8,333,333 on June 30, 2013
We also know how much Manny hates not being secure. Is it possible or even likely that Manny approaches the Dodgers this off-season seeking an extension and if he does not get it files for FA?
Perhaps he views 2/36 (example) better the he would the 1/20 with the stipulations above?
Again, not saying I want Manny at all. Just adding this to the topics. It is very Manny like and considering that only Holliday and Bay are real hitters on the market could Manny benefit?
I don’t think he does it, not coming off the year he just had (in multiple ways!). Although with Boras pulling th estrings, looking for another contract payday, who knows? And of course he will ask the dodgers, who likely say no.
But, doing the math, who signs him for 2/26+? Red sox out, hard to believe the Yankees, and the Mets pased last time.
Too much baggage, and another year older, and he gives the aroma of not being a difference maker on a daily basis. Well, that and a DH!
not with his lack of D. We’ll be begging to put Murph back in LF.
Let’s not go “VCarver” on us.
Haha! I actually was pro-MANNY for a week or two in the fall last year.
Manny did not have a really great year, and personally I think that, with his age, baggage, and one-team market last time, he could be home watching with Bonds if he opts out.
good volleys tonight. Bottom line though, if you want to play in the FA market every year for main cogs (instead of filler pieces), yo ubetter be prepared to pay (and usually overpay) players.
And as a general rule, if you are going to spend a lot, at least get something good for it.
It’s like looking at cars. You might be fine with the used Hyundai after some careful evaluation of needs and shopping, but once you talk yourself into “needing” the BMW, no point in scrimping and getting the one without the moonroof!
anyway, lackey for roughly Lowe money? OK. for 5/90? pass, even if it means loading up on a few more mid level guys to comepte in ST.
Take the money and try to overfill the other holes and beat them to death with offense and BP (like 2006)
AGREED.