By David Rubin
Jane, you ignorant slut...okay, now that I KNOW I have Mack's attention- a couple of points.
First, I was a fan back when the Mets owned this town, and the Yankees roster numbered not just Horace Clarke but Hal Lanier, Jerry Kenney, Bobby Murcer, Roy White, Gerry Moses, Fritz Peterson, Mike Kekich, etc...and i remember what it was like to own this town on 3 occasions ('69, '73 and '86).
That being said, I stand by my assertion- it's impossible to BE the Yankees...but we CAN be a Mets team that spends around $150 million per season, competes regularly, and will win some World Series. But our ballpark is smaller, our revenue streams are smaller (their merchandise sells world-wide, their network is older and has a higher viewing audience, etc). The Yankees aren't about to let go of their reigns, so we're NOT going to see Horace Clarkes anymore. They were the creators / chief practitioners of checkbook spending, and when we tried to emulate them, under Al Harazin and under Omar, we lost on both occasions- in every way. Going down that road again is tantamount to continued failure.
Moving forward, there's little to no chance that Carl Crawford and/or Cliff Lee would want to head to Queens. Both players have stated for the record that they are interested in signing with a play-off contender, and the Mets, no matter WHAT we think of them, are certainly not at that point. You're putting the cart before the horse. Lee will either sign with the Yankees or Rangers. No matter what the Nats offer, even if it's $20 mil more, he won't be headed to DC. Crawford wants to win, like he almost did with the Rays. He, too is the master of his fate and has no desire to head to the Mets. If we wanted to sign EITHER of them, we'd have to overpay to the tune of at least 15% above ANY OTHER OFFER, or a total of about $35-$40 million - and that STILL probably wouldn't be enough to land either player. Also, we'd once again be saddled with long-term contracts for players who base their games on something that breaks down- speed (Crawford) and velocity (Lee, although not a fastball-reliant guy, the fact that he'd be 38 at the end of the deal would make for a steep decline in performance.)
Zack Grienke is not a free agent- he's signed for 2 more years. The Mets would have to give up a package of Ike Davis, Mejia, Niese, Flores and maybe another player in order to land Grienke, and then we are back where we started- tons of $$ invested in few players, with no major league-ready talent left to promote/fill out the big league roster. O-Dog Hudson would only command about $5-$6 mil on a one year deal, and I've long been a fan of his, but that move alone certainly doesn't help as much as saving that money for a better, longer-term player would.
Finally, we're no longer living in the world of baseball cards, as we did under Omar. We can't afford to put tons of $$ into a few ballplayers, because that leaves little, once again, for the draft and other players. Adding, for argument's sake, Lee, Grienke, Hudson and Crawford adds approximately $62 million per year to the payroll- where will you find the $$ to sign Reyes to a long-term deal?? If Reyes gets only $15 mil per, that means approximately $100 million 6 players - Johan, Reyes, and your new 4. It would cost about another $100 million to keep Beltran, Wright, K-Rod, etc...and we are now in the throes of the dreaded Luxury Tax, which adds another $20+ million to that payroll. You are now over $200 million- how is THAT baseball smart OR Fiscally Smart???
Mack, I love ya, but on this point, we are, and will remain, of different minds...and that's what makes us better reporters for it...
Folks- do NOT get us started on an argument about taxation!!!!! (LOL)
Jane, you ignorant slut...okay, now that I KNOW I have Mack's attention- a couple of points.
First, I was a fan back when the Mets owned this town, and the Yankees roster numbered not just Horace Clarke but Hal Lanier, Jerry Kenney, Bobby Murcer, Roy White, Gerry Moses, Fritz Peterson, Mike Kekich, etc...and i remember what it was like to own this town on 3 occasions ('69, '73 and '86).
That being said, I stand by my assertion- it's impossible to BE the Yankees...but we CAN be a Mets team that spends around $150 million per season, competes regularly, and will win some World Series. But our ballpark is smaller, our revenue streams are smaller (their merchandise sells world-wide, their network is older and has a higher viewing audience, etc). The Yankees aren't about to let go of their reigns, so we're NOT going to see Horace Clarkes anymore. They were the creators / chief practitioners of checkbook spending, and when we tried to emulate them, under Al Harazin and under Omar, we lost on both occasions- in every way. Going down that road again is tantamount to continued failure.
Moving forward, there's little to no chance that Carl Crawford and/or Cliff Lee would want to head to Queens. Both players have stated for the record that they are interested in signing with a play-off contender, and the Mets, no matter WHAT we think of them, are certainly not at that point. You're putting the cart before the horse. Lee will either sign with the Yankees or Rangers. No matter what the Nats offer, even if it's $20 mil more, he won't be headed to DC. Crawford wants to win, like he almost did with the Rays. He, too is the master of his fate and has no desire to head to the Mets. If we wanted to sign EITHER of them, we'd have to overpay to the tune of at least 15% above ANY OTHER OFFER, or a total of about $35-$40 million - and that STILL probably wouldn't be enough to land either player. Also, we'd once again be saddled with long-term contracts for players who base their games on something that breaks down- speed (Crawford) and velocity (Lee, although not a fastball-reliant guy, the fact that he'd be 38 at the end of the deal would make for a steep decline in performance.)
Zack Grienke is not a free agent- he's signed for 2 more years. The Mets would have to give up a package of Ike Davis, Mejia, Niese, Flores and maybe another player in order to land Grienke, and then we are back where we started- tons of $$ invested in few players, with no major league-ready talent left to promote/fill out the big league roster. O-Dog Hudson would only command about $5-$6 mil on a one year deal, and I've long been a fan of his, but that move alone certainly doesn't help as much as saving that money for a better, longer-term player would.
Finally, we're no longer living in the world of baseball cards, as we did under Omar. We can't afford to put tons of $$ into a few ballplayers, because that leaves little, once again, for the draft and other players. Adding, for argument's sake, Lee, Grienke, Hudson and Crawford adds approximately $62 million per year to the payroll- where will you find the $$ to sign Reyes to a long-term deal?? If Reyes gets only $15 mil per, that means approximately $100 million 6 players - Johan, Reyes, and your new 4. It would cost about another $100 million to keep Beltran, Wright, K-Rod, etc...and we are now in the throes of the dreaded Luxury Tax, which adds another $20+ million to that payroll. You are now over $200 million- how is THAT baseball smart OR Fiscally Smart???
Mack, I love ya, but on this point, we are, and will remain, of different minds...and that's what makes us better reporters for it...
Folks- do NOT get us started on an argument about taxation!!!!! (LOL)
No comments:
Post a Comment