Jump to content
SportsWrath

Just out of pure curiosity


Dragon

Recommended Posts

HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Say the Mets and Scott Boras (The Evil Agent as my old manager calls him) get on good terms and a deal is made for A-Rod.

 

 

Let it sink in for a second....

 

 

Now answer me this... wtf happens to our infield? Who moves in this situation? A-Rod went to the Yankees after playing SS for his entire career and switched to 3rd, but with Wright and Reyes firmly entrenched at SS and 3B, where does A-Rod fit? Can he play 2nd? Would Wright be willing to move?

 

 

I guess my main question about the whole situation is, Why the hell are we trying to make this deal? Sure A-Rod would bring an incredible amount of offense to us, but we need a true #1 Pitcher on our team, not more offense.

 

Am I missing something here? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could trade Wright to the Twins for Santana... or either Wright or Arod plays first... or Reyes to 2nd and Arod to SS.

 

But if you want Santana, it's going to cost you big, and there's no way in hell you should move Reyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could trade Wright to the Twins for Santana... or either Wright or Arod plays first... or Reyes to 2nd and Arod to SS.

 

But if you want Santana, it's going to cost you big, and there's no way in hell you should move Reyes.

 

READ OUR LIPS, WE AINT TRADING WRIGHT. The METS KNOW THE FANBASE WOULD ERRUPT. THEY WOULD BURN DOWN CITIFIELD. IT AINT HAPPENING!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

READ OUR LIPS, WE AINT TRADING WRIGHT. The METS KNOW THE FANBASE WOULD ERRUPT. THEY WOULD BURN DOWN CITIFIELD. IT AINT HAPPENING!

You don't have to yell. I wouldn't trade him either. But you know your GM. Santana's a latino and Wright isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to yell. I wouldn't trade him either. But you know your GM. Santana's a latino and Wright isn't.

 

FORGET ALEX, METS WRIGHT MAN’S AT THIRD Omar Minaya November 7, 2007 -- ORLANDO - The Mets should sign Alex Rodriguez only if they are ready to move David Wright, and not to second base or left field.

 

The Mets would have to be ready to trade Wright to address their pitching needs, because you cannot just guess that Wright can play another position. If he can't, what do the Mets do then?

 

No, the only way to justify a mega-signing of A-Rod is to trade Wright now for the Mets' real No. 1 need, pitching. Could they turn Wright by himself or in a package into Johan Santana? Scott Kazmir? Erik Bedard? Joba Chamberlain? Clay Buchholz? Chad Billingsley and Jonathan Broxton?

 

The possibilities are voluminous. There is just a small problem. There is no possibility. Mets GM Omar Minaya said yesterday, “We can't move David. No one is untouchable, but he is the face of our franchise. That would be more than a baseball decision. David Wright is part of our core, part of our nucleus. I don't see any scenario where that happens."

 

So if that is the case, why is there such impetus that A-Rod could play with the Mets? My gut tells me that it is because it is mutually beneficial to both the Mets and the A-Rod camp for that perception to be out there.

 

The Mets are media sensitive. They did not like being perceived as cheap for abandoning the A-Rod bidding after the 2000 season. They have not liked that since the season ended they have been overwhelmed by stories of either their late-season choke or about the Yankees. By simply being associated with A-Rod, they have changed the subject.

Minaya has told officials from other teams the Mets are anywhere from curious about A-Rod to planning to be active in the sweepstakes. But as of yesterday, the Mets were expecting to do nothing more at these GM Meetings than meet with Scott Boras to accept the historical/statistical books he has for each of his 12 free-agent clients, including A-Rod, and listen to Boras' pitch on why each of those free agents is of value to the Mets.

 

The Mets were not planning on engaging Boras in contract negotiations here. And, if Boras' proviso with the Mets is like it was with the Yanks - that it will take at least a $350 million pledge to negotiate - then this is never happening. The Mets might make an offer, but unless Rodriguez seriously curtails his current expectations there will be no marriage.

 

And there probably shouldn't be. I have yet to find an executive at these meetings who thinks it would be wise to move Wright off of third, and most did not even know the Mets' horrible recent history of trying to make Todd Hundley a left fielder, Mike Piazza a first baseman, Mike Cameron a right fielder and Jose Reyes a second baseman.

 

This is just about the analysis that, right now, Wright is the majors' best value at third when you consider he does not turn 25 until next month, he is locked up reasonably through his prime (six years at $67.5 million), he just won his first Gold Glove, is a 30-30 man playing home games at a pitcher's park and he is beloved as a homegrown fixture. Dollar for dollar, he is a more valuable third baseman than A-Rod. The moment you move him off of third, Wright's value decreases substantially.

 

I never dismiss anything with Boras, who has great ingenuity in these matters, so maybe the Mets really are in serious play. But if they aren't, you could nevertheless understand why Boras would want the perception that they are. There has long been a sense Boras wants to entice the Yanks back into these negotiations, and usually the touchstone to juice up the Yanks is to have the hint of the Mets and Red Sox involved. And Boras has only enhanced the idea both are engaged.

 

The Red Sox are interested, but have, so far, refused to meet with Boras. Boston has strongly indicated this would be on its terms, topping out in the $196 million for seven years range, and certainly nowhere near the $300 million-plus for which Boras is gunning.

 

As for the Mets, you can understand their wandering eye when it comes to chasing A-Rod to play third. But they already have the Wright man for the job.

 

joel.sherman@nypost.com

 

 

 

linkChew on that and get back to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...