After the Mets signed Francisco Rodriguez and traded for J.J. Putz, every Mets fan was content. Some of that had to do with Aaron Heilman going to Seattle. Most of it was because the Mets ownership addressed a problem and fixed it convincingly, the same way they addressed the starting rotation last year.
The Mets have more than one problem this off-season. There is also catcher, second base, left field, a big offensive threat, and a slot in the starting rotation. All of these could be fixed… if the Mets want to spend more money than the Yankees.
So Mets ownership has to pick and choose. So do the fans, bloggers, and talk show hosts, and overwhelmingly, they have chosen Manny Ramirez.
The Mets have a spot for him in the outfield, and if Manny could do for the Mets what he did for the Dodgers last year, a World Series appearance could be a reasonable discussion.
But as each day passes, the signs seem to indicate the Mets won’t move on cries of the masses. So before Mets fans start jumping off buildings like that scene from The Happening, let me explain why the Mets shouldn’t sign Manny.
By most estimations, the Mets have, at most, $20 million left to spend this off-season. With the Dodgers offering Ramirez two years, $45 million, the Mets will have to give Manny an annual salary of $25 million, and probably for three years.
That alone will leave them unable to sign a higher talent for their rotation. They might not be able to spend the money on someone marginal like Randy Wolf. With Manny, the Mets rotation after Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey, and John Maine would be some combination of Freddy Garcia, Tim Redding, Jon Neise, or another rookie or journeyman starter.
They will look more like the 2008 Yankees. All offense, no depth at starting pitching. The Mets don’t need to spend $25 million to do that, since they finished with the same record as the Yankees last year without Manny.
When Manny went to the Dodgers, they already had starting pitching. Derek Lowe, Chad Billingsley, Hiroki Kuroda, and Clayton Kershaw. It was James Loney and Matt Kemp who weren’t striking fear into other teams.
If you put Manny on the 2008 Mets, you have a World Series contender. Manny on the 2009 Mets the way they are constructed now, you have a wild card contender.
And don’t forget, this is the same slugger who quit on his old team in the 2008 season before he was traded. Although I believe that Scott Boras conducted opera for the most part, there is always something with Manny. The Dodgers were fortunate enough not to inherit that since Ramirez’s stint with L.A. was little more than a three month showcase for free agency.
That being the case, consider the alternative – not signing Ramirez.
Remember, this is a team that came within two games of the playoffs. And 27 of their 73 losses came as a result of “blown saves”. Mind you, that’s not just the 9th inning, but any lead the Mets lost following the fifth inning. How many of those losses would have been wins with Putz and K-Rod were in the 8th and 9th?
However, you can’t assume the Mets will mimic their 2008 numbers in other areas, such as Fernando Tatis and Carlos Delgado’s offensive production. But they will also improve from 2008. Before his concussion, Ryan Church was a .300+ hitter. He showed flashes of that later in the year, but was never the same hitter he was. He is a bounce back candidate.
My point is – the 2008 Mets would be just as well off with Putz and K-Rod as they would have been with Ramirez. But this isn’t the 2008 Mets.
So where should the Mets spend their remaining money?
The 2009 Mets have Putz and Rodriguez, but not Oliver Perez. Perez last year was a marginal pitcher record wise. However, he might be the best option available.
There is also Ben Sheets, who plays the role of an ace… when he’s healthy. Either of those two would give the Mets the depth they had at starting pitching last year. They also would come at a similar price, Sheets being a little more affordable.
In hindsight, the Mets should have taken the all out approach the fans want them to take with Manny, and signed C.C. Sabbathia. He didn’t want to pitch in New York, but given a choice between the American League and the National League, the Mets might have won that battle.
But let’s deal with the present.
You could improve the offense by signing Orlando Hudson, or, if you really want an outfielder, Bobby Abreu. Neither of them will do the bang up job that Manny could do, but they would work well with what the Mets have and come at a cheaper price in both dollars and years.
With the $20 million you’re not spending on Manny, you could:
- Spend only $10 million on Sheets or Perez, and save the other $10 million
- Spend $20 million on Sheets and Perez, and craft one of the best rotations in baseball, to go along with a top-notch bullpen
- Spend $10 million on Sheets or Perez and $10 million on Hudson and Abreu
Personally, I’d like to see the Mets sign Sheets and Perez, or sign one of them along with Hudson. Luis Castillo then becomes marginalized, and you dump him to the first team that wants him, no matter what the cost is.
Then you’ve got a respectable rotation, a great bullpen, and a lineup that’s been upgraded offensively and defensively.
But the best part is…
You set yourself up for free agency in 2010.
Don’t get me wrong. This isn’t a “wait until next year” mentality. You’ve still got a team on the field that competes. You’ve just set yourself up for the future at the same time.
Depending on who you listen to, the economy is not going to get better in only a year, which means bargains will be had next year just as they are this year. You’ll still have teams like the Yankees and Red Sox who will want to spend, but the Mets will be in the position of not having spent a king’s ransom in 2009.
Here are some of the outfielders available for free agency in 2010, and their age:
Jason Bay (31), Matt Holliday (30), Rick Ankiel (30), Jermaine Dye (36), Vlad Guerreo (34), Xavier Nady (31), and Magglio Ordonez (36).
And the Mets will have Delgado’s $12 million and Brian Schneider’s $4 million to spend.
Maybe they could go over the top and sign the cream of the crop in Holliday. He’s younger than Manny, plays better defense, and puts up comparable offensive numbers.
Maybe they could target a middle of the pack guy like Nady or Bay, and get a little less production for a little less price. Or maybe they can find a deal with an older, but still productive slugger like Ordonez or Dye.
My point is that the Mets don’t need Manny in 2009. They are still putting out a better team on the field with the moves they’ve already made, and the remaining ones that seem likely. They won’t wow everyone with 120 wins, but they don’t need to.
If the team does get into trouble, or produces only so-so, the Mets still have the option to trade for a left fielder, someone like Holliday who will hit free agency after the season. The price will be high, but here’s the upside:
- Holliday fits into the lineup just as Manny would, and could provide a spark for the Mets the same way Ramirez did for L.A. last year.
- It gives you a chance to see what he’s all about, and if he’s worth a long-term contract. A long-term contract he’ll no doubt be playing for.
- If you can’t resign, he’ll no doubt be classified as a Class A free agent, and you’ll get a first round draft pick in return.
I could keep going on about possible scenarios, because believe it or not, there are other avenues for the Mets to take. If you’ve read all 1400 words up to this point, I thank you, but really, the moral of the story can be summed up in eight:
Signing Manny won’t erase the last two Septembers.
1 Comment
3 February, 2009 at 3:33 pm
[...] makes more sense to me. I wrote in The Case Against Manny Ramirez that if the Mets were to spend all their money on Manny, they’d be worse off than last year. [...]