Mets’ 2013 Offseason: A Tale Of Two Sandys | Mets360

Mets’ 2013 Offseason: A Tale Of Two Sandys

November 13, 2012
By

Welcome back my friends…

I’ve missed you. It has been a heckuva two weeks hasn’t it? Hurricane Sandy arrived and we here on the East Coast have taken a battering and been left powerless, and no, I’m not talking about the Mets’ outfield or the Yankees in the playoffs. My house, in particular, was without lights for a total of twelve days, twenty hours. The hurricane was harrowing, but we got through, due to the good graces of some fantastic neighbors – allowing us the use of a portion of their gas-powered generator, giving us their expertise as far as connecting the heat said generator, general goodwill and good fellowship. We’re here, none the worse for wear.

The Mets, on the other hand…

We keep hearing tales of dire circumstances – sourced and unsourced – over at Citi Field. To which I say, “So what else is new?” GM Sandy Alderson is spending another early fall scouring the bargain bins to cobble together an outfield, a catching corps and a bullpen. Putting aside the catching and ‘pen situations, we of the general public are left with a few questions. Will it be a respectable outfield? I would guess that’s reaching for the moon. Will it be a Major League caliber outfield? I rather doubt it. Will it be an outfield? We can pretty much count on it. The fact that trial balloons have launched concerning the return of Andres Torres should tell you all you need to know about the state of things. I fear we may find ourselves pining for the good ol’ days of Jason Bay by the time Memorial Day rolls around – and wasn’t getting out of that contract a year early a coup?

Meanwhile GM Sandy keeps giving us glimmers of hope about David Wright and R.A. Dickey… all while reports to the contrary continue to surface. The latest scuttlebutt – attributed to someone at the Wall Street Journal, but not published in the Journal – holds that the Wilpons don’t have enough scratch to extend either Wright or Dickey and that they’ll be given the bums’ rush within two years. To which the cynic replies, “It’s a shame we have to wait that long.” The date of the Wilponic exit will be a good news day for most Met fans, I suspect. I was not heartened by Jeff Wilpon himself delivering the “Re-signing R.A./David is our top priority” bromide.

But Sandy soldiers on, trying his best to deliver us a competent team to put on the field, but it would seem he is as hamstrung as the rest of us. Everyone – every pundit from the MSM and blogosphere – has stated that this is a critical, crossroads offseason for this here NYM franchise. You’d think somebody in Queens would act like it.

Like the other Sandy, I’m afraid he will blow it.

9 Responses to Mets’ 2013 Offseason: A Tale Of Two Sandys

  1. November 13, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    At this point, I would celebrate if Jeff Wilpon and Sandy Alderson both disappeared. I’m less disgusted at Fred Wilpon, but that’s only because he bought some good will back in the day; that is also deteriorating.

    When can we have a real team again, let alone a New York City team?

    • Name
      November 14, 2012 at 12:23 am

      Every team goes through their ups and downs. You can’t expect a good season and offseason every year. Plus, teams aren’t created within a year. A lot of the product of last season and the upcoming season were results from actions that were decided 5 to even 10-15 years ago.

      By “New York City team” i assume you mean high payroll team. I’m sure you would feel just as bad if the Mets had a big payroll and didn’t make the playoffs. And by “real team” i assume you mean winning team. All GM’s strive for this goal, but the fact is, you can assemble and “great” team on paper, but the team could still not make the playoffs. Look at the LA Angels. The reason is that past great stats doesn’t mean future great stats(players stats are generally unpredictable)

      • November 14, 2012 at 1:16 pm

        Maybe I wasn’t perfectly clear, but I don’t have unrealistic expectations.

        Our latest peak was 2006, when we didn’t even make the World Series. (I was at game seven). Before that, it was the overachieving lot of 1999-2000 led by Bobby Valentine that lost in the World Series. And before that, it was the 1980s. The lows surrounding all of these peaks have been tremendous, clearly more bad than good.

        By New York City team I mean a team that’s not an embarrassment, from the equipment manager to the players to the general manager. Despite the signing of Pedro and Beltran last decade, the Mets are back to the cheap, terrible reputation of the 1990s. There are scandals about employees stealing and taking their shirts off. At the same time, many components of the on-field product – you know, the players that everyone spends a fortune to see – are just not good. I’m hoping he has a bounce back year but Thole was not good in 2012, the outfield did not have one legitimate starter and most of the bullpen was a disasterbacle. If it requires spending some money, well we are in the largest market in the year, but they would be even better served shaking off their reputation of being poor.

        • Name
          November 14, 2012 at 6:01 pm

          The team is only an embarrassment because they are losing. If we were winning and had all those problems, then no one would think twice of them. Like i said below, winning hides issues. For example, if the Yankees had won the World Series and A-rod continued to not hit, you think that the headlines and the main thing on the fan’s mind would have been the dismal A-rod performance? No, that issue would have been put on the backburner and some fans would have even forgiven him because in the end, the team won. When you lose or don’t meet people’s expectation, people try to find something to blame. It’s as simple as that.

  2. Charles
    November 13, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    If the Mets had a great farm system and were able to field a competitive, winning ball club using their homegrown players, than the payroll wouldn’t be an issue. However, that’s not the case. I remember a few years ago, the Marlins were told by MLB that they had to start raising their payroll; they just couldn’t keep all of their profits and field bad teams. The Mets are being treated a touch differently.

    The marketplace the Mets play in is huge. They own their own TV station. They should be able to afford a higher payroll. Question: we’ve all heard of these gigantic tv deals some teams are signing. Billion dollar deals. The dodgers deal is for an insane amount of money, enabling them to spend carelessly just knowing the money is coming. If those tv stations can afford to spend that cash, knowing they’ll still make enough money back to turn a profit, how much more cash should a team collect if they themselves own the station? They themselves make money off the station on other programming. Again, someone please tell me why the Mets are broke?

    We all know the story by now, but it just doesn’t add up to me. SNY, naming rights, MLB television deal that also pays them, attendance, food and beverage, merchandising, etc….It just doesn’t seem right that they are allowed to pay so much less then the other big market teams.

    Some will say payroll isn’t going to win you anything. I know, but too much is going to too few players, leaving very little to fill out the roster with good players. Having this budget imposed by a broke ownership when the team could easily compete with just a modest increase is criminal.

    • Name
      November 14, 2012 at 12:42 am

      “If the Mets had a great farm system and were able to field a competitive, winning ball club using their homegrown players, than the payroll wouldn’t be an issue.”

      You are totally right here. When things are going right, we ignore our weakness and potential problems. However, when things are going wrong, everyone tries to find something to blame.

      “I remember a few years ago, the Marlins were told by MLB that they had to start raising their payroll; they just couldn’t keep all of their profits and field bad teams”

      Looks like the Marlins are up to their old habits again. They just traded away their entire team to the Jays(for salary relief). What makes it Mets related is that Reyes has been traded away. Looking at the contract he signed last year, I was almost confident that they were going to trade him after a couple of years. Why else would they so heavily backload that contract? They had no intentions of paying him 20 million a year.

      “I know, but too much is going to too few players, leaving very little to fill out the roster with good players”

      When will GM’s learn that giving out 100+ million dollar deals are rarely worth it…

      “Having this budget imposed by a broke ownership when the team could easily compete with just a modest increase is criminal”

      Yes when you own a sports team, you do have a social responsibility to put out a respectable and competitive product. I wouldn’t go so far is to call what they’re doing criminal though. The reaons is that “competitiveness” is hard to quantify. Look at the Orioles. Before the season started, did anyone think that they would compete? So for all we know, the Mets could be “competitive”. The reverse can also happen, just look at the Marlins and Phillies. The Phillies were expected to be super competitive and most picked them to win the division. Meanwhile, the Marlins were a lot of people’s sleepers picks(which mean people expected them to compete) and look at where those 2 teams ended up.

      • Metsense
        November 14, 2012 at 8:06 am

        Great post, Name. All points well thought.

  3. November 13, 2012 at 8:27 pm

    I don’t wish any ill-will on anyone.What happened to the Wilpon family is a tragedy not only for them but to all those who were taken in the Madoff scandal. To invest all of your family fortune into one investment and its name is not Hathaway-Berkshire is foolish and we as Mets fans are paying the consequences of their incompetence. A new era for the Mets will only begin when the team is sold to someone like Michael Bloomberg (wishful thinking) who can elevate their shopping standards from Walmart to Neiman Marcus.

    • November 14, 2012 at 1:18 pm

      From what I’ve heard, they did not have all of their money with Madoff, but enough to do serious damage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *