2 Guys Talking: What To Do With R.A. Dickey

Jimmy:

I recently got around to reading R.A. Dickey’s book, Wherever I Wind Up, and came away with the sense that after a career of baseball uncertainty, he’d be happy to sign a three-year deal with the Mets, enjoy the financial security which eluded him for years, and call it a day. For starters, I think R.A. appreciates the opportunities he’s enjoyed with the Mets. To a point, of course. Money talks and all that. Furthermore, R.A. is nobody’s fool. I’d bet a hundred clams that he fully realizes Citifield is a great ballpark for his skill set (he referenced Baseball Prospectus in his book). So I do believe he’s a guy we can retain and it’s not going to break the bank. I’d originally hoped that he’s sign a deal similar to Tim Hudson’s 2009 extension, which was in the 3 yr/$28 million range. Maybe R.A. needs a touch more than that. But he’s 38 years old. We’re offering him lifetime security right now, a bird in hand — not a year away. I think we’ve got some bargaining position here.

Mike:

Dickey is such a hard one for me. Every fan-based bone in my body just wants him on the team, what a great guy to root for. But my logical side pulls me in the other direction. I think with an affordable $5 million dollar option for 2013 R.A. has real trade value. On top of that, all indications are that our current prospect pipeline is tilted heavily toward pitching. A trade of quality pitching for young hitting needs to happen and if Dickey can bring back a major league ready outfield propect for us I am ready to explore that type of trade. That player could be our Adam Jones, and yes, I understand he could also be our Matt Laporta. But we pay Alderson a lot of money to get this right, this is a chance for him to earn some of it.

Jimmy:

Right now, in early November, a few key pieces are so interconnected that it’s difficult to discuss anything in isolation. So let’s assume that, like it or not, the Mets sign David Wright to a massive contract. If they miraculously sign Dickey too, there’s no more money — not for the pen, not for catcher, not for the outfield. We’re stuck in 2012 Land.

Watching the Series, and that outstanding staff supported by a merely adequate roster, my main thought was: “Gosh, those fans look so happy. I want to feel that again.”

Obviously, Alderson must make at least one big move, as MLB standards dictate the Mets place three guys in the outfield for each game. So it becomes a question of trading Dickey or Niese, our two best chips. I certainly don’t want to give up the 26-year-old, improving lefty with the contract we control for the next six seasons (including options years). So that brings me back to trading Dickey — and I hate this. I really wish Dickey could stick around to anchor this exciting, young rotation for the next 2-3 years. Keep Dickey, keep Niese, keep Harvey, bring up Wheeler; flip Wright, invest that money in the roster, bring in complementary pieces. The fastest, surest way to get competitive is through wall-to-wall pitching; saying sayonara to our Cy Young pitcher (fingers crossed) feels like the wrong direction to me.

Mike:

I want to be clear on this, I hate the idea of trading Dickey and hate the Wilpons because if we had real owners this would be a no-brainer. But things are what they are. As you mention any moves we make are interconnected and I don’t see how there are any series of moves that will upgrade the talent level significantly in 2013. That includes trading Wright which you keep hinting could help in the short term. I’d love to see that series of moves.

Now I don’t think for one second that trading Dickey will help us for 2013 either but in general I am reconciled to another rough season. The correct trade, where we get talent back that projects to help us really win in 2014 and beyond is acceptable to me. Hey, I love the guy and if they keep him I will not be upset at all, but I won’t scream if they move him. Pitching’s great but we need to field nine guys at all times.

 

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

6 comments

  1. Alan K says:

    Given the present circustances, I think that they need to trade Dickey.This team isn’t going to contend for another two or three years and it makes more sense to trade RA while his value is high and obtain some young bats to fill in some holes. Dickey is popular and trading him will upset some fans but it won’t have the impact of losing Wright.

  2. Alan K says:

    Given the present circustances, I think that they need to trade Dickey.This team isn’t going to contend for another two or three years and it makes more sense to trade RA while his value is high and obtain some young bats to fill in some holes. Dickey is popular and trading him will upset some fans but it won’t have the impact of losing Wright.

  3. Thanks for reading and commenting on our blog, Alan. We really appreciate it. I started to respond to the issue of David Wright, but it quickly ran away from me. Generally speaking about contracts, I worry more about length than cost. Seven years for a player entering his decline years seems like an awfully big gamble. These are the guys who were paralyzed by Castillo’s small contract. If ownership decides to start spending over the next few years — payroll should be at $140 million — than $20 million per for a declining David Wright can be absorbed. But if payroll stays low, it’s going to be an awful lot to spend on a complementary player. Yes, he’s the sad face of the franchise; but maybe it’s time for a new face?

    • Alan K says:

      It is a gamble. But I also think the Mets are better off doing what they have to now and worrying about the consequences later. I really believe that losing Wright would be the final straw for many fans.

      • Michael Geus says:

        Wright is not 35, a steep decline should not be imminent. If these owners cannot have a higher payroll three or four years from now we have much bigger problems than anything stemming from a Wright contract.

        • Dan says:

          I agree with Mike, there is no evididence of a David Wright decline, and at his age, I would expect the same production for the next 5 years. Let’s keep in mind, I think we are looking at $20MM per year, which is only $4MM more than he made last year.

          On another topic, I have read reports that Josh Hamilton may only get a 3 year deal at $20MM per. “The estimates for Hamilton’s next deal ranged from a low of three years, $60 million to a high of five years, $130 million”.

          If that is accurate, than Sandy needs to explore that, as the Bay and Santana money becomes available. A lineup with Hamiltom, Wright, Davis, would put some fans in the stands.

Leave a Reply

Email
Print
WP Socializer Aakash Web