I wanted to discuss Bobby Parnell today. but I think it’s important to set the parameters, as set out by Sandy Alderson, for retaining David Wright and R.A. Dickey this winter.
First: he made it clear payroll will remain the same. What that statement alone means for 2013 is enormous.
Payroll was $91.6 million this year. Alderson can say it was $100 million all he wants, with calculations that have at various times included draft bonuses, 40-man roster salaries, etc. Since you’re obviously always going to have a 40-man roster and draft picks, that’s a bunch of accounting tricks to make it seem larger. $91.6 million was what was spent on the major league roster in 2012, and that’s where things can change significantly, year-to-year.
So, in light of that, consider: $50 million for Jason Bay and Johan Santana, including buyouts, which Alderson acknowledged are part of his 2013 budget. $6.5 million for Frank Francisco. $3 million for Jon Niese. And, with no raise, $16 million for David Wright and $5 million for R.A. Dickey.
That’s $80.5 million for six players. Pay the rest the major league minimum of $490,000 in 2013, and that’s $9.3 million, for a total of $89.8 million.
That’s no raise for Wright or Dickey. No Ike Davis, who is arbitration-eligible, no Daniel Murphy, who is arbitration eligible, no Kelly Shoppach or Scott Hairston, both of whom will make more than the major league minimum.
2013 also represents the only tactical advantage the Mets have over other teams in terms of an ability to negotiate a raise for Dickey and Wright. But once again, there’s just not room to give either player a raise, given the salary constraints Alderson cited for next season. This isn’t arguable. It’s not in dispute.
So the Mets are going to Wright and Dickey, who have both indicated that they want to be paid market value, but more to the point, they want to win. And the Mets will have no additional help forthcoming for them in 2013, nor the prospect of a raise.
Exactly how this will act as an inducement for either player to choose a long-term deal over reaching free agency next winter, as the best player and pitcher on the market in a league about to be flush with television money, is anybody’s guess. I suppose if they prefer security to the prospect of getting hurt in 2013 or struggling on the field, that’s the selling point for them to sign now.
But Alderson’s Wednesday presser made it clear: that’s the extent of the sales pitch.
6 Comments
Does the budget for 2013 preclude the Mets from extending Wright and Dickey for 2014 forward without raising their salaries for 2013? Wright in particular is scheduled to receive a salary for 2013, $16 million I believe, that is not terribly out of line with what his value would on the open market. Do we think that Wright would demand a big increase in 2013 as a condition of signing an extension? With Bay and Santana (and others like Francisco) coming off the books for 2014, and with the expectation that payroll will increase at least some in 2014, it seems at least conceivable that the Mets could extend Wright at something like his fair market value.
I agree with much of what you wrote, but to play devil’s advocate here – most observers have recognized, at least since news of the Madoff fiasco and the team’s losses became public, that the realistic timeline for the Mets to have payroll flexibility is 2014, when the Bay/Santana contracts come off the books (as well as others as acoustic567 points out). As you point out, those contracts comprise a huge share of the Mets’ current payroll. Given that Wright and Dickey already are taking up a combined $21M from the Mets’ payroll, even if the Mets were to re-sign them at market rates (and admittedly we don’t know what they are so this is an inexact science), the combined annual payroll increase from those extensions will almost certainly be significantly less than the combined Bay/Santana annual salaries. So even if the total payroll were to stay flat in 2014, the Mets would have flexibility to spend on productive major league players beginning in that year.
Half of the 2012 MLB playoff teams (Braves, Reds, O’s Nationals, A’s) had payrolls below the Mets’. The issue isn’t how much the team spends, but how wisely it spends. The sales pitch to Wright and Dickey, in my view, is (1) payroll will affirmatively not DECREASE in 2014; rather, the team will use the newfound flexibility that year to improve the major league team, (2) the team will spend its money intelligently (and I think both Wright and Dickey are smart enough to recognize that contracts like Jason Bay’s don’t help a team long-term), and (3) that, combined with the expected arrival/improvement of current players and prospects (Ike, Tejada, Harvey, Wheeler, Flores) will turn the team into a contender.
Acoustic, that’s absolutely right, though I suspect Wright’s extension is for a good bit more per season than $16 million if he hits the open market next winter. It’s as much about Wright signing on for scenario where Mets can’t spend in ‘13, and merely a promise that they will in ‘14.
JG, you are right. The problem with that is, it was what Alderson said would happen in 2011, back in 2010, once the payroll obligations went from $140MM to $90MM. And with a $320 million loan coming due in 2014, exactly how much the owners will manage to afford for a team beyond Wright/Dickey is an open question, while the farm system doesn’t offer many pieces that seem to be a year away.
In the unlikely event that Wright and Dickey extend with NY, it will only mean that they are comfortable with the mediocrity around them and they have given up on winning in return for personal comfort. Not a good sign. And, despite the late stroking of Hairston, he is not a major league outfielder, only effective against lefties and, at 33 in May, will get worse, not better. Absolutely no one will give you anything of worth for Duda, who would be a serious downgrade at first if Ike is sent elsewhere, which could happen. And all they could get in return for Ike is a elderly defensive outfield dud with power or a “kid” with hope- and- wishes power potential and little else.
And so far as Parnell goes, unless and until he develops an inside fastball, he’s just another loose brick in the wall.
Howard, if you see this:
To what extent do you think Alderson got sandbagged by the extent—especially the protracted nature—of the Wilpon’s debt problems? It really did seem like he let slip that he was blindsided by last year’s change of plans in re: major league payroll.
Thanks.