Friday, November 30, 2012

Mets –Wright Agree On Contract: Let The Debate Begin

WFAN’s Ed Coleman was first to report that the Mets and David Wright have agreed to a seven year - $122M contract (six years plus option they picked up which bring deal to 138M over 7 years), which makes it the richest contract the Mets have ever offered (with his $16M option this year deal comes to $138M) a player, surpassing the 6 year $137M contract signed by Johan Santana.

It was getting to the point of being obnoxious with all the speculation; 'an inside source', 'an anonymous source with knowledge of the negotiations', etc that was being bandied about this week.

Then enter the fans. Some believe that it is great that the Mets offered Wright the contract and yet others didn’t think Wright was worth the reported $120M - $150M the Mets were alleged to have offered.

Many on Twitter said fans are impossible because they want Wright, but when the Mets offer a “solid” contract, they are complaining of the money being spent.  Scribes were more or less saying we can’t have it both ways.

To put it bluntly, that’s horse manure. Fans can have it both ways. Anyone who reads this blog regularly, or sees my tweets, realizes that I have been very hard on Wright over the years. It isn’t because I dislike him, no, quite the opposite. I like Wright. I think he’s a good kid with a solid work ethic and apparently high moral standard. 

What I have slammed Wright on is his inability to hit in the clutch and that the Mets promote Wright as if he is an elite player. David Wright is a solid ball player, but don’t think of him as a homerun hitter, because he isn’t. He does have some pop, but he isn’t a big banger in the Mets lineup. Wright’s statistics look good, but if you watch him day in and day out, you realize how frequently he strikes out in huge situations and that he is prone to prolonged slumps. Is he a poor player? Absolutely not. He is a very good ball player, just not a superstar.

Wright cannot carry the team on his back when everyone is slumping, like Darryl Strawberry and Mike Piazza could. This isn’t slighting Wright; just saying he isn’t in the class of Straw and Piazza.

This is where I disagree with sports writers when they say we can’t say we want Wright and then complain when the Mets decide to pay out big bucks. I am a fan. I like Wright and wanted him to stay with the Mets. I just think you have to put a ceiling on how much is he really worth. He just agreed to a $122M contract, which will pay him an annual average of $20.33M (years  2-7) annually. That’s superstar money for a player who isn’t a superstar.

What are the Mets going to do in year 4 or 5 when Wright is making over $20M annually, and he might start to slow down? Trade him? Won’t be able to without his approval. By year 2 he will be a 10-5 player and can refuse any trade.

Another  problem that might arise is their (Mets) ability to bring in players to compliment Wright. Now it is  also being reported that it is believed the Mets might have offered Cy Young winner RA Dickey a 2 year deal. If so, great. I’m just wondering where this money was last year when they let Jose walk.

Is this Wright contract good or bad? You could have wanted Wright, but not for that much money, might not have wanted Wright at all, or wanted Wright no matter what the cost.

What we do know is that the deal should be announced last week, and regardless, there will be squabbling either way.

David Wright is a Met until he is 37…let the debate begin.

No comments: