When Pessimism Breeds Absurdity

Today, Keith Law of ESPN gave his thoughts on when the so-called "worst" teams in baseball would contend again. Regarding the Mets, Law opined that they wouldn't contend again until 2016. Yes, 2016. The year after Marty McFly and Doc Brown first took the flying Delorean for a spin. Law noted that the Mets lack high upside players on their current roster and in the minors (even though he's a big fan of Zack Wheeler, Matt Harvey and Brandon Nimmo - calling them potential stars), which would seem to contradict one of his main points. He also notes that the Mets won't be able to obtain high end talent via trades (as they did last year in the Carlos Beltran deal after most "tuned in" writers said they'd get nothing of value in return). His main reason, though, is everyone's main reason. The Mets' lack of money. Things are not all rosy in the land of the Mets. That can't be denied. However, it seems that the negativity has turned into a living, breathing, super-pessimism that has clouded the judgment of people who ordinarily have good judgment.

Here are the facts (on the field first): The Mets' win totals in 2010 and 2011 were in the high 70's. Their total most likely would've been above 80 last year had they not traded off lots of pieces with an eye on the future. See: Francisco Rodriguez, Carlos Beltran. Those moves, of course, were necessary. The Mets' farm system is viewed as average overall, with a handful of potentially high impact arms ready to contribute in 2012 or 2013. The bats are further away. The Major League roster, while devoid of established stars save for David Wright and Johan Santana, contains lots of pieces who can contribute to a contending team. Among them Ike Davis, Daniel Murphy, Ruben Tejada, Lucas Duda, Jon Niese, RA Dickey, Bobby Parnell, and Ramon Ramirez.

I don't think anyone is expecting the 2012 Mets to win the World Series, or make the Playoffs. They're being covered, though, as if they've been a perennial hundred loss team. As if they have a barren farm system, a terrible Manager, an inept General Manager, and zero talent on the Major League roster. As if the GOP is running a fact free smear campaign against them.

In actuality, they're a team that's hovered around .500 the last few seasons, with a roster made up of mostly younger players, a Manager who has done a fine job, and a front office that's one of the most well respected in the game. Why, then, is the team viewed by some as doomed to the land of not being able to contend until 2016? It's not the talent on the field, and it's not the talent in the minors (regardless of the reasons given by those who cite them as drawbacks).

The Mets are supposedly doomed because of the Bernard Madoff situation. It's that situation that has clouded the coverage of the team. It's that situation that has led to a somewhat average team being covered as if they're the second coming of the '62 Mets. It's quite clear that the on-field product is currently being affected by the Madoff situation. Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz may be on the hook for close to $386 million dollars in the event of a guilty verdict. Or they could be on the hook for a sliver of that amount. The trial is set to start on the 19th of this month, and the Judge has repeatedly expressed doubts as to whether there is any evidence linking Wilpon and/or Katz to so called "wilful blindness" as it relates to whether or not they knew about Madoff's Ponzi scheme. Even if the jury looks the other way and convicts them based on nothing but speculation, the Judge could still reverse the decision. Or order them to pay substantially less.

In the absolute worst case scenario, where the jury convicts Wilpon/Katz, the Judge upholds it, and orders them to pay the full $386 million, the Mets would likely be forced into bankruptcy. Under that scenario, the team would continue to operate while new owners were found. The two most recent Major League Baseball teams who went through bankruptcy were the Texas Rangers and Los Angeles Dodgers. The Rangers made it to the World Series the year they went through bankruptcy, and the Dodgers franchise has been valued at anywhere between 1 and 1.5 billion dollars. One would imagine they'll make it out of this fine in Los Angeles, and one would have to imagine the same would be true if the Mets went through it.

Back to the field: There's no need to cite all of the teams in baseball history who've gone from worst to first, or fourth to second, or 78 wins to the Wild Card from year to year. It happens constantly. And with the addition of the 2nd Wild Card, teams will only need to have win totals in the mid to high 80's in order to contend. If Keith Law's definition of the word "contend" means "be a preseason favorite to win the World Series," he's simply ignoring the fact that it's often the hot team, or the 83 win team, or the team with one shutdown starting pitcher, that comes out on top in October. Buying the offseason guarantees nothing as far as Championships are concerned.

Yes, hoping for a mid 80's win total is setting the bar low, especially for the National League team from New York. But a mid 80's win team appears to be the Mets' ceiling in the short-term. It's not outlandish to think the 2012 Mets could have a win total in the 80's. The bullpen should be better than last year, and the starting pitching should be about the same. The offense lost an enormous piece in Jose Reyes, but welcomes back Ike Davis - who missed nearly the entire 2011 campaign. In a likelier scenario, the team hovers around .500, and the impact arms get closer to contributing - which would make 2013 a year where the team could potentially take a big step forward. 2013 may be a big step forward because even if the financial uncertainty is still hovering, the Mets will enter the 2012 offseason having only $51.4 million committed in player contracts for 2013. In 2014, that number falls to $8.5 million in committed player contracts. In 2015, the Mets have no money committed as far as player contracts are concerned. Insert joke here about how the Mets won't have any money to pay players by 2015. Let's all laugh. Now come back to Earth and realize that there's no way it would ever come to that. The Wilpon's will recover, or they won't. In either scenario, the Mets will go on. And they're set up to have tons of flexibility down the road.

To conlude, do most Mets fans wish they could travel in time back to 2006? A time when Reyes was 22, Wright was 23, and it looked to all the World like the Mets were going to be a powerhouse for years to come? Of course. I'd even settle for going back to 2007 or 2008, seasons that ended poorly but where the team was in it until the last pitch of Game 162. We can't go back. We can only move forward. And bashing the team over every miniscule thing, throwing your hands up in the air in surrender, and/or buying into the "woe is us" attitude won't solve a thing. People are denying themselves the enjoyment that has always come with the start of baseball season, and it's a damn shame. The situation isn't hopeless. The team isn't hopeless. It's only the majority of fans who seem to be hopeless. And that needs to change, because this isn't hopeless. Less than ideal at the moment? Sure. Hopeless? Not even close.

Closing the Book on Jose Reyes

Jose Reyes was my favorite Met. From the moment he came on the scene in 2003, to the moment he walked off at the end of 2011, he was the most exciting player on the field. The most multi-talented. The most interesting. The most everything. Reyes is now gone. For many reasons, I'm completely disgusted with Jose Reyes. I don't hate him. I'm merely disgusted. When he returns to Citi Field this coming April, I won't cheer him. I won't boo him either. I'll only boo for lack of effort. What Jose had this winter was lack of sense.

If Reyes had simply kept his mouth shut after defecting to the Miami Marlins, I wouldn't have nearly as much vitriol for him as I now do. But, he couldn't keep his mouth shut. He went on and on about how the Mets didn't' appreciate him, didn't show him that they wanted to keep him, didn't make him an official offer. All of those claims are baseless and absurd. Sandy Alderson reached out to Jose Reyes' agents before he became a free agent, in an effort to lock him up long-term. Reyes' agents refused. They were determined to take him to free agency. Alderson again reached out to Reyes' agents after Jose became a free agent, and detailed the parameters of a contract they'd be willing to formally offer. By all accounts, their offer was for 80 million guaranteed over five years, with an easily attainable sixth year vesting option based on health that would've brought the total of the contract to 100 million. Reyes' agents said don't bother. Thus, no "official" offer.

The Marlins offered six years and 106 million guaranteed, and Reyes bolted. And as Adam Rubin pointed out yesterday, the Marlins weren't going to be out-bid for Jose Reyes. They were the only team in the Majors willing to guarantee an outlandish amount of years to Reyes. So, even if the Mets had matched the Marlins' offer, they would've been out-bid. That puts to bed the "Reyes left because the Mets couldn't afford him" meme. Yes, the Mets are in a perilous financial situation right now. But under no circumstance would Sandy Alderson have guaranteed more years and dollars than Miami did - and rightfully so. In the most likeliest outcome (where Reyes doesn't miss an insane amount of games due to injury over the next few years), Reyes in essence left the Mets for an extra six million dollars. SIX MILLION.

Jose Reyes said all along that his preference was to stay with the Mets. Then he went and told Marlins owner David Samson that if the Marlins paid one more dollar than anyone else, he'd sign there - making Reyes' earlier claims clear bullshit. He has the right to go after the last dollar, but he didn't have to lie about that not being his motivator. He simply could've refused to discuss his pending free agency.

The Mets signed Jose Reyes out of the Dominican Republic when he was 16 years old. Helped to shape the man he became, taught him english, promoted him to the Major Leagues when he was 19 years old. He became a permanent resident of Long Island. Started to raise a family there. Reyes was absolutely adored by the fans. Loud, emotional, supportive, die-hard fans. He owned National League baseball in New York City. But he left. Left for that extra money (again, as is his right). It's the team he left the Mets for that makes this whole thing appalling.

He left to go play for the Miami Marlins. A team with a beautiful new ballpark - a place that will draw lots of people (I say people because the Marlins don't have actual fans) early this season, and then will most likely begin to look like Joe Robbie Stadium/Pro-Player/Sun-Life has always looked: empty. It will begin to sound like their old stadium most usually sounded: noiseless. Even if the Marlins win, the place will be a shred of what Reyes has experienced playing for the Mets. Miami is a terrible professional sports city, and Reyes will find that out.

Beyond that, the Marlins are a team that has always gone for big splashes before completely gutting their teams (see 1998 and 2004). Again, IF the Marlins win, the team will be dismantled. It's how the Marlins operate. If you look at the ridiculously backloaded nature of Jose Reyes' contract, along with the fact that they didn't grant him a no-trade clause, you'll realize that he's going to get traded. It's just a matter of when. Will it be 2013, 2014, or 2015?

The Mets would have never traded Jose Reyes if he had re-signed. He would've been here for the resurgence of the franchise. Would've ended his career as the best position player in the history of the team. His number would've been retired next to 14, 37, 41, and 31. And if he won a World Series here, he would've been revered for the rest of his life. Instead, he's gone. Gone because the Marlins outbid the Mets, and would've kept going higher and higher. Gone to a terrible sports city with terrible fans. To a team that will almost certainly trade him in a few years. To a place where even if he wins a World Series title, no one will really care. That is the lasting thought I have of Jose Reyes. Not turning a single into a double, clapping his hands, or diving head-first into third. And it's that fact that disgusts me.

The State of the Franchise

As we sit here in the middle of January, with all of the offseason moves (as minor as the additions were) in the rearview mirror, the only thing anyone wants to dissect is just how bad things have gotten for the Mets. It seems that the issue of most paramount importance - much higher up on the priority list for fans over the makeup of the roster - is their desire for Fred Wilpon to sell the team. They don't care who he sells to, how much he sells the team for, or what it would mean for the future of the team. They just want Fred to sell.

It's not enough for people, though, to simply clamor for the Wilpons to sell. There seems to be a need, a burning desire even, to talk about Fred Wilpon as if he's the bad guy in the movie. The detestable bastard everyone wants to see lose in the end.

Let's be clear: I'm absolutely furious over the predicament the franchise is currently in. However, I'm not angry at Fred Wilpon. I'm angry at the situation. Here's why:

Unless you think Fred Wilpon, Saul Katz, and/or Jeff Wilpon were willing participants in or knew about the scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff, they can be seen as nothing but victims of it. And if there was any evidence to support a claim that they knew about the scheme, Irving Picard would've sniffed it out by now. That scheme is the reason the franchise is in its current situation. Once you get past that part, you have to look at this from Fred Wilpon's point of view. Not your view of what his mindset or behavior should be, but his view.

Fred Wilpon is a guy from Brooklyn. Someone who went to Lafayette high school a few miles away from where I live. Someone who grew up and turned himself into something special. Someone who is a self made multi-millionaire, who had the opportunity about three decades ago to purchase (with Nelson Doubleday) a Major League Franchise. Not a random franchise, but the one that represented his roots, his borough. The National League franchise from New York. Up until 2010 (when Madoff's fraud was linked to him), Fred Wilpon was simply seen as a gentleman. Someone who cared deeply about the ballclub he owned (even if fans at times felt put off by him for some reason). For the majority of the time he's owned the Mets, they have had one of the highest payrolls in the sport. For all of that time, Fred Wilpon has made sure the Mets were one of the most charitable organizations in all of sports. Everyone seems to recall the Yankees when the aftermath of September 11th is discussed, but it was the Mets (due in large part to Fred Wilpon) who led that charge.

Put yourself in Fred Wilpon's shoes for a minute. For over 30 years, you've owned the Mets. Over the majority of those years, you've signed off on maintaining one of the highest payrolls in the sport. You're self-made, well respected, charitable, and proud. You, like thousands of other people, were a victim of the largest fraud in the history of the Country. You've been smeared mercilessly by Irving Picard, the trustee in the Madoff case. You've been destroyed by the fans, and destroyed in the press. But, you don't want to sell the team. Again - although the precarious situation the team is in upsets me and angers me, I can understand Fred Wilpon's position. It doesn't mean I'm happy with it, just that I can understand it...at least for the time being.

At this point, it appears Wilpon will only be on the hook for about $80 million as far as the Madoff case is concerned. If that holds true, he can probably ride this out. If Irving Picard is somehow able to get a higher amount (in the hundreds of millions), the situation will most likely become untenable. Dropping the payroll to between $90 million and $100 million, while not ideal, does not create a situation where Wilpon can be forced out. However, if the payroll continues to drop, you'd have to imagine he'd eventually either cave to the public pressure, have Major League Baseball step in, or simply not have enough cash to continue to own and operate the franchise.

If you put the Madoff/cash-flow situation aside for a moment - something that's obviously incredibly difficult to do - you'll see that that the state of the Mets...you know, the team...really isn't as dire as it's made out to be.

-Sandy Alderson, Paul DePodesta, and JP Ricciardi are in charge of the baseball operations. Though hamstrung by the current payroll constraints, they've managed to not make any idiotic mistakes. To not hand out any absurd contracts. The loss of Jose Reyes was painful, but I don't think Sandy Alderson would've matched the deal Reyes got from Miami even if the Wilpon's were flush with cash. And the claim that Alderson never tried to retain him is both baseless and absurd. It was Reyes' agents who refused to negotiate mid-season, and Reyes' agents who refused to negotiate during the Mets' exclusive window after the World Series ended.

-The current Manager, Terry Collins, appears to be a stabilizing force in the dugout and in the clubhouse.

-The ballpark that was too cavernous is being adjusted. It's not being turned into a hitters park, though, simply a more neutral one.

-The Minor League System, which was basically a wasteland a few years ago, is now seen as at worst middle of the pack, and appears to be approaching the top third of systems in all of baseball.

-The current roster, while not likely Championship caliber, is being constructed with an eye on the future. There aren't any expensive long-term band aids being put on a deep gash.

Now, the almost universal fan anger is understandable. And as was mentioned above, the screams to sell will continue. And Fred Wilpon relenting and selling the team will become inevitable if the payroll continues to get slashed and/or if the outcome in the Madoff case isn't a desirable one.

I, for one, am rooting for Fred Wilpon to be able to hang onto this team. If he can't, it'll happen sooner rather than later. But I refuse to join the chorus of blood-lusting fans who are making the man out to be a villain. Painting him as a perpetrator and swindler, not as a victim. The current situation is extremely unfortunate, and a source of great anger for most of those who love the Mets. What it shouldn't be, though, is an excuse to pile on a decent man who's been put in an almost impossible situation.

Why Should We Believe Baseless Nonsense?

Prior to the 2011 season, nearly every baseball writer (national and local alike) was convinced Jose Reyes was going to be traded during the season. They had no facts to back it up, but it just "seemed" right to them. Their absurd claims caused tons of Mets fans to have near nervous breakdowns, while a select group of fans chose to look at things rationally - realizing that it made no sense to trade Jose Reyes, and that it wasn't going to happen.

As Jon Heyman surmised in an article on June 20th:

For a while, it appeared that his (Reyes) being traded was a foregone conclusion...

No, Jon, it didn't. Jose Reyes being traded made for good articles, sold papers, added clicks to websites, and drove Mets fans crazy. It was never close to being a foregone conclusion, nor was it ever likely.

Now that free agency is about to get underway, the media is at it again. Nearly every writer and talking head is shouting for all the world to hear that Jose Reyes is a goner. There's no way he'll be signing with the "cash-strapped" Mets, they say. They claim that Sandy Alderson (who it's pretty clear does not allow major leaks out of his front office) won't be willing to offer what it takes to re-sign Reyes (even though no one has any idea what it will actually take). All the media claims to know is that whatever the final number is, Alderson will shy away.

My favorite has to be today's headline above Andy Martino's article. That headline states that

"GM Sandy Alderson says Mets plan to make low contract offer to Free Agent SS Jose Reyes."

The only problem with that headline is that nowhere in the article is there any statement or hint from Alderson at what the Mets' offer will be (low, moderate, or otherwise). This is completely reckless journalism, pandering to the segment of the fan base that is gullible enough to believe it.

The "juiciest" quote in Martino's article is this one:

Sources familiar with the team's thinking have maintained that the Mets are unwilling to offer six or seven years, and might be uncomfortable with five.

The above quote is not only vague...it's also not from anyone who actually works for the Mets. Even if Martino claimed the quote was from a Mets executive (which it isn't), it could also be seen as a negotiating ploy. Why would anyone in the Mets' front office come out publicly and tip their hand? The answer, of course, is that they wouldn't - especially considering how tight lipped things have been under Sandy Alderson.

What I want to know from the writers and talking heads is this: What exactly has changed from July (when the Mets refused to trade Reyes) to now? From my end, the only major development that can potentially impact the Mets' finances was the positive ruling the Wilpon's received in the Bernard Madoff/Irving Picard lawsuit. Sandy Alderson indicated that the 2012 payoll would likely be around $110 million, of which only $65 million is currently allocated. Jose Reyes stated repeatedly during the season that he wanted to remain with the Mets (when he could've easily said "no comment" or been non-commital). According to Ken Rosenthal on Twitter, Sandy Alderson recently asked Jose Reyes' agents what it would take - in both dollars and years - to take Jose Reyes off the market. Reyes' agents failed to respond, likely because they've been determined all along to take Reyes to free agency. It certainly sounds to me like Sandy Alderson is serious about retaining him. However, he's being prudent and is refusing to set the market.

If Sandy Alderson either didn't have the payroll flexibility to keep Reyes or simply didn't want to keep him, you'd think he would've been more open to trading him over the summer. He wasn't. We heard a few weeks ago (from the writers, of course), that the Mets would seek a quick answer from Reyes' agents and would move on if they didn't receive it. Well, it appears that assumption was false, with Alderson himself stating yesterday that it will be a "slow process," and intimating that the Mets are prepared to wait it out.

If some team comes out and guarantees Jose Reyes 7 or 8 years, he'll most likely be playing elsewhere in 2012. I simply can't see that happening, though. Perhaps someone guarantees 6 years for Reyes, but perhaps no one will guarantee more than 5. I'm confident, though, that the Mets' front office knows what they're doing. I'm confident that they want Jose Reyes back, and that Reyes wants to stay (as he himself stated over and over during the season). I surmised during the season, when most Mets fans were running around like chickens with their heads cut off, that it simply made no sense for the Mets to trade Reyes - and that the Mets wouldn't trade Reyes. With Reyes about to hit the open market, the only prediction I can make is this: No one knows a thing about what the Mets or anyone else will offer Jose Reyes. Until we do, it makes no sense to doubt the Mets' chances of re-signing him for 2012 and beyond. It makes for a good story, but it's a story that's not based in reality. A story designed to get attention, not designed to be factual.

Ignore it.

The Futures of Reyes and Wright

At the beginning of the 2011 season, most beat writers held the notion that Jose Reyes would be traded before the All-Star break. When that didn't happen, "the Mets may not be able to afford both Reyes and Wright" became the new meme. Now, the question has simply become whether or not the Mets should hold onto Reyes, Wright, or both. Not because of dire financial straits, but because some are questioning whether or not the team would be better off without one or both of them.

The screams bellowing from the less astute writers suggest that since the Mets haven't won a World Series with Reyes and/or Wright, how could they possibly be worse off if one or both of them was gone? I find that suggestion to be not only absurd, but insulting to anyone who follows baseball religiously. I'm not going to waste anyone's time by pointing out how many All-Star/Hall of Fame caliber players went their entire careers without ever making the Playoffs. Those men (and there are many), were victims of the players that surrounded them.

There are some who throw out an arbitrary amount of years it will be before the Mets are "competitive" again. In actuality, no one has any idea how long it will be before this team returns to the Playoffs. The 2009 Mets won 70 games, the 2010 Mets won 79 games. In 2011, the Mets won 77 games - a small step back as far as the win total was concerned. However, it's important to note that the 2011 Mets, with an eye on the future, dealt Carlos Beltran (their most productive offensive player), and Francisco Rodriguez. Had Beltran and Rodriguez not been dealt, the team would most likely have finished right around .500 or a bit better. The trades hurt the team on the field, and probably had a bit of a negative effect on morale. It's also important to note that the Mets played most of this past season without Ike Davis, whose return in 2012 should somewhat negate the absence of Carlos Beltran from the lineup.

Everyone (myself included) has gone over the non-baseball reasons for wanting to keep both Jose Reyes and David Wright. The fans love Reyes, and to a lesser extent Wright. They're marketable. They're homegrown Mets. A separate worry is what the departure of one or both of these players would mean revenue-wise for the team in terms of ticket sales. However, let's focus on the on baseball/team construction aspect only. First, David Wright will be addressed. Next, Jose Reyes will be addressed. Lastly, the potential of the team will be addressed.

David Wright

Turning 29 this December, some argue that David Wright is already past his prime. From 2005-2008, Wright was an MVP candidate. In 2009, he had a brutal year. He was adjusting to the new dimensions at Citi Field, had no protection in the lineup, and was drilled in the head with a fastball by Matt Cain. In 2010, though, Wright rebounded to once again eclipse the 100 RBI mark to go along with 29 homers. It wasn't quite vintage Wright, but it was enough to show that 2009 was an aberration. 2011 was injury riddled for Wright. He played through a broken back before it finally forced him to the disabled list.

Dealing Wright now makes virtually no sense baseball wise, for three reasons.

1. Although some say tons of teams would be clamoring for his services, you'd be selling incredibly low. He's coming off a serious injury, and hit only .254 in 2011 - the lowest average of his career by nearly 30 points. If the Mets really do want to trade David Wright, it should be done during the 2012 season if/when he reverts to at least his 2010 level of production.

2. The Mets don't have anyone on the roster (or in the minors) who would be able to replace Wright's bat in the lineup, his glove at third base, or his leadership in the clubhouse. Aside from second baseman Reese Havens, the better hitting prospects in the organization are all in the lower levels of the minors - and are all extremely raw. The only blue-chip prospects in the organization are pitchers: Matt Harvey, Jeurys Familia, Zack Wheeler, and Jenrry Mejia.

3. The dimensions at Citi Field are about to be adjusted. In 2009, the Mets unveiled a ballpark that featured a right center field power alley that became a death valley for Wright. That alley will be shortened significantly, and the left field wall (another favorite target of Wright's) will be lowered and brought in. It would be foolish to deal Wright before seeing what he could do in his adjusted home park.

Jose Reyes

Reyes turned 28 this past June, and despite two brief stints on the disabled list, put up incredible numbers - including winning the National League batting crown. There isn't another player like Reyes in baseball. A dynamic offensive player who plays shortstop at a gold glove level, Reyes is a once in a generation talent.

Letting Jose Reyes go makes zero sense baseball wise, for the following reasons:

1. Regarding the makeup of the team, Sandy Alderson has stated that the 2012 roster will most likely have a payroll around $110 million. The other top offensive players on the market (Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols) both play a position the Mets already have filled, and would both cost a great deal more than Jose Reyes. Like Reyes, there are also question marks surrounding both of them. Pujols has had tons of injury issues over the last few seasons, and Prince Fielder is massively overweight. With nearly $60 million coming off the books with the departures of Luis Castillo, Oliver Perez, Carlos Beltran, Francisco Rodriguez, and others, Jose Reyes easily slides into the team's plan. Re-signing Reyes would not preclude the team from improving in other areas, nor would it hamper them significantly down the line. Realize this: Jose Reyes made $11 million dollars in 2011. His raise if re-signed would likely be only 6 million to 7 million yearly.

2. As is the case with David Wright, the Mets have no one on the roster or in the minors who can replace Jose Reyes in the leadoff spot, or at shortstop. Ruben Tejada may yet prove to be an adequate offensive player and a solid defensive one, but he has yet to prove that over the course of a full season. Baseball-wise, it makes more sense for the Mets to pencil Tejada in as their second baseman, and potential utility infielder if Reese Havens can ever stay healthy.

The Potential of the Team

As was stated above, the 2011 Mets had their won/lost record skewed by a few trades that will likely strengthen the team in the long run. In my opinion, the 2011 Mets were a .500 baseball team. Now, can a .500 baseball team improve by 9 or 10 games in a single offseason? Sure. Is it likely? Perhaps not. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2012 Mets (with Reyes and Wright) contended for the Playoffs. More likely, though, they'll be ready to contend in 2013. The potential of the team contending in 2013, however, will be due in large part to having Reyes and Wright on the roster.

Aside from Jason Bay, the offensive core of the team is young. Ike Davis, Ruben Tejada, Lucas Duda, Josh Thole, and Daniel Murphy are all under 27. Their two offensive prospects who may have an impact next year are Reese Havens and Kirk Nieuwenhuis, both in their mid 20's. The bullpen needs to be revamped, but should contain some promising arms in Manny Acosta, Pedro Beato, and Bobby Parnell.

The main area of concern is the starting rotation. That concern is due to the fact that the Mets lack a true Ace. However, in Jonathon Niese and RA Dickey, they have two middle of the rotation arms who should be able to contribute to an eventual contender. Dillon Gee is a question mark, but may be able to slide into the back of a contender's rotation. Until Johan Santana returns to the Major League mound, he's a non-entity. I'd never count him out, though.

The best hope for the Mets lies with the development of Matt Harvey, Jeurys Familia, Jenrry Mejia, and Zack Wheeler. All four of those pitchers have Ace potential. It's highly unlikely all four reach that potential, but the rise of one or two of them could make the team an instant contender.

If the Mets let David Wright and/or Jose Reyes go, the offense would be weakened to a point where it would be nearly impossible for the Mets to contend. They're not going to sign Albert Pujols or Prince Fielder (nor should they), and they're most likely not going to gut their rising farm system for a major offensive piece. I believe the best move is to hold onto David Wright, and make a strong effort to re-sign Jose Reyes. A fair offer would be 5 years at 17 million or 18 million per, with a vesting 6th year option based on cumulative at-bats over the last 3 years of the contract. If a team comes out of nowhere to offer Reyes 7 or 8 years guaranteed, I'd understand if the Mets didn't match. I don't think that offer is out there, though.

We'll see how this plays out. What is almost certain, is that the Mets in 2012 and beyond would be substantially weaker without Jose Reyes and/or David Wright. They should be given the opportunity to attempt to finish what they started together, to play behind the pitchers who are rising through the system, and to once and for all prove themselves worthy of being called franchise players.

Appreciating Carlos Beltran

In early 2005, after Pedro Martinez had signed with the Mets, most doubted that Carlos Beltran would soon follow. He was a sweet swinging, switch hitting, 27 year old gold glove center fielder. The Mets and their fans wanted him badly. One night in January, while I was at a friends house keeping one eye on the Jets Playoff game (I'm a Giants fan), I followed the Beltran developments like a madman: He was going to Houston. Wait, now he's undecided. Now he's deciding between Houston and the Mets. Houston won't give him a full no-trade clause...Beltran is a Met.

The Pedro Martinez and Carlos Beltran signings were the two moves that pulled the Mets out of the abyss. Without conducting research, I can't conclusively say that most Mets fans didn't appreciate Carlos Beltran enough - but that's the feeling I always got. To many, he wasn't boisterous enough. Didn't say enough. Didn't do enough. To me, he did it all.

Beltran didn't have the greatest debut season in 2005, but what I remember from that year is Carlos hitting one high off the right field scoreboard at Shea. I remember the ridiculous home run robbing catch he made against the Angels at Shea - an inning before Marlon Anderson's inside the park home run tied the game in the 9th, two innings before Cliff Floyd hit one of the most memorable walk off home runs ever in the 10th. A home run that left me rolling around on the ground in celebration in front of my seats in Section 22, Row A of the Loge. I remember screaming in horror when Beltran and Mike Cameron smashed into each other in the outfield later that season. And I remember the team telling Carlos to take the rest of the year off, only for him to return and play the remainder of the year with broken bones in his face.

From 2006 to 2008, Carlos Beltran was incredible - eclipsing 112 RBI's each year. 2006 was the year of the walkoff for the Mets, and Beltran delivered the most memorable one in extra innings against the Phillies. In the NLCS, he won Game 1 with a home run, and led the team to a win in Game 4 with two more. Yet, all anyone wants to remember about that NLCS is the called strike 3 he took with the winning runs on base in the bottom of the 9th in Game 7. I was there. It was a crushing end to what could have been a magical year. But the Mets would've never made it to that game if Beltran hadn't almost single-handedly won two games in that series by himself. And the curveball he took for strike 3 was a nearly unhittable pitch. More glaring in that inning was Randolph not bunting with runners on 1st and 2nd and no one out. But everyone needs a scapegoat - and Carlos was it.

Both 2007 and 2008 ended painfully for the Mets - with the team getting eliminated from contention on the last day of each season at Shea. In 2008, though, Beltran gave the old place one last jolt with his game tying 2 run homer. As "Twist and Shout" blared, Beltran rounded the bases and disappeared into the dugout as I and everyone around me went berserk. I'll never forget that moment. Even in defeat, there are great memories that will never go away. Especially for those who were there that afternoon.

Carlos Beltran dealt with a multitude of injuries during the 2009 and 2010 campaigns, leading many fans to classify him as soft - a notion that was and always will be completely absurd. This year, he returned and showed what kind of player he can still be.

When all is said and done, Carlos Beltran will be remembered for being one of the best players the Mets have ever had - and perhaps one of the top two all around players in the history of the franchise. Carlos Beltran was a leader, usually by example. Once he got comfortable in New York, he would constantly take young or struggling players under his wing. He always played hard. Always played hurt. Always carried himself with dignity and class. Too often, people misconstrued his lack of emotion for lack of caring. The relaxed demeanor was just how Carlos was. He didn't often let his guard down. However, if you look at his face after some of the at bats where he delivered, the smile is there. The emotion is there. Carlos cared just as much, if not more, than the other 24 guys.

If today was Carlos Beltran's last home game as a Met, that's simply a damn shame for all of us who have grown to love and respect how he plays the game. I wish I could've been there. I wish we all could've filled the place and given him the rousing ovation he deserved. Those who were there did their best, but it wasn't enough. Hopefully, Carlos knows how much we appreciated him. If he comes back to Citi Field this year or next in a different uniform, I'm confident we'll give him the long-lasting ovation he's earned.

Thanks for everything, Carlos.

The Reyes Injury Conundrum

Six days ago, Jose Reyes was removed from a game against the Yankees at Citi Field. After watching replays of his activity on the field during the game, it wasn't evident when or if he had actually hurt himself. Was Reyes simply being extra cautious in a contract year, not wanting to push himself on a hamstring that didn't feel perfect that day? After the Mets completed a thrilling comeback the next day, it was disclosed that Reyes had suffered a Grade 1 strain of his hamstring (the least severe grade, confirmed after an MRI), and that he would not be landing on the disabled list. Rather, he would fly to the West coast with the team in hopes of returning to the lineup mid-week.

Since then, what has happened has been a bit strange. On Monday and Tuesday, Reyes participated in limited activity. He walked on the treadmill, took grounders at short, and took batting practice from both sides of the plate. It appeared that he was progressing, and that his return to the lineup was a day or two away. On Tuesday, Reyes reported that his hamstring was feeling better and that he would attempt to run on Wednesday. Then, his agents stepped in. They requested for the MRI results to be reviewed by the doctor who performed Reyes' hamstring operation in 2009. Reyes' rehabilitation attempts were shut down - not by Reyes or the Mets, but because he had to wait for clearance from a doctor who was hand picked by his agents to review an already conclusive MRI.

To no one's shock, Reyes' agent's hand picked doctor recommended for Reyes to rest for a period of three weeks. The doctor didn't disagree with the initial diagnosis (Grade 1 strain), and didn't report that there was anything else wrong with Reyes. Instead of jumping all over what appears to be a clear move by Reyes' agents to err on the side of caution in a contract year, the beat writers (as expected) chalked this up as another "Met injury disaster" - which makes zero sense.

Let's review the events again:

-Reyes felt discomfort in his hamstring, and was immediately removed from the game on July 2nd.

-Reyes had an MRI on July 3rd, which revealed a Grade 1 hamstring strain.

-Reyes participated in light baseball activity on July 4th and July 5th, in hopes of returning to the lineup. Reyes himself stated that his hamstring was getting better, and that he would attempt to run on July 6th.

-On July 6th, Reyes' agents requested a review of the MRI and Reyes was shut down while he waited for the results.

-On July 7th, the doctor who reviewed the MRI (as requested by Reyes' agents), recommended for Jose Reyes to rest for a period of three weeks - while at the same time not disputing the initial diagnosis.

...Again, it's quite clear to me that Jose Reyes' agents stepped in to make sure that their prized client would take more time off than needed in an attempt to be extra cautious in a contract year. Nothing the Mets did raised any eyebrows prior to Reyes being shut down on July 7th.

Now, will this ploy by Reyes' agents come back to bite them (and Reyes) in the end? According to most who are familiar with Grade 1 hamstring strains, they heal in a matter of days - not weeks...which jives with the fact that Reyes came on the road with the Mets in an attempt to get back into the lineup quickly. Since Reyes' agents have stepped in, they have guaranteed that Reyes will miss no less than three full weeks (if Reyes returns the day he is eligible to come off the disabled list, which is doubtful). More likely, Reyes will miss around a month with an injury most believed would force him out of action for only a few days.

On the surface, it may seem that Reyes' agents are being prudent here. If Reyes returned too quickly and aggravated the injury, who knows how much time he'd have missed. However, by requesting a second opinion that forced Reyes out of action and onto the disabled list, his agents have now re-opened the conversation about how brittle Jose Reyes actually is (something that is overblown, but nonetheless out there). They've placed doubt in the minds of those who may potentially bid for Reyes' services after the season, most likely lessening the amount of guaranteed years and dollars Reyes will be able to earn from his next contract. And that scenario benefits the Mets, who badly want to re-sign him.

In the short-term, being without Jose Reyes is a huge blow for the Mets - who last night entered a stretch where they'll face seven All-Star starting pitchers in a row, before facing the Cardinals. Reyes will miss all of those games, making the task of hanging in the Wild Card race much tougher on the team. However, if you asked Sandy Alderson if he'd exchange a month of Reyes' services in 2011 in order to secure his services after the season for less years and dollars, I bet he would have happily signed up for it.