Locking yourself up into longterm contracts to age 30+ players who are past their primes and had prior injury problems is very dangerous, especially when you aren't even a contender. That's how you screw yourself into the ground financially and potentially cripple your team for years.


This actually reminds me of the vintage Omar line of, "but if Ollie and Maine pitch like they did in 2007/2008, Pelfrey like he did in 2008, etc..." This isn't 2008 anymore. A lot would have to go right for even those three players to remain healthy at once, and I feel pretty confident in saying they aren't ever returning to their prime form.

The Mets were right to trade Beltran for a future piece instead of resigning him to a 2-3 year deal. The latter would have been a bad move for a team in the Mets' position. If the Mets were in the Cardinals' or Phillies' position on the other hand, it would be a different story.

I'm sure we won't agree on the overall issue, but a key word in my previous post on the topic is "productive".

That's a huge factor, no doubt. Indeed, I think how you evaluate their chances of being productive in future years has a lot to do with your decision.

It's also a fact that the financial problems are real, so the scenario I'm raising is overwhelmingly hypothetical.

However, the 2011 reality, in the moment, was that Beltran was producing big-time to the point that the Giants saw him as someone who had a chance to help them repeat as World Champs.

But the Mets never, to any outsider's knowledge, entertained the thought of doing anything but dealing Beltran unless they somehow got closer in the wild card race.

I think they would love for Santana to make a comeback, not so that they would have an ace, but so that they can get a lot for him in a trade.

Finally, after the Reyes affair, who among us expects David Wright to be a Met beyond the expiration of his current contract? And that fate won't likely be altered, whether he reclaims his place among the best third basemen in baseball or if he continues on the path of the last couple of years.

Bottom line is, if your policy is to rid yourself of every player making star money, even if they perform like stars, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that your major league team's on-field performance will suffer in a big way for at least a few years.

And I believe that saving the money that comes from shedding star contracts is the number one concern from ownership on down. And I don't think there's another concern that's a close second when it comes to driving their moves.

Fortunately for us and them, there's a chance that the policy will be vindicated in a few years with the likes of a Wheeler coming back in a trade and draftees making the big club. In the mean time, there's a lot faith required of anyone who wants to see the team do well.

I think our views are conflicted by what we define as stars.

I don't view Wright as a star; while he's still good-to-very-good, he hasn't been a star-level player in four years. He is still just 29, so maybe there is some hope he can return to that elite level of play, but I'd bet against it. His current contract is fine but if he ends up looking for 5/85 or something like that after this, I wouldn't give it to him. You have to realize you're evaluating Wright from age 30/31 to 34/35, where further decline is expected, instead of getting caught up in paying for his past production.

I do not view Johan, who hasn't pitched in more than year, as a star either. He's just a complete unknown at this point and penciling him to be great again is foolish. His contract is certainly more of a burden than a grace at the moment, and I'm not even sure how that's debatable. If the Mets could get out from under his contract, that would open up $24M-25M a year than can be invested into younger, better, safer players.

As for Beltran, yes, he was fantastic last season. But it was also one of the best offensive seasons in his career (at age 34) and the first time in two years he was healthy enough to accumulate 360 or more PA in a season; a lot of things point to regression there, even if he manages to stay healthy. He's still a very good player, but again, not someone I would call a star at this point in his career. His contract is a bargain but you have to consider that a player like him is far more valuable to a win-now team than a likely last place team. I will say, I wouldn't have complained if they brought Beltran back in the offseason on what he signed for, but there's value in seeing what a future piece like Lucas Duda can do too instead of having him ride the pine.

If the Mets had a star-level player in or approaching his prime (with a relatively low injury history), I would 100% be for signing him longterm over trading him. But the fact is, they don't. Wright isn't that. Beltran wasn't that, and Johan is already getting paid ridiculous gobs of money to sit on the DL.

As I said, my points on the 3 guys mentioned is based on a hypothetical that they all return to star form. They all were stars at one time. I'm not claiming they're stars now (although I think Beltran performed like one last year).

But I don't think whether or not they're still stars matters all that much to the people running the Mets.

The fact that they traded Beltran and let Reyes walk makes it a lot easier to rationalize that there's no sense in keeping and paying Wright and Santana given the fact that it's a non-contending team because unloading Beltran and Reyes are a huge part of why it's going to be a non-contending team.