Guest Commentary: The New Mets
-by Daniel Smith
Well, it certainly was fun waiting for Carlos Beltran to sign with the team who offered him the most money, but now it's finally over.
Perhaps it's just my nature, but did anyone really doubt that Beltran was going to the Mets, once the final figures were figured out? Sure, the Houston Astros' offer of six years and $100 million was great (further enhanced by the lack of taxes in Texas; say that ten times fast), however, the seven-year, $119 million offer from the Mets just had more juice. Giants fans should know the power of adding another year to a contract even if it's for less money per season, because that is exactly what lured Mike Matheny to move to the Bay Area. St. Louis offered him a two-year contract, and the Giants offered a three-year deal. In multi-year contracts, it's all about the number of years and the total dollars. The average dollars per season isn't quite as important in most cases.
So where does that leave Beltran? In my opinion, utterly and completely stuck.
The Mets have a long way to go before contending for anything is really possible. Another bat is mandatory (Carlos Delgado, perhaps?), and they could still use another starter or two, not only because their rotation isn't very good, but because the ever-fragile Pedro Martinez is always just around the corner from another arm injury.
Last season, the Mets were 71-91 under skipper Art Howe. The only free agents they've acquired of any consequence to this point are Martinez (who they overpaid), and Beltran (who they just plain paid). How much of a difference will these two likely make? We'll do this the simple way: I'm just going to add up the Win Shares for each of the players acquired, and see where that would leave the Mets for 2005:
Beltran: 31 [13 (Royals) + 18 (Astros)]
Martinez: 17
Adding those up we get a total of 48, meaning that those two -- should they generally repeat their performances of 2004 -- should be worth about 16 extra wins for the Mets, or about an 87-75 record. In 2004, if the Mets had an 87-75 record instead of a 71-91 record, it would have meant that they would still have missed the postseason.
Of course, we can't just add on those two players' impact without accounting for those players they are replacing, in this case, Richard Hidalgo and Al Leiter. The Win Shares for those players are as follows:
Richard Hidalgo: 7
Al Leiter: 12
Let’s see ... 48 minus 19 is 29 Win Shares of upgrades, or 10 more wins by replacing Hidalgo with Beltran, and Leiter with Pedro. Now the Mets' 71-91 in 2004 goes to 81-81 in 2005, and that, folks, is not enough. It's not enough to catch the Braves, and it's not enough to contend for the wild card. Heck, that may not be enough to beat out the Phillies and Marlins for 2nd place.
The Mets have likely spent about 7.5 million extra dollars for 10 wins, and would probably have to spend at least $12 million more to get Delgado, which is good for about 6 or 7 more wins. It’s still not enough. While I understand the impetus behind moves like these (keeping up with the Yankees in the media), I don't understand why the Mets don't spend money more intelligently to strive for the real prize: Beating the Atlanta Braves, for once. The Mets have Beltran, and they have Pedro, but they don't have much else.
Well, it certainly was fun waiting for Carlos Beltran to sign with the team who offered him the most money, but now it's finally over.
Perhaps it's just my nature, but did anyone really doubt that Beltran was going to the Mets, once the final figures were figured out? Sure, the Houston Astros' offer of six years and $100 million was great (further enhanced by the lack of taxes in Texas; say that ten times fast), however, the seven-year, $119 million offer from the Mets just had more juice. Giants fans should know the power of adding another year to a contract even if it's for less money per season, because that is exactly what lured Mike Matheny to move to the Bay Area. St. Louis offered him a two-year contract, and the Giants offered a three-year deal. In multi-year contracts, it's all about the number of years and the total dollars. The average dollars per season isn't quite as important in most cases.
So where does that leave Beltran? In my opinion, utterly and completely stuck.
The Mets have a long way to go before contending for anything is really possible. Another bat is mandatory (Carlos Delgado, perhaps?), and they could still use another starter or two, not only because their rotation isn't very good, but because the ever-fragile Pedro Martinez is always just around the corner from another arm injury.
Last season, the Mets were 71-91 under skipper Art Howe. The only free agents they've acquired of any consequence to this point are Martinez (who they overpaid), and Beltran (who they just plain paid). How much of a difference will these two likely make? We'll do this the simple way: I'm just going to add up the Win Shares for each of the players acquired, and see where that would leave the Mets for 2005:
Beltran: 31 [13 (Royals) + 18 (Astros)]
Martinez: 17
Adding those up we get a total of 48, meaning that those two -- should they generally repeat their performances of 2004 -- should be worth about 16 extra wins for the Mets, or about an 87-75 record. In 2004, if the Mets had an 87-75 record instead of a 71-91 record, it would have meant that they would still have missed the postseason.
Of course, we can't just add on those two players' impact without accounting for those players they are replacing, in this case, Richard Hidalgo and Al Leiter. The Win Shares for those players are as follows:
Richard Hidalgo: 7
Al Leiter: 12
Let’s see ... 48 minus 19 is 29 Win Shares of upgrades, or 10 more wins by replacing Hidalgo with Beltran, and Leiter with Pedro. Now the Mets' 71-91 in 2004 goes to 81-81 in 2005, and that, folks, is not enough. It's not enough to catch the Braves, and it's not enough to contend for the wild card. Heck, that may not be enough to beat out the Phillies and Marlins for 2nd place.
The Mets have likely spent about 7.5 million extra dollars for 10 wins, and would probably have to spend at least $12 million more to get Delgado, which is good for about 6 or 7 more wins. It’s still not enough. While I understand the impetus behind moves like these (keeping up with the Yankees in the media), I don't understand why the Mets don't spend money more intelligently to strive for the real prize: Beating the Atlanta Braves, for once. The Mets have Beltran, and they have Pedro, but they don't have much else.