Bay to Mets

greenbeans · Post #1 » by **greenbeans** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:24 pm

4/66 with a vesting option is the last I heard.

Oughta be fun watching him in left come 2013.

Wade2k6 · Post #2 » by **Wade2k6** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:50 pm

Would rather have the Red Sox get desperate and overpay for him, but instead got the Mets. Don't really like Bay, but he is a solid addition for the next few years even though his production will most likely drop due to that ballpark.

greenbeans · Post #3 » by **greenbeans** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:57 pm

It would have atleast made some sense for Boston though, because there will be a hole at dh opening up after next season, so you could move him there.

Wade2k6 · Post #4 » by **Wade2k6** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:15 pm

greenbeans wrote:It would have atleast made some sense for Boston though, because there will be a hole at dh opening up after next season, so you could move him there.

Agreed. I don't think it's a terrible signing for the Mets, especially with their best players coming back healthy this year, but I do expect his production to drop. I also saw someone's twitter (forget who, but take it for what its worth) that said the Red Sox found something wrong medically and the Mets are also aware of this.

CentralQB5 · Post #5 » by **CentralQB5** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:49 pm

i have no clue why he didnt want to stay in boston

greenbeans · Post #6 » by **greenbeans** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 10:00 pm

CentralQB5 wrote:i have no clue why he didnt want to stay in boston

He did, according to everything I read. he just wanted that 6mil and the option more.

VinnyTheMick · Post #7 » by **VinnyTheMick** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:13 pm

CentralQB5 wrote:i have no clue why he didnt want to stay in boston

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWrE6DP86hc

Dr Positivity · Post #8 » by **Dr Positivity** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:17 pm

Is John Lackey really worth 15 mil more than JBay. Pretty good deal for the Mets, I like the length especially

Wade2k6 · Post #9 » by **Wade2k6** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:09 am

^^ The Bay deal is 4 years 66 million or 5 years and up to around 80 million. The Red Sox gave Lackey a 5 year deal, so it's pretty much the same amount of money per year.

Post #10 » by **sunshinekids99** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:49 am

I think it's a horrible deal for the Mets. It's a bad ballpark for Bay and his defense is only going to get worse.

He should have signed the deal the Sox offered him in July, he wanted to test the market and that is what he gets. He didn't want to sign with the Mets, but he had no other options. I think he really wanted to see Seattle get involved, but that never really happened. Oh well I'm happy, I didn't want him back in Boston to begin with, but the Sox still do need to find a bat.

CentralQB5 · Post #11 » by **CentralQB5** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 5:22 am

^^ It is a horrible deal for the mets....the mets need alot more than a 30 hr and 115 rbi season from Bay to turn there problems around. I think it was a waste of money for them IMO.

Post #12 » by **sunshinekids99** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 12:04 pm

i don't think Bay touches those numbers with the Mets. If I'm him I may have tried to get even a one year deal from the Red Sox or try and get the Giants or Mariners involved with that. Then take my chances the following season.

Wade2k6 · Post #13 » by **Wade2k6** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:36 pm

CentralQB5 wrote:^^ It is a horrible deal for the mets....the mets need alot more than a 30 hr and 115 rbi season from Bay to turn there problems around. I think it was a waste of money for them IMO.

I don't think the 4 year deal was horrible, but if the 5th year is guaranteed then yeah I'd say it's a year too much. And the majority of the Mets problems were injuries (yes even more-so then pitching depth), they're getting their team back healthy this year so I don't see them being nearly as bad as last year.

Post #14 » by **Flash3** » Fri Jan 1, 2010 3:04 am

The Mets continue to overspend in areas they really don't need. They need 2 more quality SPs behind Santana, and they still haven't found them in so many years. They spend and spend yet they get no where.

Wade2k6 · Post #15 » by **Wade2k6** » Fri Jan 1, 2010 10:35 pm

What 2 quality starters were they going to find in this years free agent class? They would just be overpaying for average starters. Next years FA class has much more quality starters and they will probably be agressive next off-season.

Swammy · Post #16 » by **Swammy** » Sat Jan 2, 2010 5:25 am

Flash3 wrote:The Mets continue to overspend in areas they really don't need. They need 2 more quality SPs behind Santana, and they still haven't found them in so many years. They spend and spend yet they get no where.

Very true. Mets will not be better than Philly or Atlanta

Post #17 » by **HMFFL** » Sun Jan 3, 2010 4:27 am

I expected Atlanta to get involved, but I guess not, and I wonder what Chipper thinks about it since he wanted Bay during the past. Pitt rejected Atlanta's trade and ended up trading Bay to Boston.

Very good addition to the Mets, but how many HR's will Bay hit at that the home park?

VinnyTheMick · Post #18 » by **VinnyTheMick** » Sun Jan 3, 2010 5:08 am

HMFFL wrote:
Very good addition to the Mets, but how many HR's will Bay hit at that the home park?

Exactly. At the end of the day, his power got him that contract.

Relentless88 · Post #19 » by **Relentless88** » Mon Jan 4, 2010 4:18 am

Also how many more years can Bay play the field. At least in the AL he could DH. Bay at left field for the next 4 years is pretty scary for Mets fans I think.

Post #20 » by **Manhattan Project** » Mon Jan 4, 2010 10:16 pm

At least now Minaya can say, hey look I did something to try and improve this team. Honestly I don't care for Bay at all and would rather see it spent on players that would have defined roles. I don't envision Bay putting up "Power" numbers at all. Considering Minaya once gave up Bay on the cheap and the Mets got rid of him already that is not very promising.

I really thought we would offer Guerrero an incentive based deal considering the attachment to Minaya.