Michael Bourn

I don't think it's any contest that the Yankees' farm system has been better than ours over the last, well, forever except for our glory years in the 80s.  They do benefit from money a little there though, as they were always able wave money around to get a player who dropped from the losing teams that couldn't pay the bonuses.  Still though you can't argue that they've had a much better farm system than we have.  You don't even need to list names.

The difference is in the idea that they are so careful when it comes to free agents.  Stop already.  They had plenty of free agents fail, but have just been able to either move them along while paying their salaries or pick up more players to compensate.  No other organization can do that.

Have they been successful in picking up and developing players?  Of course, their insane winning record proves that.  However they do play on a different level money-wise than any other team in baseball, and it makes free agent signings far less risky than they are for anyone else. 

I agree that's the right strategy, but I would even say they have these players already:

Duda
Tejada
Nieuwenhuis
Murphy

That group isn't that much different from a group like Santana, Heep, Hearn, Knight...Johnson is kind of a different situation in that he took a few years to hit his stride (after Knight left of course).

The truth is the more I think about the Ellsbury idea the more I think it's possible if they don't sign Bourn.  Then it does follow the blueprint which by the way I agree with.  You have two (or possibly three with Syndergaard) big-impact pitchers, Davis and Wright on the corners, and decent infield, and then you can sign Ellsbury and a big hitter for the OF.  There you go, it really is like 1985 again. 

Mets are going strong after Bourn according to recent reports. I could see Ellsbury as a fallback option, but its no guarantee we'd be the ones he chooses to sign with.

Yeah reported today that Wright and Davis are pushing for Bourn to be signed by the Mets and Wright has also been in talks with him to convince him to play here.

Is Boras playing a game to get a bigger contract by saying he has better offers?

He's playing a game of chicken, but according to most insiders only a few other teams are interested and only if Boras lowers the price.  Which means the Mets are still said to be the frontrunner right now.

Word is that the Mets FO now feels compelled to make a move here because attendance is declining rapidly, not just in NY but down in Port St. Lucie as well. Not many people are happy with the Mets' lack of moves or free agent signings over the past 2-3 years and since most fans don't expect the Mets to compete at all the way the roster is set now, too many people aren't enthused about buying tickets.

This is another huge reason why the Mets will most likely end up signing Michael Bourn. 

That's also the reason why anyone who thinks the payroll is going to stay at current levels isn't being realistic.  You need to put a product on the field to make money, especially here.  There's a threshold level where the lack of attendance starts to hurt you even more.  

A low payroll has a multiplier effect in both attendance and memorabilia.  You need excitement to drive both in this super competitive market.

What's going down now is the Mets are working to reach a deal with Bourn in principle. Already made him a few offers.  Once that is settled the Mets can ask MLB to make a ruling on their 1st round pick argument.  If the Mets are successful at keeping their 1st round pick, Bourn will be signed.

noticed that the Mets signed Patterson formally of the Cubs.

Still only 33 and has been a quality cf/leadoff hitter in the past.

Just in case they dont get Bourne perhaps. 

Reasons to sign Bourn..

1. He fits the Mets needs for a center fielder and a legitimate leadoff hitter. About as close to Reyes production as they're gonna get in the leadoff spot and about as close as Beltran as they're gonna get in center defensively, all in one player.

2. Best free agent available at a time with little competition to get into a bidding war with. He's also not asking for an overly ridiculous contract.

3. Mets need to sell tickets badly. Bringing in Bourn will make games closer and the season more exciting. Will also get the Mets a few more wins. Makes the Mets at least an average team as opposed to them being pathetic again this year if they don't sign him.

4. There are no outfielders in the Mets farm system even close to ready, and there aren't many top outfielders in free agency over the next 2-3 years either.

5. Bourn is black. The Mets have no black players secured to the major league roster and no star black players. This is kind of embarrassing considering the demographics of the city and the fact that the Mets dedicated their rotunda/stadium to a black player who broke the color barrier in baseball.

6. Not many players have a problem with this guy on the field or in the clubhouse wherever he plays.

7. Davis and Wright will be seeing a lot more fastballs with Bourn batting in front of them. 


I know Bourn isn't exactly a superstar or anything, but I think he's enough of a difference maker to make him worth signing in these times, especially after seeing the way things have been going over the past 4 years. 

Whether the Mets keep their pick and sign Bourn or lose the pick and don't sign Bourn is now in the hands of an arbitrator.

[http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b
aseball/mets/mets-motivated-sign-bo
urn-first-round-draft-pick-article-
1.1257452?localLinksEnabled=false]

ATW,  I somewhat agree.

1.  True
2.  True in regards to being the best position player available, 15 M for 3-4 years for a team that is not seriously positioned to win and is still rebuilding is not sound use of a limited asset.
3.  Winning sells tickets, did the Marlins sell tickets because Jose Reyes was on a bad team or did the new stadium sell tickets?  A few more wins could cost us a better draft slot.
4.  Close is relative to need.
5.  An immaterial factor in putting together a team.  It is condescending.
6.  True of Bourn, but also true of most players.
7.  True, but only 30% of the time.   

Rather than spending 40-60 M on Michael Bourn, I would prefer the Mets to use that money in trades for 5 - 21-23 year old outfielders. 
 

I have been saying all off season that the Mets need to sign Bourn but just as important is signing/trading/developing a righty power outfield bat and signing/trading/developing an entire bullpen.


Bourn should have won a gold glove this past year as he had by far the greatest range according to defensive metric charts.


Bourn, Tejada, Murphy, Wright, Davis, Duda/Byrd, Nieuwenhuis/Cowgill, Buck (till d'Arnaud ready).
Wright and Davis need guys ahead of them to drive in.


Bourn addresses the need for up the middle defense, a leadoff hitter and addresses the problem of lack of team speed.


Wright needs a few legit players around him or why did Alderson resign him? Wright can't linger in baseball hell. If that is the case the Mets should trade him, let Davis become the new face of the franchise, promote Flores to play 3B and get the missing pieces to rebuild from trading Wright.


The fans deserve a few legit ball players to go see.               

Yeah, I also agree with ATW on all points except #5.  It really is demeaning, and if anything both Jackie Robinson and civil rights leaders would say the whole point is NOT to hire someone based on race but only based on ability.  If you go out and specifically look for someone of a certain race to represent "diversity" it's patronizing.

Otherwise thogh I agree with the other points.  He just fits so well with this team that it makes sense to bring him in.  He's a table-setter and will put pressure on pitchers just like Reyes did.  Hey, if Ellsbury is available mid-season and Bourn is already here, maybe that's the outfield situation solved there. Two good defensive players with speed would fit the Citi Field mold well.  Eventually get power in LF (Duda as a fall back) and get the power mainly at 1B, 3B and C.  I know I thought Ellsbury was unrealistic when responding to met4ever's (I think it was) posts, but he really would be a great fit also.

THIS could be the moment to let the purse strings go a little in antipation of the money to come off the books next year. 

Oh and Yogi, Bourn isn't going to cost $60MM.  You're probably talking mid-30s here.  If he was going for more there'd be a bigger bidding war than there is. 

Say what you want about #5, but its true. Should have a diverse team and right now the Mets have zero black players. There's nothing demeaning about pointing out any benefit of bringing one or some in. Almost every place of employment/job you apply for in your life purposely creates a diverse workforce.

. Should have a diverse team and right now the Mets have zero black players

Why isn't this post about Asians?  The Mets don't have any of those either.  Maybe they should target Shin-Soo instead?

Give me the best player per dollar and he could be green for all I care. 

yeah, bring in an asian too, problem is there's very few of them in MLB.  But I'll make this point which is related to my point... if you remember when Alderson was hired, during his press conference, he was asked by asians(reporters and fans) if he would bring in or recruit some asian players. What does that tell you? (at least from a marketing standpoint) Its what they wanted.

Maybe they should target Shin-Soo instead? 

Look to all my other points for your answer. Bourn is a better player and fits the Mets' needs more, simple as that.

Look to all my other points for your answer. Bourn is a better player and fits the Mets' needs more, simple as that.

I'll take both if I can have them.  I do agree with the other 6 points as do many of the others, I just don't think his race should be a factor.