Skip to content

Mets official: we have “no shot” to sign Jose Reyes

Nov 4, 2011, 10:30 AM EDT

reyes getty Getty Images

Joel Sherman of the New York Post spoke with someone in the Mets front office and that someone thinks the team has “no shot” to re-sign Jose Reyes:

“My instinct is no shot. I think if [GM] Sandy [Alderson] asked for it, ownership would follow his recommendations. But where the money is going to go it is not going to be the best way to spend the money, not on one player and not one player with this hamstring thing.”

“No shot” seems kind of extreme, but it doesn’t seem all that wrong.

There are a lot of teams who could use an elite shortstop and who are willing to take the risk on “this hamstring thing.” I really have a hard time on Reyes having to take the discount that Sherman suggests the Mets would need him to give them in order to sign him.  And Alderson’s m.o. has never been to be top-heavy in terms of salary and star power. He’s probably far more content to use the money earmarked for Reyes for other things.

  1. SmackSaw - Nov 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM

    What a sham. Largest media market in MLB, and they can’t resign him. The Yankees should sign him to a 10-year $200 million dollar contract in the off chance Jeter retires in two years. Where’s Bud? I would think that having the Mets viable would be in the best interest of baseball. Mets fans should occupy the Wilpon’s office. They’re getting screwed.

  2. halladaysbiceps - Nov 4, 2011 at 10:56 AM

    It’s clear that the Wilpons and their Ponzi investments killed the Mets financially and their ability to have a top 3 payroll, like they did for years and years. The Mets were always getting the big free agent names, along with the Yankees and Dodgers. Now look at them. They can’t even sign their best player because of a lack of payroll.

    That being said, Alderson is no dummy. If he has a limited payroll, he would be wise to invest what he has in more pitching (bullpen #1) and hope that their farm system can continue to develop more everyday ballplayers. Pitching will be more of a priority, especially if they are moving the fences in there.

    If Reyes leaves, David Wright stays put and is not dealt. The Mets will not lose both. That fan base will kill them for it.

    • sdelmonte - Nov 4, 2011 at 11:40 AM

      If they got a lot of prospects for Wright (especially pitching), I would be fine with a Wright trade. I like him but he’s not going to be the guy to lead the Mets back. I just don’t see it.

      But then I am in the minority of Mets fans who is willing to let Sandy rebuild the team over a period of years.

      • halladaysbiceps - Nov 4, 2011 at 11:45 AM

        I actually agree with you. I think at this point, they should let Alderson tear it down and rebuild. He’s the prefect guy to do it. How long are they away from contending again for the NL East? 3-5 years? Probably the latter.

  3. dohpey28 - Nov 4, 2011 at 10:57 AM

    What a joke the Mets’ ownership is. They claim to lose 20 million dollars or however much, however they don’t include any money from SNY in that. The owners take the 50 million dollar profit from SNY, live off of it and pay off some of their personal debt, and give the ‘Mets’ no part of it. What a crock.

    Baseball didn’t allow McCord to this with the Dodger’s tv contract. Why do the Wilpons get away with it, because they own SNY? How is that fair?

    • halladaysbiceps - Nov 4, 2011 at 11:18 AM

      The Wilpons are personal friends of Darth Selig. That’s why they get away with it. This is an established fact.

      • dohpey28 - Nov 4, 2011 at 11:40 AM


      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Nov 4, 2011 at 1:48 PM


  4. sdelmonte - Nov 4, 2011 at 11:45 AM

    I think the Mets still have a chance. But it depends entirely on whether the teams making offers are ones that Reyes really wants to play for, and whether he really, really wants to be a Met. In theory, a player could say “I like it here” and go for less money or less years. It’s not impossible. And maybe, just maybe Reyes will not want to sign with the Nats, even if they are a team with great promise.

    But no, I am not deluding myself.

    The big question to me, the one that will get Sandy raked over the coals in the blogosphere unfairly, is “why didn’t he trade Reyes on July 31?” And even though I know the market would have been light and the hamstring would have been a big obstacle, it’s hard not to wonder a little what holes could have been plugged. Well, at least there will be draft picks.

    • miketreedy - Nov 4, 2011 at 12:38 PM

      Yea, it made no sense not to trade him. If you already knew you weren’t going to be able to sign him then trade him. Hello…..

  5. yournuts - Nov 5, 2011 at 2:28 AM

    No one is going to pay players what they used to. Those days are gone.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. J. Baez (2224)
  2. B. Crawford (2194)
  3. H. Pence (2153)
  4. B. Harper (2083)
  5. C. Correa (1951)