Skip to content

The Mets inch closer to Michael Bourn: they may offer a four-year deal

Feb 6, 2013, 9:26 AM EDT

Boras thinking

The Michael Bourn stalemate had previously been described as Bourn wanting a five year deal and the Mets being unwilling to go beyond three.  Viva compromise, as Joel Sherman notes in the middle of his piece about the Scott Boras-Mets game of chicken, that Sandy Alderson has hinted he will go as many as four years for Bourn.

It’s a good piece beyond that nugget, as it notes the usual Boras pattern: bluffs, followed by bluffs being called by teams, followed by Boras shocking everyone and actually finding deals that more or less matched the bluffs.  He’s a fascinating dude.

As of now it’s hard to see who else has a real interest in Bourn besides the Mets. But it was hard to see who else was going to sign a lot of Boras clients just before they signed big deals.

 

  1. chill1184 - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:31 AM

    Please no

  2. albertmn - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:44 AM

    Can teams do sign and trades in MLB? The loss of the 1st round pick is causing Bourn and Lohse to not sign quickly. Something tells me they are not. I also seem to recall that they can’t trade draft picks.

    But, if sign and trade deals and trading of draft picks were allowed, a team that wants Bourn or Lohse could trade their 1st rounder, and get a little something back in addition to the player instead of the current all or nothing on losing the pick.

    • jonrox - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:50 AM

      No, that would be considered collusion. Also, you are correct that teams can’t trade draft picks

    • chill1184 - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:56 AM

      Its not just the loss of the pick it also kills a teams draft pool money for the current season’s draft

      • paperlions - Feb 6, 2013 at 1:24 PM

        It doesn’t actually have that effect. Teams lose draft pool money if they fail to sign the picks. Agents figured this out early last year, so a late 1st rounder has a lot of leverage to get a deal close to slot. For example, the 20th pick this year has a slot amount of $1.85M. If the team fails to sign that pick, they lose then entire amount from the draft pool (as well as the player), if they sign the guy for $1.65M, the get the player and have an “extra” $200K to sign other guys. The effect of the lost money is really negligible compared to losing the pick itself because the way it is set up essentially protects draftees from being low balled by teams….aside from the first few picks, you won’t see teams saving a lot of money compared to the slot amount.

  3. crispybasil - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:55 AM

    Another question along the lines of the above: is there an “expiration date” on losing that first round pick? e.g. If the Mets sign Bourn at some point once the season has started? I’m assuming, “no,” but just curious.

    • chill1184 - Feb 6, 2013 at 9:57 AM

      From what I’ve read the compensation expires on the day of the MLB draft in June, which anyone who picks him up doesn’t lose their pick and draft pool money.

      • crispybasil - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:02 AM

        Interesting. Thanks for the info.

      • bolweevils2 - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:18 AM

        I wonder if Bourn might be best served to sit out the first 3 months of the season and sign after the draft?

      • chill1184 - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:22 AM

        @bolweevils2

        If he wants the big money that was expecting to get that would be his best approach.

  4. jeffbbf - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:15 AM

    Go for it, Mets! As a Cub fan, I whole-heartedly endorse a huge, long-term contract that costs you pick #11 in the 2013 draft for a 30 yr old, .270 hitter who relies on speed as his asset, yet strikes out almost 25% of the time. Oh yeah – hit .238 in the 2nd half. Love the trend! He should be the last piece you need to win the East Division this year – money well spent.

    • bolweevils2 - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:23 AM

      No, they’ve said they won’t do the deal if they have to give up the draft pick. Though, they could change their mind I guess.

      And we don’t know how huge the prospective deal might be yet. I’d say it has to exceed $10M a year for sure, so it won’t be cheap. But it may not come close to the $15M a year Boras is asking for.

  5. giantboy99 - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:15 AM

    Another dumb move by a dumb franchise

  6. Jason @ IIATMS - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

    Boras has ZERO leverage. Offer him the deal YOU want to offer and if it’s not good enough, hang up, walk out, and move on.

    Why GM’s kowtow to his demands is beyond me.

    Ditto for Loshe. He wants $15M per year for 5 years? Har har har. Here’s $10M per for 3, with an option. Don’t like it? Best of luck.

  7. missthemexpos - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

    Boras looks to be in deep thought in that picture, perhaps pondering the possibility of mystery teams bidding for his remaining free agents.

  8. DonRSD - Feb 6, 2013 at 10:53 AM

    Keep that 1st round (#11 pick).
    We are still 2-3 seasons away from contending. Bourne is NOT the difference.

    Homegrown talent is a better option. Keep the farm system healthy

    LET’S GO METS!!!

  9. dukepatrol - Feb 6, 2013 at 11:01 AM

    So to the people who want to see the Mets spend 2-3 years more rebuilding -You are willing to shell out $150 + to go to Citi field to see a non contending team with the outfield they have now? Bourn is a professional BB player. The guys they have out there now are only 50%. I don’t want the Mets to over pay but they need a real outfield.
    As far as losing a pic, how many prospects actually make it and thrive? I’m not saying if there is a Stassberg,Wheeler etc ,but that’s what they are-Prospects

    • jeffbbf - Feb 6, 2013 at 12:25 PM

      Bourne’s WAR was 6.0. A career-high number. So, let’s say he does it again . That would make him worth, what…7 wins assuming whoever might play CF in his stead is below replacement level. That brings the Mets up from, say, 70 wins to 77 wins? Let me get my wallet out!

  10. randygnyc - Feb 6, 2013 at 11:06 AM

    Say what you will about boras, and I’ll probably agree with most of it, but he’s a magician. Makes deals out of thin air, literally. His track record is off the charts. Funny how there’s only 32 GM’s, and he finds a sucker, every time (aberrations withstanding, ie Madsen etc)

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Can Angels recoup loss of Richards?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (4753)
  2. M. Cuddyer (2493)
  3. K. Bryant (2304)
  4. W. Myers (1962)
  5. G. Richards (1956)
  1. H. Ramirez (1902)
  2. D. Ortiz (1870)
  3. A. Cashner (1806)
  4. J. Hamilton (1782)
  5. A. McCutchen (1756)