My Twitter Conversation with Ray Ratto

265 total views
Embed
  1. I'm a fan of Ray Ratto's (@RattoCSN).  He's a SF sports writer; I'm a NYC sports fan.  He writes a lot about hockey; I don't know much if anything about hockey.   But I follow him on Twitter anyway, because I think he's generally analytical about his approach to things, and he's interesting. 


    The first tweet, below, through me for a loop.  The Mets made a conscious decision to go for a top prospect instead of the salary dump, and by the time the tweet hit my stream, it was clear that the Mets had gotten that top prospect.  The assumption that they had *also* cleared Beltran's salary off the books seemed implausible at best.  (I'm still amazed that the Mets ended up saving $2MM on the deal.)  


    I figured this was pretty well agreed upon.  Ratto's tweet suggested otherwise, so I replied.

  2. Two things:


    1) My point about K-Rod isn't just wrong.  And the points about Perez and Castillo are kind of weak.  (The Mets could have kept both in hopes of later trading them, saving $1 or $2MM *maybe*, but that's unlikely.)  I should have instead pointed out that the Mets are keeping Reyes through the season, at a cost, from here on out, of at least $4MM.


    2) Ratto doesn't reply to me.  Again, he reiterates that the Mets should be looking to shed salary, and doing anything else is "goofy."  But a few minutes later, he moves onto another topic, and having been ignored already, I move on.


    But fast forward a few hours, and he's on it again.  (I don't know what he means by the Mets "cav[ing] so severely on Beltran," but I assume that again is a reference to them paying the Giants his salary.)

  3. Again, he reiterates that the Mets should be looking to shed salary, and doing anything else is "goofy."  But a few minutes later, he moves onto another topic, and having been ignored already, I move on.


    But fast forward a few hours, and he's on it again.  (I don't know what he means by the Mets "cav[ing] so severely on Beltran," but I assume that again is a reference to them paying the Giants his salary.)

  4. I did.  I couldn't find anything which consistently said that the Mets were going to trade Beltran in a salary dump.  I'm sure there are some articles out there which suggest it as a possibility.  But I couldn't find one which said that the Mets were going to specifically try and accomplish that feat.  I did, however, find many rumors which said that the Mets were going to eat Beltran's salary and hope for a top prospect.
  5. I linked to a Metsblog post by Michael Baron, and specifically called out the following:


    "All along, the buzz has been the Mets are seeking top prospects in any deal for Beltran, and they"re willing to pick up most, if not all of what"s owed to him down the stretch of the season. I can"t imagine the Mets will pick up a lot of what"s owed if they can"t command premier talent in return, but given the apparent market for Beltran right now, especially inside the National League East, I would expect nothing less than a top prospect in return…"

  6. I'm not entirely sure why he cites to Adam Rubin here.  Yes, the MetsBlog/Michael Baron post mentions Rubin in it, but well before what I cited to, and the Rubin part is a non-sequitur. 


    At this point, I figured Ratto and I were probably talking past each other.  I tried to redirect it back to what he originally said and referred to the first tweet in the storyline.

  7. My point here isn't articulated well.  I'm trying to say that if the Mets spend $4MM here and get a prospect, they're saving money in the long run.  A lot of money, potentially, as Wheeler is going to be dirt cheap for three years (pre-arb) and potentially a big bargain for three after that (arb years).


Like
Share

Share

Facebook
Google+