Tuesday, July 17, 2018

N.Y. Mets: Jacob deGrom Suddenly Becomes an Urgent Matter

From the desk of:  HEAD-BUTTING MR. MET


So Much for Wishing Upon an All-Star

New York Mets: Jacob deGrom's Agent Fires Precautionary Shot Across Bow of S.S. Wilpon; Issues Club Pay or Trade Ultimatum.

Jacob deGrom's agent has spoken.  He told the Mets in no uncertain terms to either sign his client to an extension, or trade him.  I was still somewhat conflicted over the matter as recently as last night's Sunday night METSian Podcast.  But thanks in part to Jacob's agent (Brodie Van Wagenen) my mind is now clear.

Do I want deGrom traded?

No.  Why would I?

Long hair or short, he is an Amazin talent in the midst of his prime years as an athlete.  Jacob leads MLB with a 1.68 ERA and 2.32 FIP.  He's presently allowing a career low 6.6 hits per nine innings while averaging a career high 10.2 strikeouts per nine innings pitched.  Now in his fifth season with the club, he owns a 2.78 career ERA through 126 starts and 804 innings pitched.  Throw in winning a pennant, and suffice it to say his body of work already qualifies him as an all-time great Mets hurler. 

But with regards to any potential contract extension, what exactly does deGrom's agent have in mind? After all, Jacob is now 30-years old as of June.  Not old by any stretch, however, he's no spring chicken where it concerns long-term monetary commitments.  At first glance, it appears deGrom and his agent have no leverage.  In fact, the Mets maintain institutionalized control over deGrom for another two years.  Thus, the Mets front office presently holds the high ground.  They can do nothing if they chose, albeit with great folly.  Otherwise, deGrom's potential annual number means little to me.  However, the Mets should not pay deGrom a single penny beyond the age of thirty-five.  Said another way, I'm open to a three-year extension.  But anything more is completely out of the question.

There's a saying that life's the least popular decisions wind up being the best decisions.  Therefore, I do believe it's in the Mets best interest to trade deGrom, and do it now.  His worth is at an all-time high, to date.  The longer they wait, the less they can expect in return.  A contending club with talent to spare, knowingly receiving and elite pitcher replete with low cost certainty and two years of institutional control makes for a intriguing, if not a very motivated trade partner - the exact kind of trade partner the Mets need at this very moment.  Therefore I say strike while the iron is hot, lest it cools offs by the Winter Meetings.

I further my argument with words once spoken by the great Branch Rickey: "...through quantity comes quality."

The Mets have spent the last two seasons making abundantly clear their need for young players upon which to build a new sustainable competitive future.  Hence the reason Omar Minaya is serving a third tour in Flushing.  But even he can't replenish the farm system soon enough.  That's why at this very moment the most effective way of acquiring both quantity and quality is by trading (reluctantly) the gifted Jacob deGrom.

If anything, Jacob deGrom's agent may have unwittingly helped the Mets along by eliminating any potential front office struggle.  The Mets now run less risk of appearing typically wishy-washy.  On the contrary ... they no longer need to seek out potential suitors.  Instead, they now have the luxury of pitting the field against one another.

Look no further than Baltimore and how they completely mismanaged their most valuable asset.  Knowing all along they weren't going to meet Manny Machado's ask, they failed to trade him two years ago, and again last year.  Should they trade him this season, they'll be receiving only a fraction of what they could have recovered had they acted previously with any sense of timeliness and conviction.

Lesson being think long, think wrong. 

Time is of the essence, act with conviction, sell high, maximize the return.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Say what you feel. The worse comment you can make is the one you do not make.