It’s a foregone conclusion that the Mets will exercise the $5 million dollar team option on R.A. Dickey sometime in the next 2-3 days. Then there’s the matter of extension talks which Sandy Alderson said would be a top priority.
The question is how many years is too many years?
A two year extension would make Dickey a Met through the 2015 season when he will be 40 years old. Anything beyond two years seems like a huge risk, especially if we’re talking about $15 million dollars in average salary. That’s Jason Bay territory.
So I posed the question to our staff…
If R.A. Dickey demands more than a guaranteed 2-year extension (3 years in total with 2013 option), do you give it to him or do we look at trading him while his value is at its highest?
Jessica - I think Dickey has proved himself to be an ace pitcher. In the absence of Johan Santana, Dickey has been the go-to guy to stop the bleeding. He could also be a good mentor to players like Harvey and Wheeler. And we all know he’s like 28 in knuckleball years. He deserves the three years in my mind.
Nick - I would offer Dickey first a two year deal, then two and an option and then three if need be. I would only trade him if he wants more than three years and max of $45MM over the 3 years. I think he’s just the kind of player and pitcher we need here in the future.
Robert P. - I love RA! However, I think the Mets should move him while his value is at its peak. The issue with Dickey is that even if he gets that third year, will the Mets be ready to contend at that point? I’m not so sure they will be. So, while there is an excess of starting pitching working its way through the ranks, trade the shiny new penny and fill a few of the holes elsewhere on the roster.
Mitch - If Dickey asks for three years the Mets have a major decision to make. Dickey is now a fan favorite, so can the Mets afford to lose him? We know he throws his knuckleball with more velocity than any other knuckleballer ever has, which scares some people, but nobody knows for sure if it is having any negative effects on his potential longevity. Aside from the abdominal tear, he showed no signs of breaking down this year at all. The question the Mets have to ask themselves is whether or not they believe that Dickey was a one-hit wonder or is he going to give them 15-20 wins per year over the next three years? My heart says sign him, but my brain says trade him.
XtreemIcon – I think a two-year extension is the most I’d guarantee on top of the option. So I’d guarantee three in total. I would also offer a 2016 option if he needs to have it to sign, but I would not guarantee 2016. More than three guaranteed over the option would be a reason for a trade.
Clare - I can’t see trading R.A but if he is insistent and the Mets don’t think he has more than 2 years left, they might want to explore options.
Barry - I would listen to any trade offers for Dickey before signing him longterm. I still say if the Mets can get a package including a young catcher, righthanded hitting major-league ready outfielder and a pitching prospect, they should consider it seriously.
Joe S. - I would be fine with 2 years guaranteed and a mutual option for a 3rd year with a buyout. Even though he’s a knuckleballer he still not a spring chicken and the last I checked, even though we’d like to think he isn’t, he’s still human. I think if that is offered and Dickey turns it down, then yes, trade him.
Rob S. - I would say no more than 3 years for Dickey. And it also depends what happens with David Wright. The only chance we even have of keeping RA is to sign Wright first.
Jessep - Dickey has to understand his open market value. Based on his age and repertoire he has to understand that if the Mets offer him a 2-year deal then he’s getting a great offer. A guaranteed job through 2015 is not a bad thing if you’re R.A. Dickey. I’m not opposed to some sort of vesting option for 2016 based on performance, but you have to set some limits here.
Gregg - If R.A. Dickey wants more than a guaranteed two year deal, I think Sandy should give it to him. With a knuckler, I don’t see age being an issue, and it’s always good to have a knuckler in the rotation to throw the opposition’s timing off at the plate.
Dan - I don’t have an issue giving Dickey a three tear deal. If the terms come out to be what has been speculated, the Oliver Perez money, then that’s a bargain for us. He’s dominant, durable and extremely likable. He’s a fan favorite and we don’t have many of those right now, especially not ones as good as Dickey is.
Let us know what you think. Chime-in in the comments thread…