Looking More Like Dickey Stays A Met Without An Extension

An article by posted on December 7, 2012

Updated Post 11:00 AM

Ken Davidoff sums it all up like this:

As we leave R.A. Dickey’s hometown, let’s rank his list of admirers, from big fans down to skeptics.

1. R.A. Dickey

2. The New York Mets

3. The 29 other Major League Baseball teams.

That’s where things appeared to stand as the Mets and the rest of baseball packed up their laptops, slide projectors and blazers and headed home to their respective quarters.

Sandy Alderson once again said yesterday going the middle road with Dickey — taking him into his free-agent season of 2013, as opposed to trading him or signing him to an extension — is not “necessarily the optimal result.” Yet because of the way Dickey is viewed by himself, the Mets and the rest of the industry, it may be the most sensible result.

“If that’s the one that ultimately transpires,” Alderson said, “then we may be happy with it.”

That was a far-fetched option two weeks ago, but it’s one I’ve been leaning toward since then. Why do I feel that way? A few reasons:

  • Alderson want’s far too much in return for him. A difference maker or two top prospects, not one.
  • Other teams are as afraid of trading for Dickey as the Mets are in extending him.
  • Most teams still view the knuckleball as a gimmick pitch and don’t want to be the ones holding the bag if his performance goes the other way.
  • Dickey is 38 years old and while his elbow is out of the woods in terms of breakdown, his shoulder and the rest of his body isn’t.
  • Dickey is still a rental, and teams will not trade seven years of their number one prospect for one year of a knuckleballer. Desperation deals don’t go down in December, they happen in July. Mets could probably get more by waiting until then.

Original Post 10:15 AM

I guess other teams must be wondering why any team would trade a reigning Cy Young Award winner, God knows I frequently ask myself that question. But here is what the the Dallas Morning News believes is the reason:

In trying to find starting pitchers to plug into their rotation, the Rangers have been connected to reigning NL Cy Young winner (and former Ranger) R.A. Dickey in the last week.

Dickey, who’s entering the final year of his deal with the Mets, could be traded despite having just been named the NL’s top pitcher in 2012. The Mets don’t seem to be ready to compete just yet, and Dickey, at 38, may not play long enough to see the team make it back to relevancy.

Wow, they don’t think we’d be relevant even by 2015… Is that what other teams are thinking?

Yesterday, ESPN’s Keith Law said the Phillies deal for Ben Revere made no sense for the Phillies because “they robbed Peter to pay Paul”, Law wrote. “Now instead of a vacancy in the outfield they have a vacancy in the rotation.”

Isn’t that exactly what the Mets are trying to do by trading R.A. Dickey? Only if losing Vance Worley is a vacancy, than losing a Cy Young winner must be a cataclysmic, life sucking, black hole.

I mention it because the day before, Law weighed in on Dickey for Myers calling it a nice deal for all parties involved.

Is a little consistency too much to ask for from a $500K a year national journalist?

About the Author ()

I'm a lifelong Mets fan who loves writing and talking about the Amazins' 24/7. From the Miracle in 1969 to the magic of 1986, and even the near misses in '73 and '00, I've experienced it all - the highs and the lows. I started Mets Merized Online in 2005 to feed my addiction and interact with other passionate Met fans like you. Follow me on Twitter @metsmerized.

Comments are closed.