Wright’s Deal Looks Great For Both Sides…

An article by posted on December 1, 2012

I am very happy that David Wright will be a New York Met for the rest of his playing days.

For a while I was quite skeptical that a deal would materialize, considering all the inaccuracies and inconsistencies that were being reported by sources. But the two sides worked diligently through the night until the wee hours of the morning to come to an agreement before the Winter Meetings kickoff in Nashville on Sunday. In that sense, we can all breathe a sigh of relief and move on knowing that our franchise player is set to finish his career with the Mets.

One of the great aspects of this deal is how the deal is reportedly structured. As was reported yesterday, Wright wanted the bulk of his contract paid in the middle portion of the 8-year deal so that the Mets would have money to spend on free agents in the early years, while also not becoming a burden in the latter years.

This is something that I found to be both extraordinary and excellent since this will afford the Mets greater flexibility at a time when they need it most. It showed that Wright does place a premium on “winning” and that it wasn’t just about cashing in.

Initially, the $138 million dollars seemed a bit too rich considering Wright will be entering this deal at age 30, but with the team-friendly structure as well as some money being deferred, it certainly makes this deal better than it first appeared.

With his future and legacy now in place, it’s now likely that Wright will be named the team captain. Wright has always demonstrated his leadership for quite some time now and has the respect of everyone in the clubhouse. There is no doubt now, that this is Wright’s team and all that is now needed is the official “C” on his jersey.

In closing, despite all my doubts, the Mets and Wright not only got a deal done, but one that is beneficial and satisfactory for both sides. It was well worth the wait.

Now it is time for R.A. Dickey to get his deal done.

About the Author ()

Comments are closed.