Mets have interest in long term deal for Michael Bourn

[jomota]

They always have. That's why Stratomatic outsells tickets to MLB games.

What I liked about Strat O Matic was that I could pitch Koufax every day.

That was real fantasy baseball?

[Sick Of It All]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseba...ange-1.4526072

It's going to take a five-year contract to sign free-agent outfielder Michael Bourn, a source confirmed Monday, and the Mets have balked at that demand.
The Mets have approached free agents slowly, hoping that prices will fall as the start of spring training draws near. But that strategy has yet to pay off in their efforts to find an outfielder.
Bourn, 30, is the best remaining position player left on the free-agent market. The two-time Gold Glove Award winner is regarded as an excellent centerfielder whose speed translates well on the bases. Though Bourn is neither the power bat nor the righthanded hitter that the Mets have been seeking, he nevertheless would improve the Mets' current collection of platoon outfielders.
The Mets have been willing to offer backloaded multiyear contracts if it means signing a player who would upgrade the outfield. But it's unclear whether Bourn -- and his agent, Scott Boras -- would entertain such an arrangement. The Mariners reportedly also are interested in Bourn, who hit .274 with nine homers, 57 RBIs, 42 stolen bases and 96 runs scored for the Braves last season.
Even if the Mets were to find common ground on money, they likely would be forced to forfeit this year's 11th overall amateur draft pick as compensation for signing Bourn. The Mets have looked into an exemption that would allow them to keep their draft choice on grounds that they originally held a top 10 pick, protected under the collective bargaining agreement. Without the exemption, the price for Bourn might be too high for the Mets, who are reluctant to lose a first-round selection in the draft.

[YoungStuna28]

Sick, what do you think about this situation? Would you sign Bourn or na?

[thawv]

2/20........that's it!!!! His legs are his game, and they're diminishing quickly!

[PC]

There's no way I'd give Bourn a 5 year deal... Pass

[acerimusdux]

Sick, what do you think about this situation? Would you sign Bourn or na?

I'm thinking I would probably make a real lowball offer. Much as we could use Bourn, his defense is a big part of his value. Guys like that haven't traditionally been valued so highly.

When the Mets signed Mike Cameron in 2004, they got him for 3 years for $19.5M. I think Cameron had similar value at the time. Bourn is a year younger, so he should get the 4th year. Add in 9 years of salary inflation, and maybe he would get $10M a year. Granted, I thought Cameron was a steal at the time, but we also didn't give up any draft pick for him.

That said, I would probably still make an offer like 4/44. I'm not expecting that to be enough, but I have no idea what teams like Seattle and Baltimore are bidding. And I'm not eager to give up that draft pick for a guy like Bourn, unless he really falls into our lap. Much as I'm tempted to go higher, just due to the desperate lack of outfield talent here, it's probably best not to.

[KingsnQueens7]

I'd keep our pick. Yeah our OF blows right now but Bourn isn't worth that. Speed in a player degrades as someone already mentioned. He wouldn't be worth it.

[Zmaster52]

Might as well keep that 10M and spend it on an outfielder next year.

[Dugmet]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseba...ange-1.4526072

Doesn't matter what Bourne wants if no one is willing to offer it to him.

If Bourne lowered his demands to a 3 year deal and $12-$13 million/season, some team with a protected pick would probably sign him.

Best not to make moves based on desperation.

[Larry M]

I like him but he is not worth losing a draft pick for.

[nyjflightboy#10]

I like him but he is not worth losing a draft pick for.

I'm with you on that. Maybe if he was a couple of years younger I would consider it more strongly. I just don't think he's worth the pick and a 5 yr contract at the age of 30. If it wasn't for the pick I'd sign him to a 2 yr or 3yr deal max.

[The-rock-man]

Definitely save the pick and a 3 yr deal. Otherwise we'll pass.

[nyjflightboy#10]

Sandy Alderson and deputy John Ricco dined with Michael Bourn and agent Scott Boras in Houston last week, Joel Sherman reported.

Still, a match remains a long shot.

Writes Sherman:

It was more a getting-to-know-you session than a dollars-and-cents negotiation, at a time when the dollars and cents remain among the most significant hurdles in doing a deal. The Mets’ strategy has essentially been this: Patiently wait and hope Bourn’s market evaporates as spring training nears, moving him to a) turn to them as the best remaining option and b) lower his financial demands.

However, the chasm remains substantial between the two sides. The Mets do not want to give more than three years to a 30-year-old whose main asset on both sides of the ball is his speed. Also, they wonder if any other team, in late January, is ready to commit more than, say, three years at $36 million-$42 million to Bourn. ... The Bourn camp continues to demand a five-year deal, reasoning he should not get fewer years than Mets castaway Angel Pagan, who is six months older than Bourn and received a four-year, $40 million deal this offseason with San Francisco.

But that brings us to the tricky matter of what kind of draft pick the Mets would lose in compensation should they sign Bourn. The Post has learned the Mets will not ink Bourn without iron-clad assurances they only would lose a second-round pick to do so. They have vowed not to forfeit the 11th pick in June’s draft, no matter how much they could use Bourn to bat leadoff and upgrade what is currently a flimsy outfield assortment.

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/met...ourn-last-week

[wiley6]

I would be willing to go as high as 3yrs/40mil for Bourn if we can get the pick protected. If that does not work, then move on. There are still other holes to fill.

[Marty Mcfly]

I would be willing to go as high as 3yrs/40mil for Bourn if we can get the pick protected. If that does not work, then move on. There are still other holes to fill.

Will they fill them though?

The pick is not going to get protected, they were never going to give up Wheeler etc for Upton, are they just dragging this out for as long as possible?

Seems that way to me, they're putting barriers in their own way, whilst claiming to be interested, it looks like a smoke-screen to me. They're not willing to go to 5 years either.

All the while as ST approaches, the off-season draws to a close.

Let's not forget we have lost even more ground to Wash and Atl this Winter. Both got better.