Comments on: How the Mets bungled their postseason

By: tjv101

tjv101 — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:17:55 +0000

Your right. Lowe is better…right now. I doubt those last two seasons of that four year contract Lowe will be as effective as Perez in that long run. Lets be honest, both pitchers can be health risks. Lowe for his age has been relatively healthy over his career meaning he might be due for an injury. Perez, being 10 years younger, should be less of a health risk but does have a rocky setup and delivery and could fall prone to injury. In my opinion, the Mets wanted Lowe but weren’t prepared to offer him the kind of money the Braves did. I believe the Mets were hoping for another K-rod like signing where the demand for the pitcher isn’t overwhelming and only a few teams would offer big money. I think the Mets were taken back at the 4 years and 60 million like the rest of us are. They were probably hoping for a 3 or 4 year contract worth no more than 10-12 million a year.

By: Chris Wilcox

Chris Wilcox — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:59:41 +0000

Ollie might be younger, but Lowe is better. Lowe is also a sinkerballer, and that type of pitcher tends to age better than a hard thrower, meaning Ollie might be as much of an injury risk over a four year contract as Lowe despite being younger. Lowe got a lot of money, but it’s not like we didn’t know going in that Lowe was looking for a lot of money. If the Mets weren’t prepared to step into this level to get him to sign, why even pursue him?

By: tjv101

tjv101 — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:29:37 +0000

4 years and 60 million for Lowe is a lot of money. Let the Braves pay him $15 million a year. Lowe is not a young man. I believe he is 36 meaning he will be around 40 years old when his contract with the Braves is over. I doubt he will still be throwing 180 innings that entire time. I hope the Mets did not insult Perez by offering him a 3 yr 30 million dollar contract. You know its going to take 4 years and close to 50 million to get him here. Ollie is inconsistent but I am not heartbroken the Mets wouldnt budge on Lowe. Ollie is much younger (27), left handed, strikeout pitcher who has had success as a Met before. I believe he has quite better chance of an upside than Lowe. Now if the Mets don’t re-sign Perez then I too will be flipping out with all the health concerns of the Mets starters.

By: Chris Wilcox

Chris Wilcox — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:25:11 +0000

I think the Mets will wind up with one out of Perez/Wolf/Sheets, but all of them come with question marks, and the Mets need more of a sure thing behind Johan, since they will already be coming to camp with Maine and Pelfrey as question marks on some level, and Redding probably not anything better than average. Oh by the way, if the Mets sign Jon Garland, you don’t even know the meltdown I am capable of. Let’s just hope it doesn’t come to that.

By: Joeadig

Joeadig — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:34:36 +0000

After the whole Madoff scandal, we were “assured” by the Wilpons that the Mets would not be effected. We were told that they had “other money” that was used to finance the team. Well, since that whole bogus deal happened, the Mets have signed exactly ONE player– Tim Redding. It’s pretty obvious that they could have grabbed Derrek Lowe if they had been willing to pay a bit more, and the folks at MLB 175 on XM were talking like it was a fact that Boras called Omar Minaya BEFORE signing with the Braves to give the Mets one last chance to make a play. So now here we are, with a starting rotation that looks as one-dimensional as any I’ve ever seen. Short of Johan, we’ve got NOTHING but questions. So were the Wilpons more hurt by the Madoff deal than they let on? Or has this just been a very slow off-season? It seems to me that we should be discussing which TWO of the THREE starters (Lowe, Perez, & Wolfe) the Mets should pursue, rather than how it’s now within sight to end up with a whole lot of nothing.