Why is Stephen Drew Still Available?
Stephen Drew is still available.
Heading into the the 2013-2014 offseason, the two most sought-after free agent shortstops appeared to be Jhonny Peralta and Stephen Drew. Either player seemed a good match for any team (including the Mets) who looked to add a shortstop.
They are two relatively similar players when it comes to AVG/OBP/SLG (though Peralta has more home run power) and each can field their position adequately.
When Peralta signed a four-year, $53 million contract with the St. Louis Cardinals, it seemed certain Drew would get a similar contract shortly after.
But here we are in January, and Drew is still on the market. Not only that, his value seems to be on the decline. His rumored asking price at the start of the offseason was somewhere in the three-year $36 million range. Now, the buzz is that he’ll only command a one or two-year deal.
So how is the 30 year-old shortstop still on the market?
It’s probably supply and demand. Besides the Cardinals, not many teams had a desperate need for a shortstop. Drew’s former team, the Red Sox, seem willing to go forth with young Xander Bogaerts. The Yankees publicly stated that they are not in on Drew, and will make the most of a combination of Derek Jeter and Brendan Ryan. The Mets have publicly stated they can live with Ruben Tejada at short.
These statements could be earnest, or they could be bargaining tactics. The Mets and Red Sox could each be playing hard-to-get.
Boston could re-sign Drew, move Bogaerts to third, and either trade incumbent third baseman Will Middlebrooks, or use him off the bench. The Mets could hope 24 year-old Tejada can return to his 2012 self, when he hit .289/.333/.351 in 501 plate appearances.
Also, the Mets could be looking toward the 2014-2015 offseason, when a free agent like J.J. Hardy becomes available.
With that in mind, Sandy Alderson and company could be waiting for Drew’s camp to become desperate enough to sign a one-year contract, which would give the team more flexibility following the season. And at this point, the front office seems to have refocused their attention to 2015, when Matt Harvey returns, as the year they can seriously contend.
Is Drew still appealing? Certainly. He’s not exactly the second coming of Derek Jeter at the plate or Ozzie Smith in the field, but he’s a league-average hitter (Career 98 OPS+) and fielder (2 defensive runs saved and -3.3 UZR lifetime).
In the 2013 playoffs, he struggled at the plate, but played nearly flawless defense.
He’d be a pretty good match for the Sox, and a stabilizing force at shortstop for the Mets. However, neither Boston, New York, nor any other team, seem to be ready to give Drew anything more than a discounted deal.
I hope the voice is wrong because the Mets spin on Tejada is not convincing.
It’s a shame, because the odds that things could break right and put the Mets in contention in 2014 are much higher without a gaping black hole in the everyday squad.
Having watched Tejada burst onto the scene at age 20 with great 2B defense and impressive maturity, I feel bad calling him a black hole now, but I’m pretty convinced it’s true. He drew pitch-around walks batting 8th in 2011, hit a soft .300 for a few months in 2012, and those have been his offensive highlights. His team-mandated quest to add strength has left him less quick and flexible, his former instincts have eroded from some combo of doubt, criticism and failure, and now he can no longer play the field effectively. It’s sad.
Per the Collective Bargaining Agreement between MLBPA and MLB, contract incentives cannot be performance-based, so forget about an option year based on batting average and/or lack of errors. But they can implement an option that vests based on games played — and if Drew plays, say, 145-150 games for two years, chances are his stats are pretty decent.
Also the Mets are still well under the proposed cap they had set for themselves, with limited other FAs out there, especially ones at a position of need I dont understand why this isn’t a move that wouldn’t be made… of course that’s why I am here not a GM.
1) Because Scott Boras Hosed him and told him he could do better than the $14 mill. qualifying offer.
2) He batted under .100 most of the postseason.
Who wants to pay for that?
Your memory is spot on. Alderson certainly came up small last year post-Dickey trade, money or no money and not withstanding the gift of Byrd, which had nothing to do with his skill as a GM. Should the Mets stand pat sand only add some scrap heap guys, I will agree that this offseason is a bust, they are punting on 2014, and the Grandy/Colon?Young acquisitions are just chum to the fanbase. If Alderson adds Drew for 2/years or a young SS with more upside to compete with Tejada a late inning arm to the pen, and a vet or two to compete for the #5 spot and provide AAA depth, I will consider the offseason a success. Not perfect, and the team will be flawed without a true leadoff or #4 hitter, but a least they will be respectable, with improvements especially to the defense, and they will be well poised for the next few years without terribly burdensome contracts and with all the key prospects still in their system. It’s showtime for Sandy right now!
I would think so.
This could be the subject of a future post.
I see an outfield much better than last years. This year we have 4 decent players with some depth.
I see an infield, that is at least equal to last years. I agree last year we had hope Davis would break out. This year it could be davis or duda who breaks out. Murphy has a full season under his belt and SS we all know is the weak link.
I don’t agree were all down on TdA. Joe here likes him and I don’t think you can judge his bat based on last year.
I don’t recall thinking Harvey was an ace at this time last year. This year we hace 4 solid starters, some options for fifth, two top prospects in the pipe and another month for minor league options.
Bullpen: is there a difference.
A final comparison: at this time last year, the team had many more holes and questions marks than now. This year all SA has to do is at least get more options for SS and wait for opportunities.
In the end, I believe we have a better team. How Many moré Wins? I don’t know. Are we as good as the PR machine said we were going to be? Probably not.
The good thing about blog media of Today is we don’t depend on the PR machine.
I agree with your analysis of the team going into the season, but, last year’s team benefited from some very good luck and was hurt by some bad luck. The good was Buck’s being hot in April, and besides Byrd’s heroics, Hawkins also was much more than we expected.
On the flip side, Marcum was a total waste and having Laffey start those games in April was a disaster. Also, while you hope to catch lightning in a bottle with Byrd, or Cowgill, or Ankiel, the expectation that Duda would be decent at least turned into a Duda/Davis/Tejada/Buck disaster in May when they only won 6 games.
So, while things may be a little better heading into the season, Colon running down to first may pull a hamstring and we are screwed after that. And, if Davis/Duda suck it up again?
For example, I don’t see Juan Lagares as an everyday CF, nor Chris Young as an everyday anything, so, in my mind, there are two holes in the outfield. First base is a complete mystery, as is shortstop. That’s four holes, on top of a DH playing second base and a catcher who, though I like very much, has been healthy enough to play 100 games only twice in 7 pro seasons. Additionally, Bobby Parnell is a question mark due to his back problem, there is no setup man, and the fifth starter is a toss-up. To me it appears as though the Mets have gone backward, or at best stayed in place, compared to January 2013.
I agree with the skepticism, but again let’s remember that it is early January. I think it is premature to compare the opening day 2013 team with the mid-winter 2014 squad. Joe points out that they still have holes and a lot of question marks, and that is true, but so does every team. The Nats scare me most, but the underperformed last year and have a new manager. The Braves have a lot of arms, but Uggla and BJ Upton were nightmares, there is uncertainty to how the young pitchers will progress and those returning from injury will perform, they lost two very signifcant vets, etc., etc. I also agree that I don’t care if they have a 72 or 78 win team, but they need to add enough talent to get to 78 before they can project to 82 or 85.
It all comes down to how they are going to behave from here on out. They can inject more money for the right piece, they can still make a significant deal, etc. I am more comfortable with the team at the midpoint of this winter than I was last winter, but I if they cheap out from this point I will grade Alderson at a D for the winter, which is unacceptable. Add a legit SS and bullpen arm and they can join the wildcard discussion as an underdog – that is not a bad offseason.
I think your exagerating by saying that we have gone backwards, but maybe your not. What was your W-L prediction?
Why not look at other indicators, such as we still have our pitching prospects in place (as opposed to having tarded them), we now have CG on board, with a similar timing as DW, we have a couple of players who still have space for improvement and like many money lovers like to point out, we still have space to grow on the budget.
It could be worst.
If I were being skeptical, I would be saying that the Mets will be lucky to finish fourth, because I fear Zack Wheeler, Jon Niese, and Jenrry Mejia will all suffer debilitating arm injuries; Tejeda isn’t going to improve; Lagares won’t hit enough to stay in the lineup; Young won’t hit, period; Granderson will struggle mightily due to the change in leagues and home-park dimensions; the 1B situation will be a disaster; Murphy won’t hit as well as he did last year, and therefore be a more glaring problem in the field; and all these factors will be compounded by playing NL East rivals 18 times each, because it could be argued that every other club will be improved over 2013.
In putting together my analysis and concluding that the Mets were about the same or possibly worse compared to this time last year, I did not consider any of the above.