On this day 20 years ago, the Atlanta Braves signed Falcons cornerback Deion Sanders as a free agent. Though he struggled in his first year as a Brave, 'Prime Time' was a key contributor for the National League champs in 1992; he hit .304/.346/.495 with 26 stolen bases in 325 regular season plate appearances and added eight hits and five steals in four World Series games. Sanders ended up leaving both Atlanta franchises in 1994, but not before he racked up 75 stolen bases and ten touchdowns for the Braves and Falcons respectively. Here are Sunday's links:
- The Brewers are comfortable with Rickie Weeks' deadline for an extension, writes Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. He relays a quote from assistant GM Gord Ash praising Weeks for focusing on the right area once the season starts — baseball.
- Steve Dilbeck of the Los Angeles Times looks at the possibility of Tony Gwynn Jr. hitting well enough to play every day and how that would impact the Dodgers' roster.
- Michael Cuddyer and agent Casey Close have yet to discuss a long-term extension with the Twins, writes MLB.com's Kelly Thesier. While Cuddyer is open to talking about a contract during Spring Training, he'd prefer to table the topic during the regular season.
- Martin Luther King III, son of the civil rights leader, is leading a group that's interested in buying at least 50% of the Mets, reports Kevin Kernan of the New York Post. The Wilpons were said to be willing to sell up to 25% of the team.
- Given the Mets' financial situation, some rival executives think Jose Reyes is likely to be moved before this year's trade deadline, according to ESPN.com's Buster Olney (Insider-only).
- In a tweet, Olney adds that, despite considering it, the Diamondbacks are "probably not" going to implement a humidor at Chase Field this year.
- Matt Gelb of the Philadelphia Inquirer wonders why expectations for Phillies' prospect Domonic Brown seem to have diminished since last summer.
- Within an Indians mailbag, Paul Hoynes of the Cleveland Plain Dealer says he can see the Tribe signing a couple more players before Spring Training, though the team would likely only do minor league deals.
As a Mets fan I can get behind anybody or any group of people buying the team from the Wilpons.
This way I can have a dream of the Mets winning a title at some point in my life and not sob uncontrollably at my own delusions.
It will never be as bad as a Cubs fan has it.
and yet cubs fans are 100x more enjoyable to talk to than Mets fans, who all the while, competing for a playoff spot for 4 out of the past 6 years, still made RACE the most consistently brought up issue. from oct 2004 – oct 2010
Then keep on praying Bernie Madoff rots in hell for a billion years with dogs feasting on his intestines everyday.
Suitors for Reyes:
Angels
Cubs
Tigers
Twins
Dodgers
Blue Jays
and Brewers?
Sorry. Nevermind
Angels
Cubs
Tigers
Twins
Blue Jays
Brewers
Add the Braves to that.
they wouldnt trade reyes within the division
I see what you did there.
Mr. Snips, the awesomeness of your username is unparalleled.
The Mets should hope Reyes has a great first half or else they will have to sell really low on him.
he had better have a great first half or they wont be selling at all
A short stop who hits and steals bases will not be sold low unless that short stop is dead.
I don’t know many dead bodies that run fast. Just saying.
Things are relative. What other GM’s would consider a fair trade for Reyes at this point in time would almost certainly be considered not enough by the Mets organization.
Seems like the civil rights movement made someone a butt load of money. How about buying the Mets, then donating all of the profits from merchandise and concession sales to the NAACP? Ya, I doubt that will happen.
well he is LEADING a group of investors. which means he could only be putting up a small % invested.
And just having his name out in the forefront. With the Rangers sale, there were rumblings of Mark Cuban being the bad guy and that MLB wouldn’t approve them. How in the world could MLB NOT approve Martin Luther King III?
You would think!….however that in itself could be perceived as a threat to the “old boy” network/mentality that is still prevalent throughout the MLB – despite certain notable improvements in recent years.
b/c by most accounts, including his family’s, MLK3 is a huge turd.
Correction: “Just because it says he’s “leading a group of investors” DOESN’T means they are all part of the CRM
You KNOW Nelson Doubleday had to be LHAO when he saw this !
Someone on another site proposed the question as to whether or not a Mets trade involving the Yanks for Santana would make sense for the Yanks. I don’t think it does at first sight but letme propose it another way.
Yanks Situation: They muddle through 2011 and make the playoffs with a staff of CC, Hughes, AJ, Nova and whoever. The following scenarios happen.
-CC performs well, stays healthy but decides NOT to opt out as he has stated numerous times.
-HUghes has a good 2nd full season and pitches 200 IP + and has a FIP under 4.00.
-AJ bounces back and has a solid 210 IP and a ERA (just to keep it simple) under 4.10 (as he did in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009).
-Ivan Nova proves himself to be a solid #5 starter with the possibility of being a little better.
-One of Brackman, Banuelos, Betances, Noesi, etc has a great 2011 season @ AAA and is called up sometime in August or September and shows themself deserving a rotation spot in 2012.
-Mets flounder and do nothing of consequence in 2011.
-Santana comes back in July and shows signs that he is fully recovered but might NOT EVER be the Santana that he was 3 or 4 years ago. Instead he shows the ability to be a solid #2 or #3 on a good team capable of 200 IP and a good 3.50-3.75 FIP starter who relys more on his great offspeed stuff but a mediocre 92 mph fastball w/ control that works out to a 6.5 K/9, 2.5 BB/9 and a decent 35-40% GB rate.
***Yanks decide that they want to go with CC, Hughes, Nova and one of the kids in 2012. HOwever, they want to add another frontline pitcher to give them a little more anchor on the front of the staff.
***Mets decide that even with the $50 mil that comes off the books they would be better served commiting to a short rebuild and to cut as much salary as possible and build around Wright, Bay (can’t move contract), Ike, Pagan, Pelfry and Niese.
Yanks approach the Mets and offer AJ Burnett (starting in 2012 owed 2/$33 mil) and a lower level but hi-ceiling pitching prospect (see Jose Ramirez, Bryan Mitchell or Brett Marshall) for Johan Santana (starting in 2012 owed $2/$55 mil guaranteed or possibly a total of 3/$74.5 mil if it turns into a player option).
From the Mets perspective they are guaranteed to save at least $22 mil and possibly up to $41 mil. They get a pitcher in return who can be a decent pitcher in a bigger park in the NL. NO guarantee to be a front line pitcher but should be a league average innings eater at worst and pitch to under a 4.20 FIP.
From the Yanks perspective, they would have a relatively inexpensive back end of the rotation with Hughes, Nova and one of the rookies given a spot in 2012. CC and Santana would anchor the staff and while the two would be expensive, their salaries are off set by the other three.
Does this get done? If not, who hangs up first and why?
It’s an interesting idea, but I bet the Mets hang up first.
Even if AJ has a decent season, the stigma is on him already: can’t be trusted, prone to wild swings. Even using your numbers, it would be a pretty huge downgrade from a 3.75 FIP guy to a 4.20 guy who isn’t dependable.
I think it’s a real possibility but the Yanks would have to part with a better prospect. Warranted or not, Johan is still JOHAN even with the injury history.
Intersting idea though. Hell I could see the Yanks approaching them about Johan at the trade deadline.
…No.
Mets hang up when the first name mentioned is Burnett.
thats a very interesting idea. I’m not sure how good johan could be anymore, and giving him 18mil per for 4 more years(is that the number?)is ridiculous with the mets in the rebuilding situation they are in. if i were alderson, i would need someone more consistent than AJ. it’ll give mets fans terrible deja-vu with Aj on the mound throwing wildly and walking 5 guys a game.
Guys..please go to e s p n dot com and read the story they have on there in regards to this. I’m sorry to those that disagree with me or whatever. Just read about yourself the story just popped up on espn.
I’m not a Mets fan by have friends who are suffering daily and there is nothing more I would like to see than the Wilpon’s sell the team.
I still don’t see your point.
W/ regard to the MLK III led group: Lead member TV exec Larry Meli (a white guy) said “”It’s fitting with the legacy of Jackie Robinson essentially transferring to the Mets, what better place to have African-American ownership than with the Mets?” The group included MLK III, Don Clendonn Jr, Ed Kranepool and Meli. That’s two black guys and two white guys. I don’t recall hearing them asking, receiving or even their being a possibility of them getting any sort of minority priveleges or funding or affirmative action for franchize owners.
Seli (a white guy) made the comment, and it’s obvious a self-serving one, but to say they should donate all the proceeds from concessions because of who MLK IIII’s father is, is sort of absurd. As long as they pay the cost to be the boss then they can keep or disperse their profits any way they please.
W/o even knowing their individual financial worth, it would not shock me if MLK III, Clendonn Jr and Kranepool aren’t even the majority investors of this group.
When you are “leading” a group of investors it means that you are the person providing a majority of the funds. I was reffering to the portion of the article referring to the Madoff scandal and the lawsuit. The Wilpon’s could be on the hook for almost $1 billion. I wouldn’t care if aliens bought the team. To me color has nothing to do with it. However, you can see by the term “African American ownership” that ESPN knows what I know. That is that King is the lead investor aka the lead investor aka majority share holder of the new group. he is putting up the most money. Now do you see what I am saying? King is putting up a serious amount of capital. Obviously he has a very good paper route.
Im not sure how much money that group has but after Frank McCourt’s fantastic adventure in LA, the MLB suits would be insane to let anyone in a major market unless they are filthy rich. Its still mind boggling that McCourt was approved.
If they want to make a run at a 50% share the its safe to assume they have at least $350 million minimum.
No it does not. You don’t have to have the most money invested to be the “leader of a group”. A lot of times the “leader of the group” is more the “face” of the group because they have some sort of noteriety that lends some credibility or cashe.
For media purposes, the phrase “Nolan Ryan-Led Group Agrees to Buy Texas Rangers” was thrown around often. We know Greenberg was the other name attached but it was actually Ray Davis who is the big money man behind the scenes and most of us didn’t know who he was until deep inside the Lee negotiations began.
The actuall group that own the Rangers consists of 18 different partners and those partners have partners w/in their own group.
From Forbes:
Meet The Texas Rangers’s New Money Man
Steven Bertoni
“Hall of Fame ace, Nolan Ryan, is once again the face of the Texas Rangers. Sports attorney Chuck Greenberg is the salesman. But elusive pipeline billionaire Ray Davis is the one holding the wallet– a big wallet. With an estimated net worth of $1.2 billion, the former Energy Transfer chief helped the Ryan/Greenberg group fight off a last minute bid by fellow billionaire–and Dallas Mavericks owner–Mark Cuban”.
—
So just like Ryan and Greenberg get the pub…”Group led by Nolan Ryan” or “Group led by Ryan-Greenberg” neither of them have the majority of the money invested.
The same COULD be said of this deal. I’m pretty confident in saying that MLK III is NOT the lead investor. More than likely he is the investor with the most recongnized name among the group. He didn’t even make a statement or was quoted in the article. My guess is, he will become more of a figure at some point and time as it makes for a great story and certainly acts as a great example of the American dream.
From The Post (of all raggedy papers to qute from):
“Martin Luther King III has a dream: To buy the Mets.
The son of the late civil-rights leader is uniting with some heavy hitters, including Mets legend Ed Kranepool; entrepreneur Donn Clendenon Jr., son of the 1969 Mets World Series MVP; TV executive Larry Meli; and a number of unnamed deep-pocketed investors, The Post has learned”.
“…a number of unnamed deep-pocketed investors” being the operative words.
Dude, obviously you have a hard time understanding the English language. “LEADS” a group. O.K. when it’s made clear how much money they are willing to pay and how much each person is putting up and you see that King III is putting up the most will you say that you were wrong then?
Actually, he’s right. You have no idea what you’re talking about. He just gave the perfect example. Which you can’t seem to understand.
Thank you!
sigh
Yes, if it comes out that he invested the most then I will seek you out and apologize. Don’t think I will need to though.
Hey buddy. Hey I’ve just gotten some word that the big reason the Wilpon’s are in in trouble is that they borrowed upwards of $500 million dollars against cash that they believed they had still invested with Bernie madoff. They initially invested $500 million with him..drew out $547 million but still believed that they had another $500 million in profits in their account that they used as collateral to borrow from a lending institution. Stay tuned. Also on febuary 9th there is a motion hearing regarding the lawsuit brought by trustee’s. right now the Wilpon’s have requested and been granted permission to have the details of their case sealed. this information may be revealed on feb. 9th.
LEADS just means the public face of the group, not the one with the most money invested. Don’t know how to make it any more simpler than that.
Frank McCourt is far from broke. Collectively, he and his soon to be ex-wife built an empire worth $1.2 billion. The problem is….they bought it was a couple from money they collectively earned. That means…keep your wife happy.
The fact that McCourt has been tight w/ the money is more from neccesity that his wife is his partner and the team is community property subject to be claimed as a family assett. It sucks,but that’s the law.
McCourt’s net worth is $1.2 bil and they bought the team for $370 mil plus another $60 mil for stadium and other things. Now, as of April 2010, the team is worth $730 mil. Frank is far,far from broke but giving your wife half of everything you own plus the $2 mil annual salary or $490k a MONTH in spousal support.
Moral of the story…it’s cheaper to keep her.
It’s interesting to see how Santana’s 2014 $25 mil option can become guaranteed.
2014 club option becomes player option if Santana:
-wins Cy Young award from 2008-13 and finishes second or third in the Cy Young vote in one other season
-ranks second or third in Cy Young vote in any 3 seasons, 2008-13
-is on the active roster for the final 30 days of 2013 season, and:
pitches 215 innings in 2013, or
pitches 420 innings in 2012-13, or
pitches 630 innings in 2011-13
He finished 2nd in 2008 so if he a) Wins a Cy Young b) finishes 2md or 3rd two more times from 2011-2013 then it becomes guaranteed.
Look at the shortstop group in the league. It’s Tulo and Hanley… and then a HUGE dropoff. With a rebound year, which is very likely now that he’s had time to recover from injury and doesn’t have to worry about where he bats, Reyes could bring in a king’s ransom if traded (and signed?)… but I would still keep him. He’s just too dynamic a player to give away.
“After the game, inside the Phillies’ clubhouse, his teammates gushed. On the table in the middle of the room were copies of the most recent edition of Baseball America, with Brown on the cover, anointed the best prospect in baseball.”
When did this ever happen?
i agree with bias. he’s the spark that ignites the offense(when there is an offense). i remember in 06 when he hit 280(i think?) 18 homers and 60-70 something stolen bases. when jose is healthy he’s a great shortstop. if they let him go they’d have to trade him. now think about this… the cards said they would need an already established semi-star player(jose is a star when he’s healthy) and several prospects to trade pujols. if i were alderson i could possibly give jose reyes, ruben tejada, jennry mejia, and 1 or more prospects. now thats an interesting trade idea…
Right now nobody really knows how much the Wilpin’s will have to repay or lost in this Madoff thing. Trust me, I live in NY and every time they speak they lie about something. they say they aren’t in for that much $$$ then all of a sudden they are looking to dump part of the Mets. I’m tellin you that there is more than meets the eye here and Bay’s contract and the contract of others has little to do with this in any way and won’t help even when they come off. they clearly need a large influx of cash right now. There is speculation that the Wilpon’s borrowed against the Mets to invest with Madoff or may have borrowed against the Mets to repay the money the Fed is forcing them to pay back. This is a very cloudy situation right now, but what is clear is that the Wilpon’s are in trouble.
even though alderson doesnt like long term deals you would have to think maybe puljos 2011 just saying.He would tear up Philly and he mets would have a freakin scary lineup
Who would the “Feds” be forcing the Mets to pay money too? The Mets were the victims of Madoff correct?
hard to be a “victim” when u made a PROFIT.
The people who lost money are seeking compensation through a lawsuit. The investors who pulled out early and made money are going to have to repay the victims that lost money. Essentially, the aim of the lawsuit is to have everyone break even. This lawsuit because it involves many different aspects just one of them “interstate” will be a federal case meaning a federal judge will ultimately enforce the lawsuit. Right now the belief is that the Wilpons pulled their money out around a year before Madoff was busted so they made a profit. If this is so and lets say they invested $600 million and Madoff through is Ponzy scheme gave them back $800 million they will now owe the investors who’s money was used to pay the Wilpon’s by Madoff the $200 million they received as gains from investment. Does everyone realize how a Ponzy scheme works? No investments are ever made new investors money is paid to old investors as gains when they decide to cash out. thusly if the Wilpons pulled out before the bust they received stolen funds that belong to other investors in the scheme.
A) It hasn’t been proven when the money was taken out of the investment pool.
B) The money was there’s. If you invest $100,000 with someone and they tell you a profit was made and you withdraw $150,00 then chances are you plan on doing something w/ that money. Whether you reinvest it or put it in your pocket. If you’re told that the money wasn’t given to you honestly but that now you have to answer to lawsuite and hire lawyers AND return at least $50,000 to pay others, then guess what?…you lost.
I say the Mets are victims because whether it’s because money was lost as a Madoff victim or money is lost because assets are reclaimed for disbursment to others, the Mets were not the ones doing anything knowingly fraudulent, thus making them victims as well.
He did, but not a great year. He had his lowest OBP since 2005 and his worst SB/CS ratio. There would be reason to suspect he is declining unless he has a great 1st half. If I were a GM I’d be more skeptical of less-than-stellar numbers from him in the beginning of the season than would ordinarily be, and therefore would be inclined to offer less than the Mets would be asking.
Point 2: If they never made a with drawl of funds before Madofff was busted then the Wilpon’s have to sit and wait like everyone else to recoup the funds stolen. The problem in this scenario is that if they took out loans against the team to back “investments” made by Madoff they do not have the capital to repay the lending institutions that loaned money to the Wilpon’s. At this point we have know arrived at case number 2 why the Wilpon’s are desperate for cash. If they are unable to repay loans that they may have been given using the Mets franshise and other assets those said assets can be sold by force of the lending institutions to repay debt owed by the Madoff’s. If the Wilpon’s took out loans against SNY or the Mets it was stupid as hell but here is the situation at hand. they are willing to sell up to $200 million worth of the franshise they bought in 1980 for $20 million.
I understand how a Ponzi scheme works. If the Mets gave Madoff money then it’s a “investment” nonetheless, regardless as to whether or not Madoff used it as such.
The Mets are a business. If they “invested” $600 mil from Madoff and got back $800 mil then I am sure that $200 mil was earmarked for something else. That “something else” now has to be funded “out of pocket”.
To make it clear, a “victim” of Madoff is anyone who
a) Were on the “sucker” end part of the Madoff scheme.
b) Have to now repay what were thought to be legitimate profits.
If you invest $10,000 w/ my company and I give you back $100,000 in counterfeit money and you then go out and spend $75,000 to pay your employee payroll for the next 3 months in cash and you find out it’s phony then you now have to replace that $75,000 with “out of pocket” money. Your employees are victoms just as the employer is too. Only if the employer was “in on” Madoff’s scheme are they to be considered dirty. Businesses base their decisions off of hard cash, cash flow and investments. That’s what the Mets probably did as well. Having $200 mil less than what you actually do, on top of what you have to pay lawyers, accountants and foresenic accounts to answer the lawsuit plus all the negative publicity just compounds the victimazation.
The most intelligent post I’ve seen about the Wilpon-Madoff situation. It’s good to finally see someone post something more than a one-line quip about the Mets not being able to spend anything ever again because of the whole Madoff scandal, especially from a Yankees fan.
Shhh, he’s secretly a Mets fan. lol
Mmm….maybe not so “secret,” LOL!
Then again, you haven’t exactly been a hater yourself, Mr. Bias.
Thanks for the
lovenon-hate, dude! 😀TAKE THAT BACK!!
Hate List
-Red Sox, Celtics, Pats
-Whoever shot Biggie
-Mets
-LeBron James
-Chicks who claim they “don’t do that anymore”
I didn’t say I wasn’t. I didn’t say I was a Yankee fan. I was stating that the fact that a Yankee fan was defending the Mets FO made his post even more impressive. Read carefully, dude.
I think you need to read carefully……..
haha no no, I was trying to say that YanksFanSince78 is secretly a Mets fan, not you.
So doubtful it isn’t even really worth mentioning.
ahaahaha I have to agree with most of that list… but hard to hate the Mets for me.
My mind has been blown.
I SAID TAKE THAT BACK!!!!
heh I can explain…
I’m a fan of anything New York first, so I’ll support almost everything NY related…except maybe the Islanders – they suck!
I grew up in Queens (but in a Yankee household) so I have a soft spot for the Mets.
I watched Santana a few times live when he was with the Twinkies, and became a huge Johan fan since then. Met Beltran, and was really taken back by how down to earth and nice he was. Plus he was such a complete player, 5 tools and all that, it was hard not to root for the guy. They are still two of my favorite players in the league.
So I may not be a “fan” of the Mets, but I do want to see the team do well. Plus, I hate the Phillies. Actually, more so their fans than the team itself. Yeah, final answer.
LOL ok ok I take it back!