Bill Madden is a Doosh

I am already bored of writers bashing the Mets after every game just a few days into the season.  They're writing crap as if these first week of the season contests, especially the losses, are proof positive that a long year awaits.  Is this going to be the modus operandi this year?  If so, count me out as a reader.

To whit, here is Bill Madden from today's NY Daily News:

Where does one begin on a day that Jose Reyes' return to the Mets was something less dazzling than Tiger Woods' return to golf; that one day after hitting four homers against the sub-quality Washington Nationals' pitching, the Mets again hit none; that on a bright, sunny cloudless April afternoon, Citi Field was somehow turned into a temple of gloom and frustration?

 A temple of gloom and frustration?

Bill, we have not even played ONE Week of baseball yet!

The Mets came from behind to load the bases in the bottom of the 9th inning, and the Nats made a game saving catch to escape with a one run victory.  The game itself was a bit of a dud, but the Mets played well and lost by the narrowest of margins.

Does Bill write about the comeback?  No, he writes about Jose Reyes frustration as he stood on third, and capped it all of with the tired reference to last year.

As he stood on third, after Capps had walked Wright and Jeff Francoeur in the ninth, and watched Harris - he of the vintage circus catches off Carlos Delgado and Ryan Church, among others, in recent years - make a diving stab of Rod Barajas' two-out liner to left, Reyes had a front-row view of all the Met frustration he's missed since last May.

What a poor excuse for a baseball writer.

Anyway Bill, here's $0.05, go buy yourself a clue.

Adam Rubin Continues to Shade the Truth

Normally this type of stuff doesn't bother me, but there is one small point that Adam Rubin keeps making that is simply not true.

He keeps saying that Omar accused him of lobbying for Bernazard's job, ie, lobbying for THE job of player personnel, and that Omar accused him of using his desire for THE job as motivation for his reporting on Bernazard.

The problem with that is Omar never said it.

What Omar Minaya actually said was that Adam Rubin was lobbying for 'A' player development position.

Even in Rubin's story from today's Daily News, he quotes Omar incorrectly, which is not proper journalism.

"Adam has lobbied for THE player development position," Minaya said.

This is blatantly inaccurate, and has been quoted differently in every other paper this morning.

The NY Post correctly quotes Omar as saying: "Adam, you gotta understand this, Adam, for the past couple of years, has lobbied for a player development position," Minaya said.

Much different meanings.

I reviewed the tape, and Omar said "a job", not "the job".

So why is Adam reporting that Omar said he lobbied for Bernazard's job?

Rubin is misquoting Omar because it puts him in a better light, but go back and watch the press conference and you see Rubin ask, “Are you alleging that I tried to tear Tony down so I could take his job?” “No, I’m not saying that,” Minaya said. “All I’m saying is that in the past you have lobbied for a job. You have told people in the front office that you want to work in the front office.”

Rubin himself has gone back and forth on this, saying he never asked for a Mets job, but just made some general inquiries--to all of the Mets brass--on how one gets a job in baseball.

Anyone with half a brain that hears these questions up and down an organization knows that the person that is asking the questions wants a job--Rubin, like everyone else, would never say "hey, Jeff, Omar, Tony, hire me"...the world is much more subtle than that....but by asking over and over his message was pretty clear.

I think Adam Rubin crossed the line of journalistic integrity by continually inquiring about a job from the team he was covering.

Omar called him on it....he may have botched the message and the timing by doing it in the press conference, but it's something that needed to be told.

The reporters will all jump to Rubin's side--that's fine--they are banding together. But I'm actually on Omar's side here

Boras Bingo, Derek Lowe and the Mets

One thing is clear about Scott Boras: nothing's changed.

For those that saw Omar Minaya interviewed on the new MLB Network, it's clear that he is in deep thought about his starting pitching options and the weak free agent crop.

This much is known: Derek Lowe is his #1 target, Omar and the Mets have a price in mind, and Scott Boras has quite another price in mind for his client.

To date the Mets have offerred $36M over 3 years. Boras wants $16M a year, for at least 4 years, for his client and "claims" to have several teams interested in that price point.

I say, "Bullshit".

MLB market reality points to a scenario in which Derek Lowe might get $14M a year for 4 years, but at his age the 4th year is quite the sticking point with basically all of the remaining clubs that have shown an interest for his services.

In this morning's NY Daily News, the headline blares, "Mets may miss out on Lowe!" It's as if the club most likely to sign the starter is suddenly out of the running because Boras is doing his job in trying to maximize the contract for his client.

The facts say otherwise.

1. This is a business, and businessmen are doing the negotiating.
2. The sides aren't as far apart as it seems.
3. Both Boras and the Mets are being patient, as they should.

If Boras, as he claims, truly had an offer close to what he's seeking for Lowe, he'd have already jumped at it. The Phils, a team Boras has leaked as a likely suitor, simply don't need Lowe for that money. They have 4 great starters locked up and a slew of arms competing for the 5th spot.

The Mets will land Lowe, of that I'm certain. It will just take a bit more time, a bit more Boras Bingo, and a bit more money.

3 years at $42M guaranteed and a club option 4th year for $16M is the most likely scenario.

It's just a matter of time.