The Mets Finished Last in 2009 Draft Spending

[tomkaz]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/sp...tml?ref=sports

The Mets Finished Last in 2009 Draft Spending

By BEN SHPIGEL
Published: November 19, 2009
How much money the Mets intend to lavish on free agents to fill their many needs is unclear. What is clear is that the Mets, during a dreadful season and increased criticism of their minor league system, spent less money on the 2009 draft than any other team in baseball, according to figures compiled by Baseball America.



The Mets divvied $3,134,300 among their 35 signed picks, more than 50 percent less than their 2008 outlay, when they had two first-round selections and a first-round supplemental pick. By contrast, the average for all 30 teams was a shade more than $6 million. Without a pick until the second round, No. 72 over all, the Mets’ spending was destined to decrease. But their 2009 strategy resembled that of a small-market club that sometimes bypasses talented players in earlier rounds because it does not want to spend more on them than players available deeper in the draft.

The Philadelphia Phillies, who ranked 29th in 2009 spending, were the only other team not to have a first-round pick or a supplemental pick, which comes between the first and second rounds. Traditionally, their approach has been comparable to the Mets’, though the Phillies are not as rigid in adhering to baseball’s recommendations on how much to spend in various rounds of the draft. They do not have the Mets’ resources, either.

The Mets used $1,864,300 on the first 10 rounds of the 2009 draft, less than any other team, and failed to sign their fifth- and sixth-round selections, each a hard-throwing right-handed pitcher.

“With a brand-new ballpark and a television network, the Mets’ revenues are probably among the top five clubs in baseball,” said Jim Callis, the executive editor of Baseball America and an expert on player development. “After spending about $6.5 million when they had extra picks last year, do I think they could have found the money this year? Yeah, I think they could have. It just comes down to the willingness to spend.”

General Manager Omar Minaya defended the Mets’ 2009 strategy, saying that not having a first-round pick diminished their spending and that they were committed to paying for top amateur talent. He added that the Mets tried hard to sign their fifth-round pick, Damien Magnifico of Mesquite, Tex., and their sixth-round choice, David Buchanan of Chipola Junior College in Florida, but that the players rejected what he called fair offers.

“We want to pay for the player whatever we feel the player is worth, and we do the best we can to sign the player,” he said.

The Mets are known for their conservative approach to the draft, particularly since signing Mike Pelfrey, their first-round choice in 2005, for $5.3 million with a $3.5 million bonus. They almost never offer bonuses that exceed the slotting guidelines recommended by the commissioner’s office. They signed their top pick in 2009, Steven Matz, for $895,000, about $388,000 more than what was suggested. But that extra money most likely would have gone to a first-round pick, anyway, so the Mets were not really acting as boldly as they seemed to. Callis said the Mets, the Chicago White Sox and the Houston Astros were the three teams that consistently did not go over the slotting guidelines.

“They may be being good citizens, but it’s not good for the club,” Callis said.

A farm system should perform two functions: furnish the parent club with cheap talent and churn out prospects that can be used in trades. That is how the Mets were able to acquire Johan Santana from Minnesota before the 2008 season, though the Twins were more resigned to dealing Santana than they were overwhelmed by the Mets’ offer. None of the four prospects Minnesota received from the Mets has flourished.

Still, that trade wiped out much of the Mets’ upper-tier depth in the minors, and they have been slow to replenish it.

The Yankees lavished $423.5 million on C. C. Sabathia, A. J. Burnett and Mark Teixeira last off-season, but they have also devoted more resources to the draft and the minor leagues. Now they routinely press their financial advantage in the draft, spreading $7,564,500 (ninth most) among their 27 signed picks in 2009, including about $2.2 million on their first-round pick and about $1.25 million on their second-round pick. Even after paying those above-slot bonuses, the Yankees still spent almost $1 million more on the rest of their 25 selections than the Mets did with all 35 of theirs, despite the teams having comparable picks.

“Hardly any team has spent less than the Mets the last two years,” Callis said. “On the other hand, the team that has spent the most money is the Pittsburgh Pirates, who hardly have the revenue stream that the Mets do. They recognize that they can’t compete for free agents, but they can compete for amateurs.”

Minaya said the Mets would spend more in the 2010 draft, when they have the No. 7 pick over all. The Mets relinquished their first-round pick last year after signing Francisco Rodriguez, a Type A free agent. But even if they sign another Type A free agent, like Bengie Molina or Matt Holliday, their pick will be protected because they finished so poorly last season.

“I don’t like picking early like this,” Minaya said. “I’d much rather be picking late.”

[ReyesOfHope]

01. The two "hard-throwing" right-handers -- especially David Buchanan -- the Mets did not sign were not worth the money they were asking.

02. I support the slot system. All teams should adhere to it.

[metfan13]

01. The two "hard-throwing" right-handers -- especially David Buchanan -- the Mets did not sign were not worth the money they were asking.

02. I support the slot system. All teams should adhere to it.

03. When your first pick is #72 you will tend to spend less.

[Mongoose]

I'm waiting for the other two or three Wilpon apologists on this board to pop out of the woodwork and further try to explain away his incredible stinginess.

The main reason he spends on high visibility free agents is to keep moving season tickets. Having a healthy farm system is no less important, but not immediately visible to most fans. Wilpon's obvious thinking is that spending money on signing all your draft picks won't sell any extra season tickets when the invoices are due in December, so he pockets the difference and short changes the fans in the process.

Make no mistake: prices for Mets games are exorbitant; food is expensive; souvenirs are expensive; anything that's not nailed down is for sale ranging from filthy used Minor League helmets to Angel Pagans "game worn" underpants (I jest here, but not by much - I strolled onto the main concourse one day and a pair of his soiled, unwashed, game worn pants greeted me at a table as soon as got off the elevator). The T.V. network is a gold mine. He got an $850 million new stadium with tons of luxury boxes and luxury restaurants, tons of retail space, and a vast food court paid for almost entirely with public money. The City is spending another $400 million on the insane Willets Point development project. Fred even netted $50 million in profits from his Madoff Mets accounts alone, while everybody else got wiped out!

Fred probably has almost as much money to work with as the Yankees. The difference is the Yankees are committed to spending what it takes to field a winner. Fred is basically just in it for his own enrichment. His is a cold calculus that assumes fans will keep rooting for the laundry regardless of how much he chisels them or what he puts out on the field.

I'm waiting for a couple more apologies for Fred by the usual suspects to further prove that Fred's lowball assumptions about some fans' intelligence are correct.

[PVNICK]

isn't is obvious by what comes up lately that this maty have been the case, and wasn't this the same story that was out around draft time.

[metfan13]

Ah, you can always expect Mr. Negativity to show up.

ooh ooh they're knocking Fred, let me jump in.

Tired, very tired.

[Mongoose]

Ah, you can always expect Mr. Negativity to show up.

ooh ooh they're knocking Fred, let me jump in.

Tired, very tired.

On cue.

You know, you never debate any points you disagree with whether it's myself or Pauliepal or Mandrake or whoever that makes them. All you really do is chime in with some irrelevant, bitter, personal attack like the one I've quoted. If you never engage in debate, all one can assume is that you don't have the intelligence to justify your opinions or your opinions are just too wrong to justify; I can't think of any other possible reason not to engage in real discussion. But I give you credit: being wrong and/or incapable of debate never seems to stop you from popping up to defend ownership/management when it does a bad job. Since you never bother to explain your rationale, your reflexive defense is befuddling - but you are reliable, which is kind of rare in this day and age.

Please - without any personal attacks - explain how being stingy in the draft helps serve the purpose of putting a winning team on the field?

[metfan13]

On cue.

You know, you never debate any points you disagree with whether it's myself or Pauliepal or Mandrake or whoever that makes them. All you really do is chime in with some irrelevant, bitter, personal attack like the one I've quoted. If you never engage in debate, all one can assume is that you don't have the intelligence to justify your opinions or your opinions are just too wrong to justify; I can't think of any other possible reason not to engage in real discussion. But I give you credit: being wrong and/or incapable of debate never seems to stop you from popping up to defend ownership/management when it does a bad job. Since you never bother to explain your rationale, your reflexive defense is befuddling - but you are reliable, which is kind of rare in this day and age.

Please - without any personal attacks - explain how being stingy in the draft helps serve the purpose of putting a winning team on the field?

Funny, this coming form the guy who started his post with:

"I'm waiting for the other two or three Wilpon apologists on this board to pop out of the woodwork..."

Yet then you're suprised when someone reacts to it.

I have plenty of conversation here with people who have open minds and discuss things. Not someone like you with a one track agenda.

[Mongoose]

Funny, this coming form the guy who started his post with:

"I'm waiting for the other two or three Wilpon apologists on this board to pop out of the woodwork..."

Yet then you're suprised when someone reacts to it.

I have plenty of conversation here with people who have open minds and discuss things. Not someone like you with a one track agenda.

Please - without any personal attacks - explain how being stingy in the draft helps serve the purpose of putting a winning team on the field?

[metfan13]

Please - without any personal attacks - explain how being stingy in the draft helps serve the purpose of putting a winning team on the field?

Not really that stingy in the draft. You can't just give the kids whatever they ask for. Many/most do have the option to go to college. They have that as a bargaining chip.

When you have no picks until #72, the sure fire (as much as they can be in baseball) top picks are gone. So yes, overall you're going to spend less.

You can spend on International Free Agents rather than play the game with Boras and the US kids.

[NYMets523]

01. The two "hard-throwing" right-handers -- especially David Buchanan -- the Mets did not sign were not worth the money they were asking.

02. I support the slot system. All teams should adhere to it.

I agree there should be limits to signing bonuses but the Mets are only hurting themselves by adhering to Selig's suggestions. Until it's mandated, they should spend as much as other big market teams.

[ReyesOfHope]

Not really that stingy in the draft. You can't just give the kids whatever they ask for. Many/most do have the option to go to college. They have that as a bargaining chip.

Here's an example...

In 2005 the Mets drafted Pedro Peato in the 17th round out of H.S. He did not sign, but because he went to a Junior College the Mets could sign him as a draft-and-follow up to one week before the 2006 draft.

Beato pitched very well at the JuCo and was asking for a $1 million+ bonus to sign. The Mets offered $650,000, but he turned them down.

Beato was chosen by the Orioles in the 2006 draft as a supplemental 1st round pick and signed for $1+ million. After 3 1/2 years he is a very mediocre Class A pitcher, and is not much of a prospect. The $1 million was pretty much a waste for the Orioles.

Some scouts use the saying, "Dollar sign on the muscle". It refers to what a kid is worth money-wise. The Mets adhere to this philosophy. The Mets thought Beato was worth a $650,000 risk, and they were more right than the Orioles. Yet... some fans would beat them up over not overspending... maybe the Mets are getting it right when evaluating the dollar sign on the muscle instead of just pouring money down the drain.

[Mongoose]

You can't just give the kids whatever they ask for.

Brilliant. I think the legendary M. Donald Grant was the first man to say those words in a Mets context.

I think a lot of people are going to say those exact words to the Mets when they get their season ticket renewal notices. The Mets owe it to their fans to sign the best players they can; they charge the highest prices in the league! In fact the Mets charge comparable prices to the Yankees and consider their corporate customers their best friends. Fair enough, but if you're going to charge confiscatory prices, you forfeit the right to play the "lovable loser" card. How disgusting was it when Dave Howard said, in response to the wretched play of the team, "being a Mets fan builds character"?

This is unacceptable when the team uses despicable, fan-unfriendly tactics to strong-arm fans into buying outrageously priced season plans. Anyone who was paying attention to the ramp up to moving into the new stadium knows what I'm taking about. The Mets certainly have the revenue to sign the best players.

Here's an example...

In 2005 the Mets drafted Pedro Peato in the 17th round out of H.S. He did not sign, but because he went to a Junior College the Mets could sign him as a draft-and-follow up to one week before the 2006 draft.

Beato pitched very well at the JuCo and was asking for a $1 million+ bonus to sign. The Mets offered $650,000, but he turned them down.

Beato was chosen by the Orioles in the 2006 draft as a supplemental 1st round pick and signed for $1+ million. After 3 1/2 years he is a very mediocre Class A pitcher, and is not much of a prospect. The $1 million was pretty much a waste for the Orioles.

Some scouts use the saying, "Dollar sign on the muscle". It refers to what a kid is worth money-wise. The Mets adhere to this philosophy. The Mets thought Beato was worth a $650,000 risk, and they were more right than the Orioles. Yet... some fans would beat them up over not overspending... maybe the Mets are getting it right when evaluating the dollar sign on the muscle instead of just pouring money down the drain.

And in 1981, the Mets made a lowball offer to their 12th round draft pick, who then told the Mets to blow off and wound up pitching for the University of Texas instead. His name was... Roger Clemens. I will admit it was a thoroughly superior cadre of baseball men running the show back then; the scouts picked a lot of winners, but even the best organization in the world will sometimes draft a Shawn Abner or two - but the Darryl Strawberrys, Dwight Goodens and Lenny Dykstras (taken the round after Clemens in 1981!) will make up for this.

All your anecdote proves is scouting is not infallible - but is consistently being too cheap to sign your best rated prospects the way to go? Has this method been successful? I think the scant number of bona fide Major League stars the Mets have produced in the last 20 years screams "NO"!

[ReyesOfHope]

Brilliant. I think the legendary M. Donald Grant was the first man to say those words in a Mets context.

All your anecdote proves is scouting is not infallible - but is consistently being too cheap to sign your best rated prospects the way to go? Has this method been successful? I think the scant number of bona fide Major League stars the Mets have produced in the last 20 years screams "NO"!

I think you missed the point. The point is that there is a fair value that each amateur player is worth. The Mets aren't being cheap, they are being fair. They pay a legitimate amount for the dollar sign on the muscle.

BTW, "Dollar Sign on the Muscle" is a really good book about scouting. It follows a Phillies scout around his territory while preparing for the 1982 amateur draft. It's out of print, but pick up a used copy off of amazon.com.

And in 1981, the Mets made a lowball offer to their 12th round draft pick, who then told the Mets to blow off and wound up pitching for the University of Texas instead.

01. How do you know the offer low-balled Clemens? Perhaps it was fair value for a 12th round pick.
02. How do you know he told them to "blow off"?

Fact is that 12th round picks are rarely offered significant money. I'm sure a full scholarship ride to the University of Texas and the opportunity to pitch in the College World Series was worth far more than fair value. It wasn't as if Clemens fell to the 12th round because of bonus demands. Clemens was not high on scouts' radar coming out of H.S., didn't get an offer to attend a division I school, and had to go to a JUCO to get some in-state recognition.

BTW, the Mets also drafted but did not sign players such as Kal Daniels, Rafael Palmeiro and Matt Williams while Joe McIlvaine was scouting director.

[metfan13]

I think you missed the point. The point is that there is a fair value that each amateur player is worth. The Mets aren't being cheap, they are being fair. They pay a legitimate amount for the dollar sign on the muscle.

BTW, "Dollar Sign on the Muscle" is a really good book about scouting. It follows a Phillies scout around his territory while preparing for the 1982 amateur draft. It's out of print, but pick up a used copy off of amazon.com.



01. How do you know the offer low-balled Clemens? Perhaps it was fair value for a 12th round pick.
02. How do you know he told them to "blow off"?

Fact is that 12th round picks are rarely offered significant money. I'm sure a full scholarship ride to the University of Texas and the opportunity to pitch in the College World Series was worth far more than fair value. It wasn't as if Clemens fell to the 12th round because of bonus demands. Clemens was not high on scouts' radar coming out of H.S., didn't get an offer to attend a division I school, and had to go to a JUCO to get some in-state recognition.

BTW, the Mets also drafted but did not sign players such as Kal Daniels, Rafael Palmeiro and Matt Williams while Joe McIlvaine was scouting director.

Thank you for a fair and reasonable reply.

[Mongoose]

01. How do you know the offer low-balled Clemens? Perhaps it was fair value for a 12th round pick.
02. How do you know he told them to "blow off"?

Fact is that 12th round picks are rarely offered significant money. I'm sure a full scholarship ride to the University of Texas and the opportunity to pitch in the College World Series was worth far more than fair value. It wasn't as if Clemens fell to the 12th round because of bonus demands. Clemens was not high on scouts' radar coming out of H.S., didn't get an offer to attend a division I school, and had to go to a JUCO to get some in-state recognition.

BTW, the Mets also drafted but did not sign players such as Kal Daniels, Rafael Palmeiro and Matt Williams while Joe McIlvaine was scouting director.

Clemens was drafted out of Junior College. He had already gotten the recognition you described. The Mets came up a measly $10,000 short in their offer to him. It wasn't enough, so he took his mother's advice and went to U of T instead, thereby telling the Mets to blow off.

The short list of great players the Mets failed to sign (and over the past 15 years the picks the Mets failed to sign have been more impressive than the ones they have signed) proves that spending the money to sign your picks is a winning strategy. A lot of those guys were selected in the lower rounds and could have been signed for relatively cheap. The Mets have a long standing problem with penny pinching sabotaging good scouting.

I think you missed the point. The point is that there is a fair value that each amateur player is worth. The Mets aren't being cheap, they are being fair. They pay a legitimate amount for the dollar sign on the muscle.

You don't understand economics: Selig doesn't determine fair value - the market determines fair value. The Mets refuse to pay fair value as determined by the market, so when they need youth to fill in for the broken down veterans they love to sign, the well always runs dry.

[ReyesOfHope]

Clemens was drafted out of Junior College.

I stated that. Can you read?

He had already gotten the recognition you described.

Only enough to be a 12th round pick.

The Mets came up a measly $10,000 short in their offer to him. It wasn't enough, so he took his mother's advice and went to U of T instead, thereby telling the Mets to blow off.

They offered him fair market value for a 12th round pick. It's not telling the Mets to blow off. "Blow off" suggests he stuck up his middle finger at the Mets. He CHOSE to go to Texas. I never heard about any hard feelings.

The short list of great players the Mets failed to sign (and over the past 15 years the picks the Mets failed to sign have been more impressive than the ones they have signed) proves that spending the money to sign your picks is a winning strategy.

I agree, but as you stated the list is short, and all teams have a list of players they failed to sign at some point.

A lot of those guys were selected in the lower rounds and could have been signed for relatively cheap.

Name them.

The Mets have a long standing problem with penny pinching sabotaging good scouting.

No more so than any team. All teams have a list of players that slipped through their fingers. I'd like you to name these players of whom you speak.

You don't understand economics: Selig doesn't determine fair value - the market determines fair value. The Mets refuse to pay fair value as determined by the market, so when they need youth to fill in for the broken down veterans they love to sign, the well always runs dry.

Of course I understand economics, but the draft is supposed to allow the worst teams access to the best players. The commissioner's office suggests compliance with the slot system, it is up to clubs to comply, or not. They may agree or disagree as it is the scouts' job to determine what a player is worth to his team in terms of dollars on the muscle. Still there is a lot of pressure on teams to acquire talent and in many cases they overpay - as the Yankees did with Andrew Brackman for example. Just because they gave him $3+ million, doesn't mean fair value for him was $3+ million. They simply overpayed.

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/m...pbp&pid=457581

[ReyesOfHope]

This is unacceptable when the team uses despicable, fan-unfriendly tactics to strong-arm fans into buying outrageously priced season plans.

See... here's the problem Mongoose. You are clearly angry, and an angry man or woman is not likely to be completely objective. Your opinions are tainted.

[Mongoose]

See... here's the problem Mongoose. You are clearly angry, and an angry man or woman is not likely to be completely objective. Your opinions are tainted.

If you want to see angry fans, I suggest you read the Citi Field Seating/Ticket Pricing thread; maybe you'll learn something:

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread...81199&page=582

You live in Massachusetts and your compatriot lives in Charlotte NC. You're really unqualified to discuss the current Mets fan experience. The point is Mets fans pay more than enough to generate sufficient revenue to sign the best talent. The team owes its fans the best talent.

Otherwise, I don't really know what to say to you. Let's go back to the original post and review the article:

The Mets used $1,864,300 on the first 10 rounds of the 2009 draft, less than any other team, and failed to sign their fifth- and sixth-round selections, each a hard-throwing right-handed pitcher.

“With a brand-new ballpark and a television network, the Mets’ revenues are probably among the top five clubs in baseball,” said Jim Callis, the executive editor of Baseball America and an expert on player development. “After spending about $6.5 million when they had extra picks last year, do I think they could have found the money this year? Yeah, I think they could have. It just comes down to the willingness to spend.”

General Manager Omar Minaya defended the Mets’ 2009 strategy, saying that not having a first-round pick diminished their spending and that they were committed to paying for top amateur talent. He added that the Mets tried hard to sign their fifth-round pick, Damien Magnifico of Mesquite, Tex., and their sixth-round choice, David Buchanan of Chipola Junior College in Florida, but that the players rejected what he called fair offers.

“We want to pay for the player whatever we feel the player is worth, and we do the best we can to sign the player,” he said.

The Mets are known for their conservative approach to the draft, particularly since signing Mike Pelfrey, their first-round choice in 2005, for $5.3 million with a $3.5 million bonus. They almost never offer bonuses that exceed the slotting guidelines recommended by the commissioner’s office. They signed their top pick in 2009, Steven Matz, for $895,000, about $388,000 more than what was suggested. But that extra money most likely would have gone to a first-round pick, anyway, so the Mets were not really acting as boldly as they seemed to. Callis said the Mets, the Chicago White Sox and the Houston Astros were the three teams that consistently did not go over the slotting guidelines.

“They may be being good citizens, but it’s not good for the club,” Callis said.

This article is damning.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. The Mets' farm system had little to contribute to the Major League club this past disastrous season. It's had little to contribute for years. Unfortunately, the team's answer to depth has been dumpster diving. If you think otherwise, you're delusional.

Meanwhile, Clemens was a 12th round pick, Palmiero was an 8th round pick, Matt Williams was a 27th round pick, John Wetteland was a 12th round pick, John Olerud was a 27th round pick, Scott Erickson was a 36th round pick, Darin Erstad was a 13th round pick, Billy Koch was a 4th round pick, Aaron Rowland was a 40th round pick, Garrett Atkins was a 10th round pick...

It wouldn't have taken a fortune to sign most of these guys - the only one taken above the 8th round was Koch! They passed on Clemens over a difference of $10k!

One is struck by how poor the Mets' drafts have been in recent years. One would guess the cost of signing picks has been a factor and has prevented the team from drafting the best available talent. One thing's for sure, the Mets do not pay competitive sums; they're only one of three teams not to.

But if you want to believe that not paying competitive sums in the draft has no ill effect on the quality of the roster, go ahead. The New York Times, Baseball America, and most thinking people would disagree.

[NYMets523]

The point is Mets fans pay more than enough to generate sufficient revenue to sign the best talent.

Can you prove ticket prices and team salary are correlated?

ReyesOfHope is right about you, though. You are a very angry individual.

[metfan13]

Can you prove ticket prices and team salary are correlated?

ReyesOfHope is right about you, though. You are a very angry individual.

Oh look, you're in New Jersey. Maybe he'll deem you qualified to have an opinion.

[Mongoose]

Can you prove ticket prices and team salary are correlated?

What an irrelevant question. The discussion here is whether or not the Mets pay competitive bonuses in the draft. Obviously they have the revenue to do so.

ReyesOfHope is right about you, though. You are a very angry individual.

Oh, dear. I suppose this personal attack is the real reason for your post, which is unfortunate. I guess you're still peeved that in the past I've pointed out your tendency to make absurdist, uninformed posts:

Sitting in the Promenade at Citi is like where the blue seats were at Shea.

I don't really care what the name of the blue section was. The seats in the Promenade are better than some of the Lodge seats at all of the Mezzanine.

I apologize and will try not to quote wrong things you say anymore. Please try to behave civilly.

Oh look, you're in New Jersey. Maybe he'll deem you qualified to have an opinion.

Actually his obvious lack of knowledge about the live Mets baseball experience indicates he's not actually a customer and would tend to disqualify him from commenting on the fan unfriendliness of the organization, as well.

Gentlemen...

I realize it's difficult to justify the Mets being the cheapest team in baseball in signing their draft picks, which for some bizarre reason you feel compelled to do, but please try to stay on topic!

[NYMets523]

"What an irrelevant question. The discussion here is whether or not the Mets pay competitive bonuses in the draft. Obviously they have the revenue to do so."

No, it's not irrelevant. I asked you to prove something you stated. You should be able to do so.

"Oh, dear. I suppose this personal attack is the real reason for your post, which is unfortunate. I guess you're still peeved that in the past I've pointed out your tendency to make absurdist, uninformed posts:"

Yes, I didn't remember the name of the blue seat section at Shea. I'm such a horrible fan. You see, when I went to Shea, I was watching the team play a baseball game. I didn't pay attention to the stadium as you did; it was a dump.

By the way, how is that at all relevant to the discussion?

"I apologize and will try not to quote wrong things you say anymore. Please try to behave civilly."

I sat in the blue section (I still don't know the name and I couldn't care less) and I didn't care much for the seats. I preferred my opening day seats at Citi Field. I was higher up and further but I could see more of the field.

"Actually his obvious lack of knowledge about the live Mets baseball experience indicates he's not actually a customer and would tend to disqualify him from commenting on the fan unfriendliness of the organization, as well."

I'm willing to bet you haven't gone to Citi Field. That would mean you aren't a customer either. And according to you, ineligible to comment on the perceived fan unfriendliness.

[ReyesOfHope]

I realize it's difficult to justify the Mets being the cheapest team in baseball in signing their draft picks, which for some bizarre reason you feel compelled to do, but please try to stay on topic!

For what it is worth at this point. The Mets did sign 26 of their first 29 picks. That is a pretty high ratio. I guess none of those 26 players had any problem with the Mets' offers. By comparison the Yankees only signed 22 of their first 29, and Boston signed only 21 of 29. Pittsburgh signed 19 of 29. Shall I look up some other teams, or is my point clear enough?

If you want to see angry fans, I suggest you read the Citi Field Seating/Ticket Pricing thread; maybe you'll learn something:

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread...81199&page=582

You live in Massachusetts and your compatriot lives in Charlotte NC. You're really unqualified to discuss the current Mets fan experience.

What an obnoxious thing to say. I moved to Massachusetts in February 2009. Besides, what would it have to do with the topic? LOL. You ARE an angry person, and I summarily dismiss your opinions because they are clearly tainted by rage. Be gone. Shoo fly.

[Mongoose]

For what it is worth at this point. The Mets did sign 26 of their first 29 picks. That is a pretty high ratio. I guess none of those 26 players had any problem with the Mets' offers. By comparison the Yankees only signed 22 of their first 29, and Boston signed only 21 of 29. Pittsburgh signed 19 of 29. Shall I look up some other teams, or is my point clear enough?

Looking at the Mets' bad drafts in recent years, I'm inclined to think they may just draft signable players, rather than the best available in their slots.

What an obnoxious thing to say. I moved to Massachusetts in February 2009. Besides, what would it have to do with the topic? LOL. You ARE an angry person, and I summarily dismiss your opinions because they are clearly tainted by rage. Be gone. Shoo fly.

You could have simply explained that without the personal attack.

YOU are an angry person, and I summarily dismiss your opinions because they are clearly tainted by rage. Be gone. Shoo fly.