clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Michael Bourn: Bad Idea For The Mets

Despite the fact that many Mets fans want to see an upgrade in the outfield, Michael Bourn isn't a good fit for the team.

Scott Cunningham

It has been a loud offseason for the Mets, but not necessarily in a good way. First they signed David Wright, which was good. Then they traded R.A. Dickey for a boatload of prospects, which was difficult, but probably good. They haven't added an everyday outfielder, though.

The market for Michael Bourn is quiet, but the Mets have been a rumored landing spot for the speedy center fielder. There are a acouple of problems with the Mets potentially signing Bourn.

The Draft

As it stands right now, they would have to surrender the 11th overall pick in the draft, which is the highest-possible non-protected pick. This is a costly price to pay, and for a team that is in a position to have a good draft, it probably is not worth it. It's important to remember that not only do the Mets have the 11th pick, but they're allotted the bonus money that comes with it. The Mets would be sacrificing $2,625,000 from their bonus pool this year, which is particularly significant because they have two second-round picks due to their failure to sign last year's second rounder.

Signing Bourn would be devastating to the team's 2013 draft class and because of that it would cause direct harm to the farm system. The Mets are in position to grab a guy who falls into the 2nd round this year, but if they signed Bourn they would be stuck with one of the smallest bonus pools in the league.

Bourn's Age

The Mets would be signing a risky player in his 30s to a multi-year deal — Carl Crawford, anyone?

I am in no way guaranteeing that Michael Bourn will collapse, but there is risk in a long-term deal for him. A player who has a career .343 BABIP and gets a lot of his value from baserunning and defense is a scary proposition to sign for multiple seasons into his 30s. If Bourn ends up off of center field and has his BABIP come crashing down to Earth, the Mets could be in a scary position having more dead money on their payroll.

The 2013 Season

The Mets do not appear to be playoff contenders in 2013, so why pay for wins that wouldn't necessarily matter?

This is perhaps my weakest argument, but still a worthy one. If the Mets will not be contending for the postseason this year, why add wins now in exchange for a lower draft pick? Bourn would still constitute a huge upgrade over any of the current outfielders for certain, but it is difficult for me to see a fit here. If he is interested in signing a one-year "pillow contract," then the Mets would not be a fit because 2013 is going to be a rough year in all likelihood. If the contract is for multiple years, it would make more sense on the baseball side of things, but I would question the risk of a deal like that.

The Mets are trying to get their 11th overall pick protected, though. If this is the case, then I would be less opposed to a deal for Bourn, but still would not fully be in favor because of his high BABIP and speed-based skill-set.

Summing my argument up, I feel as though Bourn is not worth it for the Mets under current circumstances because he will cost the Mets a high draft pick, he would be too risky, and he wouldn't add enough wins to the Mets to be worth it.

What do you guys think? Is he worth it?