Originally posted on FOX Sports  |  Last updated 11/30/12
If the Mets' negotiations with David Wright were a test of ownership's willingness to spend, not even the most cynical can deny that the team just passed in a big way. Time to give credit where credit is due. I was among those who questioned when the Mets, under Fred Wilpon, would emerge from their post-Madoff funk and resume operating like a high-revenue franchise. The answer came early Thursday morning, when the team agreed with Wright on an eight-year, $138 million contract -- the largest in team history. The deal, which is pending a physical, is not necessarily a wise one for the club. Wright turns 30 on Dec. 20, and so many of these large contracts rarely work out well. But for the Mets, who last offseason lost shortstop Jose Reyes in free agency, locking up Wright was absolutely essential, just to prove they are back in business again. The next question, obviously, is whether Wright will be an isolated case. The news on that front, however, also is good: The team's Opening Day payroll is likely to be between $105 million and $110 million, an increase from $93 million last season, major-league sources say. That doesn't mean the Mets are going to embark upon a free-agent binge; Sandy Alderson is not that type of general manager. But Wright's willingness to commit long-term to Wright amounts to supporting evidence that the Mets are serious about making improvements. Players want to win, no matter how much money they're earning. Wright, even with $138 million guaranteed, is no different. He wasn't interested in spending the rest of his career in a baseball Alcatraz. Surely, Wright asked for assurances that the team intends to spend the money necessary to contend in the highly competitive NL East. And surely, he received them. Now, teams aren't always bound by such promises, as the Miami Marlins have proved time and again. But Wright is not some free-agent mercenary joining Team Fire Sale. The Mets are his original club, and he is close to ownership. The question of whether the Mets should have traded Wright is not unreasonable; some within the organization, in fact, believed that it was the proper move. From a baseball perspective, that might be true. But the Mets play in New York, the nation's largest media market. They needed to start acting like it, rather than continue operating like the Cleveland Indians. Cy Young Award winner R.A. Dickey is next on the Mets' agenda; he is under contract for $5 million next season, and the team has been talking to him about a two-year extension. A deal seems likely, given Dickey's desire to remain with the club. But you know what? Trading him in a pitching-starved market could make sense. The Mets, after signing Wright, could pull off such a move without incurring much public-relations damage. Indeed, their fans might welcome such a trade if it appeared to be in the team's best long-term interests. That is a baseball question, the kind of question that every team confronts daily, the kind that had gotten lost with the Mets because of all the talk about their financial difficulties. That's the best part about the Wright deal. Maybe now Mets fans can start talking about baseball again.
MORE FROM YARDBARKER

LeBron becomes youngest in NBA history to score 30K points

Report: Isaiah Thomas led charge against Kevin Love

Baker Mayfield addresses Johnny Manziel comparisons

Report: Rob Gronkowski in good spirits, Patriots optimistic he'll play in Super Bowl LII

Astros' Jon Singleton receives 100-game suspension

LIKE WHAT YOU SEE?
GET THE DAILY NEWSLETTER:

Jalen Rose: ‘Kawhi Leonard wants out of San Antonio’

WWE fires Enzo Amore in wake of rape accusation

Tyronn Lue says it’s ‘crazy’ to scapegoat Kevin Love for Thunder loss

Report: NFL wants Raiders to sign Kaepernick after Rooney ruling

Jay Feely: Gisele tried to get me to convince Tom Brady to retire

Raiders to make a run at Le’Veon Bell if he becomes free agent?

The 'OK, so it's not always good to be The King' quiz

How to stop a Pats comeback: Never think you're ahead

How the Philadelphia Eagles arrived at Super Bowl LII

How the New England Patriots arrived at Super Bowl LII

Close calls: 20 MLB greats who came closest to Cooperstown but never made it

Nine reasons why the Eagles will beat the Patriots in Super Bowl LII

The surprising failure of Jason Kidd

How things have changed since last Eagles-Pats Super Bowl

The Chicago Bulls' future is on the clock

Position-by-position breakdown of Super Bowl LII teams

The 'More things change...' quiz

Greatest surprise Super Bowl stars

MLB News
Delivered to your inbox
You'll also receive Yardbarker's daily Top 10, featuring the best sports stories from around the web. Customize your newsletter to get articles on your favorite sports and teams. And the best part? It's free!

By clicking "Sign Me Up", you have read and agreed to the Yardbarker Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. You can opt out at any time. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Close calls: 20 MLB greats who came closest to Cooperstown but never made it

The 'OK, so it's not always good to be The King' quiz

How to stop a Pats comeback: Never think you're ahead

How the Philadelphia Eagles arrived at Super Bowl LII

Greatest surprise Super Bowl stars

Position-by-position breakdown of Super Bowl LII teams

Oldest players to ever be on Super Bowl rosters

The 'More things change...' quiz

How the New England Patriots arrived at Super Bowl LII

Players with the most Super Bowl appearances

Today's Best Stuff
For Publishers
Company Info
Help
Follow Yardbarker