(
)
QUESTION: What’s it going to take?
That’s the relevant inquiry now. Everything else, every other debate, every other question, belongs in a vacuum.
Q: Should the Mets trade Jose Reyes?
A (in a vacuum): Are you insane? Of course not.
Q: Should the Mets be prepared to do whatever’s necessary to re-sign Reyes in the offseason, preferably during their exclusive window of negotiating opportunity, before everyone and their brother-in-law gets a chance to woo him?
A (in a vacuum): Are you feeling faint? Of course they should.
In a vacuum, there is nothing to argue about, because in a vacuum the words “Madoff” and “Picard” do not exist. What we’re seeing out of Reyes is something the Mets have never experienced in this, their 50th season of existence. Mike Piazza’s .324/.398/.614 (batting/on-base/slugging) from 2000 is probably the finest single-season in the team’s history for an everyday player, with honorable mentions to Carlos Beltran ’06 (.275/.388/.594), Darryl Strawberry ’87 (.284/.398/.583) and Cleon Jones ’69 (.340/.422/.482).
METS’ SCORING BINGE ROLLS ON IN LATEST ROUT OF TIGERS
BYRDAK SPIKES BALL AFTER DIRKS’ HOMER
Even with his extraordinary first half, Reyes’ value isn’t limited to those slash numbers, though thanks to his 15 triples he does check in at .349/.393/.525. That’s an OPS (on-base plus slugging) of .918. That’s higher than Ryan Howard’s, Alex Rodriguez’s and Albert Pujols’ — to name three — and is also between 200-300 points higher than almost every other leadoff hitter in the sport (J.J. Hardy is at .916 overall and 1.113 as Orioles’ leadoff man, but he’s only hit first 18 times).
No, much like another shortstop we know, Reyes’ more telling value sits beyond the calculator. Perhaps he isn’t the patron saint of intangibles that Derek Jeter is, but the things Reyes brings to the Mets that aren’t found in his batting splits tend to be just as valuable as the integers. It’s found in the electricity he generates, his disruptive nature on the basepaths, the way the Mets simply look — and feel — more dangerous when he’s in the lineup, even on a rare 0-for-4 day. Which leads us back to . . .
What’s it going to take?
There is no vacuum attached to that one. There is precedent, and there is market value, and there is loyalty, and there is money. All of those conspire in a brew that makes it impossible to predict to the penny what it’s going to take to keep Reyes a Met, but certainly gives us a fair ballpark idea. And it’s a Citi-Field-like ballpark, too, not a cozy-confines field.
Looking for a precedent? Let’s put it this way: If Jayson Werth is worth $126 million, then Reyes is probably worth a figure only Bill Gates is familiar with. More to the point, Carl Crawford signed a deal with the Red Sox this offseason for seven years and $142; specific to Reyes, of course, was Fred Wilpon, the man who (for now, anyway) still signs the checks, who said with great certainty that Reyes will not make “Carl Crawford money” next year. Some have backed that up, saying Crawford’s power is the one part of the two men’s games that Reyes lacks.
But Crawford has never hit as many as 20 homers in a year, has reached 90 RBIs once — on the dot, in 2010. People were making the argument about Crawford’s durability, but that’s died down since Crawford presently sits on the DL. His finest slash year was 2007, when he was .315/.355/.466. That, clearly, isn’t Jose Reyes 2011.
Or Jose Reyes 2008, for that matter (.297/.358/.475).
Or . . . yeah, Jose Reyes 2006 (.300/.354/.487).
So it’s probably best to stop the foolishness that Reyes is playing this well because he’s in a contract push. Truth is, when healthy, he’s played just as well while toiling under a very club-friendly deal (five years, $33.75 M) too. Is that clause — “when healthy” — important? It is. But Pujols, another pending free agent, suddenly has his own injury cloud. And nobody is on a bigger salary drive than Price Fielder, whose current 1.033 OPS is 162 points higher than last year.
So . . . what’s it going to take?
For the Mets, we’ll start here: Six years, $126 million. Slightly higher average value than Crawford, one less year, a nod to a legs-driven player. For the Mets, it means a $10 million raise over Reyes’ current deal, offset nicely by the disappearance of $36.5 million worth of Luis Castillo/Oliver Perez/Carlos Beltran — and nearly matching the $11.5 million the Mets are paying Frankie Rodriguez this year (we’ll put K-Rod’s $17 million vesting issue in that vacuum, for now).
That’s a cool $21 million a year, which still only would place him fourth (behind A-Rod, CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira and Johan Santana) on the yearly salary scale of New York baseball players.
If that’s not enough? Well, that’s more motivation for the Mets to find viable ownership again so they can play varsity ball again. That’s another matter for another column to answer on another day.
The answer to this question is simpler:
A: Plenty.
michael.vaccaro@nypost.com