I think this team is closer to competing than you make out, like 2014 close. There is nothing wrong with the infield and if the hyped kids turn out to be real, they will be solid behind the plate and in the starting rotation (with Johan at the back-end in 2014, if he isn’t traded before the end of 2013).

Bullpens and benches are always a work in progress; that leaves the outfield. With nothing expected to be on the market next off-season, why not take on Bourne. He is a solid CF on a team who doesn’t have a true major league outfielder on its roster. Neither Neiuwenhuis nor Cowgill are going to end-up being stars, and along with Duda, the Mets will have 3-guys vying for 2-positions.

A multi-year low-teens offer to Bourne isn’t going to hurt the Mets payroll in 2014. The only real money in the payroll (aside from David Wright’s) belongs to Johan Santana and Jason Bay. Both come off at the end of 2014, and as mentioned, if Johan is having a good 2013, he is likely to be traded this year.

Last point, I don’t understand where you are going with your comments about R.A. Dickey. Sandy’s position on that one all along was to find a good trade. If he couldn’t he would sign R.A.; he found one and pulled the trigger. If it had turned out Toronto was unwilling to part with D’Arnaud and Syndergaard, R.A. would still be a Met. Instead, Sandy got his catcher of the future, and the next coming of Zach Wheeler. Both D’Arnaud and Wheeler are likely to arrive in Flushing this May, while Syndergaard probably makes his first appearance in late 2014 (at best).

All that puts the Mets in good position for 2014 and great position for 2015… even with Bourne as a veteran in CF. At that point the real money can be spent on a corner outfielder and potentially a closer (if they finally give up on Parnell in that role).

So, although he is in no way a savior, I don’t buy into your argument about Bourne being a “disaster” for the Mets. Especially, if they can get him for less than the $15MM he’s seeking.

There’s little reason to think that Bourn’s legs at 32, when a 3 year deal would conclude, will be unsound. Moreover, if one of the Mets outfield prospects appears to be equal to or an upgrade from Bourn, (not necessarily a very high probability) the Mets will get a fine return for him in trade. Meanwhile, he gives the Mets an excellent leadoff hitter and gold glove center fielder, major unfilled needs of theirs for years. Moreover, Bourn will probably be the Mets best option as a leadoff hitter in 2014 and 2015, when, as you say, the Mets mature and are ready to make a playoff bid. Bourn therefore, definitely will help in that effort.

Anyone who thinks the Dickey trade was made because the FO was unwilling to go that extra $5 million is naive or foolish. That trade wasn’t aboout the money at all. They did it to upgrade the team and build for the future. Obtaining a future all star catcher and a likely #2 starter, as well as a high upside young prospect, was a major coup. Signing Marcum to replace Dickey in the rotation was also a smart move. Marcum is a quality starter who could contribute 12 to 14 wins, and with Harvey winning at least 10 more games than the 3 he won last year, the rotation should easily make up the 20 wins that left with R.A. Santana, Marcum, Niese, Harvey and Gee (with Wheeler waiting in the wings) is a strong rotation, possibly stronger than last year’s.

Lastly, you missed the boat on the Reyes departure also. The FO was willing to resign Reyes to a reasonable long term deal. What he got from Miami was not that, and the FO was wise not to match it, or to chase Reyes. Jose is another player whose game is dependent on his legs. You are complaining about a possible 3 year/$45 million deal for Bourn. How would 6 years/$106 million with a 7th year option sound?