3:58 pm: The Mets were not interested in paying $10 million for Drew, Mets GM Sandy Alderson told reporters on Tuesday.
"We need to do our best to give some of our younger players an opportunity," he concluded (Kraus, May 20).
2:59 pm: The Mets expressed interest in Drew early in the off season. However, by April, talks between the two sides were essentially nonexistent (Daily News, Apr. 25), with the Mets continuing to discuss only a one-year deal (NY Post, May 20).
The Tigers, Blue Jays and Astros had also been linked to Drew, who at one point was offered a two-year deal from the Yankees (NY Post, May 20).
Drew turned down a one-year, $14 million qualifying offer from the Red Sox this past winter, which meant he would cost draft-pick compensation if signed by a team other than Boston.
Drew’s name had not appeared in a post on MLB Trade Rumors since early March, at which time he was reportedly still seeking a multi-year deal and willing to wait until after June's MLB draft to find a new team.
3:11 pm: Drew would've cost a three-year deal, probably worth around $40 million, based on the information above. Naturally, this will not stop some fans from insisting the Mets should've signed him. I'm not one of them. I feel Drew would have been worth a two-year deal, but I assume he would have instead taken the same deal from the Yankees. So, it's a moot point. In the end, the Red Sox are the only team that made sense here, which is why no one ponied up the extra years and why he's returning to Boston...
The minute it became clear Drew was willing to wait until late June to ink a new deal and the Red Sox would not be getting draft pick compensation for his departure, I'm sure Boston started drawing up a new contract for him to sign. In this scenario, Boston saves $4 million, Drew gets to play where he's done well, and he can be a free agent this winter with a lot less baggage than he had this time around.