I'm thinking that if free-agent SS Stephen Drew had a two- or three-year offer in hand, he would have accepted it by now. The fact that he's still on the open market more or less indicates he's still only seeing one-year offers.
So far, Sandy Alderson has intimated that he's open to a long-term contract with Drew, but only if the money is right. My read has been that Alderson will do one year, maybe two, but ideally that second year is an option and in no way will the player be in control of it.
The way I understand it, the Mets and Drew's agent, Scott Boras, had meaningful talks early in the winter. However, since then, the relationship has been mostly Boras calling the Mets to see if their position has changed, which it has not.
WFAN’s Mike Francesa said on air earlier this month that the Mets made an offer to Drew.
“They’re fighting over the number of years,” Francesa said (WFAN, Feb. 4). “It’s not the money."
Naturally, a team source quickly denied Francesa's report in several publications, including the Boston Herald and the Daily News. In every public interview during the last two weeks, Alderson has repeatedly said the Mets are unlikely to sign Drew or make another significant acquisition this winter. Yet, the Mets continue to find themselves connected to Drew in trade rumors.
I bet a number of teams have essentially 'offered' him one year, or at least expressed interest at that level. If that's the case, and he's weighing one-year situations with the Mets and Red Sox, and let's say the Astros and Twins, maybe the Yankees, maybe the A's, I wonder if Alderson would move to guarantee the second year to get the deal done? And, if he did, would Boras then be able to get two years, and maybe even three, from from someone else? At which point, Alderson would no longer be interested, I assume...