Mets Blog reports that speaking on the MLB Network on Monday, Alderson said, “The payroll this year is lower. The effective payroll will be about the same as it was last year, in terms of the players we actually have on the field.”

What he meant by that is after taking away the salaries of Oliver Perez, Luis Castillo, Francisco Rodriguez and Carlos Beltran (which of course the Mets still paid), the payroll in the second half of 2011 is similar to the payroll this season.

At least Alderson admitted the payroll is lower this season, but by talking about the “effective payroll” he is trying to gloss over the fact that the payroll is $50 million less — a record MLB reduction. He is in essence saying, “The payroll is the same as last season.”

That is just a lie. The Mets are operating like a small market team that keeps its revenue sharing and does not put it back into the team. The Mets took that $50 million savings and put it in the Wilpons pocket. This “effective payroll” thing is just a bunch of garbage.

But of course no one will call it what is is.  Just another example of the Mets not being honest with their fans.

But I begin with the non-spiritual one. Like millions of other children, I used to write to baseball teams and players asking them for some kind of memorabilia. They often sent pictures (I wonder if teams still do that today). Of course I wrote to my idol Hank Aaron. I liked him because I had read the young-adult book “Hammerin’ Hank of the Braves” (a book I recently picked up again at a flea market), and I was struck at how, despite his accomplishments, I didn’t think he got the credit he was due. He was still chasing Babe Ruth’s home run record at the time, and everyone was saying, “He’s not as good as the Babe. He’ll never be as good as Willie Mays.” This struck a chord in my underdog mentality (I am the youngest in my family, and of course, I am a Mets fan!), so he became my favorite.

On my 10th birthday I got an envelope in the mail. It contained a signed picture of Aaron, addressed personally to me:

I was excited. I wrote on the back “Got it on my birthday 1973″ in my childish elementary school script. A few years later when I started collecting memorabilia I decided that my inscription might hurt its value, so I tried to erase it. I didn’t do a good job; it can still be faintly seen.

(But I did destroy any value of a Roberto Clemente card. In the early 1970s Topps came out with a line of over-sized cards on thicker cardboard. Next to Clemente’s date of birth I wrote “Died 12/31/72.” My brother, the card’s co-owner, still won’t let me forget it. Yet he forgets that he was the one who wrecked the big Aaron card my trying to copy his signature on it. So there.).

In any case, I felt like I got a birthday present from the great Hank Aaron himself, and I’ve kept it ever since. Is the signature real, or did some clubhouse kid sign it? Does it really matter?

Now onto the biblical gift. I assume I wasn’t the only kid who looked at the back of every baseball card to check the players’ birthdays in the hopes that at least one of them shared mine. Well, at least one did; exactly one, actually — Clyde Wright. Wright was a relatively obscure player who pitched mostly for the Angels in a 10-year career from 1966-1975. He had a couple of good seasons, including winning 22 games in 1970. Yankees fans probably hate him because he is the father of Jaret Wright, a high-priced failure from a few years back. I would never have known of Clyde Wright had it not been for our shared birthday, but I did know of him, even at an early age.

So one year on my birthday (it might have been the year before the Aaron gift, perhaps the year after, but probably not the same year) I was walking to school with my friends (back in the day when it was safe to walk to school without parental involvement) when I saw something on the ground, glistening in the early morning winter sun. As I got closer I saw that it was a baseball coin.

In 1971 Topps came out with a line of baseball coins, each a little bit bigger than a JFK half-dollar. There were 153 in all.

I bent down to pick it up. I looked at the player. Of course it was Clyde Wright.

I found a baseball coin on a random street in Brooklyn, on my birthday, of the one player who shared a birthday with me. That is too big to be a coincidence. That coin was left there for me to find. I believe that to this day. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on matters such as this, and call it what you want, but I think it shows that something bigger than all of us is at work here.

This year for my birthday I might get a Tom Seaver autographed baseball if my girlfriend picked up on my very obvious hints. It would be a great gift that I will always keep, but I just don’t think anything can top my Hank Aaron picture and my miracle Clyde Wright coin.

Obviously if Santana can be the Santana of old, or even a reasonable facsimile, the starting rotation will be that much stronger, giving the Mets a chance to compete. Without him the Mets are aceless (remember the great “Mike Pelfrey is an ace” experiment in 2011? That ended when John Buck’s grand slam sailed over the wall on Opening Day in Florida).

If Santana can solidify the rotation — the weakest link on the team in my opinion — the Mets could actually contend if everything else falls into place. So in that sense the Mets future is in his left arm.

However let’s say Santana does come back healthy and everything else does not fall into place and the Mets are out of contention by the trading deadline. You don’t think at least one team which thinks it is one pitcher away from the World Series would take a chance on a healthy Santana? Perhaps that team would also be willing to pick up most, if not all of Santana’s contract, which would be around $10 million for the remainder of 2012, $25.5 for 2013 and then a $5.5 million buyout for 2014. You get a proven Santana for the stretch run, the playoffs and a full 2013 for around $40 million. If you win a World Series or two because of it, that’s not too bad at all, and it’s not a long commitment.

Likely the Mets would have to pick up some of it, but if they can clear most of that salary from the books, they can go out and get two or three quality players as well as keep David Wright. A rebuilding team cannot afford a $25 million ace, whether he is healthy or not. So once again the Mets future, this time the team’s financial future, is in Santana’s left arm.

The double-whammy would be if Santana cannot come back healthy. Then the Mets are saddled with the contract and getting no production out of it.

That is definitely an unfortunate possibility. It’s been repeated ad nauseum that Chien-Ming Wang is the latest pitcher to attempt a comeback from this particular shoulder surgery to the anterior capsule, and it took him two years to make it back to the majors. Santana’s surgery was in September 2010, so he is hoping to top Wang’s timetable.

So if Santana makes if back by Opening Day — still a big if — no one knows what to expect. It is safe to say he won’t have the same stuff he had before, but I think he can still be effective. Santana is a smart man who knows how to pitch, not just throw. As Mets fans we have seen this twice recently, with Al Leiter and Pedro Martinez. Both of them had diminished stuff but they were still able to go out there and even if they struggled a bit, they were able to battle because they knew what they were doing out there.

It could be really fun to watch Santana this season. It is difficult to say that watching someone struggle is fun, but it will be interesting to see how Santana will be able to get himself out of trouble by using his pitching smarts. Just from a baseball standpoint it could be fascinating.

In any case, the Mets future — both on the field and financially — is literally on Santana’s shoulders. That is a tough burden for anyone, especially someone whose shoulder may not be up for the challenge.

I am deeply saddened to tell you all that my precious dad went to be with Jesus today at 4:10 pm. This is the most difficult thing I have ever had to write in my entire life but I wanted you all to know. He is in heaven and has reunited with his mom and dad. I believe with all my heart that dad had a STANDING OVATION as he walked through the gates of heaven to be with Jesus.

Carter was diagnosed with brain tumors last May. Initial treatment seemed positive, but then last month more tumors were found and his treatment was stopped.

In a statement Mets ownership said:

“On behalf of everyone at the Mets, we extend our deepest and heartfelt condolences to Gary’s family — his wife Sandy, daughters Christy and Kimmy and son D.J.  His nickname ‘The Kid’ captured how Gary approached life.  He did everything with enthusiasm and with gusto on and off the field.  His smile was infectious. He guided our young pitching staff to the World Series title in 1986 and he devoted an equal amount of time and energy raising awareness for a multitude of charities and community causes.  He was a Hall of Famer in everything he did.”

Carter was only a Met for five seasons, but he was the final piece of the puzzle that put the team over the top. He made an impression during his very first game in 1985, hitting a game-winning home run in the tenth inning on Opening Day.

He also deserves credit for starting the amazing comeback in Game 6 of the 1986 World Series. With the bases empty and two outs in the tenth, Carter singled. We all know what happened next. Carter said he didn’t want to be the one to make the final out. Good thing he didn’t!

Despite his relatively brief career in Flushing, Carter certainly thought of himself as a Met. When he was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2003, he wanted to wear a Mets hat on his plaque. However the Hall forced him into an Expos hat — he did play 12 years in Montreal, after all. Carter later managed in the Mets minor league system and for a time was considered a possible Mets manager of the future.

Sadly though, that will never happen.

This lying is nothing new. Omar Minaya was a compulsive liar, but he lied about little things. The big lies came after the Madoff scandal. How often and for how many years did the Wilpons say it would not effect the operations of the ballclub? Of course they knew it would from the moment their account statement read $0 instead of $500 million. Unless you are uber-wealthy, losing $500 million and the guaranteed 15% yearly cash flow from that money will effect the way you operate. The Wilpons are rich men, but not that rich.

Now we are getting dishonesty from Sandy Alderson. Again, we are used to a GM lying, but it was easy to pick out Minaya’s exaggerated statements. Alderson is tougher.

See, they can’t even look us in the eye!

Where is that $120 million payroll you promised? Then $110 million to $120 million? Then around $100 million? The payroll now sits closer to $90 million. Perhaps Alderson made the misleading statements based on changing information from the Wilpons, but barring that possible revelation, this is on him.

And what about Jose Reyes — did the Mets have any intention of resigning him? Alderson claims he wanted to, yet he never even made him an offer. That doesn’t sound like a team that wants to retain a player. If Alderson just came out and said, “You know what, he is just too expensive for us right now, so we’re not going to sign him,” Mets fans would still be angry but we would appreciate the honesty. Instead we are left with statements that have no basis in fact.

Are the Mets rebuilding, or what? Will they shed all big contracts and live with a low payroll for the foreseeable future while the prospects advance and the Wilpons get their finances in order? Who knows? No one is telling us. I think we could support a rebuilding process (as long as David Wright is still there for us to cheer) if we know that is what is happening. But leaving fans in the dark just creates more resentment. That is something the Mets do not need from their already disillusioned fan base.

Obviously the Mets fear that if they tell fans they are going into full rebuilding mode they won’t come to games until the project is complete. They are dead wrong. While the fair-weather fans will stay home, the die-hards will not. We love and support this team, but it is very difficult to support anything if the people in charge are not being honest about what they are doing. We just want to know what is going on. That is not too much to ask.

For the Mets, this is the slowest time of an already-slow off season. The players who will report to spring training are pretty much the same players we saw last season, with the exception of a few guys here and there. So what to do during such a time? Well, many writers are just chasing shadows.

Like the “reports” that the Mets were pursuing such left handed hitting outfielders as Rick Ankiel, Johnny Damon and Kosuke Fukudome. These were the same people claiming the Mets were going after Seth Smith, Ryan Theriot and a host of other available players this winter. Of course, none of this came to pass.

When will these alleged “experts” get it through their thick heads that the Mets are not spending money on anybody unless they can be had for around a million dollars or less — preferably less. Why do you think such superstars as Scott Hairston and Ronny Cedeno are taking up room on the Mets bench?

This off season was dominated by money, or more precisely, the lack of it. The Mets spent the least that they possibly could to field a respectable team. So much for playing “meaningful” games in September. The new buzz word around Flushing is now “respectable.”

Are the Mets setting up Daniel Murphy to replace David Wright as the team’s third baseman?

I have gone on record as saying I don’t think the Mets should ever trade Wright; instead, they should sign him to an extension right now. But that won’t happen, and the conventional wisdom is that Sandy Alderson might look to trade Wright at the July 31 deadline if he is doing well and the Mets are not.

If that horrible event does actually happen, who’s on third (no Abbott and Costello jokes, please)? It would have to be Murphy. I think Murphy will open up the season as the starting second baseman. He will be a whiz at the plate and a butcher in the field. Since two of his seasons have ended early with busted knees on plays at second, it is clear Murphy does not have a feel for the position.

He started out in the minors as a third baseman, and while I’m sure he was no Brooks Robinson out there, my guess is that he would be adequate. He proved while playing first base (where he was quite competent) that he can react well to balls hit right at him. He would get the same treatment on the other side of the field. Whether he can make the long throws remains to be seen.

I think this is why Alderson spurned offers for Murphy and Justin Turner during the off-season. Turner would slide into second if Wright is traded and Murphy moves to third.

I pray that this does not happen. Nothing against Murphy and Turner playing everyday, but if Wright goes, for whom do the fans root? Ronny Cedeno?

On Wednesday I was a guest on “The Baseball Page Podcast with Phil Naessens,” discussing all things Mets. The conversation spanned the gamut from the current state of the Mets to the infamous 1986 Houston strip club bust.

I had a really good time doing it. Thanks to Phil for having me on.

Check it out here:
http://phillipnaessens.mlblogs.com/2012/02/02/the-baseball-page-podcast-new-york-mets-baseball-with-mark-berman/

Since this Mets off-season has been boring and quietly disappointing, I’ve decided to take a look back at 1977, when they pulled off one of the biggest trades in Mets (and perhaps baseball) history, as far as number of teams and players are concerned. I am talking about the four-team, 11-player deal that netted the Mets one of the biggest hot dogs in baseball history — Willie Montanez.

Here’s how it went down on December 8, 1977:

Mets

Trade:
Jon Matlack
John Milner

Get:
Willie Montanez
Tom Grieve
Ken Henderson

Braves

Trade:
Willie Montanez

Get:
Tommy Boggs
Adrian Devine
Eddie Miller

Rangers

Trade:
Bert Blyleven
Tom Grieve
Ken Henderson
Tommy Boggs
Adrian Devine
Eddie Miller

Get:
Jon Matlack
Al Oliver
Nelson Norman

Pirates

Trade:
Al Oliver
Nelson Norman

Get:

Bert Blyleven
John Milner

It was a curious trade for the Mets. The 30-year-old Montanez was pretty good, coming off of a 20-home run season. But fellow first baseman Milner was a few years younger and was a similar hitter. Matlack, though, was only 27, and while he was coming off his first bad season for the Mets, there was no reason to give up on him. He went on to pitch six reasonably successful years with the Rangers.

Montanez played well for the Mets in 1978. In addition to 96 RBIs, he gave the awful, bland team some personality. He was traded midway through the 1979 season to, of course, the Rangers, which perhaps wanted him in the original deal. Grieve and Henderson were useless for the Mets.

It looks like this was just a Montanez dump for the Braves. The three players they got in return did nothing.

The Rangers gave up quantity for quality. In addition to Matlack, they got Oliver, one of the top hitters in the game at the time, and an underrated player overall.

But they had to give up Blyleven to get him, and that’s what made the Pirates the big winners of the trade. The future Hall of Famer went 12-5 for Pittsburgh in 1979, helping to lead the “We Are Family” Pirates to the world championship. Milner contributed with 16 homers that year. Incidentally, Milner was traded during the 1981 season to Expos for — you guessed it — Willie Montanez!

They just don’t do trades like that anymore. Ah, the good old days!