In-Trade Thread

[Edgy MD]

From the "Show us the plan" file, I don't think we're ever going to really hear how money is going to be re-invested. The best you can do is look at the next purchase, and consider the outlay coming in part or whole from whatever was saved or returned in the previous non-cash-neutral deal.

[A Boy Named Seo]

WRT to bonus pool money, here's what it looked like before the Mets got that extra $1M.

Signing Bonus Pool B ($6,025,400): Reds, Marlins, Brewers, Twins, Athletics, Rays
Signing Bonus Pool A ($5,504,500): D-backs, Orioles, Indians, Rockies, Royals, Pirates, Padres
Signing Bonus Pool ($5,004,500): Cardinals
Signing Bonus Pool ($4,983,500): Braves, Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, Tigers, Astros, Angels, Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Mariners, Giants, Rangers, Blue Jays, Nationals
Signing Bonus Pool ($3,949,000): Phillies

Teams in italics can't spend more than $300K on any player as a penalty for exceeding their bonus pool last signing period.

So the Mets now have $1M more than their $4.9M bonus pool peers, but still have a little less $$ to spend than the Fish, Brewers, Twins, and Rays ($42K is still $42K, especially to a amateur teen from a poorer country). Def good to have that extra cash to splash, but will still a bit of luck and/or savvy to get a clear-cut #1 prospect dude (Victor Vector or whoever that may be). Maybe there's a big talent the Mets love but knew they'd need the extra $$ to sign. Or maybe they just wanna be able to buy a few more 17-year old player lotto tix than before. Who knows.

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2018-19-mlb-international-bonus-pools/

[batmagadanleadoff]

The Mets aren't putting up any more of the team for sale, so they won't be receiving any more money. It's two of the recent investors that are interested in selling their shares. Besides, the Wilpon/Katz group now owns just 51% of the team, after the recent Madoff necessitated selloff.

[bmfc1]

Good analysis, thank you ABNSeo.

[Guest d'Kong76]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The Mets aren't putting up any more of the team for sale, so they won't be receiving any more money. It's two of the recent investors that are interested in selling their shares.

You're right, I misspoke in my excitement last night.

[G-Fafif]

Can I just say Justine Ward is doing a helluva job?

[ashie62]

Love Justine!

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The Mets aren't putting up any more of the team for sale, so they won't be receiving any more money. It's two of the recent investors that are interested in selling their shares. Besides, the Wilpon/Katz group now owns just 51% of the team, after the recent Madoff necessitated selloff.

well sort of. _Sterling Equities_ owns 51% or whatever. 52 I think, if it was really 12 4% shares.

but Jeff Wilpon bought one. Saul Katz bought one. SNY bought 4.

No one ever talks about it like that though. The creative accounting must be confusing to baseball writers.



As far as this trade goes, on one's seemingly leaked a report of an obviously better offer, though Law asserts it and then claims it's not on him to cite anything approaching a source.

[nymr83]

Edgy MD wrote: From the "Show us the plan" file, I don't think we're ever going to really hear how money is going to be re-invested. The best you can do is look at the next purchase, and consider the outlay coming in part or whole from whatever was saved or returned in the previous non-cash-neutral deal.

when it comes to international signing bonus dollars, we do actually get to see where they spend the money (unless the prospect comes from Venezuela, things are so bad there that Baseball America isn't posting signings out of fear of kidnapping of prospects' families)

[Frayed Knot]

Pitched the 9th & 10th in his Oakland debut and was rewarded with the 'W' vs the Bay-area rivals when the A's pushed across the tie-breaking run in bottom 10th
2 innings, 6 batters, 1 hit, 1 K on just 22 pitches: Single - K - GiDP; Line-out - Pop-out - Pop-out


A's won the game 'Yanqui-style: 5 runs via 4 HRs then won when an infield single + an error on SS Brandon Crawford allowed the winning run to score from 2nd

[A Boy Named Seo]

Not sure if anyone here has subscribed to the Athletic, but per MLBTR, Jim Bowden of the Athletic claims that rival teams interested in Familia told him "they didn't know why the Mets didn't approach them one final time to give them a chance to top Oakland's offer." Bowden called the trade "the most lopsided trade so far this trade season."

And Ricco is speaking about the trade. No mysteries to reveal. He says the A's offered what the Mets wanted. Story --> https://nypost.com/2018/07/22/why-mets-pulled-trigger-early-on-this-jeurys-familia-trade/

[nymr83]

Padres trade reliever Brad Hand to Cleveland for TOP PROSPECT catcher Francisco Mejia.

just saying.

[nymr83]

Not sure if anyone here has subscribed to the Athletic, but per MLBTR, Jim Bowden of the Athletic claims that rival teams interested in Familia told him "they didn't know why the Mets didn't approach them one final time to give them a chance to top Oakland's offer." Bowden called the trade "the most lopsided trade so far this trade season." And Ricco is speaking about the trade. No mysteries to reveal. He says the A's offered what the Mets wanted. Story --> https://nypost.com/2018/07/22/why-mets-pulled-trigger-early-on-this-jeurys-familia-trade/

I think there is one relevant quote in the article though at the very end concerning the role of Minaya here -

“I realize we’re a couple of weeks into the signing period. A lot of the big-money players are off the board, but one of the things we have now with Omar back — we’ve been aggressive in the international market — but Omar has a track record of going out and finding talent in that arena, and we want to give him the opportunity to go out and do that.”

[seawolf17]

Nymr83 wrote: Padres trade reliever Brad Hand to Cleveland for TOP PROSPECT catcher Francisco Mejia. just saying.

Hand is under contract for two more years, though. So there's a lot more security for Cleveland in that trade.

[nymr83]

didnt realize that!

[Edgy MD]

And Mejia may or may not be a lost cause at catcher.

Even on offense, the guy has high upside, but he's one of those guys who just whales and whales at the ball, with violent recklessness and little in the way of nuanced form.

Some guys make a living out of this (Céspedes for instance), but many hit a couple of memorable blasts but never make enough contact to stay in the lineup. I have my doubts.

[nymr83]

yeah, yankees "catcher" prospect Jesus Montero never came together.

you need to talk about the trades now though. right now, the Mets dont look so hot based on what the 'experts' think of the guys they got back. maybe the experts are wrong and the Mets scouts are right. we'll see.

[Edgy MD]

[fimg=600:3f5vlgux]https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ANfc93Rt7qE/V1BMHJa91UI/AAAAAAABAjQ/3CHkT4sDgN4Vd4sXqvoKHxPVQeP37YSPQCLcB/s640/Justine%2BWard8.jpg[/fimg:3f5vlgux]

Yeah, I'm Justine Ward and I've seen enough differing opinions that I'll reserve judgement.
Besides, I'm a pro reporter and it's part of my job to be objective here. But I was just talking
to my colleague Nelson Figueroa, and he and I agree that comparisons to Hand, who comes
with another two years to go, are tough to make.

I was able to corner one Mets exec earlier in the day, and he was telling me that he just
hopes this is the Mets' chance to get the A's back for the Billy Taylor/Jason Isringhusen-Greg
McMichael deal. That seemed odd, considering that trade was, like, four Mets regimes ago,
but Nelson says that while revenge is probably not a good mindset from which to swing a
deal, it's a good reminder that memories are long in this game.

Back to you, NYMR.

[nymr83]

Edgy MD wrote: Back to you, NYMR.

nope, i'm not going to strongly attack or defend the deal, lets see what they do with the bonus money. i was just commenting on another reliever trade that happened today. i can't get too worked worked up about the return on a 3 month reliever rental or the Mets not eating salary.

[smg58]

seawolf17 wrote: Nymr83 wrote: Padres trade reliever Brad Hand to Cleveland for TOP PROSPECT catcher Francisco Mejia. just saying. Hand is under contract for two more years, though. So there's a lot more security for Cleveland in that trade.

Plus Cleveland got a second major league reliever (under control for five more years) in that deal as well.

[Edgy MD]

Nymr83 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Back to you, NYMR. nope, i'm not going to strongly attack or defend the deal, lets see what they do with the bonus money. i was just commenting on another reliever trade that happened today. i can't get too worked worked up about the return on a 3 month reliever rental or the Mets not eating salary.

[fimg=600]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/GHJTSRXthmo/maxresdefault.jpg[/fimg]
I wouldn't use this kind of language myself, but Nelson says you—quote—suck at this TV
thing—unquote.

[smg58]

I like that the relief pitcher involved is major-league ready; that's already progress relative to last year at this time. But I bet they could trade Mesoraco or Bautista and get nothing but money for the international market in return, and I'd be OK with that. The deal will look better or worse depending on what Zack Britton gets (recovering from an injury, averaging about a walk per inning).

[batmagadanleadoff]

smg58 wrote: seawolf17 wrote: Nymr83 wrote: Padres trade reliever Brad Hand to Cleveland for TOP PROSPECT catcher Francisco Mejia. just saying. Hand is under contract for two more years, though. So there's a lot more security for Cleveland in that trade. Plus Cleveland got a second major league reliever (under control for five more years) in that deal as well.

But Oakland's suddenly in the playoff hunt. The added revenues the A's will get from a playoff run probably made it worth their while to give the Mets a better prospect. Isn't that precisely what the Mets did when they dealt Michael Fulmer to the Tigers for Yoenis Cespedes, at the time, a two month rental? I think the Mets made a terrible deal, from the fan's perspective. I guess the Wilpons made out with the salary dump, but this is an example where the owners interests aren't perfectly aligned with the fans.

[Centerfield]

Our owners' interests are not aligned with the fans. They haven't been since Madoff.

The fans' interests are, and have always been, to become the best team in baseball, to win for a sustained period, and win championships.

The owners' interests are to feign a commitment to winning while turning enough profit to stabilize their finances so they won't be at risk of losing control of the team.

[Lefty Specialist]

Centerfield wrote: The owners' interests are to feign a commitment to winning while turning enough profit to stabilize their finances so they won't be at risk of losing control of the team.

[Ceetar]

The Wilpons are roughly at zero risk of losing the team, and roughly every one of the 30* owners priorities are making a profit over winning. The difference since Madoff is that the Wilpons are unwilling to risk much of their own money in a gamble to get more via it working out. I don't know what percentage of owners are willing to do that, but it's nowhere near 29.

Anyway, my concern about the Familia deal is that they set a target and jumped as soon as the offer topped that. You're setting Familia's value yourself that way, rather than the market setting it. Of course, I'm not the one talking to the other teams and getting a sense of his value, as I'm sure the Mets have been doing for months. I also don't believe said other GM through Bowden that they would've topped Oakland's offer. I also peg the percentage that that GM is Jerry DiPoto at like 70%.

Let's see what the other relievers go for.

[Edgy MD]

I think the difference since Madoff is that not the owners are unwilling to spend beyond a threshhold, but that they haven't (or at least) been able to, because their creditors placed spending limits to guarantee that at the end of the season, there'd be enough revenue to service their debt.

I think that era is effectively wrapped up, and the next GM will land in a much stronger position than Sandy Alderson did.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: I think that era is effectively wrapped up, and the next GM will land in a much stronger position than Sandy Alderson did.

I'd take a slightly less than max return if it shame-insures the Mets pick a GM that's not currently in the front office.


but yeah, the new guy (or gal) probably won't deal with frozen assets and a team in the red.

[A Boy Named Seo]

Ceetar wrote: Anyway, my concern about the Familia deal is that they set a target and jumped as soon as the offer topped that. You're setting Familia's value yourself that way, rather than the market setting it. Of course, I'm not the one talking to the other teams and getting a sense of his value, as I'm sure the Mets have been doing for months. I also don't believe said other GM through Bowden that they would've topped Oakland's offer. I also peg the percentage that that GM is Jerry DiPoto at like 70%.

The quote wasn't that they would've topped it, but that they were surprised the Mets never game them the chance. Regardless, why wouldn't you believe it?

[Centerfield]

A Boy Named Seo wrote: Ceetar wrote: Anyway, my concern about the Familia deal is that they set a target and jumped as soon as the offer topped that. You're setting Familia's value yourself that way, rather than the market setting it. Of course, I'm not the one talking to the other teams and getting a sense of his value, as I'm sure the Mets have been doing for months. I also don't believe said other GM through Bowden that they would've topped Oakland's offer. I also peg the percentage that that GM is Jerry DiPoto at like 70%. The quote wasn't that they would've topped it, but that they were surprised the Mets never game them the chance. Regardless, why wouldn't you believe it?

Because it doesn't fit his narrative.