Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

Cano-Diaz Poll: Record Your Real Time Reaction NOW!!!!  

29 members have voted

  1. 1. Cano-Diaz Poll: Record Your Real Time Reaction NOW!!!!

    • I love it! Van Wagenen 2020!
      0
    • I like it! No trade is perfect, but this one's close!
      1
    • I kinda like it.
      8
    • I am completely neutral
      1
    • I kinda don't like it.
      11
    • I don't like it. I miss Sandy
      4
    • WTF. This is what we get for hiring a guy named "Brodie"
      4


Recommended Posts

Posted


I'm going to be as optimistic as I can and say "I kinda don't like it."

I think it will make them better for 2019, so if the Mets go deep into the postseason this year or next it will have been a worthwhile trade, more so if they win a World Series.

But Cano is very likely to be a headache in 2022 and 2023, if not before then. We'll have to see how the Mets deal with that.


Guest 41Forever
Guests
Posted


I had grave concerns at first. But I'm starting to come along. Will need to see what the rest of the puzzle looks like before we know for sure, of course. But we identified offense and relief pitching as weaknesses.


Posted


I've been living in WTF-ville all weekend.

But today, I read a few things recently that Cano still has a very good hard-hit rate, and Steamer has performing pretty well this season. Plus the Diaz strikeout highlights are awesome.

Also, in my head, I started justifying it by saying BVW has kinda painted himself into a win-now!!! corner, so maybe this opens up the spending for elite free agents.

Maybe.

I'm went "I don't like it". But with a strong WTF-lean.


Posted


Your favorite team is better right now! For the moment, don't worry about a 19-year-old who is years away and a pitcher who is projected for the backend of the rotation or middle-relief. The Mets are getting a solid arm for the pen and a great hitter for the infield.


Posted


I don’t like it even though I think it improves the team.

Main dislikes:
- on the hook for too much Cano $$. Should have gotten more salary relief.

- don’t like giving up 2 of the organization’s best prospects. Certainly not for a closer with a 1-year track record.

- generally skeptical about closers in general.


Guest d'Kong76
Guests
Posted


I kinda like it, but it's more like kinda or 'kinda?'
Was happier with $60 mil vs the $20...


Posted


By the way, I disagree with this notion that the Mets are better now than before the trade.

If you’re looking at this as a strict 25 man team, then yes. The Mets are better. But that is a meaningless statement.

Peter Alonso could be traded right now for a mediocre starting pitcher. That would make our 25 man stronger. But it’s a stupid move.

If you mean our organization as a whole, then no. I don’t know that you can say the Mets are better. In fact, I think the Mets are worse. We lost the best prospect (in terms of upside). That has value.


Posted


I kind of like it. I generally don't mind saying good bye to prospects, they are unproven commodities. There's always another wave of guys in the system, high draft picks, to take those slots. And I won't miss Bruce & Swarsak because they both sucked a lot of ass last year.


Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Guests
Posted


Kinda don't like it. Kinda like it, too, but I picked the former, since I lean that way, and because I'm more ambivalent than the neutral option sounded to me.

But what REALLY worries me is the thought of what happens next, in the name of "aggressive" pursuit of winnery.


Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket
Guests
Posted


LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:
Kinda don't like it. Kinda like it, too, but I picked the former, since I lean that way, and because I'm more ambivalent than the neutral option sounded to me.

But what REALLY worries me is the thought of what happens next, in the name of "aggressive" pursuit of winnery.


you said it


Posted


I took WTF.

I would be "neutral" if the Mets actually followed this up with a free agent spending spree to try and win now. I have doubts they will.


Posted


kelenic pushes me from somewhere in the love it/like it range, down to a kinda don't like it.

i believe this move makes us a much better team for this year, and probably the next three or so. i'm worried about the back end, and i think we over paid by giving up part of our future. i think the deal could have been done for less than kelenic.

do i think kelenic is the real deal - no. gosh i have no idea about prospects. i just think that a 6th round pick has move value than this. but maybe not. it's so hard to judge the market.

i guess, i'm excited about the potential this trade has for this coming year. and nervous that we could instead one day look back on it as a colossal fuckup. or... not. it's certainly better than kaz/zam, right?

the biggest potential problem i see with this trade is that by the end of it, instead of seeing our window close, it may slam shut faster than we would want it to. and maybe that's the model going forward - milk your window and then hard rebuild once it closes, with an eye on a fast reset, like all those other teams seem to be doing. we'll see. how well that part of the plan works out may ultimately be the true test by which this particular trade is measured.

fuck it. just put me down for mixed feelings. decidedly not neutral. probably kinda don't like it. maybe kinda do like it.


Posted


I opted for kinda don't like it. If Diaz pitches for us like he did for the Mariners last year, it will be good enough. My opinion will change for the worse if McNeil gets relegated to the bench or traded, however.


Guest 86-Dreamer
Guests
Posted


kinda don't like it. will take 3 good years of Diaz to change my mind.


Guest Mets Willets Point
Guests
Posted


Put myself in neutral. I think I'm going to need to see what other deals happen/don't happen before I can put it in context, but if it's just the deal on its own, then I'm more kinda don't like it.


Posted


Nymr83 wrote:
I took WTF.

I would be "neutral" if the Mets actually followed this up with a free agent spending spree to try and win now. I have doubts they will.


exactly this.
and how often does THAT happen?


Posted


I'm not 100% sure why, but I feel a little dirty.

I mean, the Mets have taken on guys with a PED suspension on their résumé before, and I usually feel OK about it. It's typically a market-efficient move. And while Canó doesn't come at a butt-cheap price like, say, Marlon Byrd, the money coming back with him is a discount. But it's still the fat back end of a giant deal, and it's still a 36-year-old infielder.

Maybe the roid taint PLUS the Yankee taint is too much for my sensitivities.

And, you know, I tend to hate all trades to begin with. I realize of course that it is a reality of the game, but I feel complicit in a bad system.

TWO first-round draft choices. One of them made an instance smash and was the highest-picked schoolboy in the country, and the other, while he hasn't had a full outstanding season yet, took home a Sterling Award, is competitive and athletic, and a homeboy. The Mets minor league system just got a lot worse, and it's not like the system was looking deep. Kelenic might have already been the team's best outfield prospect.

Also, closers that saved a billion games the year before are as good a bet as anyone to blow up the next season, or merely fall back toward the mean. While I don't think any WAR system correctly scores closers, Diaz had 3.5 fWAR last season, but DEPTH CHARTS is projecting him for 2.1 in 2019, and STEAMER, for pity's sake, has him at 1.4. That's not good! That's buying high and absorbing the low, which the 21st Century Mets have done several times with closers.

Oh, and speaking of fWAR, McNeil, in his third of a season, was easily the best Mets infielder last season by that metric. You wanna know who was second? Asdrubal Cabrera, that's who. Def Jeff had 80% more WAR than any full-season Mets infielder. Now we've taken his job.

Dirty.

I'm ag'in' it.


Posted


I'm not yet convinced that McNeil has lost his job. I can see a scenario either where McNeil plays third (at Frazier's expense) or he stays at second and Cano plays first.

But we'll learn more over the next couple of months.


Posted


Cano basically responded to a question about first base from Steve Gelbs with, "Yeah...no."

Van Wagenen tamping down Syndergaard rumors, saying it would take "special circumstances" to deal him, that with the Mets having their "chips in" to win now...which is not to say that within the month, "we have found those special circumstances."


Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket
Guests
Posted


I really hope the Syndergaard trade talk is a smokescreen to soften the blow of the forthcoming Steven Matz deal


Posted


Three more reasons I don't like the Canó deal:
[list:2i9jk9yd][*:2i9jk9yd]Juan Samuel[/*:m:2i9jk9yd]
[*:2i9jk9yd]Carlos Baerga[/*:m:2i9jk9yd]
[*:2i9jk9yd]Roberto Alomar[/*:m:2i9jk9yd][/list:u:2i9jk9yd]

I don't want to be a fatalist and say that getting burned in the past means you should shy away from parallel moves in the future. Run-producing secondbasemen are rare and lovely things, but getting one with some piece of his prime left would be nice, especially if we're giving up two first-rounders. TWO!

You know what you get for, say, two first round picks in the NFL? John fucking Elway.

Young John Elway, though.


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Mets community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...