Taylor v. Robert

[Edgy MD]

Who has more value out there — the guy who is more established on offense and defense, or the guy who is hot?

Not necessarily how you, I'm askin', but how the market feels.

I'm not sure I know the answer.

Robert, however comes with a far steeper salary, along with a $20 million option/$2 million buyout for 2027.

So it's gotta be Tay-Tay, right?

 

[Gwreck]

It’s Robert and it’s not particularly close:

-Being “hot” means very little, especially when “hot” is a couple standard deviations above his career norms.

-Robert comes with a year of not-expensive team control and a cheap buyout.

-Robert, when healthy, is a better defensive outfielder than Taylor.

-The money difference is significant, sure, but an acquiring team is only taking on <$10 M for Robert (remaining 2 months plus the buyout).  That’s not so high as to be a hindrance for any team.

[MFS62]

Any team going after Robert is doing it on name only. They hope they have the magic talisman to revive the corpse back to prior life. Right now he’s a little more useful than a third nostril, not earning his salary. 
Taylor is a cheaper, probably more dependable player. I’d keep him around. 
later

[Edgy MD]

I'm not advocating for the traded of either.  They might both be gone by Tuesday morning and if so, that would answer the question.

A pro-rated $20 million vs. a pro-rated $3.8 million is a big difference, and hot means more when you're only looking at the next eight weeks.

Beyond that, I'm a poor man with a poor man's perspective, but I'm not sure I agree that $20 million for Luis Robert is "not-expensive."

[Edgy MD]

Fun Fact: The Mets were in a somewhat analogous position in 2023 when they dealt off well-paid established regular Mark Canha for minor-league starting pitcher Justin Jarvis, and economical-but-hot part-timer Tommy Pham for low-level minor-league infielder Jeremy Rodriguez.

As Jarvis is no longer in the system and pitched badly in the Atlantic League this year, and Rodriguez remains in the system but isn't really progressing, I guess we can call that one a technical-but-Pyhrric win by a hair for Pham.

[Gwreck]

29 minutes ago, Edgy MD said:

I'm not advocating for the traded of either. 

It’s irresponsible to not trade Taylor given his status as a free agent at the end of the year and that a trade can bring value to make the team better in the future.

Robert is a tougher decision because of the option.  Feels like a real roll of the dice either way because of the injuries. 

[MFS62]

It depends on whether you need a regular or part time player.

Taylor is a decent sub, and seems comfortable in that role.

Robert is a crappy regular and after being a regular, I'm not sure how he will be in the clubhouse if he has to fulfill a part time role.

Later

[Edgy MD]

7 minutes ago, Gwreck said:

It’s irresponsible to not trade Taylor given his status as a free agent at the end of the year and that a trade can bring value to make the team better in the future.

Then I am not the GM you seek.  I work with a different magic.

[Gwreck]

4 minutes ago, Edgy MD said:

Then I am not the GM you seek.  I work with a different magic.

Don't leave us hanging here.  What’s the case for keeping Taylor?

[Edgy MD]

Trading is just bad.  It's bad in an astounding number of ways.  It was bad from the first time you were lining up in recess in second grade and some kids were talking about baseball and said about some ballplayer they would never know, "He sucks — trade him."

It's the sea we swim in, so we just accept the massive amounts of toxicity as the only way there is, but it isn't.

[Edgy MD]

But I suspect nobody has really been hanging on that answer.

[Gwreck]

Well, while not meaning to insult, that’s kind of a silly answer that ignores nuance and context, right?  And if trading is bad in an “astounding” number of ways, one anecdote about childhood toxicity is such an odd choice as the only example to cite.

And especially so because the situation the Mets find themselves is nowhere close to the “he sucks, trade him!” scenario.  Instead it’s “he’s good, trade him so we can get value back instead of losing him to free agency and getting nothing back.”

I could totally get on board with generally disfavoring offseason trades (Nimmo for Semien, anyone?), or taking on bad contracts (Cano) or trading prospects for in-season help.  Even if sometimes you get back a Mike Hampton or Yoenis Cespedes or Keith Hernandez.

But just a “I never want to make trades” — comes across as strange if not…petulant?

 

 

 

[Edgy MD]

I'm happy to add plenty more, but the dehumanizing nature of it certainly is foundational.

Who will teams find more appealing between two outfielders?  It's an academic question that I thought might be relevant and engaging in a less-than-active forum, as both may or may not be gone tomorrow, so I put up a thread.  But I cannot embrace the ethic of the trade.  It is just an endless cycle.

And there is always a value to keeping a player you think can help you.  Every game, including today's, is someone's first.  Every game is someone's last.

Play it for all it's worth.

[Gwreck]

Yeah, I thought the question was interesting too which is why I participated.

I don’t think it should come as a surprise that the position (in sum and substance) “we shouldn’t trade anyone because it’s dehumanizing” got the response it did. 

[Edgy MD]

I certainly wouldn't express any surprise.  It's no news to me that I am in the minority.  I appreciate any indulgence the majority offers.

[Edgy MD]

I also don't like the two-disengagements rule.

[Frayed Knot]

But do you like is less with Taylor at the plate or Robert?

[Edgy MD]

The punishment doesn't fit the crime.  Give the batter a ball, maybe.  Treating like a balk is ass.

And let's make differentiation between game-delaying lobs over to first and actual pickoff attempts, which are an actual baseball play.

[smg58]

8 hours ago, MFS62 said:

Any team going after Robert is doing it on name only. They hope they have the magic talisman to revive the corpse back to prior life. Right now he’s a little more useful than a third nostril, not earning his salary. 

That's not fair.  I can think of a lot of ways that a third nostril could be useful.

[smg58]

In all seriousness, Taylor is quietly having a great year despite a clearly unlucky BABIP.  Robert has had an unlucky BABIP too, but the power has been absent and that might be contributing to it.  I said over the winter that Robert is a short-side platoon player on a good team, and with a little luck and a clean bill of health he has an OK chance of getting back to that level.  Talylor should get the better return.  That doesn't mean he will.

[Edgy MD]

This I like.  Gwreck and smg are on opposite sides.

It makes it more interesting if they both get dealt.

[ashie62]

Gwreck and smg are both being traded?

[seawolf17]

"We're not really posting well as a forum. We figured it was time to give some of the younger guys a shot."

[smg58]

(sniff) I've given this forum everything I've had for over twenty years...

[seawolf17]

We'll make a *really* nice tribute video when you visit next season to do a special guest KTE from the Ernie Banks Forum.

[ashie62]

Too funny

[Edgy MD]

If you think that's embarrassing, I keep getting DFA'd, but returning after nobody claims me on waivers.

[Benjamin Grimm]

So unless there's late-breaking news, it looks like Robert will stay for the remainder of the season.

[Centerfield]

He's going to hit 50 HRs.  The Mets will pick up his option and trade him for Ohtani. 

[smg58]

Picking up Robert's $20M option would make giving Alex Cora an extension with a vesting option look shrewd.