All Purpose Mid-Season Trade Speculation Thread

[Guest ABG]

Re: Zito

I'd place the chances of Zito--assuming a move to the NL and pitching in Shea to even out the external factors--having an effective next 5-7 years higher than I would the chances of Petit or Humber. I would therefore trade either of those guys as the centerpiece for him.

I don't see how getting Zito is prohibitive of dumping Glavine or Ishii (if either is at all possible)--rather, I think it would make more sense from an organizational standpoint to replace at 66 or 75 cents on the dollar the prospects you trade for Zito to indeed get rid of those guys and pay their salaries.

I'm not all that concerned about Heilman's blocked ascension. If he continues to pitch well in the pen, hopefully he'll get more starts. If it doesn't happen this year, he'll have his shot in ST.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Yeah, I think many Mets fans think Cam will keep hitting this way, which clearly isn't the case. I've really no idea what management thinks, though. In terms of the proposed deals I'd heard about from vaguely reputable sources, Cam was totally undervalued by other teams. Byrnes for Cameron, for example, would not have been a good deal for us. I haven't heard any other "real" trade offers--I thought the Cano for Cam thing was mostly fan-driven.

Cano's young, and he's advanced quickly through the minors, which on its surface is good, but it looks like he was rushed a bit, something I think the Yankees have a tendency to do in order to drive up their prospects' trade value. He basically had a great half season last year at AA, where he hit .301 and earned a .853 OPS. Then they promoted him to AAA midway throught the season, where everything but his BB/K plummeted. This year in AAA, he was great in just over 100 at bats--.932 OPS--but it remains to be seen how sustainable that is. That's better than he hit at any level, ever, and he, like Cam, looks to be playing over his head now.

Honestly, his stats and rate of advancement remind me of Reyes', but Cano was basically a year older at each stop and he doesn't have Reyes' speed. He also made less contact and got on base less than Jose. Given how much Reyes, who unlike Cano has had scouts drooling over him for years, is struggling now, I don't think we shoud hold Cano as the answer to our middle infield problem.

Not that I think Cano won't wind up being a decent 2B, but I doubt he'd help us much in the next year or two, or be much better than average even at his peak. I DO think we can do better than Cano for Cameron straight up . . . Now maybe if we threw Kaz Matsui and his salary into the equation, and got back a less advanced prospect from the Yankees, I'd change my mind . . .

Anyway, the bigger problem is that the Yankees are so short on tradeable players. I have a hard time thinking of Yankee prospects we'd want to take in my above proposal. Henn? Wang? We have pitching; what we don't have are first basemen or catchers, and neither do the Yankees.

I might be inclined to ride Matsui & his contract out and take our time finding a replacement for him, while looking for that young first bagger and catcher . . .


As for Zito, I agree that he's a safer bet than either Petit or Humber over the next few years, and I can certainly see the point of going after the more sure thing. Projections for minor leaguers are a crapshoot, but I have to think that we'd do better trading our prospects for ace pitchers in the offseason. The number of teams in the mix who need pitching are many. The number of teams trading pitchers are few--aces even fewer. Actually, it might just be Zito. We'd get scalped trying to do a deal now, just like we did last year. This year, we should be doing the scalping, not getting scalped.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

You may be right about Cano, of course, but some of your argument is counter-logical: the Yankees rushed him through the system (i.e., played him at a higher level than he was capable of playing at) and he did well at those higher levels--shouldn;t the higher levels have exposed his weaknesses?

The big picture is the Mets, having screwed the pooch big-time the last few years (judging Piazza to be a good choice for cleanup, judging Glavine a start away from 1995, judging Matsui to be a Gold Glove shortstop, etc.) need to take some chances to get back to contention. If this means taking a stab at trading Cammy when he's hot to a team that needs a CFer bad, then you do it. Of course, you trade him for the best young player available--whether that's Cano, or Wang, or whoever, I don't know, but the structure of the trade is the same: you want to trade veterans other teams want for young players they're willing to sacrifice to get them.

We dont want to do that, and probably won't, but we need to.

[metsmarathon]

i'd be fairly happy with cameron for cano and a little bit of something else. but i'm not sure what that is. i tend to greatly undervalue yankee prospects.

also, i can only imagine the fan revolt that would happen if we traded our good outfielder for a yankee prospect turmed bust (always a risk when trading for prospects).

cano & wang for cammy, i'd prolly do in a flash - i think the yanks are undervaluing wang, and even if we don't need him, we could still use him in an other trade somewhere.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Okay then YOU find a team that needs a good CFer to get back in contention, with a young player or two available. You get these gifts, and you look down your nose, "Well, yeah, but it's the Yankees and I always think those thieving overrated scum are puffing up their zo-genante "prospects...'" IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY! You want to wait until you get assurance that a young player (whom the Yankees are putting into the lineup in the middle of a desperate pennant drive) is the real deal? You'll wait a long time for that assurance.

I love Cammy, think he's fabulous, but if you want to get better you take advantage of chances to sell high and buy low. The Mets refuse to do that, unless they get guarantees and a 300% return, and the chance to return merchandise for 30 days, and air miles... it is to laugh.

[metsmarathon]

sorry... the fan revolt thing was not an indication of my dislike for a cammy/cano trade, merely a side comment. i dont think that fan reaction should be a primary driving factor in transtactions. i think the "also" occluded that a bit.

i find myself more skeptical of yankee prospects than other prospects, typically. which is why at first blush i say i want a little bit more than just cano. like, maybe a middling prospect - idk.

but i wouldnt be terribly UNhappy with a cammy/cano trade, except that i like cammy, and it would be sad to see him playing in pinstripes. but if we could do no better than cano, from the myriad other teams who could perhaps use a hot-hitting GG CFer, then i'd likely be happy with cano.

i'd be happier with floyd for cano, but im not so sure that makes any sense whatsoever for the yanks... (well, it gets womack out of the outfield, and gives them an upgrade at leftfield while womack slides back to second.... but not as much an upgrade as cammy going into center)

[Guest Rotblatt]

]You may be right about Cano, of course, but some of your argument is counter-logical: the Yankees rushed him through the system (i.e., played him at a higher level than he was capable of playing at) and he did well at those higher levels--shouldn't the higher levels have exposed his weaknesses?

Well, I'd say he did okay at those levels, but he's never had 500 at bats at any one level, and the only time he came close was over two seasons. I would expect his weaknesses to be exposed over the course of a full season. What the hell do I know, though? I'm just basing this on my impression of his stats and the few bits I've read about Cano. That being said, I'd do him+Wang as well. Or if we could unload Glavine . . .

]The big picture is the Mets, having screwed the pooch big-time the last few years (judging Piazza to be a good choice for cleanup, judging Glavine a start away from 1995, judging Matsui to be a Gold Glove shortstop, etc.) need to take some chances to get back to contention. If this means taking a stab at trading Cammy when he's hot to a team that needs a CFer bad, then you do it. Of course, you trade him for the best young player available--whether that's Cano, or Wang, or whoever, I don't know, but the structure of the trade is the same: you want to trade veterans other teams want for young players they're willing to sacrifice to get them.

I agree we should trade Cam if we can get fair value--or better--for him, but I think we can aim higher than whatever prospects the team that needs him the most has. The Yankees have a barren farm system and it's possible we'll get better prospects elsewhere. We should at least try, of course. . .

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

Cameron for Hidecki Matsui makes so much sense it'll never get done.

Yankees need the D, can prolly spare the O.

Mets need O, can prolly spare the D.

Contracts are nearly a wash.

[Frayed Knot]

I'm just not that high on Cano.

There's a decent sized sect of Yanqui fans who believe - because so many things went well for them in the mid-90s - that future call-ups are pre-destined to go work out perfectly for them forever and therefore have already inked Cano in as their starting 2nd baseman for the next 10 years.

Except that Cano has been considered a decent (not great) prospect who hasn't hit LHPs since A-ball, just now has poked his OBA above .300 (as it barely was in AAA), is slow for a middle infielder.
Maybe he becomes a good player; or maybe he struggles to even maintain a starting job in the big leagues. Ricky LeDee was a starter for some pretty good NYY teams also.

Meanwhile Floyd (on pace for 40+ HRs) & Cameron (60+ X-base hits last year despite the bad hand) are the best 2 offensive players on our offensive-starved team. Does Cano hit these highs even in his best years?
Oh yeah, and we currently have two 2nd basemen.

I just don't get it.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Three, counting the guy who's playing there now.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

I'm not making myself clear. I'm not saying the Mets must trade Cammy for Cano (I don't know Cano's peculiar skills very well, and I'm willing to take your word for his overhyped status)--I'm saying the Mets have players whom contenders desperately need. Cammy is the most glaring need, because the papers and the airwaves have been full of "the Yanks need a CFer, bad" for months, but my point is that we have plenty of vets and other teams (maybe not the Yanks, but I suspect they do) have plenty of young players on their rosters and their systems who will be big stars someday, and if the Mets want to get back into contention, they need to identify these players and package their aging stars to get them. (To use my favorite example, you could have gotten Heilman for half a tube of liniment this winter if you'd had the scouting to tell you he was any good. Now, not so much, right? This phenomenon is happening with perhaps hundreds of players at any given time whose teams think as little of them as the Mets thought of Heilman very recently.) My main point is that the Mets overvalue their own vets, and ask so much for them, that they've effectively removed themselves from the trade market. They've firmly established at this point that they don't recognize nor evaluate talent correctly, and our trading partners are looking to take advantage of the Mets, which they do on a regular basis these days.

Do you realize what we're saying with the "Benson-set-the-market" argument in another thread on this fine board? That there was NO NEED WHATSOEVER to trade young players for Benson during the 2004 season, which we're fessing up to by stating as fact that he set the market rate (as I believe he did) for pitchers of his type. If that's true, and it is, then we could have gotten him (or a similar pitcher) for the same money in the offseason when he wouldn't have cost us young players.

Now, you can deride those young players' abilities (I still hold out hope for Wiggy and Peterson) and you can claim that we were gearing up for a 2004 pennant drive (it is, again, to laugh....), but basically we dropped two cards that we might need someday in exchange for just about no advantage. That's not smart poker. We want to be accumulating young talent, not dispersing it freely.

OE: I was just reminded that we also dropped the Justin Huber card in the Benson debacle: "The Kansas City Royals recalled 1B Justin Huber from Double-A Wichita. He was hitting .332 with nine homers, 50 RBI, 50 runs scored and seven stolen bases as a 22-year-old in Double-A," according to Seawolf17 in the "Rico Brogna, Good Fit" Thread.

O further E: Wiggy is hitting .286 and batting cleanup for Indianapolis. He hit his 4th HR Sunday (don't know how many ABs) and is the kind of player we should be taking a chance on. Matt Peterson, at AA (Altoona), is doing less well (6-3 with a high ERA, but still in the rotation and third on the staff in IP) but I'd still rather have him in our system than in theirs.

[Frayed Knot]

I'm not saying, have never said, and likely WILL never say; "we can't trade [insert player here]". If someone wants to give us all kinds of goodies for Caneron or Floyd I'll help pack their bags (even though I've enjoyed having both here).

My point is - specifically about Cano but also as a more general statement - that there's a significant portion of Met fans who are so tied up in the grass-is-greener syndrome, and so enamored with this 'younger-is-automatically-better' mantra, that they believe we'll come out ahead if we can just take Cammy/Floyd, plus throw in a prospect or two, plus pay a chunk of their salary, if only it could land us some fair/middling prospect (nowhere near BA's top-100) like the great Robinson Freakin' Cano - who, to this point, has hit ML pitching to an exceedingly mediocre level for about as long as Rookie Carroca held the Bantamweight championship.

[Guest Rotblatt]

It sounds like most of us are on the same page. We all think it's a good idea to trade Cam and/or Floyd for younger guys with potential. The question is how much potential and how young, I think . . . And personally, I'd rather have us pick up players who fill a need--like 1B or C--but I can see just getting the best prospect available too.

[metirish]

I've no idea why the Mets would want Cano, is he that much better than Keppinger?, I don't think so, I don't like the idea period of making any kind of deal with the MFY's,and certainly not for the prospects they have.

[Guest Edgy DC]

You people make me sick. HE'S A YANKEE, THAT'S WHY!!

Honestly, the answer is that trade speculation is often generated by narrow-minded folks who don't look beyond the end of their nose. So 90% of what the Mets allegedly should be pursuing will be

(1) all-stars (37%),
(2) Yankees (20%),
(3) former all-stars (17%),
(4) former Yankees (10%),
(5) former Mets (9%),
(6) Rotodude Fantasy Prospect Guide coverboys (7%).

[Guest Rotblatt]

I think the advantage Cano would have over Keppinger is age--he's three years younger. Neither is considered a great prospect, and IIRC their numbers are fairly similar, but Cano managed to produce them at younger ages.

In theory, he'd probably have a higher ceiling.

But I tend to agree that a Cano-type player who was a C or 1B would make more sense for us.

I wonder if a 3-way deal could be worked out. Cam for Cano + B-type prospect, who then get flipped for a Ryan Howard or Shoppach-type player. Maybe we throw in a prospect of our own if the prospect's value is closer to Howard's. What's San Diego got in the way of prospects? They're hurting in the 2B category, I think.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Edgy's sickness aside, the main reason that Yankees turn up so often (in my trade speculations, at least) is that I (and all of us) are so much more exposed to their roster than to any other team.I mean, of course I could speculate that "if there were a team that needed a centerfielder, and if that team were barely in contention, and if that team had money to burn, and if that team had certain young players who looked promising, and if that team's promising players played positions where we currently suck HMB, then could we not offer them Cammy?" but frankly "Cano" is only four letters and I hate being long-winded.

[Guest abogdan]

]O further E: Wiggy is hitting .286 and batting cleanup for Indianapolis.

Indianapolis is AAA, right? Wiggy wasn't good enough to stay on Pittsburgh's major league roster. I agree the Benson trade didn't make much sense, but touting Wiggy's AAA stats after he lost his roster spot to Freddy Sanchez and Bobby Hill doesn't exactly strengthen the argument.

I also am not opposed to dealing Cameron for younger players, but Cano isn't enough for Mike. The Mets don't need another middle infielder trying to learn plate patience in the major leagues.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Yeah, it would be a stronger argument if Wiggy were batting cleanup for the Cardinals. My point was that we could still (easily) have Wiggy's potential (AND Peterson's AND Huber's) AND have Benson, but for the delusion that the 2004 pennant might depend on our dumping these potentially good young players .

Not good planning, not good policy, not good baseball.

And to take up Frayed Knot's rhetoric: I'm not saying (and never will say) that dumping good old guys for young bad players is smart. But young players (generally) tend to get better while old players (generally) tend to get worse. A team that is on the verge of winning can afford to acquire (and to keep) old players on the hope that they'll retain the skills they have a bit longer, but a bad team needs to swap out its old guys (generally) for new young guys they've scouted intelligently.

You guys are like addicts thinking that just one more fix, one more swig, will straighten you out. Look around you. You're living in the gutter. Clean yourselves up. You've had an awful baseball team, and a worse organization, for a long, long time. You need help.

OE: I also want to stop referencing Piazza all the time. He's just a convenient synecdoche for the Mets' problems, so easy I can't resist using him as an example of things that often involve him personally only marginally. It's all a matter of reviewing your current roster and IDing those players who will be helpful on the next playoff team: if you're looking over this roster and seeing Piazza, Glavine, Cameron, Floyd etc. on your next playoff roster, well, I can't help you. So the idea is to turn them into players who might be a part of that team. Will it cost you money? Hel, yeah, but as Soupy so eloquently argues, money is hardly a concern, because the big picture is Fred's real-estate portfolio.

The big point is: you've already spent that money. If you pay 5 bucks for an ice-cream cone, and it tastes like it has chunks of garbage in it, do you eat it? Do you say, "Hey wait a minute, I paid five bucks for this and I'm going to enjoy it if it kills me?" How about if you've paid five bucks and loved the first few bites but then discovered a bit of raw sewage? Do you eat the rest because you hoped to get a pleasant dining experience for more than half the ice-cream cone?

Now one might argue that you had no business spending that much money for an ice cream cone in the first place: that a logic you can apply to your next snack purchase, but you're not getting a refund on this one, whether you eat the raw-sewage ice cream cone, trade it to a friend, or pitch it out. The only question is: What do you do now that you're out the five bucks and you've got an ice cream cone that smells like the East River?

Me, I pitch it or swap it, if I can find a friend stupid enough to give me a peanut for it. YM, as Norrin liked to say, MV.

The other reason I don't enjoy using Piazza as a prime example is that I agree that no peanut-bearing friends exist anymore. But I think I'm the only one who wanted to bat Piazza 7th to start 2004. There's no sense blaming him: he is what he is, and we seem stuck with him. But thus my outrage at not having signed Delgado or Sexton or some decent FA IB man (or better yet gone with Valent/Wiggy/Phillips until we grew our own better 1Bman). And my outrage at not having signed Vlad in 2004. We need a heart of the order, despite the fact that we're paying Piazza a lot of money to hit poorly, and he have to pay money to get it.

A key idea, and one that would be revolutionary and productive for the Mets, would be to play players where the quality of their play, and not their salary, demands. if we paid every player an equal amount, whst would this team look like? Would Heilman be in the bullpen? Would Matsui be the first -string 2B man? Would Piazza be in the heart of the order? Once you've spent the money, if it turns out (as it will) that you've spent some of it foolishly, why persist in your foolishness? This principle applies to every one of our lives, but we disregard it when it comes to the Mets roster. This makes no sense to me. Use your bad decisions to make better decisions in the future, but sticking with them now only hurts you in every way imaginable.

[smg58]

Yes, I'm for giving playing time based on merit, but the bigger question is what to do with the overpriced players we have, and most importantly, how to make this team a real contender by April 06 at the latest.

Matsui: must go, but to whom, for what, and would he agree to it? I'd say your best hope is a viable reclamation project (maybe somebody like Eric Milton), but don't expect much.

Glavine: Hope he pitches well enough to be dealable, or that he doesn't make 200 IP and have his option vest.

Cameron or Floyd: They're both under contract one more year, and given the market adjustment are not overpaid at all, especially Floyd. If you think Diaz will give the Mats as much as Cameron in right by April, then find a suitor. It can wait until the offseason, but make the right deal. (For example, if the Red Sox somehow don't trade Stoppach in July and then Johnny Damon bolts, the Mets would be in an excellent position to take advantage.) Certainly don't trade both Floyd and Cameron, though.

What do we need? First base, second base, catcher, and (like everybody else) more pitching.

[MFS62]

Bret, I like your style.
That ice cream cone analogy was priceless.
Later

[Willets Point]

Yeah, that ice cream thing is definitely a bullet of cool.

[Elster88]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: But thus my outrage at not having signed Delgado or Sexton or some decent FA IB man (or better yet gone with Valent/Wiggy/Phillips until we grew our own better 1Bman). And my outrage at not having signed Vlad in 2004. We need a heart of the order, despite the fact that we're paying Piazza a lot of money to hit poorly, and he have to pay money to get it.

I especially agree with this.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Has Victor Zambrano joined Ishii on the block?

]With Steve Trachsel expected back right after the July 31 trade deadline, the Mets probably are more interested in using Ishii as trade bait than as a viable member of their rotation for the future. And if the Mets can find a taker for Victor Zambrano, who has pitched better of late, they would be satisfied to supplement their starters with Seo and Aaron Heilman.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmside054331756jul05,0,7932242.story?coll=ny-mets-print

I would be thrilled if we traded Ishii & Zambrano and called up Seo. For Ishii, any prospect would do; for Zambrano, I'd think we'd need at least a B prospect, if only because pitching is at such a premium right now. If he turns in another 2 or 3 starts like his last one, we might even be able to land an A prospect.

[metirish]

But the Mets can't trade Zambrano, doing so would be an admission that the Kazmir trade was a disaster.

[Frayed Knot]

What is your definition of a "B prospect" and why is dealing Zambrano for one a good move?

June-July: 40.2 IPs, 23 H, 2.65 ERA, 1.18 WHiP

[Willets Point]

I was wondering the same thing. Especially with the "if he turns in 2 or 3 starts like his last one" part. If a pitcher starts pitching consistently well, that may be the point where you might want to think about keeping him.

[Guest Edgy DC]

metirish wrote: But the Mets can't trade Zambrano, doing so would be an admission that the Kazmir trade was a disaster.

What if they trade him for somebody really really good?

[seawolf17]

Can we switch Zambranos with the Cubs? You think anyone will notice?

[MFS62]

seawolf17 wrote: Can we switch Zambranos with the Cubs? You think anyone will notice?

I still can't get it out of my head* that Carlos was the Zambrano they (Wilpon and Peterson) thought they were trading for in the Kasmir deal.
Later

*= Hoping that all is well with Kiley Minogue and she is on her way to good health.