Zambrano: What's Wrong & What Happens Next

[Centerfield]

At that salary, he could probably be had for Bartolome Fortunado.

[Guest Rotblatt]

sharpie wrote: Thing is the Dodgers would want to move him quickly. They brought up Aaron Sele over the weekend and he pitched well and they'd like to slot him in instead of Perez (don't know how long this bereavement leave lasts). I'm not advocating for him, necessarily, he just seems like a better option than Lima, etc. I'd give him a pass on not getting along with Tracey. The inconsistency does bother me.

Me too, although the fact that his non-BAA peripherals are pretty stable seems a little odd--and potentially promising--to me.

2002: 7.4 H/9
2003: 8.5 H/9
2004: 7.8 H/9
2005: 8.9 H/9
2006: 11.2 H/9

Makes me wonder if it's just random.

I agree he'd be a better option than Lima, and if we can get him for some scrub, I'd be okay with it. He is hella expensive, though.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I found this on Newsday's Mets page. I'm among those who voted for the Heilman or Oliver option.

]How should the Mets repair the back end of their rotation? http://www.newsday.com:/images/standard/blue.gif 20.9% Piece it together until Brian Bannister gets healthy (388 responses) http://www.newsday.com:/images/standard/blue.gif 26.0% Use Aaron Heilman or Darren Oliver as a starter (483 responses) http://www.newsday.com:/images/standard/blue.gif 22.7% Call up Mike Pelfrey (422 responses) http://www.newsday.com:/images/standard/blue.gif 30.3% Make a big trade (562 responses) 1855 total responses

[Guest Rotblatt]

Ah, the old "Make a big trade" option.

I'd have voted for that too if the only criteria for the trade is that it be "big."

I mean, trading Matsui to the Twins for Castillo and Liriano is "big," right?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

More from Newsday:

]Dontrelle is the answer Ken Davidoff May 8, 2006 The Victor Zambrano news doesn't really strike a blow to the Mets. It simply creates a void, and a silver lining: It underscores what they must do to carry out their impressive beginning. Just as they thought last winter, the Mets will need another frontline starting pitcher to win their first world championship in 20 years. The most sensible maneuver is a deal for Florida's Dontrelle Willis, even if it costs Lastings Milledge. "No chance," one person in the Mets' loop said yesterday before Jose Lima and the bullpen's dregs suffered a 13-3 loss to the not-dead-yet Braves at Shea Stadium. Certainly, there's no reason to panic. However, as Cliff Floyd said when asked if the Mets' starting rotation is good enough to win a World Series: "The way things are going, 31 games in, damn right. But when you start having injuries, it's a tough question. You're asking guys to do a lot. "Hopefully, whoever we call up, whatever they do, they're just going to give us an opportunity to win." Lima kinda sorta did that yesterday, and later this week, Jeremi Gonzalez will likely get his shot, taking Zambrano's rotation turn. So even when Brian Bannister comes back, perhaps this month, you're talking about still keeping either Lima or Gonzalez around. It's not as if Bannister is an established commodity, either - and that goes double for John Maine. Working your way from the bottom, you come to Steve Trachsel, who is ordinary, and Pedro Martinez and Tom Glavine, who are not. But they are human, and they will hit slumps, and they will require assistance from their fellow starters. Aaron Heilman? No argument here to keep him in the bullpen. Why mess with a good thing? Mike Pelfrey? General manager Omar Minaya tells friends that the youngster can help the Mets this year, and maybe he can. Given the stakes, though, it would hardly be ideal to lean so heavily on a guy just out of college. Especially when there's Willis. The baseball landscape has changed. Teams on the bubble, mindful of the 2004 and 2005 Astros' late-season runs, are more reluctant to give away veteran talent. And clubs all over, even our Mets and Yankees, don't want to dispose of young, cheap talent. The Athletics will be open-minded about Barry Zito, but there will be strong incentive for contending Oakland to keep the lefthander. Zito, furthermore, would cost talent; then, as an impending free agent, he would have to be signed to an extension for, let's call it, five years and $75 million. What incentive will the Marlins have to retain Willis a month or two from now? You need be only an amateur psychologist to look at Willis' numbers (1-3, 5.15 ERA) and wonder if all of the losing in South Florida is getting to him. We already know the Marlins offered Willis to the Mets for David Wright, and that the Marlins don't mind conducting business within their division. Willis, earning $4.35 million, won't be eligible for free agency until after the 2009 season, and though you can never predict one's New York adjustment, the lefthander's outgoing demeanor bodes well for that issue. Now, the other part of the equation: trading Milledge and other, lesser youngsters. The Mets, largely because of the deal that sent Scott Kazmir to Tampa Bay for Zambrano, are gun-shy about repeating that mistake. The greatest sin of the Kazmir trade, though, wasn't shipping out Kazmir. It was dealing him for Zambrano, which - what with this weekend's development - now officially becomes the second-worst trade in Mets history. At the time, nearly everyone thought the Mets received poor value in return for a commodity as strong as Kazmir. But Willis is no Zambrano. Sure, Milledge could be a star. He might not be. Trading him for Willis would bring no shame to anyone. It could be the capper for the aggressive Minaya, who has brought in so much already. "I'm confident, budget-wise, that we have the ability to [take on money]," Minaya said yesterday, and he said the same about his available talent. There's time to get this done. But it should get done.

One thing that Davidoff says that does make sense: trading Milledge for three and a half years of Willis is better than trading him for three and a half months of Zito. But I think there's some of that Peter/Paul thing going on here too. If Floyd doesn't get his act together (and he may not) then we'll be glad to have a Lastings Milledge to promote later this season.

I kinda doubt that the Mets can get Dontrelle while retaining both Pelfrey and Milledge, but if there's any way to do it, I'd love to see it get done.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I'm so dead-set against trading Milledge it ain't even funny. Not for Willis, not for nobody.

[Gwreck]

Way, way too early for Davidoff to call this deal the second-worst in Mets history.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Exactly. Scott Kazmir has a long way to go before he's Nolan Ryan. It's not too early to call it a bad trade, but second worst is stretching things quite a bit.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: I'm so dead-set against trading Milledge it ain't even funny. Not for Willis, not for nobody.

Me too. Well, there are a few people I'd trade him for, but Willis doesn't quite fit the bill for me.

It's not entirely logical, as Milledge has still got a long way to go before he's anywhere nearly as valuable to us as Willis would be, but I'm pretty excited about the kid. Especially as he seems to be making some important strides this season (although he's currently embroiled in his first slump of the season).

On the other hand, I'd trade Pelfry to Florida for Willis in a heartbeat.

Go figure.

[Frayed Knot]

1) Void gets created

2) Media gets behind MAJOR SPLASHY MOVE as a MUST DO!!!!

3) Rinse/repeat

[Guest Edgy DC]

Media trashes Mets for lack of foresight if/when MUST DO bites them in the ass. Mets particlularly attacked for kowtowing to media by going for backpage-grabbing MUST DO deals.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I was disappointed to discover during lunchtime that Mike and the Mad Dog are united with me in their opposition to dismantling the bullpen (at least for now). OTOH they still think Milledge for Zito is a good deal, so I haven't become a complete maniac.

[Elster88]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: OTOH they still think Milledge for Zito is a good deal, so I haven't become a complete maniac.

Mad Dog, at least didn't think this was a good deal. He said he wouldn't even trade Milledge for Willis because "I don't like trading an everyday player for a pitcher." Among the reasons he didn't like trading an everyday player for a pitcher when the players are so close in relative skill level, age, and upside is because a pitcher's arm can sponataneously combust at any time.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

Maybe I misinterpreted. Maybe I'm tunring into the Mad Dog.

maybe I AM the Maddog.

[Guest MadDog]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, COME ON, JD! You CAN'T be the Mad Dog because I AM The Mad Dog!

You can't give up on a guy like Lastedge Millings! Unless you're trading him for Barry Bonds. You gotta make that deal.

[Willets Point]

Is that really what Mad Dog looks like? I always imagined him bald, neckless, old and having a face for radio.

[Guest KC]

Yeah, that's him - although that picture might be a few years old.

[seawolf17]

He's much scarier animated; that picture must be old. I had never seen him until he was on Today a few years back promoting his book, and I was startled by his appearance.

[Elster88]

MadDog wrote: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, COME ON, JD! You CAN'T be the Mad Dog because I AM The Mad Dog! You can't give up on a guy like Lastedge Millings! Unless you're trading him for Barry Bonds. You gotta make that deal.

Mad Dog, don't you know that you start your shows with the word "And" drawn out? AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND

[Frayed Knot]

FWIW, Francesa said he talked to Omar today (off the air, prior to their show):

- Want to keep their pen working as is (at least for now)

- Will 'work the phones' to see what's out there and in the meantime fill-in with internal folks (at least for now)

- Dontrelle Willis isn't available and was never offered despite a newspaper report a few weeks back saying that he was at some unspecified time.

[Zvon]

="Frayed Knot"] - Dontrelle Willis isn't available and was never offered despite a newspaper report a few weeks back saying that he was at some unspecified time.

Willis has me worried. I have him on both my fantasy teams and Ive had a close eye on him. You can blame the state of the Marlins only so much for his current record. He has not hit his stride yet this season, and I can only hope he does.

A change might be perfect for him, but I agree with the sentiment that you dont give up a hitting prospect for him. A pitching prospect, maybe. A bunch of small parts, certainly.

Willis is still young and would make a great Met pitcher, the guys a workhorse-----but not for Milledge.

Same with Zito. Not worth Milledge at this time.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

="Frayed Knot"]FWIW, Francesa said he talked to Omar today (off the air, prior to their show): - Want to keep their pen working as is (at least for now) - Will 'work the phones' to see what's out there and in the meantime fill-in with internal folks (at least for now) - Dontrelle Willis isn't available and was never offered despite a newspaper report a few weeks back saying that he was at some unspecified time.

Never ceases to amaze me how people who demand mulitple sourcing from newspaper columnists will not even think that they are being played by Mets' front office people. Do you KNOW that Omar wasn't in bed with the Marlins' GM, Frayed Knot? HOW do you know?

Rumor-mongerer. FWIW, my ass. Gossip-spreader. Disseminator of untruths.

[seawolf17]

I don't think anyone's taking that as gospel; FK was just reporting what was said on the radio, in case anyone was interested. He even started with a "for what it's worth," fwiw.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

There was a line in the Daily News this morning quoting a Mets front office source as saying that the Mets are not interested in trading their prospects.

I like reading that. I do take it with a grain of salt. I don't assume that it means that Lastings is really untouchable. But it's nice that they're saying it. They could instead have said, "We're planning on winning this year, and we'll do whatever it takes to do so. Nobody in the farm system is untouchable."

The fact that they're saying what they're saying is an indication that it may really be true. You may think there's no value in such statements, but I think that there is some. Maybe not a whole lot, but some.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Completely don't get why you would ascribe an iota of credibility more to the Mets organization than you would to a newspaper columnist.

For Chrissake, CPFers often gloat how good a job the Mets org. has done in spinning BS and PR the way they want, or how marvelous a job they did of denying with skillful indignance the deals they were working on (Todd Hundley/ Mike Piazza, anyone?), yet you claim to believe for a nanosecond what they supposedly have revealed now. Are you terminally gullible? Have you willfully detached your brain-stem connection? Do you think it's fun to assert that you believe a source you've already identified as unreliable? Please, we need to know.

[Frayed Knot]

Various Adam Rubin musings as they pertain to starters for the near future:

- (what Yancy refers to) -- Mets insiders insisted yesterday that the team's core prospects, including Lastings Milledge, won't be dealt under any circumstances - not even to obtain Barry Zito or Dontrelle Willis if they were made available.
"We're going to be fine," a team source said. "Nobody's panicking. None of the top prospects are going to be dealt."

- Jose Lima and Jeremi Gonzalez are penciled in for the weekend Brewers series.

- Brian Bannister (strained right hamstring) will throw his first bullpen session today and is scheduled to return May 19 for the series opener against the Yankees.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

And if tomorrow's back pages read "Zi-TO METS. Milledge, Pelfrey, Bannister, Humber Go to A's in Trade. Mets also agree to pay their salaries for length of their careers, plus 20 Mil Bonus" you won't feel in least played or lied to or misled, correct?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Completely don't get why you would ascribe an iota of credibility more to the Mets organization than you would to a newspaper columnist. For Chrissake, CPFers often gloat how good a job the Mets org. has done in spinning BS and PR the way they want, or how marvelous a job they did of denying with skillful indignance the deals they were working on (Todd Hundley/ Mike Piazza, anyone?), yet you claim to believe for a nanosecond what they supposedly have revealed now. Are you terminally gullible? Have you willfully detached your brain-stem connection? Do you think it's fun to assert that you believe a source you've already identified as unreliable? Please, we need to know.

My brain stem must be disconnected, because I don't know what you're talking about.

Where did I say I believed them? I said that I was taking it with a grain of salt. I acknowledge (although not explicitly) that it may be spin. But the fact that they're spinning one way and not another may have a sliver of meaning.

As I've said before, I don't care if they spin. I don't care if they lie. If denying an impending deal makes it, or a different deal, more likely to happen, then more power to them. The Mets don't owe me anything at all. There are hundreds of organizations and companies that get more of my money than the Mets do.

Paying attention to the Mets is an entertainment. A diversion. I'm not going to get outraged about what they say, who they trade, or who they put at any one position. I'm not 12 years old anymore.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

]But the fact that they're spinning one way and not another may have a sliver of meaning.

Really? Why?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Because if you care to do it, you can analyze their motive for spinning one way or another.