Syndergaard for Profar

[Edgy MD]

I don't believe for a minute that the Mets have distinctly less able doctors than the standard.

It's certainly come to pass often enough that players from other teams, uncertain as to their condition, have gone out of their way to consult with Mets physicians.

[Guest sharpie]

Maybe not a good idea

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/texas-rangers/post/_/id/4915556/winter-meeting-notes-profars-status-for-opening-day-doubtful

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

So... Montero for Profar?

[MFS62]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: So... Montero for Profar?

If Profar isn't healthy he ain't worth diddly.

Later

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

MFS62 wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: So... Montero for Profar? If Profar isn't healthy he ain't worth diddly. Later

If Profar's farther away from healthy than he might have hoped he'd be at this point, but headed in the right direction, he's a buying opportunity.

[MFS62]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: If Profar's farther away from healthy than he might have hoped he'd be at this point, but headed in the right direction, he's a buying opportunity.

Then (my sneaky mind at work, not sure if its legal wrt MLB rules) lock in a healthy Profar.
Trade them a minor league infielder (Tovar?) and a PTBNL (Thor, or a veteran or combo of players) for one of their minor league prospects and a PTBNL (who will be Profar once he has proven that he's healthy). If he doesn't get healthy, bail out with lower level players on both sides.

Later

[Lefty Specialist]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: If Profar's farther away from healthy than he might have hoped he'd be at this point, but headed in the right direction, he's a buying opportunity.

Yeah, but there'd be no use of Syndegaardian currency in the purchase.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Well, yeah, my point exactly.

Still, MFS' lock-in thingy intrigues. It smells vaguely imlegal (though I can't find anything as yet in the rulebook about it), but still... it intrigues.

[Vic Sage]

if Profar' demonstrates that he's healthy and productive, then they won't WANT to trade him, so why would they do this? It seems to me that the opportunity is only here BECAUSE of the risks involved.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

There's the issue of Texas having too many young infielders and not enough young pitching; and our opposite problem.

[Vic Sage]

if filling mutual needs was all it took, Starlin Castro might be a Met today. But there is a question of value, or perceived value, that may have kept that deal from happening, and would keep this one from happening, too.

If you had a potentially great SS in the high minors (ranked by some as the #1 prospect), and I had a potentially great pitcher (ranked by no one as the #1 prospect, but by many as in the top 10), would you trade your SS to me? I sure hope you would, cuz i'd drive the pitcher to the airport.

It doesn't matter who else Texas has on its roster, they would not move such a player for less than what they perceive his value to be vis-a-vis another player's value. That's the kind of thing that gets a GM fired. But the reason they MIGHT move him now is because of the uncertainty and risk involved due to the SS's recent injuries. His value is now diminished to the point where such a deal might make sense to them. But why on earth would they agree to a deal that only gets them our pitcher if their SS is demonstrably healthy? Then, we're back to square one.