Jung-Ho Kang?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Point in fact: Matsui played in a different league, and had a significantly different skill set. (Although, y'know, if I squint a little to make my eyes more slit-like, it gets a little easier to see, I suppose.)

All I'm saying is... there are probably some other comparisons to be had out there, and probably some less intellectually lazy/fraught ones, at that.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: On further thought I'd be very surprised if they go after this guy inasmuch as best-case he's a kind of Flores but older and more expensive.

Oh, very much yes. Hell, Flores has probably been doing it in tougher run-scoring environments in his teens than this guy did in his mid-twenties.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I've thought all along the Mets would go for a SS with the idea of having him be a LH hitting lead off guy, moving Flores to 2B, and trading Muffy. I sort of still think they do that.

Holdupholdupholdup. I hate to sound like a broken record, but, um... long-term second base vacancy, shmong-term second base vacancy. The Mets already have a young guy with some pop and on-base ability and a glove carrying Murph's bags, who's demonstrated more in a short sample at the big-league level than Flores has (never mind Bi Bim Bopper over here).

Edited December 16, 2014 by Guest

[Edgy MD]

Sure, but as you note above when contrasting him with Kang, Flores' minor league track record still looks pretty sharp on his CV.

[Zvon]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Reports today suggest that a Mets bid for Kang is "unlikely."

Come on. We all must know by now (they have been saying it as a side note all along just to prepare us) that the Mets are going w/Flores/Tejada at short. Anything else is highly unlikely.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Oh, c'mon. These bullshitting Mets were as likely to get this guy as my mom going out and getting me an original Van Gogh for the holidays. I'm still waiting for the money saved from the Santana and Bay contracts to be put back into the payroll. This is a joke, right? The team might already be as much as 10 or 15% over budget and they tried to sell the public that there was a chance they'd pick up a $10M+/year* player.


*Includes posting fees

[Edgy MD]

If Sandy Alderson were in on an elaborate PR scheme, wouldn't he just put in a lowball bid? Bids are sealed, except for the winner, so he'd just say something like, "We were right there."

Saying "We're thinking about it but probably not" doesn't sell anything to anybody.

[batmagadanleadoff]

What if Sandy's not in on it? What if the owners lead Sandy on, knowing all along that at the eleventh hour, they'd pull out, leaving it to Sandy to make the announcement? Anyways, there are limitless ways to pull off a dog and pony show, even without Sandy's complicity.

But what do I know? I don't. The Mets might've been sincerely considering Kang, I'll concede. Adding $10M to salary shouldn't be that burdensome, even for the Mets, especially if they're trying to dump Gee and probably Murphy's salary.

Now if the Mets have to pare down to the sub $90M payroll levels of recent past because that's all they can afford, then that might be evidence that the Mets couldn't have afforded Kang. Time will tell. And even then, we'll never know for certain, so there'll always be plausible deniability for anyone who wants to deny.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I don't think getting rid of Murphy would be classified as
a salary dump... more a get something for him while his
value is perceived at it's highest by some and he's in his
last year of a contract.

[Edgy MD]

Pretty cool how that post reads as almost perfectly justified.

[batmagadanleadoff]

d'Kong76 wrote: I don't think getting rid of Murphy would be classified as a salary dump... more a get something for him while his value is perceived at it's highest by some and he's in his last year of a contract.

We'll see. If they trade Murph for minor leaguers and major leaguers with little experience who don't make much more than the minimum salary, I'd suspect a salary dump no matter how the team describes it. I'd also suspect a salary dump if the Mets salary is eventually $10M or so below current levels.

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: I don't think getting rid of Murphy would be classified as a salary dump... more a get something for him while his value is perceived at it's highest by some and he's in his last year of a contract. We'll see. If they trade Murph for minor leaguers and major leaguers with little experience who don't make much more than the minimum salary, I'd suspect a salary dump no matter how the team describes it. I'd also suspect a salary dump if the Mets salary is eventually $10M or so below current levels.

But it can get more complicated than to simply look at what the Mets get in return for Murphy to figure out if the Mets are dumping salary. All the future moves are related. So, for example, if the Mets can unload Colon and his $11M salary without taking on any significant salary in exchange, that would allow the Mets to take on more salary for Murph. So maybe, the way to determine if the Mets are dumping salary is to just look at the overall team payroll once the dust settles.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Oh, c'mon. These bullshitting Mets were as likely to get this guy as my mom going out and getting me an original Van Gogh for the holidays. I'm still waiting for the money saved from the Santana and Bay contracts to be put back into the payroll. This is a joke, right? The team might already be as much as 10 or 15% over budget and they tried to sell the public that there was a chance they'd pick up a $10M+/year* player. *Includes posting fees

If that's true, they were already over budget and signed Cuddyer, so why would that prevent them from signing someone else?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Oh, c'mon. These bullshitting Mets were as likely to get this guy as my mom going out and getting me an original Van Gogh for the holidays. I'm still waiting for the money saved from the Santana and Bay contracts to be put back into the payroll. This is a joke, right? The team might already be as much as 10 or 15% over budget and they tried to sell the public that there was a chance they'd pick up a $10M+/year* player. *Includes posting fees If that's true, they were already over budget and signed Cuddyer, so why would that prevent them from signing someone else?

You could be right. But maybe, the Mets signed Cuddyer knowing all along that they would pare down the payroll going forward in order to squeeze Cuddyer into what might be the same budget as last year's budget.

TBD

[Vic Sage]

Regarding 2b, if the Mets feel like either Flores or Hererra are ready to play 2b (or Matt Reynolds even), then Murphy is still available for trade.

According to this http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/16/giants-look-likely-to-trade-for-pablo-sandovals-replacement/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
the Giants are looking to trade for a 3bman, and that is Murphy's best defensive position.

Is SF a possible landing spot for Mr. Murphy? I'd take Brandon Crawford straight up for him. What about that kid they have, Matt Duffy? He was a SS in the minors and hit really well, with speed and a high OB%. They view him solely as a 2bman, though. Is his range that limited? Can he play SS in the majors? i'd take him if he can.

[Zvon]

Regarding 2b, if the Mets feel like either Flores or Hererra are ready to play 2b (or Matt Reynolds even), then Murphy is still available for trade. According to this http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/12/16/giants-look-likely-to-trade-for-pablo-sandovals-replacement/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs the Giants are looking to trade for a 3bman, and that is Murphy's best defensive position. Is SF a possible landing spot for Mr. Murphy? I'd take Brandon Crawford straight up for him. What about that kid they have, Matt Duffy? He was a SS in the minors and hit really well, with speed and a high OB%. They view him solely as a 2bman, though. Is his range that limited? Can he play SS in the majors? i'd take him if he can.

I'm starting to get the feeling Muffy is always available for trade. If we could get a much needed piece from SF, I wouldn't bitch too much, cause as far as Dan's goes, that could be a good move for him career wise.

[Edgy MD]

You think that's a deal that the Giants would want? Do you think it'd take a throw-in?

I like Crawford a lot.

[Vic Sage]

i have no idea if they'd do it, and it may take another piece, even if they liked Murphy, because he's only under team control for 1 more year. Murphy and Montero for Crawford and a prospect?

[Edgy MD]

Better be a meaningful prospect. Montero's more than a throw-in.

I don't like Crawford that much necessarily.

[Centerfield]

It looks like the Mets are going to take a pass here. I can't blame them for this.

Kang's 38 HR's last year are the exception, not the norm. It looks like he is more of a 15 HR guy, even in Korea.

If he were a terrific defensive player, then it might be worth considering, but as of now, he is not likely to be better than Flores either offensively or defensively.

On the plus side though, I imagine he'd generate a lot of revenue from the Korean population in Flushing.

[Vic Sage]

Edgy MD wrote: Better be a meaningful prospect. Montero's more than a throw-in. I don't like Crawford that much necessarily.

Montero is AAA/ML ready; i was thinking of an equivalent but younger prospect still at A/AA. SF could put Montero at the back of their rotation immediately and let him develop there; we don't need to do that. We need a guy who can play SS well and whose offense still has upside, whose shown improvement every year, and is just now coming into his prime. We're not going to get that for 1-year rental of a solid but unspectacular 30-year old player who would asked to change positions... again. of course, since this is all a just a WATP, lets get him for Tejada!

[Edgy MD]

I don't know. Murphy may have one year of control, but Crawford has only two. Murphy will be 30 and has a 109 career OPS+. Crawford will be 28 and has a 91. I like him, but I think, as assets, they're closer than the difference Montero represents, to me.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Yeah, I would think it would be more of a Rainy Lara-sized (or something comparable) difference between the two. Maybe a little more. (Crawford IS a shortstop, and a half-decent defensive one at that.)

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'm intrigued with this Crawford fellow. I'll bet Paul DePodesta thinks about him.

Here's my deal:
Muffy
Tejada or Tovar
Mazzoni or similar P prospect

--for--

Crawford
Affeldt

We get the SS we need, they get the 3B they need + depth from which to choose Crawford's successor.

We get a nice LH relief pitcher they get a young guy they like who could eventually be a role player or successor to their long-in-the-tooth guys like Vogelsong.

[Ceetar]

I wonder if other teams legitimately consider Murphy a possibility at third. He played there a little last year, but really has barely played third in the Majors so not regularly since 2008ish in the minors. (split some time in 2008 at other positions, and played OF in Flushing)

He's a very good hitter for a 2Bman, for 3B, not as much.

Just wondering if there is reluctance, which isn't a great thing for your trading partner to have.

[Edgy MD]

Murphy may not be a superlative hitter by third base standards, but the seeming back-of-the-baseball-card certainty he brings probably has a value. Somebody (the Mets!) once traded for Brian F. Schneider.

Countering Montero with Rain Lara is good thinking. Ynoa good trade chip when you spot one.

[Frayed Knot]

I believe SF would take either a 2B or 3B as they believe their half-year wonder Joe Panik can be Edgardo-like and play either position.

[Guest d'Kong76]

bids must be submitted by Friday, the 19th

Is this in our time or Korean time.. I think it's
tomorrow there?

[Fman99]

Winning bid went to Pittsburgh. I don't think he'll pan out as a star in the states but that could just be sour grapes.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Looks like Kang is a Pirate according Hey Man.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Scooped again!

[Frayed Knot]

d'Kong76 wrote: Looks like Kang is a Pirate according Hey Man.

Well the Pirates are the bid winner but they still need to reach a contract agreement, so he's not a Pittsburgher yet.