Centerfield

HahnSolo wrote: Yeah I think Jeff believes he's showing that the Mets aren't to be messed with, but in reality it sounds kind of desperate. And I'd say that might explain why the return to Seattle was pricier than many (myself included) thought it should have been. Ann Richards quote on W kind of applies to Jeff whenever he speaks: "born with a silver foot in his mouth." I didn't watch the press conference, but the articles look like there are a lot of Jeff quotes. So I guess we are not even pretending that Jeff is not involved anymore right? Basically Jeff Wilpon is our GM, and Brodie is his spokesman.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: if everything goes great, he hits to his career averages and the Mets win the WS, you still try to trade his ass in the offseason. If we tried to move Cano right now, we wouldn't be able to do it.

Might as well get it started now. Preview: Let's all have a discussion about Robinson Cano. No question that one of Brodie's main objectives will be to find a taker for Robinson Cano and his hefty contract. Any takers out there? I know he has a no-trade, but he's been so unhappy as a Met you'd think he'd at least be open to a change of scenery. Obviously we're going to have to eat a chunk of that money. How much do you think it will take?

Lefty Specialist wrote: For an organization often castigated as being cheap, paying $100 million to a 36-year old seems to be a waste of resources. I mean, if you're going to pay $20 million to Robinson Cano, you'd be better off paying $30 million to either Harper or Machado, no? Absolutely. I'm often criticized for harping on money. Some say it's not relevant. Others point to teams with big payrolls that are not successful. Or they say dumb things like "There's no point in spending just for spending." Let me be clear, this is exactly the opposite of what I recommend. I recommend spending wisely, and committing $100 million to a 36 year old PED user is not spending money wisely. I remember last winter, some of the garbage spouted by Sandy was how the Mets had spent more than other teams. You can see how wise those moves were now, when we have to give up prospects to unload those contracts. Make no mistake of the fact that we will eventually be looking to unload the Cano contract. We'll have to eat a significant portion of it, and we may have to give up a prospect. The no-trade will make it even harder. And I can tell you, we're not getting a prospect like Kelenic back when we move him.

By the way, I disagree with this notion that the Mets are better now than before the trade. If you’re looking at this as a strict 25 man team, then yes. The Mets are better. But that is a meaningless statement. Peter Alonso could be traded right now for a mediocre starting pitcher. That would make our 25 man stronger. But it’s a stupid move. If you mean our organization as a whole, then no. I don’t know that you can say the Mets are better. In fact, I think the Mets are worse. We lost the best prospect (in terms of upside). That has value.

Shockingly, other executives are expressing surprise at the underwhelming returns going back to Seattle for Segura, who had a no trade clause. Dipoto asked for one of Philadelphia's young arms. They said no. Seattle did the trade anyway.

I've been living in WTF-ville all weekend. But today, I read a few things recently that Cano still has a very good hard-hit rate, and Steamer has performing pretty well this season. Plus the Diaz strikeout highlights are awesome. Also, in my head, I started justifying it by saying BVW has kinda painted himself into a win-now!!! corner, so maybe this opens up the spending for elite free agents. Maybe. I'm went "I don't like it". But with a strong WTF-lean.

So you can be mocked mercilessly years from now.

Per Jon Heyman. Yankees, Phillies and Nats considered serious contenders. I haven't heard the Mets linked to him, but I guess it's somewhat relevant in that if we trade Syndergaard, one of his possible replacements would be off the table. Also, it seems generally things are moving a lot faster than last season.

We get our hero. Shang-Chi. Moving forward. https://deadline.com/2018/12/shang-chi-marvel-studios-first-asian-film-superhero-dave-callaham-kevin-feige-black-panther-1202512660/

Benjamin Grimm wrote: And it overestimates (in my opinion) the value of a closer. If Diaz is really the best of the best it will be nice to have him, but they've paid too much to get him. I mean, at some point I have to let it go. But to do all this when you have all the leverage coming from a no trade clause. It's just mind boggling. Deep breaths.

I go back to my theory on Bryce Harper. The guy looks like a douchebag, and he has douchebag hair, but I haven't seen anything or read anything that suggests he actually is a douchebag. In fact, all of the quotes I've read about him suggest that he's actually a pretty decent guy. I remember how gracious he was in 2015 after the Mets won the division. I'm ok to give him the benefit of the doubt, but understand if others don't. I mean, I get it. That hair.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: They'd be very left-handed though, but I suppose another roster move or two could take care of that. Did I forget to mention McNeil and Nimmo have been traded for Kluber? McNeil was expendable after we signed Machado.

Keith Law thinks it was a mistake. This is from his twitter: (Not sure how to embed), but the tweet reads: IMO yes. I think this deal undervalued both prospects, especially Kelenic, relative to the way the rest of baseball sees them. My writeup (ESPN+) He has an ESPN Insider article too. http://insider.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/25417888/even-mets-contend-cano-diaz-dealing-kelenic-haunt-them But it's subscription and I can only read the intro. Basically it seems like he's calling it a foolish move. Underestimated the value Kelenic among other teams. I agree with this.

The reason Kelenic was expendable, is because Michael Conforto is going to man one corner OF position for the next 10 years, and Bryce Harper will man the other. Duh.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Fair point. But they got significantly less money back than previously rumored/expected, Grimmy. Do you think that makes them more likely to splash the pot, FA-wise? Those in favor of the trade seem to think that this means more moves are on the way. I don’t know if they think this means elite free agents. Let’s hope so. I agree they will sign a few players. I guess we can only wait and see the quality of those players. Personally, I think these headline grabbing trades and trade rumors mean we won’t shop at the top of the market. But we will all soon find out.

Kluber is older and more expensive. If it means trading Noah, I’d keep Noah. Short of that I don’t know what we have left to trade.

He was better against RHP than against lefties last year. Don’t know if that’s just last year or career wise. That may be a consideration.

If you’re talking about who is paying what, then you can’t say that the Mets are “effectively” paying Cano $1.5 million this year. Your logic doesn’t add up. You can’t discount the full salary of Bruce and Swarzak. If you go strictly by who is paying what, the Mets are paying $20 million for the next five years.

You’re discounting their entire salaries. This deduction is incorrect unless the players are completely valueless. If the Mets offered to pay $20 million of Bruce’s salary, most teams would want him. And maybe even give up a prospect or two. If that number dropped to half his salary, there would still be several teams interested. Especially in the AL where he could DH. The Mets needed only one team to bite, so they might have been able to get away with paying even less. So that means you can’t deduct the full salary. Only what they would have been stuck with in a prospective deal with another team.

Looks like it just went official. It’s $20 million. Not $60. I give up.

I’ve resigned myself to the fact that this trade will happen. Nothing to do now but to hope for the best. Maybe Cano will stay productive for three years and Diaz will be as good as advertised. Selfishly I hope that I don’t have to watch Kelenic turn into a star for Seattle, but it seems wrong to root against a kid that had nothing to do with this trade. So at least I can take solace that he’s in the AL West. If there is one positive, it seems the overwhelming thought, even among those who like the trade, is that this move must be followed by a commitment to win by the Wilpons. No more excuses. Sign some elite players. The bad news is that I’ve lost all confidence in Brodie Van Wagenen. If he can’t win a trade where he has this much leverage, how badly will he be fleeced on an even playing field? But we’ll see. It’s one move. In fact, it’s not even one move yet. Long offseason. Maybe we end up with Harper still.

Of course the ultimate goal is to win it all. But as batmags says, there is so much luck involved. You can do everything right and not win one. Failing to win it all is not necessarily a failure. The real goal is sustained success. Several division titles and a string of playoff appearances. And you hope to snag a title along the way. If you fail to obtain sustained success, you have failed. And I think a minimum is 3 out of 5.

The remaining years left on the Cano contract are foolish. Even if you cut it in half it’s too much. It’s still a bad trade at $60 million. At $20 million it’s incomprehensible. Full no trade clause. Those trades are supposed to be one sided.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: fuck this guy I agree with JCL. I wonder if we are both drunk. Anyway... Gomes career OPS: .719 Travis career OPS: .712 Mex just trashed BVW for tendering Travis and advocates trading Nimmo for Gomes. And I get it. Defense matters, but come on. Let’s sign Ramos. Then trade Travis to Seattle for Diaz.