Reese's Pieces - Is Signing Wright Wrong?

By - Reese Kaplan

While watching the Mets try their best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the 9^th inning last night my wife, a casual fan at best, said, “Why don’t the Mets just trade David Wright?  He deserves to play on a winning team.”  Then came Mack’s earlier diatribe in which he excoriated the Wilpons and suggested that Wright will not be a part of the Mets’ long term future.

For laughs on a slow news day when the bullpen can’t blow a lead, let’s ponder the imponderable – what if instead of trying to sign David Wright the Mets sold high and traded him for the best available package?

First consider the positives -- $16 million of immediate salary relief and salary flexibility moving forward instead of being saddled with another 3-5 year $54 to $90 million contract.  Then there’s the haul you’d get in return.  A perennial All-Star player in his prime, not yet 30, a career .302 hitter with both power and speed.  He fields his position quite well, though his arm is always a mystery. 

Wait, you’re probably saying to yourself.  If he’s all of these things and home grown, why would the Mets let him go?  Go take a look at the history of the Oakland A’s and count how many players were developed and then jettisoned when it was no longer economically viable to keep them – Rickey, Giambi, Canseco, Zito, Hudson, etc.  Remember who built those teams?

So, let’s go back to the hypothetical trade.  What would you net in return for David Wright?  I’m thinking you’d want at minimum a catcher and an outfielder back.  They should be ML ready minor leaguers or rookies who have shown great promise.  After that the pitching mantra can take over…starters or relievers, either way, we need both of them. 

As a frame of reference the Mets received 4-for-1 when they traded the best pitcher they’d ever developed in Tom Seaver.  In return they got the reigning co-rookie of the year in Pat Zachry, a gold glove 2^nd baseman in Doug Flynn, a rookie-of-the-year candidate in Steve Henderson and the long forgotten Dan Norman.  Did that trade work to the Mets’ favor?  Obviously not, but it’s the kind of trade you would expect when now you’re debating trading in his prime the premiere offensive player the team has ever produced.  Hopefully this time around they would pick the returns a bit more judiciously.

So assume they go ahead and make the deal, who plays 3B for the Mets next year?  I see quite a few possibilities.  You have Murphy who could slide over from 2^nd to his original position.  You have Valdespin who could play 2B or 3B since he came up as a, um, “raw” shortstop.  You have those AAAA hitters in Lutz and Satin who both could probably hit if given the opportunity to play regularly.  Or they could go dramatic and pluck Flores out of AA and insert him into the majors.  While none of them are Wright, the fact remains you have options. 

Would this trade work for the Mets?  Well, without knowing who the players are it’s hard to say.  However, Flores plus a catcher other than Thole and an outfielder other than Bay seems like a gamble worth taking.  Furthermore, the $16 million or more saved per season could go into locking up multiple players to Niese-like contracts, affordable and movable.  That approach sounds more Moneyball-consistent than opening the nearly empty vault for just one player.