It seems likely that Daniel Murphy is going to be dealt this offseason. At the MLB level, the only Mets position players that have much value are Wright, d’Arnaud, and Murphy. Wright is obviously going nowhere and although d’Arnaud’s debut was bumpy, he’s still the catcher of the present and future until he’s not. Murphy, on the other hand, is expendable. His value has never been higher and there are already rumblings that the team will listen to offers for him. Considering their desperation for middle-of-the-order run production, lack of quality MLB position players to deal from, and the prospect of selling high on Murph, he looks to be a goner. He was 8th in all of MLB in hits, but only OPS’d .733 and had a WAR of 1.8. He also isn’t getting any younger and does not fit the organization’s philosophy of getting on base. I’m sure there are some teams that would love to have him and would pay pretty well for almost 200 hits. Given Alderson’s record, I’m expecting him to ask for the stars. However, if he only comes down with the Moon I still think he pulls the trigger. Murphy can be packaged to bring in a hitter to protect Wright or return prospects from a team to be traded to accomplish the same thing….what’s more desirable, a team with Duda hitting cleanup and Murphy playing 2B or a team with a real cleanup hitter and someone else filling the void at 2B?
The question becomes who will fill in at 2B for Murph if/when he’s dealt? To me, if the team is able to structure the middle of the lineup (2-6) to make it a strength, they can afford to take a chance on a risky (younger, cheaper) player to play 2B. This brought me to Dustin Ackley of Seattle.
Ackley was the #2 overall pick in the 2009 draft. He breezed through the minors and has hit a wall in the majors. He had a very good rookie campaign in 2011 and looked to be on the fast track to stardom. However, except for a few stretches of brilliance here and there, his experience so far has been a struggle. He lost his job at 2B to Nick Franklin and was even demoted this year. On the other hand, he’s an extremely gifted athlete who might be worth taking a shot on.
Similarly, the Mets have their own enigma in Ike Davis. Davis was a 1st round draft pick and was supposed to be the answer at 1B for years to come. Unfortunately, his career has been up and down since his rookie campaign. He flashes the potential for 30+ HR, but there are still questions as to whether or not he’ll ever reach that ceiling and do so consistently.
Currently at 1B in Seattle are Justin Smoak and Kendrys Morales. Smoak’s inability to play MLB-level ball and Morales’ likely departure to the highest bidder as a FA this winter leave 1B up for grabs for Seattle. Likewise, with Murphy presumably being dealt 2B will be a hole for the Mets. Why not try and swap Ackley and Davis? Both players can get a change of scenery that they both seem to need. Ike will have less pressure on him in a smaller market like Seattle and with a team with low expectations he could still blossom into the power hitter we hoped he’d be. Assuming the Mets are able to assemble a solid lineup 2-6, Ackley can play 2B and hit 7th. He won’t have the pressure in NY that he had in Seattle with being such a high pick and he won’t be counted on to be a top producer, he’ll be given the chance to grow in a low-pressure situation at the bottom of the order with another young phenom in Travis d’Arnaud. We could see him eventually reach the ceiling that was projected for him, as a top-flight leadoff or #2 hitter on a top team.
Of course, additional pieces might be needed to be added to the deal in order to balance it out and there’s always risk involved – Davis could turn into a monster power threat while Ackley continues to struggle. However, if Murphy is being replaced, I’d prefer to see the Mets both get some value for Davis AND take a chance on a young and talented player who could pay dividends for years if he works out.
At first, I thought you were advocating Murph for Ackley. That would have been an awful deal on the Mets part. But this one makes a lot of sense and gives two kids who showed a lot of potential but then fizzled out for one reason or another, while still showing parts of the potential. I'd be onboard!
ReplyDeleteThanks Sam!
ReplyDeleteI would never deal Murphy for Ackley, that would be taking a step backwards. But, if the Mets are going to trade Murph, why not take a chance on a young kid with potential?
Do you actually say Ackley would have less pressure on him playing in NY then in Seattle? It doesn't matter where he was picked, he could have been a Bryce Harper type prospect in Seattle with all the fanfare and still wouldn't have the pressure he'd have in NYC.
ReplyDeleteIt takes a special type of player to pitch or hit with those bright lights in your eyes. Many have failed. Pelfrey, Bay, Alomar, and Kent are just four of the biggest busts the mets have ever had. Those four guys prove that skills alone wotnt get it done in NYC.
If Dustin couldn't cut it in Seattle, I say don't touch him because he'll be even worse in Flushing. Now, I like your idea if swapping Ike out for something of value, but I think he'd be better off in a package for a bigger fish.
I'm against trading pospects this off season unless it's an absolute no brainer. Stanton is a no brainer. I say Ike would be better off in that type of deal. Ike as the cherry on top, along with some prospects might get the Mets a big time slugger. If I couldn't swing that, I'd sign Beltran, Bryd, Peralta, and Lincecum and call it a day.
Yes, that's what I'm saying. With the Mets he'd be buried in the lineup and have low expectations. In Seattle he was expected to be the next big thing.
ReplyDeleteYour choice in comparison players is arbitrary and there's little proof that it was the 'bright lights' of NY that doomed them here. Kent didn't start producing until he had protection from Bonds in the lineup. He wasn't all that good in small market Cleveland either. Pelfrey suffered as much from being rushed through the minors as anything. Alomar was at the end of his career and there are well-known rumors about his health at the time that could easily have lead to the drop in performance. And Bay couldn't play in a big ballpark. Of course he complained about the NY scrutiny, but he was getting it because he sucked, he didn't suck because of the scrutiny.
Sure, there are players who love the limelight and take to the city. But that doesn't mean a player has to have Gary Carter's personality to succeed here.
If Murphy goes, bringing in Ackley and burying him in the lineup will give him the chance to improve. If he's hitting as low as 7th that means the FO will have done its job and brought in better hitters for the more important lineup spots. The spotlight will be on them, Wright, and the pitching. He'll, people are so fed up with Ike that Ackley might get a grace period after coming over for him.
As far as packaging Ike for a slugger, Id love to be able to pull it off. I just worry about his value when a team with tradable stars (Colorado) and a glaring hole at 1B says they want position players but don't like what the Mets have to offer. I'm afraid he'll have to be moved in a problem-for-problem trade.
I love this idea....Ackley is also a great defensive second baseman
ReplyDeleteBut im not sure they would have interest in Davis. They have smoak, who is essentially the same guy.
What about expanding the deal to include michael Saunders? He's another buy low guy i like.
I just felt Davis offers more than Smoak because he's shown more at the MLB level. I also assumed Seattle would be out of patience with him and be looking to turn the page there.
ReplyDeleteAs far as expanding the deal, why not? I figured it would be more than just those two anyway.
The Mets need guys they can count on, not more unknowns. Plus, who wants someone you'd have to "bury" in the lineup? It's a bad deal. I'd rather have Ike who has shown he capable of a 30 hr season.
ReplyDeleteLet's face it, the Mets are so bad, that you could just about replace everybody but the third baseman and end up upgrading that particular position. So there's no need to replace the second baseman who's your second best hitter, with another question mark.
Sandy needs to get away from his passive approach to free agency. I certainly don't want a spending spree that'll put them back in the red, but it's a fact that this team would be monumentally better by going into the season with a 100-110 million dollar payroll.
25 million naming rights
50 million MLB TV revenue
70 Million from SNY
5-10 million WROW RADIO payments
That's a minimum of 150 million dollars the mets will be paid for their season before attendance. If they invest and raise their payroll to 105 million, I'd be comfortable estimating attendance to be around the 3 million mark. Mets fans show up if their team is good.
My point is that this is a NY team. The other NY team is dropping their payroll to 189 million and their fans are going nuts. I'm not saying that the mets need to spend 140 million like years past. They just don't need to. But to say that a 105 million dollar payroll is too much is literally criminal in today's MLB market place.
Jeff Wilpon said it...."I want to get out if the hope business. It's a bad business model."
You're 100% correct Jeff. It's a stupid ass plan to sit on your hands when you have one of the leagues best rotations and young pitching, and allow them to get old and expensive without ever giving them an offense. Time to pay up before you can't afford them all in 5 years.
I don't care to hold my breath hoping that Davis is going to hit next year. The team is likely going to add a different starting 1B this offseason, meaning Ike is gone. If he's traded he won't bring back that much considering his current value, a value that will never rise with this team because he'll never get serious playing time with a new 1B in town. It's not a bad deal, Davis just doesn't have the value you seem to think he does.
ReplyDelete" So there’s no need to replace the second baseman who’s your second best hitter, with another question mark."
This really misses the point. It's a choice between a proven and reliable slugger plus Ackley and Davis plus Murphy. I'll take the proven slugger and my chances with Ackley (or another reclamation project or up-and-comer for that matter) every time.
Every time you post it turns into a railing on the Wilpons and their financing of the Mets and how this situation can easily be bought out if. Why don't you write a post on that?
The Dodgers need a 3B and bottom-of-the-rotation pitcher. Seems to me that could spell Murphy and Gee as the start of a package for Kemp. Maybe it is the whole package if we take on all of Kemp's contract.
ReplyDeleteRe Ackley, I'm on the no side. I want to see EYJ at 2B and at (or near) the top of our lineup come April. I have a strong feeling Ike is going to get another opportunity to redeem himself next year, and I am OK with that. I'd love to see a lineup for next year of:
Young - 2B
Beltran - RF
Wright - 3B
Kemp - LF
Davis - 1B
d'Arnaud - C
Drew - SS
Lagares - CF
Herb - I appreciate the comments. I don't think EYJ is a starting MLB player and if Mack's right and the Mets intend to target (and sign) Napoli, Ike's playing in another town next year. No way do I want to watch him kill rallies from #5 in the order again in 2014.
ReplyDeleteKemp? I'd love to have him if the price is right.