John Harper, a frequent commentator and baseball analyst on SNY’s Daily News Live, in an article on today’s NYDailyNews.com, proposes five trades for the Mets. Since the seeds for many trades that we ultimately see this off season will be sown at this week’s G.M. meetings, it is appropriate to consider potential trade ideas now. Since the same players are mentioned in more than one of Harper’s trades, he isn’t suggesting that the team could do all of them. Rather, each trade idea is considered independently, on its own.
Harper’s article is titled “Mets should consider trading pitching for sluggers” although, in my mind, only one of his trades involves obtaining a legitimate slugger. Harper believes that we will see an inordinate number of trades this year, some of them real blockbusters, because the free agent market is shallow in impact players, and those who are there will be overpriced. The Mets may therefore find it easier to meet their needs through trades rather than by chasing expensive free agents.
Harper’s suggested trade ideas are:
1. Jon Niese, Rafael Montero, and Ike Davis to the Orioles for J.J. Hardy, Nick Markakis and Wei-Yin Chen
2. Zack Wheeler and Daniel Murphy to the Dodgers for Andre Ethier, Joc Pederson and Zach Lee
3. Jon Niese, Rafael Montero, and Ike Davis to the Blue Jays for Edwin Encarnacion and Brett Cecil
4. Dillon Gee, Rafael Montero, and Daniel Murphy to the Angels for Mark Trumbo, Howie Kendrick and Mike Morin
5. Noah Syndergaard to the Cubs for Javier Baez
Each of these ideas has some merit to it. We all know the Mets need at least one new outfielder this year, and perhaps two, a shortstop, and possibly a first baseman. Each trade addresses at least one of those needs, and some make more sense than others, but the bottom line is that I wouldn’t make any of these trades as specified by Harper. Lets take them one at a time.
1. Both Hardy and Markakis are in the final year of their deals. Actually, Marky has an $17.5 million option for 2015 with a $2 million buyout, so figure he’d cost $17 million for 2014, way too expensive for my tastes. Hardy would cost a reasonable $7 million. Hardy would be a decent pickup for the Mets if they could negotiate an extension, but most importantly, I’m not giving up both Niese and Montero in the same deal unless the player coming back is named Giancarlo. If I’m keeping Niese, I don’t need (nor do I want) Chen. So, my offer to the O’s would be Ike and a PTBN for Hardy, but only if I could extend him. But first I would be in contact with the Angels. (See my revised proposal for trade #4)
2. Wheeler is not going anywhere. Period. The Dodgers are a very viable trade partner for us, but this isn’t the trade I’d want. Murphy fills L.A.’s need for a 3B and Gee would be a fit for a hole in their rotation. My primary target is Kemp if he passes a medical. Getting Pederson as insurance would be a major attraction. The Dodgers would have to send a load of cash along to make Kemp’s contract reasonable, around 33%. I’ll offer Murphy, Gee and deGrom for Kemp (plus cash) and Pederson. Let the Dodgers keep Lee.
3. I love the idea of getting Encarnacion to play first, but I’m still not giving up Niese and Montero together. As a matter of fact, I hate to give up Niese altogether, since we are very shallow in LH starters down the road, and even if we were to sign Kazmir, I can’t see relying on him to replace Niese. Let Brett Cecil stay north of the border, and send Encarnacion to New York for Gee, Davis, Flores and Bowman.
4. The Angels would be one of the first teams I would contact . . But not for Trumbo, Kendrick or Morin. Trumbo is a RH hitting Duda, and Kendrick would be an upgrade at 2B, but I don’t need to upgrade 2B when I have positions with no decent candidates. Morin is OK, but again, I have other fish to fry before I take another arm. All I really want from the Angels is Erick Aybar. He’d be a good fit, decent bat, fine glove and a threat to steal, and a reasonable 3 year contract that would take us to 2017 when Cecchini or Rosario could be ready to take over. So how about Gee, Verrett and Kolarek for Aybar.
5. Under normal circumstances, this is a good trade. We need position prospects and the Cubs need pitchers. I hate to give up Synders, but Baez could be a Tulo type SS. If Baez was major league ready now, I’d jump at this trade. But Thor can join our rotation in June, while Baez probably won’t be able to help us for another year. Still, I’m thinking long and hard about this one.
18 comments:
I wrote John and asked him:
So, we spend years building a pitcher-based future and give it all up in one big swoop..."
He hasn't responded.
I would not make any of these proposed trades!
I hate all of them.
Why would i trade Niese and Montero for Hardy a Markekis there both 30 and over and they both reached there potential and are not going to get any better and Edwin Ecarnacion is mid 30's.What is Harper thinking.
The only trade I would consider is #5. Baez is a big time hitting shortstop. I think Cubs GM Epstein would also look long and hard at that trade. The Cubs have some really good young SS prospects in their organization and already have a young Starlin Castro on the big league club.
Wow....just wow....these are ALL terrible.
I would like #2 if we make it Montero and Murph for Ethier and Pederson.We take on all of Ethier's salary and hope Pederson or Puello is the answer for our third OF. Sign Peralta and money left for pitching
Ed i agree with you that trade makes sense. Plus with Peralta we would be instant contenders.A nd we kept Niese and Wheeler and Noah.
Word is that the Dodgers have already expressed a willingness to pay a substantial part of Ethier's salary. Ethier would be the low hanging fruit, but if I'm Sandy, I'd push for Kemp first. Taking Ethier would depend on who I was able to get for the other corner. Signing Granderson or Cruz would certainly do it, and maybe the Ike for Aoki trade suggested by Joel Sherman would do it too.
I'd be interested in what he has to say. As I said above, I don't like any of the trade exactly as Harper proposed them, (except possibly the trade for Javier Baez) but with some tweaking, making one or two of them wouldn't constitute throwing away the pitcher based future we spent so long to build.
If we traded Gee as part of a package to get Encarnacion, Aybar or Kemp/Ethier, and signed a decent starter like Arroyo, Kazmir, Feldman, etc. we'd still have a rotation this year of Wheeler, Niese, Arroyo, and Mejia, with a place holder like Dice-K, Hefner, or Torres to hold the fort until Syndergaard and/or Montero came up.
Actually, I think Montero showed us last spring (and in Las Vegas this summer) that he was ready for the majors, so if Alderson can get ovet the stupid Super Two thing, I'd give him the 5th spot in the rotation from Day 1, or at least let him compete. Then, in 2014 you have an overabundance of quality arms competing for rotation spots, with 7 guys; Harvey, Wheeler, Niese, Arroyo, (in his final year) Mejia, Syndergaard, and Montero and 5 spots. Gee would likely have been the odd man out anyway.
Similarly, if we gave up one of our prospect arms as an add in, it wouldn't deplete the system. We would still have great depth. Take away one of Matz, Fulmer, Bowman, Lara, Ynoa, Cessa, Koch, Keubler, Flexen & Whelan, and you still have a pretty darn good pipeline
You're right. Niese and Montero for Hardy and Markakis is a terrible trade. But Hardy himself wouldn't be a bad acquisition. I'd prefer Aybar, or signing Peralta, but trading Ike for Hardy, say, wouldn't be a bad fall back position if we were strapped for a new SS as spring training approaches.
I hate all of these, too. And I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why a trade for Lowrie isn't even mentioned anywhere.
I'd offer Tejada and one or two prospects along the lines of Gorski, deGrom and Kolarek.
Bill - A Lowrie trade isn't mentioned because Harper didn't include Lowrie as a target among the 5 trades in his article. I only commented on the trade ideas he suggested.
Lowrie is definitely on my list of suggested targets. I don't think your package of Tejada and 1 or 2 pitching prospects (not named Syndergaard or Montero) is going to do it. The A's #1 prospect, SS Addison Russell, is not expected to be major league ready until 2015, so they might regard Tejada as an adequate bridge for this year, but they would need more to part with Lowrie. They could use an upgrade at second base, so adding Murphy, or even Flores, to Tejada would probably do the trick. They could then let Tejada and Sogard compete for their starting SS job in spring training. Alternatively, a package of Tejada, Montero and a lower level prime pitching prospect like Lara, Bowman or Cessa, could sway Oakland.
My question should've been clearer, Herb. I wasn't asking why YOU didn't mention Lowrie. I've been wondering why NO ONE in the media that I've seen/heard hasn't mentioned him. I've seen Drew, Peralta, Tulo, Cabrera, and others brought up as targets, however unlikely (especially Tulo) they may be.
I find it curious that Lowrie is omitted, since he's Arbi-eligible on a team with a history of trading players once they become expensive. For the Mets, he'd be a lower-cost acquisition than the others, and be under team control for two years. If Ceccini or Tovar seems ready by then, or Tejada reverts to his '11-'12 form, we have a chance to trade or non-tender Lowrie. If Lowrie performs well for us, he can be extended.
To me, unless Oakland makes a ridiculous demand in talent, it's a win/win for us.
Lowrie has been mentioned by a few writers as a target over the past couple of weeks. Just today, Joel Sherman mentions Lowrie as the best of the SS trade targets for the Mets in his NY Post column. He concludes, however, that since Lowrie profiles similar to Peralta, and the Mets would have to give up prospects for Lowrie while Peralta would just cost cash, that they would probably go for Peralta.
I'm on the fence here. Lowrie would clearly be less expensive salary wise, at least for this year (projected $4.8 mil in arb vs. estimated 3 years/$30 million for Peralta) but Lowrie is a free agent in 2015. We could try to extend Lowrie to a similar number of years. There is some uncertainty with Lowrie, since this was his first season as a full time player, but the Biogenesis thing casts some doubt on Peralta too. Lowrie is a switch hitter and 2 years younger. It might come down to who Oakland demands in a trade.
Oops! Check that. It wasn't Sherman who reached the conclusion that the Mets would go for Peralta over Lowrie. It was Danny Abriano, the guy who wrote the Sherman article on RisingApple.com. Sherman talks about trading for Lowrie and then signing him to a 4 or 5 year extension.
Thanks for the tip, Herb. I just read Sherman's article. Now I can't say any longer that "no one" has mentioned Jed. Sherman says Lowrie will be a FA next Fall, but Baseballreference.com says it won't be until '15.
We'll soon see which direction Alderson goes in, anyway.
Jed is scheduled to become a FA next fall, which means for the 2015 season. With an extension he could be quite attractive.
Post a Comment