11/28/18

OPEN THREAD - Robinson Cano Trade

24 comments


There's been a rumored trade going on at Twitter that was started by Dan O'Dowd. It has the Mets and Seattle Mariners swapping the following players:

The Mets get:

    2B Robinson Cano  (36/yrs old)
        2018:  .303
       $24mil/year due through 2023
        some $$$ would be paid by Seattle and Mets would
        work out payoff of later years of contract

    CL Edwin Diaz  (24/yrs. old)
        2018:  73-apps, 1.96/0.79, 57-SV
        team controlled 4 years

    CF Mallex Smith   (25/yrs. old)
        2018:  .296  2-HR
        team controlled 4 years

Seattle gets:

    OF-1B Jay Bruce   (31/yrs old)
        2018:   .233   9-HR
        $13mil through 2020

    1B-OF Dominic Smith   (23/yrs old)
        2018:   .224    5-HR
       team controlled 4+ years

    SS Andres Gimenez   (20/yrs old)
        2018:  AA/Bing:   .277   0-HR
        team controlled 4+ years

  SP Justin Dunn   (23/yrs old)
        2018:   A+/AA:   .359   134-IP   156-K
        team controlled 4+ years

The plan would be for Jeff McNeil to move over to 3B and Diaz take over the closer role.

Thoughts?





24 comments:

Tom Brennan said...

I would think long and hard about this one. Great reliever in Diaz. Cano not turning into Robbie Alomar II is key.

Mike Freire said...

Mack, I think they also suggested that the Mariners would add money to the deal, as well (something like 50 million, which would offset Cano's costs by 10 million per year).

If you factor in that reduction, then Cano's price drops to roughly 14 million per year.......not horrible when you compare that to what the Braves just gave 33 year old Josh Donaldson (23 million, albeit for only one season). I think Cano can be an effective player for another two or three seasons (i.e. NL style of play where he has to hit and play defense), but the last two years of that deal may be a bit rough (unless you flip him to the AL so he can DH for his last couple seasons).

The big question is where does Cano play? If you play him at 2B, then Jeff McNeil has to move (third base), which shouldn't be a huge issue since he has experience there in the minors and that would put Todd Frazier into a super utility role. Amed could also stay put at SS since Gimenez would be in Seattle.

The bigger upside is the addition of a premier closer (Diaz) and a leadoff type/center fielder (Smith), which are huge voids on this team, IMO.

The costs are definitely high here, but you are getting significant value back.

VERY interesting to say the least...........I think I would pull the trigger, honestly.

Mike Freire said...

I forgot to add that you are shedding Jay Bruce's salary (horrible signing) in the process!

Sucks to lose Dunn, but we have other solid arms in the upper minors so his loss would sting a bit, but not be insurmountable.

The Dim said...

I would not target Mallex, but rather Mitch Haniger as he's a righty and not a lefty like Mallex. Mariners will have to send $10 per year for the next 5 years

Gary Seagren said...

O.K. I get it but now do you trade Thor or keep him and focus on another BP arm and a defensive catcher.....very interesting.

Gary Seagren said...

Also I love Nimmo but I'd throw him in the trade to add Haniger as I've heard only good things about him and he's right handed.

Eddie Corona said...

Rough Trade... would only be worth Cano's headache if we make it to the WS with him. he is going to be awful to carry when he is post 38...

If diaz is the best closer in the league as he was its would soften the blow but he would need to be here for the next 4/5 years which mean we need to sign him.
the loss of gimenez and dunn would hurt as there is no immediate help after them... so we need to be correct in evaluating them as to whether the are an acceptable loss for this move...

tough risky start for the GM... all i have to say is he better be right...

close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes...

Seattle Steve said...

IF Mariners add 30 Mil...Do it....Diaz is the real deal...We are trading 3 suspects.

Robb said...

This is an awful trade. Mets would be getting fleeced. If it was bruce and smith for Diaz and cano and 50 million it might be fair value. Diaz doesnt have 40 mm of excess value and thats what you would need to make Cano (who is going to be age 37-40 at the back end) even palatable. You would be making your team better for 2 years (at best) and then have 3 more years of cano at minimum 14mm per year albotross. Mallex is a cheaper less powerful Lagares. Also Im not giving up 2 or my 3 best prospects for the closer.

Viper said...

I would pass.

You can honestly expect Cano to play at a high level for another 2 years and would be stuck for another 3 with an immovable contract / player.

Lets add that you don't really know what you're getting in Cano once he is off the juice.

You would do this in order to get a CF (which we have) and a closer which we can sign while losing Dunn and Gimenez. So you're trading a starter for a closer and a shortstop for a CF.

Why don't the Mets do the smart thing and actually acquire that which they need? you know..BP arms, a legit 3B?

Again, I would pass.

Reese Kaplan said...

This type of trade is very interesting because instead of taking flyers on unproven talents in the lower levels (think Steve Nogosek and Ryder Ryan), we'd be the ones taking on known commodities in Cano, Diaz and Mallex Smith.

If Seattle is indeed kicking in $50 million to reduce the investment to $70 million on Cano, then you subtract the $28 million owed Bruce, you're talking about a five-year spend of $42 million for a guy who's showing no sign of slowing down on a likely Cooperstown-bound career. That's a net cost of less than you're paying Juan Lagares.

Then consider the prospects going to Seattle for the guy who led the league in saves and had a 1.96 ERA with 4 years of control and a guy who nearly hit .300 with high stolen base totals who is a true centerfielder. Rosario's dramatic increase in production suggested Gimenez might be tough to shoehorn into the infield anyway, and Dunn is pretty much an unknown in terms of how good he will or won't be. Trading these upper level prospects for already proven talent makes this deal a no-brainer to me.

Tom Brennan said...

Reese, as you outline it, it seems to make dollars and sense to me

TexasGusCC said...

Reese, I am thinking on your wavelength also, but Robb and Viper make good points too. The hidden facts are Diaz going into arbitration also and getting expensive quickly and I would rather have Haniger than Smith back. Also, can we keep Dunn and give them the Oregon kid Peterson?

Have to really think about it, but all this is just Dan Odowd’s idea of what a trade would look like. No one said either team is considering this proposal.

TP said...

I would be stunned if the Mariners took Bruce and kicked in $50 million. Cano is a big risk but the two proven quantities make this deal a Win for the Mets, which is probably it wouldn’t happen as prooosec. I am very leery of acquiring a 36 year old without studs attached. Brodie needs to move on if Seattle wants any more.

Robb said...

One of the problems with cano's contract is that its a sunk cost for the Mariners. Right now the mets have 2 year 26 mm sunk into Bruce. even with the 50 mm the mariners would be kicking in, youd be holding cano at 14 mm for 3 years. There are very few players who have ever been good in age 38-40 seasons without steroids. So take how annoyed you are in bruce's contract, assume cano will be almost as bad and less mobile (trust me if you dont remember there is a huge difference in your body from 35 to 37.) and then add him and his roster spot to the costs of arb 2 and 3 to the closer and potentially youre paying 25 and 31 mm for 2 roster spots one of which is on the bench the other is the closer, plus you lost 2 top 100 prospects. and then after Diaz hits free agency you still have to pay Cano for another year.

Its actually a great trade for the mariners. They get 3 prospects (smith still counts) they get to remove their future liabilities per year from 24 to 10 mm per year, which reduces the sunk cost and gives them flexibility in budget disbursement. They lose a closer, but there is little value in having an elite closer on a bad team, expect when they have less than 2 years of control where they become the perfect asset (highest value) at a deadline (andrew miller/chapman)

If youre talking about 1 year this is trade you make, but the 5 year time frame makes this a bad deal for the mets even if all 4 players mentioned it it flame out horribly.

bgreg98180 said...

After reading everybody's thoughts, there are good points on both sides.

Some are making good points about positives for the Mariners and negatives for the Mets.
Others are making good points about the positives for the Mets and negatives for the Mariners.

This is definitely not an "Alderson trade".
There is obviously neither party trying to prove they are the "smartest man in the room" by fleecing the other team.
If nothing else, if Vanwagenen is having serious conversations about this trade, whether it comes to fruition or not, perhaps it is a good sign that the Mets can re-enter the trading community for serious trades. Perhaps other GMs will talk to the Mets about more than just relievers that they would like to trade for the Mets money saving castoffs.

Reese Kaplan said...

Other than salary dumps for suspect talents Alderson and trade should seldom be used in the same sentence together. He seemed to forget how to use this mechanism after 2015.

Viper said...

Reese,

You make a valid point on how you break down the numbers but, the Mets would still need a 3B and additional BP arms.

Yes, you can slide McNeil to 3B but if he was any good at it, he would be the starting 3B for 2019 so I suspect that we may be looking at another TJ Rivera type performance at 3B with McNeil.

You then would have to add at least one more experienced BP arm so lets say, Familia. Is 10M reasonable per year for him? Is probably more.

I still don't like it. Everyone is forgetting WHY Cano is available. He is persona non grata with the Mariners and they just want to get rid of a cheater. But the Mets who always talk about their clean image, want to welcome him with open arms.

We better hope he doesn't turn into another Mejia and fail another drug test.

bgreg98180 said...

Actually if he fails another PED test, that would relieve the Mets if having to pay him.

Anonymous said...

To me the trade was a win/win for both clubs...


Mets shed Bruce and Swarzak, both of whom did little to nothing in 2108 with no assurance that 2019 will be any better for either one. Robinson Cano can play infield and should hit 20 HR, 80 RBI, .300+ average for next few years at least. That's not so bad. It's better than Flores would ever have been. Won't miss Wilmer, just had too
many skill liabilities for me. I liked TJ Rivera better actually and Flores was robbing TJ's game time and advancement.

The only sure thing it sounds like from the kids the Mets sent to Seattle was Kelenic. G.Bautista and Dunn will have to prove themselves because neither one is a lock for anything in Seattle.

Jeff McNeil can move over to third, which moving forward would be his natural position for his size, and the Mets add a really good righty closer, no more Familia.

I think that David Pertson will be far better than Dunn. And with Nimmo, Conforto, Lagares, and hopefully Cespedes the 2019 Mets outfield should be fine.

Would I try my luck and trade for Mitch Haniger if Possible? A: Oh yeah. Maybe Dom Smith, Seth Lugo, and Andres Gimenez. Somehting like that might do. Haniger is a homerun outfielder and still young.

Anonymous said...

From Here to Mets Eternity...

Mets need to start the MiLB rebuilding process. All positions. The team that they will end up having in 2019 is the starting block. Their MiLB is pretty depleted and their 25 man does not offer up too many trade worthy players because they now will need them all.

Anonymous said...

Questions & Answer Time

Q: Are there any really good catchers out there to be obtained?

A: Not really. All the good ones are taken. You can settle on second best, but why really. If the Mets, I might sniff out the Asian leagues. For instance, there is a corner outfielder named Yoshitomo Tsutsugo wanting to come here to play. He's a HR bomb man. Maybe Bobby V, still has some ties there that may know of a catcher as well? Would be nice.

Q: Would you trade Steven Matz?

A: Absolutely. Steven was oversold to the Mets by an old baseball coach I have heard. Mets bought. But Matz has a losing record and three straight seasons of little to nothing. I would trade him or the team will suffer again. Fans are fleeing his ship. I'd even take Corey Oswalt over Steven Matz right now. Then go out and get someone like either Corbin or Happ to be the new lefty starter.

Q: Do you see Kluber as essential?

A: No. Might be nice, but look, you have deGrom, Wheels, and Noah in the 1-3 starter spots. Leave that alone. Add-in a Happ or a Corbin lefty more and either Corey Oswalt or Drew Smith (or someone else) as the 5th starter.

Anonymous said...

Any update on David Wright's health situation? Just wondering. He'd be my bench or batting coach with Riggleman.

Mack Ade said...

Anon -

No, I have nothing on David.

Mack's Mets © 2012