Comments on: Was Dodgers Deal A Missed Opportunity For Rebuilding Mets?

By: Metsie

Metsie — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:40:54 +0000

And your insistence that it was wise to wait until the deadline to do something defies the basic logic that says WHY wait until it’s too late!
Add something to help your team sooner and then you can let the deadline pass knowing you already did something to make things better and if it is not enough for this year at least you have one less problem to fix in the offseason so you can focus on the next problem!

I just don’t get why you folks are so interested in waiting for something when everyone knows Idle hands do the DEVILS work!

By: DaveSchneck

DaveSchneck — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:30:14 +0000

Joe D,
Your insistence on defending a weak position defies basic logic. Since Aug 2, the Mets continued a freefall that gave them no possibility of playing meaningful Sept games, the desired goal on July 31. Alderson’s hope was that they could stabilize and actually beat teams like the Rockies and Astros, a quite reasonable thought process a few weeks ago.

By: Martin

Martin — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:01:34 +0000

You consistently imagine trades and possible deals like you know more than you do.

By: Donal

Donal — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:58:53 +0000

You don’t know what I thought after 2007 and 2008. And what “everyone wanted” is inconsequential.

Its not rebuilding if the same biggest problem is still there. If the bosses are still playing the same crappy games that made the situation 100x worse, all they are doing now is shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Could this help them out in the long run? Yes.

But this is not the be all and end all of their problems.

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:34:26 +0000

Why didn’t they throw him into the Beltran deal?

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:31:48 +0000

And what does that do for rebuilding for the future?

Hmm? Did that get us a decent htting OFer? A catcher? A kid in the Minor?

How did that make us a winner in the future?

Did we spend him money on something good? What?

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:25:13 +0000

Nope! No Consequence!

I pay you millions to play baseball you shut up and play baseball!

They won 90 games last year but won nothing in the end.

They did what many of you thought should have been done after the chokes of 2007 and 2008!

PURGE!

By: TRS86

TRS86 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:23:18 +0000

It is possible that the Redsox trade had something to do with Hairston being more attractive now to other teams. However, it’s just as likely that they basically used him for the worth of “staying competitive” and are now looking to see if a team wants to panic and make a move for him as his usefulness to the Mets this year has passed.

By: TRS86

TRS86 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:20:31 +0000

That’s actually a good question. Why wasn’t Bay traded earlier. Using the current example the Mets would have had to trade a star to get rid of Bay’s contract earlier in the process. Evidently the Mets determined they would rather ride out the contract instead of sacrificing a star just to rid themselves of the contract and then need in turn to go out and spend the money saved to go out and replace that star.

By: TRS86

TRS86 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:17:09 +0000

I think you are right in the fact that Hairston wasn’t just dumped in July because they wanted to stay competitive, which does have to do with attendance. However, what has changed is the Mets tanked and now maybe a team is desperate enough to trade a PTBNL for Hairston. With the Mets most likely playing more of the kids in September Hairston is no longer necessary IF they can get a return. However, most likely the claiming team doesn’t even want him. Thus again, another reason why trading Hairston or any other player after the deadline has it’s own difficulties.

I think Alderson said he would have traded Hairston in July if they obtained a piece that would help them in the immediate future, not just a warm body.

By: TRS86

TRS86 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:16:49 +0000

I think Alderson said he would have traded Hairston in July if they obtained a piece that would help them in the immediate future, not just a warm body

By: TRS86

TRS86 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:12:23 +0000

Getting rid of Perez. One.

By: Donal

Donal — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:01:20 +0000

So, the fact that they use the media to attack their players is of no consequence? The managerial situation is of no consequence? The lack of defined leadership is of no consequence?

The fact that the team won 90 games last year but the FO still wigged out is of no consequence?

Hey, they got rid of some malcontents…and a perennial MVP candidate.

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:49:36 +0000

Finding a replacement 1B is really not all that hard….
Take any power hitter (preferably lefthanded glove) who isn’t awful with the glove and within a year you have replaced your 1B!

Remember Duda and Murphy were turned into 1Bs.

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:46:16 +0000

Not even a coffee no milk or sugar? LOL

He would probably have to throw in Flores to get the Milk and Sugar! LOL

By: Alex68

Alex68 — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:38:19 +0000

Hell Sandy should at least be able to trade him for a cup of coffee!”

From what we’ve seen in his negotiations tactics, i’m sure SA would just get the cup empty without the coffee.. that’s how bad the man has been as a “GM”

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:29:41 +0000

All they really did was get rid of high priced malcontents who get paid big money and enough that they should shut up and perform but did neither!

What some should be asking is if they could get rid of Crawfords contract then why hasn’t Sandy been able to find someone to dump Bay on whose contract is far less toxic than anyone the RedSox traded!

Hell Sandy should at least be able to trade him for a cup of coffee!

By: stick

stick — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:20:34 +0000

I would say it is step 1 in a 2 step forward plan.

step 2 is finding a replacement for the 1 guy they lost that hurt, and they have a ton of money to do it with! No clue if there is anyone that will hit FA that makes sense, but yes, in the near term, it is a big step forward.

By: Donal

Donal — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:14:35 +0000

By itself, perhaps. But, given what we have seen coming out of Boston the last 18 moths or so, I’d say they are desperately clawing to “do something”. This is still a franchise with very public power struggles happening at the top levels. If John Henry is back to actually be the owner and restore order, this could be a step in the right direction.

If he’s still playing with his new toy in Liverpool (and the EPL just started up again so that may be the case) then this was probably just another move in the pissing contest between Lucchino, Cherington and whoever else is calling shots.

By: Metsie

Metsie — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:10:40 +0000

Yet casshen didn’t really spend a pennyto restore the team.
The pennies he spent were much the dsame as what Omar spent (which has been knocked adinfinitum) to try and maintain some attendance to buy him the time to do what needed to be done!

Sandy has NOT done this and while you can try and blame the WIlpons for that the truth of the matter is he has only made the finances worse not better!
Attendance has gone down every year he has been here!

Thats not helping the spending it is only making it worse!
And what he HAS decided to spend on has been a total failure!