Five Moves That Can Happen This Spring: Mets Will Trade For At Least One Starting Outfielder

49 Comments + Add Comment

• TX February 16, 2013 at 11:52 pm

  You are welcome.
• TX February 16, 2013 at 11:53 pm

  Also, Murph is not playing the OF. Ever.
  • XtreemIcon February 16, 2013 at 11:53 pm

    FOR an outfielder, no TO the outfield.
    • TX February 17, 2013 at 10:46 am

      Gotcha. Misread that.
• Brian February 17, 2013 at 12:00 am

  I don’t think the RHP you’re probably referring to have that kind of value because they are all in High-A or lower. I’m assuming you mean Tapia, Montero, Syndergaard, Cessa, Robles, Lara, etc. Not sure trading one of them gets it done and I don’t think they will trade two of them. The Murphy thing makes more sense or even trading Duda who could play first for another team, his natural position.
• Little Nicky February 17, 2013 at 12:04 am

  I would rather just go with what we have and see what they can do before trading anyone. We can always trade at the deadline. For now lets just see what we have. And don’t forget Matt Den Dekker, he’s very close.
• Mr North Jersey February 17, 2013 at 12:29 am

  I wouldn’t be surprised if some type of trade did indeed take place. Something to keep an eye on at least.
• Hitman February 17, 2013 at 12:35 am

  Please, please, PLEASE get Brantley.
  • Mr North Jersey February 17, 2013 at 12:37 am

    LoL, you forgot to say “pretty please”.
  • XtreemIcon February 17, 2013 at 12:44 am

    Why the love for Brantley? He’s a moderate hitter at best and can’t field with an utterly miserable SB%.
    • Hitman February 17, 2013 at 12:53 am

      A .288 hitter is “moderate”? He has very good discipline for one (53 BB/56 Ks last season in 149 games) and his fielding has gotten better the last couple seasons. As far as his SB% goes, I don’t know why Cleveland’s coaching staff don’t have him running more often so you got me there.
      • XtreemIcon February 17, 2013 at 1:11 am

        His career stats are .274/.329/.376, which is very moderate. He has no power, and his improving defense propels him from “terrible” to just “bad.” As far as not letting him run more often, it probably has to do with his pitiful success rate.
        • Hitman February 17, 2013 at 4:10 pm

          You know Xtreem, just from that description, it got me thinking of a certain someone who got the chance to play their first two 100+ game seasons and I compared Brantley’s last 2 seasons (because you’re including Brantley’s numbers when he barely got a chance to play every day) to this person.

          Brantley: .278/.335/.394/.729
          Mystery OF: .277/.332/.401/.733

          Eerily similar, isn’t it?

          What if I told you that mystery OF was Angel Pagan? He’s not bad or terrible as you proclaim him to be defensively. Again, Cleveland is not making him run. Stop acting like they’ve been a competent ballclub because they’re anything but. Would you run a man who was 46/51 (90% success rate) in SB attempts in AAA more often or less? Just like I thought. Only thing that’s pitiful is having him run 12-21 times a season when he can fly.
• Joe February 17, 2013 at 12:38 am

  I wouldnt mind losing a Familia, or Mejia, for Drew Stubbs or Chris Young straight up.
  Even if either pitcher turns out to be a stud we have an abundance of pitchers that can fill their spots.
  Our outfield situation is a more critical situation that needs to be addressed..
  • DrDooby February 17, 2013 at 2:48 am

    While I agree about Chris Young jr. who certainly would be worth a solid prospect or two, Drew Stubbs should be available for any sort of non Top 20 in the system type prospect or marginal player. For now, Stubbs pretty much is the player that Matt Den Dekker projects to become for the time being – only as a RHH.

    While Stubbs plays good defense, has some pop and is a good baserunner, he just doesn´t hit enough to justify parting with anything significant. I read a “Lucas Duda for Drew Stubbs” type suggestion on some other site. That actually would make a lot of sense – unless you expect Duda to perform at his 2011 levels going forward – as Duda would be a 1b/DH with CLE, allowing CLE to move Nick Swisher back to the OF while Stubbs would take over in CF for the Mets and at least turn the OF defense into an asset instead of a liability.
    Nieuwenhuis / Cowgill in RF
    Stubbs in CF
    and then some combo of Baxter / Brown / Byrd / Valdespin / Turner / Lutz in LF

    Now, the bottom of the order offense would probably be very questionable, barring an unforeseen breakout from one of the OF. Yet, the overall defense would be much improved at C and in the entire OF.
    • Metties and Beer February 17, 2013 at 7:38 am

      Duda for stubbs get er done
      • TJ February 17, 2013 at 5:37 pm

        No thanks. They can get STubbs for less that the Dude.
    • Joe February 17, 2013 at 8:27 pm

      Duda for Stubbs sounds good UNTIL you start talking about the void in our offense. Obviously Duda is a liability in the OF w/his glove and it would certainly make tons of sense from Clevelands standpoint to get Duda, but I still think we’re better off parting w/someone on the “B” level in AAA than trade any of our ML team for a starting centerfielder like Stubbs, or Young, or Brantley.
      • Joe February 17, 2013 at 8:51 pm

        I like the sound of, Duda/LF, Brantley/CF, Niuewenheis, Baxter, Patterson/RF
• hotstreak February 17, 2013 at 12:57 am

  Metsblog has turned into a rat pit. The “dislikes” ruined that site. At least here you identify yourself and state your case why you disagree. I actually like difference of opinion and do change my mind if someone makes their case.

  As for Dickey being a clubhouse favorite (my word) I do not know. I do not know if Captain Wright is either. I may be biased but Daniel Murphy after meeting him is definitely popular (your word). He works, harder than anyone, does volunteer work a.k.a., Sandy and he is willing to play anywhere.He is an everyday guy who doesn’t worry about PR but won’t say something stupid. Besides he wears my favorite (my word) number “28″.

  This is where Alderson really screwed up. It was apparent we had no OF especially CF and speed for at least three years. Why did he not use FA to get one. Now we have to give up a young RH pitcher when Santana will not be back next year. Maybe even traded this year.
  • Mr North Jersey February 17, 2013 at 1:05 am

    There was a dislike like feature here for a brief time but it ended up being used not on the basis of what was said but rather who said it. Eventually it was removed (don’t know if it was indeed for the reason I mentioned) and at least for me I think the commenting is better without it.
    • hotstreak February 17, 2013 at 1:23 am

      I was not at this site when they had it. Thanks for informing me. Yes people tend to “like” certain people and “dislike” certain people. My advice thru experience after a sample size big enough you just might change your mind about a person going both ways. I tend to go more from dislike to like after the guy/gal makes their case to me over time. I do not usually go from like to dislike since some good will was built up. However I may no longer like them. Tthe more dialogue between two individuals without breaking down to “kool aid” and “what drugs you on” the more a blogging relationship builds up for a like. The problem is rarely with me outright differences of opinion..
      • Mr North Jersey February 17, 2013 at 1:41 am

        Your welcome.

        I can see the novelty behind the idea of a like/dislike feature it’s just too bad it could not work here as it was intended.
  • Dave In Spain February 17, 2013 at 2:50 am

    I just started coming to this site (ironically through a link on Metsblog), and have kept coming back because the content is better. I don´t really care about the likes/dislikes, but the personal attacks by commenters bothered me. The biggest thing though was Metsblog´s lack of attention to quality: the factual, grammatical, and proofing mistakes were constant and never addressed by the editors, and the analysis and writing has become lazy, repetitive, and superficial. What I´ve seen so far here on Metsmerized is a more professional and more interesting product.
    • Frankie Says February 17, 2013 at 7:47 am

      I got here about six months before you did and I agree. As far as content goes there is an attention to detail on MMO you won’t ever find at MetsBlog and as an added bonus the points here are always diverse and not monotone. Even when I disagree the arguments made are compelling. While you have some jokers in the comments, what site doesn’t these days? At least you don’t have to sift through hundreds of comments each day that are all mocking the typos, the ridiculous and meaningless posts, and the awful writing on MMO.
  • Hawk February 17, 2013 at 7:35 am

    Metsblog stinks.
    MMO, keep up the good work.
• srt February 17, 2013 at 7:26 am

  I think SA said after Bourn was signed that he wouldn’t discount a trade before the season began – but more than likely we’ll start the season with what we have. I’m going with the latter. I’ll be surprised if a trade for an OF comes up during ST.
• nickel7168 February 17, 2013 at 8:20 am

  I’d like to see what the OFs we have can do for a couple of months (say end of May) to see if there is an actual starter there for down the road. Then I’d like to trade Santana for an OF once he has shown the league he is healthy and look at Mejia as a starter in his place until Wheeler is ready at the all-star break.
• Peter February 17, 2013 at 8:58 am

  Why waste trade chips on any of those guys? They need all trade chips for next year, they can get a player like Julio Bourbon who is out of options for nothing basically, those are the guys they should look at. None of these guys are difference makes and are all on the same tier somewhat. When I say difference makers I mean it does not put the Mets at least on paper into a playoff team. Save all trade chips for Stanton and grab an out of options guy like Bourbon who has talent and is still young, never know he has speed and plays good defense.
• CThomp519 February 17, 2013 at 10:12 am

  Please no trades….just wait it out until next off season.
  • Jerseymet February 17, 2013 at 11:26 am

    Agreed. Lots of lottery tickets will be in camp. We should at least scratch and sniff them first.
    • metsaddict77 February 17, 2013 at 11:56 am

      i’d be surprised if he actually tried to improve the team.
• Metro12 February 17, 2013 at 12:02 pm

  I don’t think Sandy will trade for an OFer at this point unless something decent falls into his lap. He probably wants to see exactly what he’s got in Duda and gang first. Maybe a few months into the season he will, but not now.

  One of the reasons the “Michael Baron photography, typo, and grammatical error blog” is no longer good is that crappy design Cerrone changed over to. He put that obnoxious static bar at the top of the window and made the comment column too narrow. If you want to make the column wider, you have to increase the type size of the web page so it looks ridiculous. It’s just not a user-friendly website anymore. And it’s always bugged me that Cerrone would close off comments after a day.

  FYI – Joe D, the link to Chris Young in the article goes to the pitcher, not the outfielder.
• jdon February 17, 2013 at 12:48 pm

  sounds like a lot of crap out there. if they want to upgrade the crap slightly–fine. but nothing long term, please. guys who will be gone after this year.
• Barry Duchan February 17, 2013 at 12:54 pm

  I have a feeling Matt den Dekker will get off to a strong start at Las Vegas and will be the Mets’ fulltime centerfielder by June. If you look at the numbers Drew Stubbs put up last year, I’d guess MDD could do at least that well.
  • Padilla February 17, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    Everyone gets off to a good start in Vegas. That’s why nobody wants to be there. You can’t evaluate your players properly in Vegas.
• JorgeLCastanos February 17, 2013 at 1:07 pm

  You are very welcome. Just started reading you guys this month. I have no idea how I didn’t know about you sooner.
• taskmaster4450 February 17, 2013 at 1:19 pm

  I think the Mets actually will be okay at 2 out of the 3 positions.

  My feeling is Duda will have a good year at the plate; good enough to overshadow his pathetic defense.

  Also, I think the Mets have an answer in CF….someone between Kirk, Den Dekker, and Cowgill will emerge as a decent player.

  RF needs helps. Baxter, in my view, is a bench player. I am not real high on Brown etal so finding a decent player out of that bunch is going to be difficult.

  I would feel better if 2 out of the CF bunch produced but I dont believe that either. But I tend to agree with playing the numbers game at this point. I do not think the Mets will go 0 for 8 or 9 out there (however many guys are competing for jobs).
• Metsie February 17, 2013 at 1:29 pm

  “That’s why GM Sandy Alderson will continue to search for upgrades.”

  And people will continue to search for Bigfoot and Loch Nessy as well….

  He had a shot to get a pretty good holdover for the next 3 years that would also take care of his leadoff, CF and add some power….

  The price was 13 Mil per year for 3 years….
  He would be an FA and tradeable right around the time Nimmo was poised to get promoted if he doesn’t have any further setbacks.
• Joey D. February 17, 2013 at 1:37 pm

  Hi Joe D.

  “He made a four-year, $48 million offer to Michael Bourn that didn’t get done when Alderson wouldn’t relent on a vesting fifth-year option.”

  This is what upsets me not with Bowden personally but when a story is so simplified that it creates a perception which when vetting deeper raises questions that need to be answered and thus the story still remains open rather than be concluded.

  I’m referring to motives. Sandy was making an offer knowing he would not relent on the fifth year option and would not guarantee contingent upon retaining that protected draft choice in which a decision would not be known for two to three weeks later. He also knew he was bidding against other teams.

  Why does one still pursue negotiations knowing either one or both of those terms would be unacceptable by the other party? What is the motivation? Why also did he pass up on others that he could have signed for less money? There were also trades made that didn’t strip an organization of it’s top prospects as well. Why weren’t these avenues looked at more seriously.

  As a lawyer, Sandy is fully aware of what planting an idea in one’s head (this case, the heads of the fan base) can do. Was it again for show? Don’t forget this coincides with Fred Wilpon’s acknowledging the family is on better financial footing now – which does not mean the Mets are.

  There are also so many elements leading to the eventual Bourn signing with Cleveland that Sandy was aware of as far as restrictions or non-restrictions faced by other teams he was bidding against – not just for Bourn but possibly others before him.

  http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/cleveland-indians-michael-bourn-takes-longer-than-expected-to-land-with-new-team-scott-boras-021513

  I’m sorry, but with all the stories planted before by the Mets and way too long to repeat once again I cannot believe this talk with Boras was anymore than for show. This is based not only on Rosenthal’s report above but on the actions taken or not take and philosophy espoused by this general manager. That is why I do not take the report by ESPN Insider too seriously. The Mets could have taken actions beforehand and didn’t. We know Sandy has been misleading with his statements in the past.

  George Steinbrenner, the Barnum and Bailey of baseball, would have been proud.
• 3doza33 February 17, 2013 at 3:04 pm

  Please don’t trade any of our prospects yet. We will have the money to sign any outfielder we want next season and with another year under their belt, our prospects will be worth a lot more! One last bad season. Next year is the beginning of special things for this team! Save our prospects for Stanton!
  • Joey D. February 17, 2013 at 5:24 pm

    Hi 33,

    After all the times the Mets said they would they have the money to spend and never did, and for all the times it was found that their financial situation was much worse than lead on, I would hold off judgement about when the Mets will start having the money to spend again until we actually see serious movements – and with that, I don’t mean something that might be for show as per the points I raised above regarding Bourn.

    And even if we do have the money to spend, remember Sandy said that doesn’t mean that he will spend it. Oh, how I would have loved to have seen Boras accept Sandy’s offer just to see if he was bluffing.
    • DrDooby February 18, 2013 at 1:00 am

      Again, the 2014 projected payroll will be at by far the lowest it has been for well over a decade – as of today somewhere between 50 and 55 million $ maximum if the Mets bring back every player except for the free agents Santana, FF, Lyon, Marcum and Buck.
      At the same time, every MLB franchise – including the Mets – gets a major boost by the new National TV deal, well over an extra 10 million $ per year.

      Even leaving out SNY – a very profitable entety very close to the Mets that makes major gains every year and has the upside of much much higher gains if the Mets do well and thus an incentive for the Mets to do well – the Mets as an isolated entety can easily field an 85 million $ payroll in 2014 and probably break even, without needing any sort of boost from ownership ( via their tremendous SNY gains). And that’s merely assuming the Mets perform as a .500ish team without any realistic contention hopes.

      So, even by this very conservative measure, there’s an easy 30+ million $ available next winter to spend on upgrading the team shortterm. If the Wilpons are willing to re- invest some of their SNY gains, that opens up another 20+ million $ to spend – though considering the recent frugal approach, I wouldn’t even expect that much.

      And the financial idea behind this resetting of the payroll is that with winning more games, attendance will rise again, allowing for a higher payroll going forward with higher revenue.
      So, while 85 million may be the ” break even” point in 2014, that could easil jump in 20 million $ steps on a year-to- year basis as the Mets perform better on the field.
      Thus, it should be no issue sporting a 125 million $ payroll again by 2016 for example, probably even higher going forward. So, if Harvey, Wheeler and d’ Arnaud or Ike perform well, there won’t be a problem compensating them and keeping them around longterm.

      That’s the entire idea in theory. Whether it works on the field remains to be seen.
      • Metsie February 18, 2013 at 1:36 am

        and the 2014 Revenue will be the lowest in 20 years as well!

        A point you seem to forget dooby…You count the bills but the bills don’t dictate how much you can spend the REVENUE DOES!
        • DrDooby February 18, 2013 at 5:46 am

          I understand that with each passing year of mediocrity the attendance figures will drop.
          And – even including SNY – their gains will drop with a product that fewer people want to watch on TV and thus lesser revenue from advertising will come in.

          However, the new National TV deal that kicks in to start 2014 will add significant revenue to the Mets – from what I´ve gathered significantly more than 10 million per year starting 2014. So, even if attendance / Mets revenue declines again this year (unlikely with ASG packages), the new TV deal will more than make up for it and actually create more income than there is in 2013. And if spring 2014 is about more hope – a young & promising core in the majors, plus a few bigger name additions in the winter of 2013/2014 thanks to plenty of payroll space – then attencance may not decrease at all compared to 2013 or 2012 standards.

          So, if in 2012, sporting a 95 million $ payroll led to operating losses of 23 million, sporting an 85 million $ payroll in 2014 figures to be more or less break-even (counting additional revenue due to the National TV deal that goes directly to the Mets and no other Wilpon entety). Of course, 85 million is still well below what it should be for this franchise. And it doesn´t count huge gains the Wilpons would receive for their majority shares in SNY.

          And again, counting projected 2014 salaries for the current Mets, you get to somewhere between 50 and 55 million – depending on how high the raises for Ike Davis, Daniel Murphy, Bobby Parnell, Ruben Tejada, Dillon Gee and Lucas Duda end up being in arbitration. So, no matter how you turn it, for the first time in 4+ years there won´t be any sort of payroll limitation excuse. And with the first wave of young talent likely to have reached the majors for good, the “we´re rebuilding” excuse (even if not publically stated) won´t apply anymore either.
          • Metsie February 18, 2013 at 9:34 am

            It’s not just mediocrity that makes it drop though, If you think they can cut another 10 Mil from Payroll in 2014 and not lose another 20 Mil in revenue you got another thing coming…

            They are keeping Payroll static this year and they will draw less people unless a Miracle happens this year…And they become world beaters

            If they lose money this year they will not spend a penny next year….None of this buying you are hanging your hopes on will occurr.

            And to hope the 10 Measly million (that wouldn’t even get you Victorino for a year) is going to offset the losses is just overly optimistic…

            I don’t fault you for that just saying it is hardly based in any reality of business sense.
  • TJ February 17, 2013 at 5:42 pm

    This team needs a FC/leadoff and a closer. All they need to do is write a check, albeit an affordable one, and sign Valverde. Yet, they waffle and will “revisit” if no one else signs him. This is the behavior of BS artists. Regarding the CF/leadoff, there will be nothing out there FA-wise next year. They should make a deal and spend some of these prospect chips if they can get a legit CF that will help the team for a few years. Think Dexter Fowler. I’m all in on Stanton, be he doesn’t play CF of leadoff.
• Ya Gotta Believe February 17, 2013 at 6:11 pm

  IMHO Here’s My Game Plan (Obi Tug/Yoda Brainstorming)

  Pitching & Defense, Defense, Defense, etc.

  A. I would let the OF’s battle it out in Spring and see who emerges.
  I would rate the players in this order 1. Defense 2. Batting Avg.
  3.On base % / Baserunning. I would De – Emphasize HR’s because this results in too many SO’s and could lead to temptations to use PED’s. If you do #1-3 well the RBI’s will come.
  Hopefully some OF’s will get hot in the spring and you can use that to help you get off to a good start in the win column. (Even if Duda hits he’s a terrible OF/ He will kill their defense)

  B. To Terry Collins: I like the way Bobby Valentine managed the Mets during his era with a LOT of platooning to keep players fresh, involve the bench and smart baserunning and the hit & run. I think way the SF Giants play is a good style for the Mets to try to emulate.

  C. Hopefully the Starters will grow and develop Niese, Harvey, etc and the bullpen is improved. I would try to give establish defined roles for the relievers, once you can sort out who is more reliable.

  D. Lastly If I was Alderson I would try to pry an outfielder away from the Tigers e.g. Dirks, Brantley, Boesch OR Indians Brantley for a B- prospect package if possible. (Mookie/Dykstra lite type)
  Coco Crisp, Grady Sizemore and some others might work as a plan B.

  That’s what I would do …….. Ya Gotta Believe
• Poconos February 18, 2013 at 10:15 am

  You’re welcome Joe D…..I’ve been reading this site ever since I found it on Myspace back in ’07

  Lets Go Mets!

  Looking for Ike, and Harvey, to have monster years…Duda and D’Arnaud to have huge breakout years, and Wheeler to have a dominant debut when he’s brought up after the all-star break….D Wright gonna give us his .300/25/100, and you pretty much know what we’re gonna get out of Tejada and Murphy. And lets hope Neise and Gee improve, and the newly assembled holds it down.

  We will be competing for a wild card spot come Sept.