|
="Ashie62":js36fjj6]Mets rejected..not Jays[/quote:js36fjj6]
Good, it's too much. Keep Niese.
|
Ashie62
Jul 20 2009 08:06 PM
|
|
="Fman99":2t58bidg]="Ashie62":2t58bidg]Mets rejected..not Jays[/quote:2t58bidg]
Good, it's too much. Keep Niese.[/quote:2t58bidg]
Ojeda said the Mets need Halladay like a fish needs a bike..
Thats about how I feel...Let the year expire and rebuild
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jul 20 2009 08:07 PM
|
|
Well, it'll make the Phils pay more hopefully.
|
Ashie62
Jul 20 2009 08:08 PM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2yv1ykdh]Well, it'll make the Phils pay more hopefully.[/quote:2yv1ykdh]
J.A. Crap for sure
|
seawolf17
Jul 20 2009 08:10 PM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1ep41fsk]Well, it'll make the Phils pay more hopefully.[/quote:1ep41fsk]
I say Rollins, Victorino, Utley, Ibanez, Pat Burrell, Von Hayes, Jamie Moyer, the ghost of the Lenny/Roger for Juan Samuel trade, and the Phanatic seems like a fair trade for Halladay. Make it happen, Phillies!
|
soupcan
Jul 20 2009 08:15 PM
Re: Mets reject Blue Jays on Halladay Package
|
|
="metirish":3kmo5wr4]F Martinez
Niese
Parnell
Tejada
[/quote:3kmo5wr4]
That doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.
|
OlerudOwned
Jul 20 2009 08:29 PM
|
|
Taken with a John Heyman sized grain of salt.
|
seawolf17
Jul 20 2009 09:03 PM
|
|
="OlerudOwned":3k9llp1w]Taken with a John Heyman sized grain of salt.[/quote:3k9llp1w]
How many grains of salt fit inside a douche bag that big? He's not a small man.
|
OlerudOwned
Jul 20 2009 09:19 PM
|
|
="seawolf17":162dac7x]="OlerudOwned":162dac7x]Taken with a John Heyman sized grain of salt.[/quote:162dac7x]
How many grains of salt fit inside a douche bag that big? He's not a small man.[/quote:162dac7x]
http://twitter.com/keithlaw/status/2750610015
2,750,610,015. I suppose.
|
Gwreck
Jul 20 2009 11:42 PM
Re: Mets reject Blue Jays on Halladay Package
|
|
="soupcan":31694kki]="metirish":31694kki]F Martinez
Niese
Parnell
Tejada
[/quote:31694kki]
That doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.[/quote:31694kki]
Me either, but there's also the money. I figure he gets an extension that wipes out the last year and gives him another 5 at 18 million per.
|
Nymr83
Jul 21 2009 03:50 AM
|
|
| ]Heyman reporting that the Jays tabled an offer to the Mets that would get the Mets Halladay
F Martinez
Niese
Parnell
Tejada
|
i would have done it. not for this year but because Halladay is under contract still for next year.
|
Frayed Knot
Jul 21 2009 06:57 AM
|
|
I think it's certainly a fair deal (even as its accuracy is questioned) and one that I could pull the trigger on and not have to swallow too hard.
But I'm not too sure that the Mets are in a position where packaging and unloading prospects for post-30 players is the way to go right now.
|
metsmarathon
Jul 21 2009 07:03 AM
|
|
i'd be willing to give up three, but not necessarily four of those players. specifically, were the trade offer genuine, and according to keith law's tweet as linked above, i would prefer to keep one of parnell or niese.
and while i think the rotation could be a beast when topped with doc and johan, in no particular order, i'm also torn up by the notion that the way certain teams seem to be in the thick of it each year is through the development of their own minor leaguers. in fact, i feel like every contending team save perhaps the yankees, is doing so on the backs of their own homegrown talent. and i'd like ot be like one of those teams. eventually.
of course, if we were to get doc halladay, i think it would nicely prevent us from making a big huge mistake in trying to get matt holliday either this season immediately thereafter.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jul 21 2009 07:08 AM
|
|
I wouldn't have complained too loudly. You worry a little about getting hurt maybe in the coming years of the Halladay extension, whatever they may be, but aces don't grow on trees.
|
metsmarathon
Jul 21 2009 07:14 AM
|
|
no. i'm certain i would be thrilled in the short term. but i'd be a bit worried about those later years...
|
metirish
Jul 21 2009 07:18 AM
|
|
Nor would I have complained much , if at all. F Martinez I think will be a good major league player , Parnell is a reliever and I would never hesitate to throw one of those in a deal. The Jays might start him , whatever. Niese could work out and the other kid I have never seen.
|
Frayed Knot
Jul 21 2009 07:19 AM
|
|
Of course part of this depends on what the theoretical extension would look like -- which in turn assumes that Halladay will demand one in return for his agreeing to the trade.
I think everyone assumes that he'll do just that (it's not like his leverage is likely to go up from where it is now) but I don't know that he's outright stated it's a prerequisite.
|
Edgy DC
Jul 21 2009 07:40 AM
|
|
We want a batter, not a wooden ladder.
|
Centerfield
Jul 21 2009 08:08 AM
|
|
I would do that deal.
I would not drive Pedro Feliciano to Colorado to make it happen, but I would do that deal.
|
MFS62
Jul 21 2009 09:22 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":hwzslqzr]We want a batter, not a wooden ladder.[/quote:hwzslqzr]
Exactly. The team needs a hitter.
But when you get right down to it, it may be a moot point. Its not up to Omar or the pimp (my Canadian friends' name for JP because he dresses so slickly). Halliday has complete veto rights over any trade, and it is doubtful he'd want to come to the Mets. (according to Steve Sommers last night on WFAN)
Later
|
Frayed Knot
Jul 21 2009 09:31 AM
|
|
| ]Halliday has complete veto rights over any trade, and it is doubtful he'd want to come to the Mets. (according to Steve Sommers last night on WFAN) |
Oh well that settles it then.
|
metirish
Jul 21 2009 09:37 AM
|
|
Steve Somers is like the Walter Cronkite of sports talk.....in age terms anyway
|
Centerfield
Jul 21 2009 09:48 AM
|
|
I obviously don't disagree that this team needs a batter, but that doesn't mean this team doesn't need more pitching. Particularly, ace-level starting pitching. If the lineup were producing, we'd be lamenting having to start Nieve/Livan/Redding etc. The Mets are currently 19th in team ERA, despite playing in a great pitchers' park.
I really dislike the notion of passing on good, productive players because "we need ____". This was my problem with not pursuing Texiera last off-season. We never made a run at him because of reasons like "we need to focus on the bullpen" and "we have a first-baseman". My philosophy is to get top-notch talent when it's available. Now that Delgado is likely done after this season, there are few good options out there at first for next year. Thinking that "the offense is fine" is what led to the lack of lineup depth. Which made us particularly vulnerable in the event some top guys went down.
So if a 32 year old legitimate #1 is available, make a run at him. If he doesn't ask for the moon and stars in terms of an extension, ship out those four guys and let the Phils face Santana and Halladay back to back.
|
Vic Sage
Jul 21 2009 09:54 AM
|
|
The TiTTS say: "Boo!"
|
Edgy DC
Jul 21 2009 10:09 AM
|
|
Was pursuing Texiera really explicitly rejected because the team needs to focus on the bullpen?
Obviously, talent is talent. I just think Halladay is old talent, and if the Mets don't find some way to generate offense, Halladay's effectiveness may well have expired by the time it could have made a difference.
Personally, based on Martinez being injured, I think this report looks faulty.
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Jul 21 2009 10:55 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC"]
Personally, based on Martinez being injured, I think this report looks faulty. |
It looks outright false. Leaving aside my own gut feeling of implausibility, hell, consider the source-- I know Keith Law's misled me a good deal less than Heyman has.
| ]Was pursuing Texiera really explicitly rejected because the team needs to focus on the bullpen? |
Pretty strong implicit tie at least, methinks. The publicly identified primary need area took precedence, and Omar had this year's solutions (presumably) at 1st and 2nd and OF already in hand for the season, if not beyond, so Teixeira and Hudson and Abreu/Dunn were extraneous and not worth a serious bid (even if they were markedly superior to our extant solutions there... and, in at least one case, more or less begging to come to New York). But yeah, that's bygones.
Playing the what-if game, though... assuming the trade were to happen, we're looking at this team locked in as a poor man's 2001 D-Backs-- with Santana and Halladay's paychecks, and Reyes due to make open-market rates after 2011, there's no money to sign anything but replacement-level or steeply discounted (due to injury history, or "correctable" mechanical flaws) talent for C, 1B, and corner OF over the next several years. The offense would end up being even more top-heavy than we're used to-- Wright, Reyes and what's left of Beltran, surrounded by Castillo, Murphy, Evans, Ike Davis (maybe?), and a REALLY ugly bench-- wouldn't it?
|
smg58
Jul 21 2009 11:29 AM
|
|
The Blue Jays GM said last week that he was listening to offers, not making them.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jul 21 2009 11:37 AM
|
|
Making a play for Teixera was probably a little more of a high-wire act than Omar had the stomach for. He'd have had to outbid the MFYs, O's and Bosox then find a trade partner for Delgado without any leverage. And if it didn't work out, deal with hurt feelings.
I'm not saying it couldn't be done but that it would have been risky and expensive and they get a pass from me for not trying it. Besides, Teixiera's a douche.
Knowing what we know now, I suppose the real dumb thing was not deciding on Murphy at 1B sooner and trading Delgado for what they could get. That would have provided more opportunities to upgrade the pen or rotation or gather in a prospect. Not that so vast a dropoff in production there has helped, just that we'd have gotten something in exchange for it.
|
smg58
Jul 21 2009 11:42 AM
|
|
="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":lq51jb1x]Playing the what-if game, though... assuming the trade were to happen, we're looking at this team locked in as a poor man's 2001 D-Backs-- with Santana and Halladay's paychecks, and Reyes due to make open-market rates after 2011, there's no money to sign anything but replacement-level or steeply discounted (due to injury history, or "correctable" mechanical flaws) talent for C, 1B, and corner OF over the next several years. The offense would end up being even more top-heavy than we're used to-- Wright, Reyes and what's left of Beltran, surrounded by Castillo, Murphy, Evans, Ike Davis (maybe?), and a REALLY ugly bench-- wouldn't it?[/quote:lq51jb1x]
The contracts for Beltran, Castillo and Perez run out after 2011 as well, so it's not like there's already zero payroll flexibility that far ahead.
In the meantime, we're freeing up the money spent on Delgado, Wagner, and Schneider, plus Putz in all likelihood. It will also take more than one home run to justify tendering a contract to Francoeur. That's a quarter of the team's current payroll right there. I've got no problem with building a more balanced team, but I don't think a deal for Halladay necessarily rules that out.
|
Edgy DC
Jul 21 2009 12:14 PM
|
|
This has surely morphed. If the Mets weren't going after the top two targets in the starting pitcher market, certainly Teixera wasn't in the cards under any circumstances, Omar or no Omar.
|
Nymr83
Jul 21 2009 03:16 PM
|
|
| ]Was pursuing Texiera really explicitly rejected because the team needs to focus on the bullpen? |
they had to make a decision on Delgado' option before they could talk to Texiera, if Delgado had become a free agent they could have gotten outbid on Texiera anyway amd then had to give Delgado more years (which would have sucked imo), so i think they made the right move there.
|
Centerfield
Jul 21 2009 04:16 PM
|
|
I didn't mean to re-hash the Delgado/Texiera arguments again. I realize the degree of difficulty was high on that one. I just wish we had a GM that was willing to explore it and not be constrained by "We are set at first"-type thinking.
Similarly, I don't want the Mets to not pull the trigger on a Halladay deal (if one is, in fact, available to them) because of the mindset that "we need bats". We do need bats. But if we can get an ace, we should look to get that ace, then get bats with the money freed up when Wagner, Putz, Delgado, Schneider and Franceour come off the books.
|
Edgy DC
Jul 21 2009 04:44 PM
|
|
Understood. To be fair, though, the extension that Halladay would require would eat up a fair chunk of that money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
