Master Index of Archived Threads


Let's try again: Milledge for Zito, NO contract extension.

Let's try again: Milledge for Zito, NO contract extension.

Yes	5 votes
No	29 votes

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 09:59 AM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jul 28 2006 10:01 AM

Let's try again: Milledge for Zito, NO contract extension. (Continued from this thread.) My vote is still NO.

metirish Jul 28 2006 10:00 AM

No no no no

MFS62 Jul 28 2006 10:06 AM

I still vote "no". The only possible mitigating circumstance, under which he might sign once here, is that he would really (as in strongly) want to be reunited with Rick Peterson. But Boras would keep that up his sleeve during negotiations anyhow. Later

seawolf17 Jul 28 2006 10:14 AM

Hmm, let me think about it... no.

TransMonk Jul 28 2006 10:15 AM

Yes. Nothing will frustrate me more than winning the division and getting beat in the playoffs.

Elster88 Jul 28 2006 10:21 AM

No.

Johnny Dickshot Jul 28 2006 10:23 AM

Keep in mind also that failing to extend him results in 2 first-round draft pixx, which is one reson Oakland might prefer to keep him). I'd like to see us get Zito some other way.

soupcan Jul 28 2006 10:24 AM

No contract no trade. Makes no sense without the extension.

Frayed Knot Jul 28 2006 10:35 AM

]Keep in mind also that failing to extend him results in 2 first-round draft pixx Well two picks, not necc both 1st rounders. Depending on where he signs and other factors, those picks could be as low as say the mid-30s thru lower 50s. Nothing to sneeze at of course, but tough to get someone potentially as good as Milledge (#12) with those.

MFS62 Jul 28 2006 10:38 AM

FK, this morning's Daily News said one would be a regular first rounder and on ewould be a sandwich pick (between the first and second rounds). Later

Frayed Knot Jul 28 2006 10:51 AM

Yeah, except that if a low-finishing team signs him it doesn't quite work out that way. A team with a [u:b4cdf8ee50]bottom 15 pick[/u:b4cdf8ee50] doesn't lose their 1st round pick to the spurned team but rather their 2nd rounder. Let's say Zito signs with the Braves (from either the Mets or A's) who wind up finishing under .500 and own the 13th pick next June. In that case the team losing him would get Atlanta's 2nd round pick plus a supplemental. So with 30 picks in the 1st round, the supp pick would fall somewhere in the 30s and Atlanta's 2nd round pick could be in the mid-50s depending on how many supp picks there are. Usually there are at least 10 so the 1st pick of round 2 = #41, 13th pick of round 2 = #53 Also, if Atlanta signs [u:b4cdf8ee50]TWO[/u:b4cdf8ee50] FAs, the team losing the [u:b4cdf8ee50]better ranked[/u:b4cdf8ee50] guy would get the Braves' 2nd round pick and the other team the 3rd. Probably tough to imagine them signing someone better than Zito but yaneverknow. Again, nothing to sneeze at, but it's not like losing him is guaranteed to land you 2 sure-fire young studs.

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 10:54 AM

The Athletics, though, may end up getting no compensation for him, if it turns out that they're reluctant to offer him arbitration. (I think it's a pretty safe bet that Zito wouldn't accept arbitration, but you never know. Didn't Greg Maddux trip up the Braves by doing that a few years ago?)

Frayed Knot Jul 28 2006 10:57 AM

Yup! Maddux accepted and Atlanta wasn't budgeted for it which triggered the Millwood for Estrada deal - one which worked out well for the Braves anyway but was roundly panned as a panic move at the time. I strongly suspect Oakland would offer him arb. Maddux wasn't 28 y/o at the time and wasn't passing up his first long-term mega-contract that is sure to come Barry's way this winter.

TransMonk Jul 28 2006 11:01 AM

I guess I don't like the wording of this poll either. We wouldn't know until the offseason if we would be able to re-sign Zito if we were to trade for them. I guess, given what I know about the situation now...there's no way I don't make that deal. If I were to play the odds, I would say there is a better chance of re-signing Zito if he were traded here than Lasting Milledge becoming anything more than a mediocre outfielder.

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 11:04 AM

My feeling is that the team that Zito finishes the season with won't be any more or less likely to sign him this winter. He'll follow the money, just like Beltran did when leaving Houston. So whether or not Zito is a Met in 2007 (and I think he will be) this trade would still be a two- or three-month rental.

Willets Point Jul 28 2006 11:06 AM

Wait for the winter and sign Zito to join the team that defends the World Sereis title.

TransMonk Jul 28 2006 11:09 AM

IMO this team is not good enough to win the WS as is.

Vic Sage Jul 28 2006 11:55 AM

The question really is whether the mets are good enough to win the world series WITH Zito. I think they would be. And i don't think they can do it without him, or someone comparable. So do you pass on a legit shot at a WS to gamble not only on Milledge's future, but the future of the team as a whole to get back to a post-season again in the forseeable future, even with Milledge? There are no guarantees that we'll get back to this position again next year, or the year after. But we're here NOW, so you take a shot, and grab for it with both hands, and don't let go. Then you spend all that NY money to keep Zito here. Its not like we wouldn't be the favorites to re-sign him, because we have the resources, a winning team, a favored pitching coach, and extra $$ media opportunities not available elsewhere. Yeah, go for it.

Elster88 Jul 28 2006 12:00 PM

Vic Sage wrote: The question really is whether the mets are good enough to win the world series WITH Zito. I think they would be. And i don't think they can do it without him, or someone comparable. So do you pass on a legit shot at a WS to gamble not only on Milledge's future, but the future of the team as a whole to get back to a post-season again in the forseeable future, even with Milledge? There are no guarantees that we'll get back to this position again next year, or the year after. But we're here NOW, so you take a shot, and grab for it with both hands, and don't let go. Then you spend all that NY money to keep Zito here. Its not like we wouldn't be the favorites to re-sign him, because we have the resources, a winning team, a favored pitching coach, and extra $$ media opportunities not available elsewhere. Yeah, go for it. This is the best argument for doing such a deal. And with Pedro getting old, Glavine looking poor over his last few starts, and Traxx sucking, there is a very strong chance (in my pessimistic mind, at least) that when they are all a year older and when the NL teams retool next year that we may not have this chance again. I still say no, though.

Rotblatt Jul 28 2006 12:27 PM

="Vic Sage"]The question really is whether the mets are good enough to win the world series WITH Zito. I think they would be. And i don't think they can do it without him, or someone comparable. I agree with the first part of that statement, but not the second. The post-season is a crapshoot, and while Zito helps our chances, there are so many variables that I just don't see slotting him into the #3 slot in the postseason instead of Pelfrey or El Duque or Trachsel really make us that much more likely to win it all. Now, I might change my tune if our lead were 1 or 2 games, but we're practically shoe-ins for the post-season already, which means we're essentially giving up Milledge so that Zito can make maybe 3 or 4 starts in October. That's an awfully high price to pay. ]There are no guarantees that we'll get back to this position again next year, or the year after. But we're here NOW, so you take a shot, and grab for it with both hands, and don't let go. I hear you, but I've got more of a long-term bent at the moment, involving a series of championships--one I think is jeapordized by sending Milledge away for a three-week (if we're lucky) rental.

TheOldMole Jul 28 2006 01:08 PM

I voted no, but here's an interesting thought from the News: ]Yet, would it be so bad if the Mets used Zito in October, then lost him this winter? If the Mets lost the southpaw as a free agent, they would get compensation picks - Oakland's first-round pick (provided the A's finished with a top-15 record), plus a sandwich pick between the first and second rounds. That's exactly how the Mets landed Aaron Heilman (18th overall) and David Wright (38th overall) in 2001 - as picks received for losing free agent Mike Hampton to Colorado. T

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 01:31 PM

That same article, though, went on to mention two compensation picks that the Orioles received who ended up being duds.

Centerfield Jul 28 2006 01:32 PM

I said no, but mine wasn't as emphatic as everyone here. I'm thinking of October, when the NLDS is tied 1-1 and we have El Duque scheduled to start Game 3 on the road. Would you trade Milledge for Zito then? Even if it was just to make that one start? The answer is no, but it's a hell of a lot tougher than I thought it would be. It makes no sense logically....but post-seasons are few and far between here in Metland.

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 01:38 PM

Here's the rest of the quote from the Daily News article that Old Mole mentioned above: ]That's not to suggest that compensation picks are guaranteed to remedy the loss of a marquee player. The same year the Mets took Heilman and Wright, the Orioles received the 19th and 31st picks for losing Mike Mussina to the Yankees. Baltimore's draft didn't go as well. They used those picks for LSU second baseman Mike Fontenot (two career major-league at-bats) and high school shortstop Bryan Bass (hitting .198 in Double-A).

smg58 Jul 28 2006 01:48 PM

Like I just told a friend of mine, if Beane wants Milledge badly enough that he'd trade Zito when the A's are a half-game ahead, that should gives us all pause. Not that I see any evidence beyond rumor that Zito is available.

Edgy DC Jul 28 2006 04:15 PM

I just think pitching is never as bad as it looks when it's failing and never as good as it looks when it's succeeding. Bottom line: despite the last month, we've got the league's top ERA, plus we've got six active starters and one on the DL. Now, I understand the failures of the Braves being theoretically related to too much excess depth in the starting rotation and not enough thunda at the top of both the rotation and in the lineup. But then the answer may be moving for an upgrade on Nady or something. You've got to know when to hold.

Rockin' Doc Jul 28 2006 04:34 PM

Uh, no!

KC Jul 28 2006 04:37 PM

If nothing else, it's nice to see almost 30 unique ip addresses voting!

Rockin' Doc Jul 28 2006 04:40 PM

I didn't know we had that many individuals that hung out at the CPF on a regular basis.

TheOldMole Jul 28 2006 06:25 PM

But the Orioles' front office, since Cashen left, are bozos. Nonetheless, I voted no. But if we did Compensation Pick Trackers, we'd be a-likin' that one.

Frayed Knot Jul 29 2006 10:06 PM

Zito's not making this kind of decision easy; - he coughs up a 1st inning Salami to Troy Glaus ... and then shuts down the Jays the rest of the way for the win.

metirish Jul 29 2006 10:09 PM

What's Zito like in the post-season?...IIRC he's kinda crap.

ScarletKnight41 Jul 29 2006 10:13 PM

[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/z/zitoba01.shtml]Zito's Stats from Baseball Reference.com[/url] Postseason Pitching Year Round Tm Opp WLser G GS ERA W-L SV CG SHO IP H ER BB SO +------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+ 2000 ALDS OAK NYY L 1 1 1.59 1-0 0 0 0 5.7 7 1 2 5 2001 ALDS OAK NYY L 1 1 1.12 0-1 0 0 0 8.0 2 1 1 6 2002 ALDS OAK MIN L 1 1 4.50 1-0 0 0 0 6.0 5 3 4 8 2003 ALDS OAK BOS L 2 2 3.46 1-1 0 0 0 13.0 9 5 4 13 +------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+ 4 Lg Div Series 0-4 5 5 2.76 3-2 0 0 0 32.7 23 10 11 32 I wouldn't characterize it as crap - he's been pretty solid in the postseason.

Frayed Knot Jul 29 2006 10:14 PM

Pretty good actually [3-2, 2.76, 23 H in 37 IPs, 32/11 K/BB] but that shouldn't enter into any decision. Post-season numbers are usually based on such a small sample size that trying to predict something off of them is useless.

Edgy DC Jul 30 2006 02:42 AM

And if we are going to judge by that, looking to Orlando Hernandez and his 12-3, 2.55 ERA is the way to go.

metirish Jul 30 2006 09:35 PM

Steve Phillips who gets way too much air time during Sunday night baseball thinks there is no way the A's trade Zito, not even if the Mets include Lastings.

Elster88 Jul 31 2006 09:00 AM

Not sure that I've ever seen such a strong preference on this board.

Rockin' Doc Jul 31 2006 09:24 AM

Well, there was that Kazmir for Zambrano (the wrong one) trade a few years ago. There may not have been a poll at the time, but the trade definitely didn't receive much support from our membership. It was a move that was pretty universally criticized from the time it was announced. .

metirish Jul 31 2006 09:29 PM

So what about Zito, he stays with the A's and now when Oakland loses him all they will get are compensation picks, certainly a tough spot for Beane to be in.

Frayed Knot Jul 31 2006 11:16 PM

That's what Beane has done with virtually every FA he's had over the years: Giambi, Damon, Isringhausen, etc. He did deal the two pitchers' Mulder & Hudson but that was a full season before they went FA

Edgy DC Jul 31 2006 11:52 PM

Tejada too. Give me a GM with more faith in what his scouting and development team will give to him than in what an opposing GM will.