Master Index of Archived Threads


Anyone remember the real reason why Rico Brogna was traded?

User 362 Aug 26 2007 09:52 AM

I remember Brogna refused to do something that the front office asked him to do, but I can't recall what it was. Howard

Willets Point Aug 26 2007 10:17 AM

He wasn't a good fit.

Nymr83 Aug 26 2007 11:31 AM

maybe he refused to sit the bench because John Olerud was 50 times better?

metirish Aug 26 2007 12:00 PM

These days he's a North East scout for the D-Backs,so he spends a lot of time at Shea sitting and watching.

User 362 Aug 26 2007 12:11 PM Question

metirish wrote: These days he's a North East scout for the D-Backs,so he spends a lot of time at Shea sitting and watching. metirish, Do you remember what Brogna did to antagonize the Mets front office and result in his being traded?

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2007 01:23 PM

I don't remember a specific "incident" that caused him being sent away, nor even that there was one. Rico had been injured during 1996 (back issues IIRC) sitting out the last half of that final season and neither that year or the prior one (his only full season in NY) were a match for that first partial one in '94. I just remember the trade as an attempt to shore up the bullpen. They actually dealt him to Philly a month prior to trading for Olerud so those two weren't directly related. * and, on that note, I become '96 Met Todd Hundley

Rockin' Doc Aug 26 2007 02:12 PM

metbaseball - "I remember Brogna refused to do something that the front office asked him to do, but I can't recall what it was." Not suck? Oh, welcome to the 'pool. I hope you stick around and continue to take part.

vtmet Aug 27 2007 04:04 PM

I don't think that Brogna did anything wrong to tick off the front office...I just think that when he got injured, Butch Huskey took his place at 1B and outplayed him (Butch's split's that season were very good at 1B, and his numbers improved once he was playing 1B every day...at least until he got injured himself on August 5th, then the Mets used Petagini/Baerga/etc at 1B)...and then in the offseason, the Mets got an offer that they couldn't refuse, and Olerud unseated Huskey at 1B, not Brogna...IMO, if Brogna didn't have the bad back, he probably wouldn't have been traded for such crap, and might have at least been the lefty part of a 1B platoon for at least another season...

User 362 Aug 27 2007 04:09 PM Brogna

vtmet wrote: I don't think that Brogna did anything wrong to tick off the front office...I just think that when he got injured, Butch Huskey took his place at 1B and outplayed him (Butch's split's that season were very good at 1B, and his numbers improved once he was playing 1B every day...at least until he got injured himself on August 5th, then the Mets used Petagini/Baerga/etc at 1B)...and then in the offseason, the Mets got an offer that they couldn't refuse, and Olerud unseated Huskey at 1B, not Brogna...IMO, if Brogna didn't have the bad back, he probably wouldn't have been traded for such crap, and might have at least been the lefty part of a 1B platoon for at least another season... I think he might have refused the owner's request to participate in an off-season event, but I can't remember exactly what it was.

Kid Carsey Aug 27 2007 04:54 PM

I looked in the Way-Back Machine and there was speculation that he was too injury prone and also refused to play winter ball in Venezuela as the team wanted him to and stayed home in Connecticut. Whether to say this is the "real" reason is impossible to know any more than whether he was "a good fit" played into de- cisions back then as people on the internet and talk radio liked to cling to for some reason.

User 362 Aug 27 2007 05:26 PM The answer?

Kid Carsey wrote: I looked in the Way-Back Machine and there was speculation that he was too injury prone and also refused to play winter ball in Venezuela as the team wanted him to and stayed home in Connecticut. Whether to say this is the "real" reason is impossible to know any more than whether he was "a good fit" played into de- cisions back then as people on the internet and talk radio liked to cling to for some reason. Kid Carsey, I think with your winter ball item that we're closing in on the answer. Good memory! Maybe someone else can either confirm it or provide details.

Kid Carsey Aug 27 2007 05:38 PM

Not from memory, I couldn't tell you what color socks I wore today. It's from a 11/28/96 New York Times story.

Johnny Dickshot Aug 27 2007 09:56 PM

As stated above Brogna had had back shoulder and knee problems limiting his usefulness, while the Mets had other options including Huskey & Petagine to begin with, and revamping the bullpen was McIlvaine's stated priority (he also traded for Armando Reynoso that day). There was also speculation another deal was in the works, perhaps for Fred McGriff if he were to be moved for rookie Ryan Klesko; or, eventually, the Olerud deal. The Snooze (11/28/96) says Brogna "angered the Mets by refusing to play winter ball," but McIlvaine denies that having had anything to do with the deal. Brogna thinks it could have been *a* reason but seems more concerned with making the case that by staying at home he was doing his best to prepare for the new year. Anywhoo, Jordan looked like all the world as a lefty killer in the making. He had a 1.80 ERA in AAA the prior year and lefties his .129 vs him. Borland was standard reliever roster-filler. But what do you want from an injured first baseman who ideally was a No. 7 hitter. I don't think there was a hidden agenda.

G-Fafif Aug 27 2007 11:48 PM

I find it helpful to think Brogna and Person for Olerud, Jordan and Borland. Then it doesn't hurt so bad.