Master Index of Archived Threads


The Untouchables

TheOldMole Nov 28 2007 09:49 AM

According to a fan poll in Newsday: Lastings Milledge (1309 responses) 14.9% Phillip Humber (614 responses) 7.0% Mike Pelfrey (954 responses) 10.8% Carlos Gomez (2057 responses) 23.4% Fernando Martinez (2814 responses) 32.0% Kevin Mulvey (1052 responses) 12.0%

metirish Nov 28 2007 11:11 AM

From the same rag, believe this all to be true because Jim has seen it with his own eyes. ] Trading Reyes for Santana still makes sense Jim Baumbach In the days after the Mets' historic collapse I advocated trading Jose Reyes for Johan Santana - and I still stand by that move, even though the Mets clearly don't agree. But if I'm the Yankees, I wouldn't give up Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes for Santana. They're untouchables, to me. Is it a double standard to trade Reyes, but not Chamberlain and Hughes? Not when you consider the different situations the Mets and Yankees are in, and what Santana represents. Santana is more valuable to the Mets because of their enormous need for a top-of-the-rotation starter, and just imagine how dominant he'd be in the National League with half his starts at Shea Stadium (albeit, for one more season). Yes, the Yankees need him, too. The Red Sox have complete control of the rivalry because of their pitching staff, and the Yankees need to start matching that soon to catch up. That is why I wouldn't trade Chamberlain or Hughes, not even for a two-time Cy Young award winner who is only 28 years old. Chamberlain is 22. Hughes is 21. There is no guarantee they will ever post the spectacular seasons that Santana had from 2004 through last year. But there's also no guarantee Santana will be just as dominant going forward. He was great last season, but not as great as the previous three years. Yet this past season we saw some serious glimpses from Chamberlain and Hughes that they have the ability and guts to both become big-time pitchers for many years to come. As good as Santana is, the Yankees can't give these guys up. Even if it means letting Santana go - gasp! - to Boston. That's probably the scariest proposition of this strategy for the Yankees, the idea of Santana joining Josh Beckett in the Red Sox rotation for years to come. But the Yankees have to trust their belief that what they saw from Chamberlain and Hughes this past season was not a fluke. Going forward these are the guys that will anchor their staff, and there is no doubt they can be as good as any pitcher in the majors. In the interest of full disclosure, I feel it's important for me to state that I've always been somebody who doesn't put as much stock in prospects as others. I've always been a big believer in trading prospects for known quantities, because it's rare when prospects meet the hype they receive. (Look up the Mets' Generation K on Wikipedia for proof of that. ) But I don't consider Chamberlain and Hughes can't-miss prospects anymore. They're major league pitchers now. We're not going by how scouts describe them, or trying to take their minor league stats and project how that translates to the majors. We've seen they have the ability to do it here. So if I'm the Yankees, trade away Alan Horne, Jose Tabata and Austin Jackson for Santana. And don't let Melky Cabrera stand in the way, either. I think I would even be willing to trade Ian Kennedy, if only because the Yankees can afford to with Chamberlain and Hughes ready to stay in the rotation. As for the Mets, I keep going back to this question: If they were starting a team today, who would they rather have, Reyes or Santana. If your answer is Reyes, fine. But I'm going with Santana. more in /sports Copyright © 2007, Newsday Inc.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 28 2007 11:20 AM

None of those guys in the Newsday poll are untouchable. Some are more touchable than others, but I think they can all be touched. David Wright is untouchable. Reyes too, I think, but less so. Beltran won't be dealt either. Martinez, Hernandez, Delgado, and Alou are less desirable because of their health, age, and/or salaries. If I understand the rules right, Castillo and Castro can't be dealt until June 1 because they were recently signed as free agents. (Does that apply when the player is returning to his previous team?) Beyond the names I listed above, I'd have to think that everyone else is in the conversation. (And Delgado and Hernandez too if a team is interested.) Other than the kids in Newsday's poll, I'd think that Maine, Perez, Heilman, Feliciano, Chavez, Gotay, and Smith all would have some appeal to certain teams. Maybe Estrada too. From the big league roster, who else is left? Schoeneweis? Easley? I find it hard to envision the Mets putting together the best bid for Santana.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2007 11:22 AM

]Santana is more valuable to the Mets because of their enormous need for a top-of-the-rotation starter, and just imagine how dominant he'd be in the National League with half his starts at Shea Stadium (albeit, for one more season). The first have of this sentence is distorted, and the second makes no sense. Who plays shortstop if Reyes is traded? Jose Valentin? David Eckstein?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 28 2007 11:23 AM

Not for nothing but this notion that the Mets are in desperate need of an ace starting pitcher are pretty overblown -- I mean, their need is no worse or appreciably greater than the next guy's. F Santana. The Mets need Milledge to hit like crazy, Reyes to rebound and the catcher to not hit like shit and they'll be OK.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2007 11:24 AM

And, um, the bullpen (and starters too) not to do what they did last September. I agree about the fucking of Santana.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 28 2007 11:26 AM

I think their biggest requirement is a guy who'll pitch about 200 innings for them. It doesn't have to be a former Cy Young winner. Another guy like Maine or Perez would be adequate.

metirish Nov 28 2007 11:27 AM

Officer Joe Blanton can do that and more for you.

Valadius Nov 28 2007 11:32 AM

We need bullpen help. That's more pressing, in my opinion. And we need Reyes - a large part of our team is built on speed. Plus you'd be giving up that arm at shortstop.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2007 11:35 AM

Bullpen help is more readily available.

Frayed Knot Nov 28 2007 11:42 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Not for nothing but this notion that the Mets are in desperate need of an ace starting pitcher are pretty overblown. Nuh-uh, the Mets HAVE to do something DRASTIC!!!! I know this because Chris Russo just told me so.

smg58 Nov 28 2007 11:47 AM

But would Baumbach trade Reyes for Chamberlain or Hughes? The Mets' need is apparently greater (at least according to him), but Reyes for Santana would improve next year's Mets only slightly, if at all. And that's only before you factor in what you could get with the difference in their salaries. Sigh. Nobody's untouchable if dealing them gives the Mets a better chance of winning a title over the next three years. I don't foresee how any deal involving David Wright that could be offered to us would meet that criterion, but I suppose it's not absolutely impossible.

Gwreck Nov 28 2007 11:48 AM

I might be worried if there were other teams all picking up the mythical "top of the rotation" starter and the Mets would be appreciably worse as a result. Given that said pitchers number about 8 throughout both leagues, I'm not worried.

Edgy DC Nov 28 2007 12:00 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 28 2007 12:54 PM

Just keep in mind that John Maine and Ollie Perez were each similarly productive to Daisuke Matsuzaka, and clearly superior to Barry Zito. The offseason flurry will always tell the Mets to go nuts for a starting pitcher.

smg58 Nov 28 2007 12:15 PM

metirish wrote: Officer Joe Blanton can do that and more for you. The OPS against Blanton last year was .677, Santana was .678, and Haren was .687. I agree that the need for a BIG DEAL is exaggerated. What hurt the Mets last year was not the absence of a BIG DEAL, but a series of little deals that backfired spectacularly. Hell, you could make the argument that if Minaya had done absolutely nothing about the bullpen -- no Mota, no Schoeneweis, no Sosa, no Sele, no Heath Bell and Royce Ring for Joe Adkins and Ben Johnson, no Henry Owens and Matt Lindstrom for Jason Vargas, and no Brian Bannister for Ambriorix Burgos -- the Mets would have won at least 95 games. So the rotation as it currently stands has Pedro instead of Glavine, and Pelfrey with another year's experience. That's certainly functional if you find bullpen depth and a sixth starter who can keep you in games when called upon. The free agent market for relievers is still better than the market for starters, even with a few people already taken.