Should Mets revisit last year’s David Wright-Peter Bourjos rumor?

In November of last year there was a rumor of a Mets-Angels trade involving David Wright. As with most rumors, it’s hard to say if there were actual talks between the two teams or if it was something created by a drunken journalist in a bar or a blogger in his mom’s basement. Most versions had the Mets acquiring Peter Bourjos, along with another player or two.

Mets fans were shocked that their star player would only fetch a slap-hitting outfielder and chaff while Angels fans saw no reason to trade a Gold Glove-level CF who posted a 116 OPS+ in his first year in the majors (much less throw in anything else) for an expensive 3B who was an injury risk and who was under team control for just one year.

Fast forward a year and this is what we saw unfold for the principals in this deal: Wright stayed healthy the entire season, posted his highest OPS since 2008 and returned to being a Gold Glove-level defender at third. Meanwhile, Bourjos was limited to just 195 PA, posted a .606 OPS and became a forgotten man with the ascendance of Mike Trout.

So, Mets fans are going to call me crazy when I suggest that Sandy Alderson should revisit (visit?) trade talks with the Angels with the same two players being principals of the deal.

Like many people, David Wright is my favorite player. In an ideal world, Wright would finish his career in a Mets uniform and be elected to the Hall of Fame five years after he retired. But it’s not a perfect world. The Mets’ owners have serious financial problems and the last thing they need to do is to commit to another long-term nine-figure contract that hamstrings the club financially while the player fails to meet expectations.

While Wright rebounded to an .883 OPS in 2012, the way he got there is a bit unsettling. The first two months of the season, Wright was an MVP. After that he was a much different – read worse – player. Because it’s handy, let’s use his first half/second half splits and compare that to what he did in 2011.

2011: .254/.345/.427
1st Half .351/.444/.563
2nd Half .258/.334/.416

In most cases, splits have no predictive ability whatsoever. But I’m not jumping thru hoops at the chance to lock up a guy to a contract north of $100 million who in 77 percent of his last 1,117 PA has posted an OPS significantly below .800 (roughly .765).

That’s still a good player. It’s just not a guy to pay $20 million a year to, regardless if he’s the “face of the franchise.” Add in the fact that paying Wright that money would preclude them from getting someone with a better shot of being worth that type of contract and it becomes even more distressing.

OK, you might be willing to play along with the idea of shopping Wright. But why the Angels and why Bourjos? Not many teams need a third basemen and would be able to pay Wright’s contract, which makes the Angels a nice fit. As for Bourjos, everything that made him attractive last offseason still applies. The fact that he had a .274 BABIP, 64 points below what he posted in 2011, does not change things.

He’s still a top-notch center fielder, one who had 9 DRS in less than half a season in the field. He’s still a guy who could give the Mets speed on the bases, someone who could be a nice leadoff hitter, one capable of driving the ball (lifetime .155 ISO). Last year when he wasn’t hitting, Bourjos retained a good approach, with an OBP 71 points higher than his AVG. Only Wright and Ike Davis had a higher OBP-AVG differential for the Mets last year.

The Mets need a good fielding center fielder, which Bourjos is. They need someone to hit leadoff, which Bourjos could do. They need RH bats in the lineup and while Bourjos does not have a pronounced split, he does fare slightly better against LHP in his career. The Mets could also use someone cheap and Bourjos is a pre-arb player.

But, we cannot completely dismiss Bourjos’ 2012 season, either. Which is why Alderson should hold out for more and the name that stands out is Jordan Walden. At the start of 2012, Walden was the Angels’ closer. But like half of the closers in baseball, Walden stumbled in the early going and was yanked from the job. Walden then came down with an injured biceps. While he returned to the majors, Walden was never able to reclaim his job as closer.

Ernesto Frieri took over as the closer and the 26 year old notched 23 saves, a 2.32 ERA and a 0.957 WHIP last year.

Meanwhile, you could compare Walden a bit to Bobby Parnell as both are hard throwers with some command issues. But after returning from his injury the third week of August, Walden appeared in 14 games and did not walk a batter. A fastball-slider pitcher, Walden has swing-and-miss stuff, with a lifetime 12.6 SwStr%. And he’s also a pre-arb player.

My guess is that those who are opposed to this will see it as trading an All-Star 3B for two guys who lost their jobs last year. That would be an accurate, yet totally incomplete look at the issue. It’s akin to the reaction Lee Mazzilli had when he heard he was traded. Mazzilli was incredulous when he heard he was dealt for a couple of minor leaguers that he had never heard of before. Ron Darling likes to remind Mazzilli of that comment every time he sees him now.

A Gold Glove CF and a shutdown closer, both pre-arb players, would be a nice haul for Wright, don’t you think?

44 comments for “Should Mets revisit last year’s David Wright-Peter Bourjos rumor?

  1. nym
    October 7, 2012 at 10:58 am

    No, I do not. No offense, but if the Mets are to trade Wright they need to do more than an reliever and a good glove/not much of a bat CFer.

    Trading Wright for Bourjos does absolutely nothing to solve the “RH bats” problem. In fact it makes that problem much, much worse. The Mets offense was mediocre as is….trading Wright who was by far their best hitter and getting a much much worse hitter in return would kill an already weak area on the team.

    Speed is an overrated facet of the game. The Mets need power more than they need speed. And they’d be losing a lot of power in a Wright for Bourjos swap. And in order for “speed” to matter offensively, a player needs to be able to get on base…something Bourjos hasn’t shown himself to really be able to do. .291(!) OBP last year and a whopping .327 in his “good” year. No thanks.

    Sure the Mets do need a CFer. But Bourjos isn’t nearly good enough at this point to make it worth trading Wright to get him. They can play a guy like Kirk there or look for a relatively cheap alternative on the market. Just bringing back Torres is more appealing than trading Wright for Bourjos.

    • October 7, 2012 at 11:21 am

      Absolutely no offense taken. If everyone agreed it would be a boring world. Opposing viewpoints respectfully stated are always welcome.

      You’re right – Bourjos does not solve the RH bat problem. But I think you are mistaken that he is not much of a bat. You’re putting too much weight on 195 PA in 2012 and not enough on 552 PA in 2011. Bourjos put up a 116 OPS+ in 2011 – that’s a top 10 offensive CF in the majors. And speed may not be as important as power but it would be a mistake to term it useless.

      Since making the World Series in 2000, the Mets have had six seasons where they had someone steal at least 30 bases and six where they did not. In the latter six years, they finished under .500 five times, the lone exception being the 2001 edition which went 82-80. On the flip side, the six seasons where they did have someone swipe at least 30 bags, they finished over .500 four times.

      While correlation does not equal causation, my belief is there’s something worthwhile going on there.

      The point about his OBP is noted. But in 2012 veterans Ronny Cedeno and Andres Torres both posted career highs in BB% and it’s not unrealistic to think Bourjos could do the same thing working with Dave Hudgens instead of Mickey Hatcher and Jim Eppard.

      Finally, it’s not just Bourjos. No one thinks Frank Francisco is the long-term answer at closer and Walden has the potential to hold down the back of the bullpen for a decade.

      • nym
        October 7, 2012 at 3:36 pm

        Just being a good hitter for a CF doesn’t help much if we are trading away a big bat like Wright. Our offense gets much worse with that exchange.

        And just looking at the Mets records in regards to having a “30 SB” guy is too simplistic and not all that meaningful. Wright stole 27 in 2009…its not like if he stole 3 more bases the Mets would have been contenders. Lots of factors go into records. The Mets led the NL in steals in both 2009 and 2010 and as we know those seasons went no where. Similarly, the top 3 teams in the NL this year in steals were the Brewers, Padres, and Marlins. (Those 3 teams were pretty close together and well ahead of the 4th and below teams). Of those 3 only the Brewers actually had a good offense (they led the league in runs, while the Padres were 11th and the Marlins were 15th). And the Brewers also led the league in SLG% and HRs…which had a lot more to due with their runs than just the SBs. The Brewers were also the only team of the 3 to finish above .500. Meanwhile, playoff bound STL was 2nd in the league in runs scored and 13th in the the league in SB

        I don’t think speed is meaningless, but being unable to get on base belittles its value. And there are way other more important aspects of offense (like getting on base, and having power). Wright is a much better hitter than Bourjous….its just not worth it to trade Wright for him. And yeah Walden has “potential” but so do a lot of guys.

        • October 7, 2012 at 6:17 pm

          But no one knows how much of a “big bat” Wright really has. If Wright produces like he did in April and May, then he’s a “big bat” worthy of a nine-digit contract. But if he produces like he did in the second half – sorry, I don’t consider that a “big bat.”

          And that still leaves out of the equation that the Mets can use the money they would have spent on Wright elsewhere to get that “big bat.” That payroll freedom is a huge part of the appeal in shopping Wright, whether you like this particular proposal or not.

          Johan Santana was a more valuable property following the 2007 season than Wright is following the 2012 season. And we know what the Twins ended up getting for Santana. The idea that some team is going to trade some fully developed, cost-controlled star(s) for Wright is kind of crazy.

          • nym
            October 7, 2012 at 9:04 pm

            You don’t trade him now if the best you can do is Peter Bourjos.

            What Wright is, is probably somewhat close to what he was on the season as a whole…which is a very good player…especially for a 3b. Wright at his absolute worst in a injury riddled year was a 116 OPS+ guy.

            And not spending on anyone with the idea that someone better will come a long in a few years isn’t the best way to do business. You can be waiting forever and making excuses every year as you wait for the perfect player to come along. And even if that perfect player does become available…no guarantee your team is the one who gets him. Of course you do have to spent intelligently…but I don’t think signing Wright (unless its to an absurd deal) will be a bad move.

            They should have tons of flexibility starting in 2014 even if Wright is signed to a big contract. So they don’t need to trade him to have payroll freedom. And signing Wright now means less work a year from now b/c you’ll already have one good key piece in place.

            The Santana situation was a bit different since the Mets really had the Twins over a barrel. The Yanks and Sox backed out of trade talks, and the Mets were the only team interested and the Twins really wanted to move him before the start of the year. I’m not saying you are going to get multiple cheap stars for Wright…but there should be a few teams interested in him. I think they should sign him…but if they do go the trade route…they have to take advantage of his trade value. Trading him for Bourjos and Walden doesn’t do that. If that’s the best offer they could get this offseason (and I don’t think it would be) then they should wait and try to trade him at the deadline.

            • October 7, 2012 at 9:38 pm

              I’m not sure who’s talking about not spending while waiting for the perfect player to come along but it’s not me.

              If Wright can give you what he did this year over the next 4 years before falling off, then he’ll be worth the 6-year, $120 million deal he’s likely to command. The way he ended this year makes me scared about his chances to do that. What if he becomes a 5-WAR player next year (he was 3.6 and 4.0 in 600-PA seasons in 2009 and 2010)instead of a 7.8-WAR player like he was this year?

              The Mets had the Twins over the barrel because the Twins were limited in who they could trade Santana to. How many teams could the Mets trade Wright to, given that he’s going to command a nine figure salary? How many teams out there can add a $20 million guy to their payroll, who don’t already have someone at 3B or a top prospect in the minors?

              To me, it looks like the market is: Angels, Orioles, White Sox, Braves and Phillies. Five teams is plenty to get a bidding war going but are the Mets really going to deal with the other two NL East clubs?

              Orioles have two more years with JJ Hardy at SS, so maybe Manny Machado becomes their 3B and they’re out of the bidding. Maybe the White Sox think Kevin Youkilis is the answer.

              I just don’t see the Mets having great leverage in a trade for Wright. And perhaps the best deal doesn’t materialize until the deadline. I’d much rather the Mets pick up his option and work out the details of a long-term contract during the year, giving them the time to see if Wright can quit striking out so much and not hitting for much power like he did in the second half of 2012.

              • 7rain
                October 7, 2012 at 11:47 pm

                I agree and in between now and opening day you see if something is possible. Keep your options open. Probably means that he gets traded or walks but 6-7 years is a huge risk. I hate the idea of trading Wright but this idea is nuts.

                With Dickey and Wright we weren’t close to winning and signing them will do nothing to cure four of the eight everyday positions either now or later. What are we going to do? Sign those two and play Duda, Kirk, Baxter and Thole? That’s not going to work.

                Trade them if there is anything worthwhile. Wright for Yelich and Realmuto. Dickey and Mazzoni for Swihart and Brentz. Davis for Mikie Mahtook

                Take the 22 M you save and sign Reed Johnson for 2 years, Melkey for one and Gerald Laird for 2. Something along these lines. Put Lutz or Turner at 3B, Murphy if it doesn’t work, Duda at 1B, play Flores exclusively at 3B in AAA.

                2015 if things break right

                C – Swihart/Realmuto
                1B – Duda, Dykstra, Aderlain or even Flores if need be.
                2B – Tejada/Murphy
                SS – Tovar/Tejada
                3B – Flores or Marte or ?(Headley as a FA)
                LF – Brentz
                CF – Yelich
                RF – Mahtook

                Nimmo, Evans, Muno, den Dekker, Lagares, Vaughn, Cecchini, Plawicki, et al are your bench and AAA depth.

                Niese, Harvey, Wheeler, Familia, Mejia, Fulmer, Montero, Gee, Tapia, Edgin, Carson, Ramirez, German, Rosario, Rodriguez, deGrom.

                Now you have young 6-10 year starters at every spot and the farm can catch up, start pumping in elite talent every year.

                Basic framework, Sacrifice now, prosper later.

                • October 8, 2012 at 12:20 am

                  For a guy who refuses to trade Mets prospects, you sure are willing to trade other teams’ top prospects to us!

                  Do you really think the Marlins are going to trade us their top prospect and throw in another player to get another big money deal? They already went in salary dump mode in 2012 trading Ramirez ($15M), Sanchez ($8M) and Infante ($4M). I don’t see that at all.

                • Name
                  October 8, 2012 at 12:41 am

                  Damn 7train. You really love your prospects. Chances are that more than 50% of the players you listed there won’t pan out in the major leagues and a few probably won’t even make MLB.
                  It’s a nice thought, but no one can accurately predict out that far into the future. If someone could, they would be making millions.

                • 7rain
                  October 8, 2012 at 12:40 pm

                  The Marlins going into salary dump mode in 2012 means they have money to spend this year. They are a very impetuous Organization by nature and I could see Wright being on their list. Whether my proposal is in the ballpark or not I cannot say but I do think they will be active, 3B is a need and Reyes thoughts on the matter could sway things in that direction.

                  Brentz is close but much more of a RH half of a platoon (with a chance to be more) Not a huge piece to lose and Swihart is at least 3 years away. Boston freed up a lot of salary this year and will be active in restructuring their team this off season with pitching a primary focus. Swihart is right now considered a top 10 catching prospect and between RealMuto, Forsythe, Centeno and Plaweicki at least gives us a legitimate chance get us to average behind the plate WITH AAA depth and a solid chance to be much more than that.

                  Between the five of them we have a great chance to have a competent, competitive and well conceived catching tandem, with the three we have now the odds of that are greatly diminished and the later we wait to find a high impact catcher the longer it will take us to get one.

                  TB has the pitching and has been able to piece together the pen. They have some good pitching on the way, two middle infielders and two OFer’s (both RFer’s) but lack HR’s at 1B and DH and will soon be losing Upton’s 28 HR’s. Mahtook is a very highly regarded prospect but Davis is under control for 4 more years. Theoretically getting a Carlos Gomez type for CF and replacing Upton’s 28 HR’s with Ike’s 35-40 and dumping Pena would make the loss of 2 control years worthwhile.

                  I am not even saying that these are the players we should be targeting or that the trade proposals are reasonable. What I am saying is that we should trade for high ceiling, high impact talent that will provide long term solutions. Guys who are age appropriate for their league. Brentz, Swihart, Yelich and Mahtook were selected in the first round. Swihart got 2.5 M at #26 over 1 M above slot for a reason. Miami gave Yelich 1.7 M about 200K over slot, Mahtook got slot as a college player but at 1.1 M. Those three are as solid a chance as there is to be long term above average players and Brentz can fill a serious need for a long time to come as well as he crushes LHP. All but Swihart will be in AA or AAA next year.

                  Players like the one’s I mentioned also retain their value and allow you to make other trades something Kirk (360K signing bonus) Lucas (85K signing bonus) Den Dekker (110K signing bonus) Vaughn (240K signing bonus) Ceciliani (204K signing bonus) Forsythe (392K signing bonus) don’t and who’s to say Wright and Dickey don’t bust, get hurt, under perform their deals, fall of a cliff in the middle of the contract, That can’t happen?

                  To me the whole trick is three fold. High impact players who will be on your team for 8-10 years, having lots of them all at the same time and then getting something with a chance to do the same for them when they are 31 or 32. If you keep the value chain going you can keep your team competitive year in and year out.

                  We weren’t winning with Wright and Dickey, I have no idea where we’re going to get high impact position playing talent to pair them with for 2013 or later. We can trade some of our future to address that or we can bite the bullet and take the chance on being great instead of just filling holes every year.

                • Name
                  October 8, 2012 at 12:59 pm

                  7train, what if a Marlins fan told you that they should trade Reyes for Wheeler and den Decker?
                  Why should the Mets be the only team that follows this prospect first attitude?
                  And why do you discount prospects on other teams while overvalueing them when they are in the Mets system. You say Brentz is not a huge piece to lose, yet you want him? Kinda bias here aren’t ya? And you say Swihart is 3 years away so Boston should look to trade him for that reason? Should we look to trade Cecchini/Plawicki/Fulmer/Tapia because they are 3 years away?
                  You can’t just dismantle the entire team and say it will benefit the future. Look at the Royals. They have been trying that philosphy for how many years now? And look at where they have been that last couple of years.

                • 7rain
                  October 8, 2012 at 2:14 pm

                  Name, I don’t think those two trades are similar but assuming they were it’s because two teams are in different positions.

                  Why would an older couple sell their big house to a younger couple and buy a smaller one?

                  The Marlins built it up in order to fill their new ballpark but tore it down when it became clear they weren’t going anywhere, now with fresh prospects and the ability to take on payroll their going to start the makeup over. Are Yelich and Realmuto available? I don’t know. Depends on how quickly they want to accomplish the makeover and what other pieces they can acquire.

                  Boston should want to move quickly too. They blew out a ton of payroll this year. Swihart being 3-4 years away could get them something very useful to further that effort. Brentz’ floor fits us like a glove, Boston? Not so much as LHP is avoided when possible in Fenway. That doesn’t mean he is available just that he might be a bigger piece for us as Duda for instance could be for them.

                  Just ideas but teams in transition are usually the one’s you can strike a deal with the easiest and Boston and Miami are definitely in that category.

                  The ideas I mentioned weren’t a total dismantling either. It still leaves Niese, Harvey, Wheeler, Gee, Fulmer, Montero, Mateo and Tapia in place as well as Tejada, Flores, Nimmo, Evans ect.

                • 7rain
                  October 8, 2012 at 2:21 pm

                  Incidentally the Royals have just been treading water while their prospects mature. Since 2008 they have gone WAY over slot and picked up a lot of the best prospects in baseball. This gives them a chance to fill out their roster with true talent and then affords the opportunity to trade for the right imports when it’s close to being assembled.

                  It’s not reasonable to compare KC’s lack of success to ours because for years the Royals weren’t building. It takes time and they just started 4 years ago. Before that they were run by a trust and skimping on expenses and pocketing revenue sharing was the name of the game.

                  The only thing similar to us about the Royals is that they last won a World Series in 1985, we last won one in 1986.

              • nym
                October 8, 2012 at 2:29 am

                Well Wright isn’t guaranteed to sign with the team trading for him. He probably wouldn’t want to. It could be a one year thing. With Santana it seemed like it was clear from the beginning that the team trading for him would be trying to sign him and there was only a limited amount of teams that expressed interest.

                Some times its better to have more years left on the deal, but its not always the case. Sometimes not having the big long money commitment is a good thing. Matt Holliday was a hitter traded in the last year of his deal and he netted Carlos Gonzalez and some others.

                And if Wright is a 5 WAR player that is still really really good and probably would be worth about the 20 mil.(Though we have no idea what his new contract will be…that might not actually be 20 mil) Fangraphs estimates the 5.0 WAR guys being worth about 22.5 mil this year.

                Wright has already said he doesn’t want to negotiate in season. So waiting until midseason to try to discuss the contract with him probably won’t work and they’d have to wait until the end of the season. And by that time they’ll have just a few weeks to get a deal done before he’s a FA….so if he has another good year, he’ll likely get much more expensive.

                • October 8, 2012 at 8:23 am

                  Yes, a 5-WAR player is very good and would be worth a $20 million contract. The problem comes at the end of the contract. If he’s a 5-WAR player in Year 1 of the deal, it’s extremely unlikely that the last few years of the deal he’ll have the same value. The end result being an anchor at the end and just barely worth the money at the beginning. For some teams, that’s an okay tradeoff. If the Mets were in position to contend for a World Series right now, OK. But they’re not and it doesn’t make sense inking a deal where you think you’re going to hate it by the time the team is good again.

                  I don’t think another good year is going to make Wright that much more expensive. How many guys make *more* than $20 million a year? And I’d rather wait a year, see him match 2012 numbers and pay $23 million than rush to sign him now, see him match 2011 rate stats and be left paying him $20 million for most of the rest of the decade.

                  In late 2008 when the Rockies got Carlos Gonzalez as part of the Holliday deal, they were buying low on a player — much like I’m suggesting that the Mets do with Bourjos and Walden. In Triple-A, CarGo had a .760 OPS in the PCL (where the average player put up a .792 OPS) and in 316 PA in the majors, he had a .634 OPS, with all of 4 HR and 4 SB. They didn’t get 34-HR Gonzalez — that guy didn’t show up until two years later. He had the potential to do that, but his 2008 season could only be described as a huge disappointment.

                  The Rockies got a guy who had upside but looked overmatched in CarGo, a pitcher whose xFIP exceeded his ERA by more than a full run (and his ERA was 4.16 in Oakland) and a reliever who openly clashed with his manager, had declining velocity, who always ended up on the DL and who had just turned in a sub-par year.

                  I challenge you to find any Rockies fans who thought that was a good deal at the time.

  2. October 7, 2012 at 11:28 am

    I don’t think, I know that’s not crazy. That’s STUPID!Where is your logic?What is next years attendance level going to be?What reason is there to go watch the Mets?You don’t think we had enough AAA players on the field this year? David Wright and Ike Davis are your foundation.Why are you so anxious to take away one of the few players you can trust to at least be able to play and play well at the major league level?There is no money for free agents.So 2013 is going to be just as painful. Bay is a lost cause and the Mets are not going to eat his contract. Johan is not the Johan of 4 years ago and that’s 43 million between the 2 of them. What about Frank Francisco’s 6.5 million for next year?(that’s 50 million already).What are we going to achieve here? Instead of looking to grab all the rejects out there why not keep what decent players we have and put some prssure on management to put a more respectable product out there.If Tampa Bay can survive on a 60 million dollar budget and be competitive year in and year out in one of MLB’s toughest division what the hell did we get Sandy here for? He can’t complain about lack of funds. After all Oakland never had a large payroll.Almost forgot. Who will play 3rd base? Daniel Murphy? I know we’ll put Justin Turner there!

    • October 7, 2012 at 11:41 am

      People will come out to watch a good team. If David Wright is on the club and the team is losing, attendance is not going to be good. Just look at all of the empty seats in non Dickey games this September.

      The idea of David Wright = attendance attraction does not hold up to scrutiny. The question becomes if Wright pushes the team forward enough to justify a $100-125 million contract.

      The Mets attendance is not going to plummet next year because they have the All-Star game to sell and tie in to season ticket packages.

      The question is: What helps the Mets more – David Wright at $20 million and the rest of the roster being minimum wage guys from the farm system or Bourjos and Walden at $1 million and the ability to be active in the free agent market or make a trade where you take on a big salary?

      It’s fine to talk about “putting pressure on management” but that’s the type of thing that works better in theory than reality. And as has been pointed out here by Name, 7train and others, the reason that Tampa Bay can succeed with a low payroll is that A) they were worse than the 2012 Mets for 10 straight years and B) they did not skimp on their draft picks.

      Actually there’s a third reason, too. The Rays are not afraid with moving popular players if they believe their salary is greater than their production. They said goodbye to Matt Garza, Carlos Pena and Carl Crawford rather than pay them inflated contracts. And I don’t think they regretted those decisions once.

      • 7rain
        October 7, 2012 at 9:33 pm

        Knowing when to say when is what is all about.

        Just think of all the guys we signed. Someone else said no and palmed them off on us. Refreshed their farm on our dime too with a couple draft picks.

        Wright with a full team or pieces very close would easily be the call but without is just asking for another losing decade.

  3. Some Guy
    October 7, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    The Mets already have a GG/no bat CF. His name is Matt Den Dekker. Granted, he may hit for lower average, but he seems to have a tick more power potential. And, again granted, though he has not played in the MLB and is only one year younger, I don’t think the difference between the potential of these two players is enough to offset the price of losing Wright. Sure, MDD is yet another LHH and not really a leadoff hitter, but again does that difference really offset what you give up in Wright?

    The Mets also have a number of power arms in the minors that could make a difference in the BP in the (relatively) short term, so including Walden is also a non-factor to me.

    I know that trading a star player generally doesn’t return a “fair” value, but this is way below what Wright could fetch via trade IMO.

    • October 7, 2012 at 12:27 pm

      Hey Some Guy – thanks for reading and commenting.

      Good point about MDD. But the Mets need 3 OF so I’m not worried if either Bourjos or MDD has to move to another position in 2014.

      The Mets do have a lot of reliever options coming up through the system and perhaps one of them could wind up a closer. I admit being a sucker for a guy with an 11.08 K/9 in the majors.

      • Some Guy
        October 7, 2012 at 12:59 pm

        True, and having multiple defensive whiz OFs would be nice for a change. But their bats both do not profile for a corner OF spot. Who knows, maybe Bourjos becomes a star CF. He certainly has flashed that potential in the minors, where MDD has not. I guess I just feel Wright should get MORE than this, but at the end of the day it’s really about what some other team is willing to offer.

  4. Charles
    October 7, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    I could never justify traded Wright for those to players. Now, I certainly can’t name someone off the top of my head, but let’s say a team has a player drafted in the first round from 2010. He’s on the cusp of the majors having just been promoted to AAA in the second half of last year. He batted 310/375/500 w/ 10 hrs and 45 RBI after his promotion. Maybe for the year he hit 25 hrs. The team he belongs to doesn’t need another outfielder but does need a great third baseman who hits good, but hits even better in a good lineup. You give me that guy and a good reliever and that’s a deal I can swallow. Hard to do? Yes, but this is David Wright being traded. It must be a great deal for the Mets. The package that San Diego got for Mat Latos from the Reds comes to mind. I could never, in the Mets situation, turn down a deal like that.

    Also, if I’m Sandy, I’m calling every team in baseball and trying to get a similar package for Dickey as we speak. I would love if the Mets traded Dickey to the Yankees for a package centered on Gary Sanchez. They have Martin already who is defiantly a fit on that team. He passed up a three yr deal for 30 million and then promptly played poor enough to drop his price tag but remain a option for them. They still have Romine to fall back on as well as Cervelli. Dickey’s price tag fits into their getting cheaper budget by 2014. Sanchez would be an outstanding player for the Mets at a premium position over the next ten yrs. Dickey would be excellent in that rotation that might be minus Kuroda and Petitte in 2013. That is my wish for this off season.

    • 7rain
      October 8, 2012 at 12:54 pm

      Sanchez should be in the top 5 of our trade targets no question. Good idea.

  5. Chris F
    October 7, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    No. Not because Im afraid to think about moving players on this team, but because on the order of things that need to be accomplished with the personnel involved I see it best as a wash. 3B will become a big issue, but more importantly, the whole infield will have a go to anchor, for everything an anchor provides. I feel its time to settle with DW, hang the “C” on his jersey, and let him help bring this team along to contender status in 2-4 years. He brings tons of X factor to the Mets. This is why I see a Niese/Davis combo (or individually) has the potential to bring in some real changes and while leaving the Mets with certain gaps, they are things we can fill with existing and up-coming.

    To me, I think we get the 100M$ to DW and he literally becomes Mets360: past, present, and future.

    • October 8, 2012 at 12:49 pm

      But third base is also a position where they have options. We know it’s Murphy’s natural position and Wilmer Flores could fit there, too. If the Mets trade Wright, they decide where Murphy and Flores fit best. They can plug in a Turner or Josh Satin for a year until Flores is ready.

      I don’t see 3B being a huge issue if Wright is gone. Step down – sure. But that’s a different thing.

  6. joe gomes
    October 7, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    While I agree with you in that David Wright is not a 20M player, I do not like the trade you propose. To trade David, you need to get back at least 4 position players and the Mets can probably find another team with players that would help the Mets better.

    The Phillies and Braves need a 3B but I don’t think the Mets will trade Wright to either one.

    Regardless, to me the Mets should trade not only Wright but Dickey as well. Think about it, by trading both, the Mets should be able to get at least 2 outfielders, starting catcher and 1 top notch BP arm.

    Now take the 21M that Wright and Dickey would have made minus the money from the players coming in and the Mets should have 12 to 15M to spend for other areas.

    Now fast forward to 2014. Bay and Santana are gone which gives the Mets an additional 50M.
    Both Wright and Dickey have said they will test FA if their options are picked up so who is to say that the Mets cannot extend offers to them at this point? Or that using the additional 50M on other players won’t give them a better team?

    • 7rain
      October 8, 2012 at 12:58 pm

      Agree 100%. Even with Wright and Dickey we are outgunned and there is very little in the way of offensive position players in the system above SS ball.

      Take the 22 M, spread it around for two years and add the prospects from Dickey and Wright to the prospects we already have. That could be a damn fine team.

      Do it the other way and we’re outgunned now and outgunned later too.

  7. Name
    October 7, 2012 at 2:20 pm

    In all reality, if i were trading DW, it wouldn’t be for a CF because with the money saved from no David Wright i would go after Bourn or if some team wants to overpay i would rather take on BJ Upton as a reclamation project rather than Bourjos.
    Walden could have the potential to be a great closer, but i don’t think he can be the main piece in a David Wright deal.

    Also, i think some people are overestimating DW’s value. He only has 1 year left on his contract and he was mediocre in the 2nd half. Also, he carries a lot of sentimental value to Mets fans, and other teams won’t pay for intangibles like that.

    • Metsense
      October 8, 2012 at 12:19 pm

      MLB Traderumors indicate that the Diamondbacks are looking to upgrade the left side of the infield. They have a suplus of OF. Wright for Upton could work. Wright for Chris Young and Chris Johnson fills two spots and maybe you could get a prospect also. There is a market for Wright.

      • Name
        October 8, 2012 at 12:38 pm

        Wright for Upton straight up? I don’t think there’s a chance the D-backs will do that. I wouldn’t be opposed to Wright + JV + a minor leaguer though. Then i would slide Murph to 3rd and put Turner at 2nd until Reese Havens is ready(or another 2nd basemen that we have).
        Also, i would never do Niese for Upton straight up either. Niese is owed half the money that Upton is owed, plus he has 2 more options years. You don’t trade a cheap SP like that for a highly unpredictable outfielder.
        Chris Young + Johnson + a minor league would probably be fair value. But i think that the prospect would have to be more than a throw-in. But i have never been a fan of Chris Young or Chris Johnson so i wouldn’t do it unless the prospect was really good.

  8. joe gomes
    October 7, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    Sorry, I meant 4 position players by trading both Wright and Dickey, not just Wright.
    The Mets should be able by trading both to end up with at least 2 outfielders, 1 catcher better than what we have and 1 bp arm.

    To trade David for another position player is just plugging one hole while creating another so in that scenario to trade David or Dickey makes no sense.

    Wright and Dickey have to get you at least 4 ml ready pieces and with the additional money, Sandy should be able to get at least another one. So that is 5 in exchange for 2.

    Now Niese? I would not trade him. Too young, too good and under control.
    Even without Dickey, our 2013 rotation would be Santana, Harvey, Niese, Gee, Young/Pelfrey/Familia/Mejia. That is not bad.

    After the all star it could be Santana, Harvey, Niese, Wheeler, Gee.

    • Name
      October 7, 2012 at 7:34 pm

      It’s very easy for us fans to say should, could, would, but in reality in that aint easy, especially if you propose moving big name pieces like DW or Dickey.

      “The Mets should be able by trading both to end up with at least 2 outfielders, 1 catcher better than what we have and 1 bp arm”

      When you proclaim something as bold as that without something to back you up means you have unrealistic expectations out of our GM and anything less than what you were expecting will be considered a “failed trade” in your book.
      So give us potential names you think DW and Dickey could fetch. You’ll find it is much easier to critisize a problem rather than try to find a solution to it. (Other can try to as well)

      • Joe Gomes
        October 8, 2012 at 9:58 am

        All I can say is that the Mets got Wheeler for half of year of Beltran who was on his last year just like Wright. Why would you think the Mets cannot get 1 ML ready outfielder + say a good BP arm or a minor leaguer who is ready but doesn’t have a position with that particular team?

        3B right now is at a premium. Who will be a FA 3B this year that is better than Wright?
        Phillies and Braves both need a 3B but I don’t know if the Mets would make that trade with them.

        Put out the word that Wright and Dickey are available for the right deal and teams would call the Mets with offers. All they have to do is listen and take the best one.

        This is not a winning team with or without Wright and Dickey. However, if the Mets were willing to spend a little bit and signed Cody Ross and Josh Willingham for the OF, then the Mets might be wild card contenders.

        • October 8, 2012 at 11:01 am

          And the Rays once got Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano. If you refuse to make any deal that isn’t a grand slam HR in your favor you A) won’t make many deals and B) miss a lot of opportunities to help your club.

          I congratulate Alderson for getting Wheeler for Beltran. I do not make that the bar to reach in order to execute all future trades.

        • Name
          October 8, 2012 at 12:17 pm

          Did you forget that the Mets nearly picked up all of Beltran’s remaining money? The Giants were also deseprate for a bat with very few bats out there. In the offseason, there are multitudes of options you can do and so I don’t think you can expect such a steal for Wright. Wright is also owed 16 million next season.

          You also didn’t understand what my earlier post was about. You keep saying it would be really easy to find a trade partner who would be willing to give up “1 ML ready outfielder + say a good BP arm or a minor leaguer”. Well, if it is such an easy task, can you name a possible scenerio for us? At least Brian gave us a name to work with rather than just writing a post that reads, “Should Mets trade Wright for OF?”

          And i don’t see why the Mets can’t win with Wright and/or Dickey. They posted a very solid record in the first half, and if they had fixed some of the issues(mainly bullpen) and not sustained some serious injuries(Santana,Gee which is 2/5 of our rotation), there’s no reason why they couldn’t have been relevent the entire 2nd half.

  9. Metsense
    October 7, 2012 at 11:05 pm

    As Branch Rickey told Ralph Kiner, I can finished last with you or without you. The Mets have finished 4th the last four years. I don’t care for your paticular trade Brian but if the consensus is that trading Wright (and Dickey) could fill 4-5 holes with above average players and still have financial flexibility, then it might be the best course of action.
    If the Mets are living in a 100M payroll world it is better to take a Tampa Bay approach and trade players when they become unaffordable.

  10. Dave
    October 8, 2012 at 1:59 am

    This may be the most ridiculous article I’ve ever read!!!…..David Wright is must remain absolutely UNTOUCHABLE, PERIOD!!!!!!

    • October 8, 2012 at 8:29 am

      Hey Dave – thanks for reading and commenting.

      In the future try to bring more than hyperbole when you disagree with something.

  11. TJ
    October 8, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    Brian,
    I like the deal, but I would prefer to part with Dickey over Wright. Do you think the Angels would trade those two for RA?

    • October 8, 2012 at 12:35 pm

      That’s a real interesting question. The Angels are locked into CJ Wilson and Jered Weaver but the rest of the rotation is up in the air. Greinke’s a FA and they hold club options on Haren and Santana. I can’t imagine Santana will be back but they have legitimate replacement options in Jerome Williams and Garret Richards. Not sure what they have in the upper minors that might be ready to step in.

      I’m sure most clubs would be interested in acquiring a Cy Young Award winner!

      • TJ
        October 8, 2012 at 2:30 pm

        I’m a big Dickey fan, but I would have to pull the trigger on this deal. Yes, it weakens the starting pitching strength, and at best the starting pitching is only 4th best in the NL east going into 2013. However, it fills two holes with young inexpensive players under control for several years, and frees up about $4 mil to fill other 2013 holes.

  12. Charles
    October 8, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    David Wright and RA for… Trout. Any takers? Yeah it’ll never happen, but is that a deal worth taking? I do it in a second.

  13. Charles
    October 8, 2012 at 3:37 pm

    Yonder Alonso and Yasmani Grandal plus Edison Volquez AND a good BP arm!!! That’s what the Padres got for Mat Latos last offseason. You give me a package like that and David Wright is GONE. Same goes for Dickey to a lesser extent in terms of a player package.

    • Name
      October 8, 2012 at 11:19 pm

      Uhh, Mat Latos and David Wright are totally different players. Wright is locked up for only 1 year (and at a high price too) and he’s middle-ish aged while Latos is still very young, very cheap, and locked up for multiple years. Plus, one is a pitcher while another is a hitter. Not even close to a reasonable comparison.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *