Poll: Gary Apple’s Dee Gordon proposal

MetsBlog recently ran this on potential trades:

Perhaps the most interesting suggestion came from Gary Apple, who said the Mets should trade LHP Steven Matz, INF Wilmer Flores, and INF prospect Luis Guillorme to the Marlins for 2B Dee Gordon.

Gordon is a good defensive second baseman and the Mets could surely use that. When he runs a super high BABIP, he’s a good offensive guy, too. Last year he had a .354 BABIP and a 3.3 fWAR. In 2016 he had a .319 BABIP and a 1.0 fWAR.

Here are Gordon’s contract details from Cot’s:

18:$10.5M, 19:$13M, 20:$13.5M, 21:$14M club option ($1M buyout)
2021 option guaranteed with 600 plate appearances in 2020 or 1,200 PAs in 2019-20

Oh, and he failed a drug test and was suspended 80 games in 2016.

So, if he puts up numbers like he did in 2017, he’s a good deal. If he puts up numbers like he did in 2016, it’s a bad contract with an option that’s likely to trigger. And all the while he’s a failed test away from a permanent suspension.

And for that, we have to give up a similar type prospect in Guillorme, a bat in Flores and a potential SP2 in Matz. It’s too rich for my blood but what do you think?

Should the Mets trade three guys for Dee Gordon?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

40 comments for “Poll: Gary Apple’s Dee Gordon proposal

  1. Joe Gomes
    December 6, 2017 at 1:18 pm

    Everyone goes gaga over any player that is not a Mets. I rather have Wilmer hitting 25 hrs and driving in 80 over Gordon. Marlins want to trade him? fine, Montero or Gsellman and Nimmo or Cecchini.

  2. TexasGusCC
    December 6, 2017 at 1:40 pm

    “Too rich for my blood”? How about Apple shouldn’t offer a trade ever again?

    I can’t believe the Giants offered their top four prospects and are taking $250MM of Stanton’s contract. The Marlins will be spoiled after that.

    I’m going to hate Derek Jeter more than I used to, and I didn’t think that was possible.

    • Name
      December 6, 2017 at 6:14 pm

      I’m not fond of the Giants prospects but the reported deal still looks like highway robbery for the Marlins

      Only way it’s not is if the money the Marlins are going to eat is all in the early years before Stanton opts out. That way if Stanton opts out the Giants end up paying only $30 mil for 3 years + the prospects they gave up. And then the Giants should be praying he does so they don’t have to pay him $200 mil for his late 30s years.

      But that’s highly doubtful because the whole point is that the Marlins need the cash flow right now.

  3. Jimmy P
    December 6, 2017 at 2:17 pm

    No big problem on Flores and Guillorme for me.

    But I won’t sell Matz that low. If healthy, he’s capable of being one of the top LHP in the game. I won’t give up on that. I wouldn’t add any premiere arm to that package, frankly. They can have one of the RH relievers we’ve been stockpiling.

    I wonder if there’s much of a market for Dee. The contract is not insubstantial.

    • Eraff
      December 6, 2017 at 9:25 pm

      correct again

  4. December 6, 2017 at 2:17 pm

    Maybe for Wilmer and a pitching prospect like Dunn. But even then, I’d hesitate.

    Guillorme is the future Mets second baseman–great glove, looks to be getting clue on how to maximize his somewhat limited hitting strengths. At this point, I’d bring back Reyes for one more year and let him mentor both Guillorme and Rosario. The idea of Guillorme and Rosario in the middle of the infield is very tantalizing.

    I’m keeping Matz for at least another year, only because of deGrom’s success following the same type of surgery.

    Dee Gordon looks good on paper, but as the old joke goes, the game is played on grass. Having lived through the Vince Coleman and Roger Cedeno nightmares, I’d rather the Mets not go the “let’s import a speedster” route again!

    • Jimmy P
      December 6, 2017 at 2:47 pm

      I think Guillorme is interesting as a longshot. I’m impressed and surprised that he’s been able to continue to get on base as he advances through the system. There seems to be a lot right with this kid’s makeup.

      However, no power, no speed. That’s tough. Feels like he’s showing up about 50 years too late. But I can’t entirely rule him out as a major leaguer. Doesn’t seem like the type of guy who’ll get much of a chance; doesn’t fit the profile.

      As I’ve said before, 4 years ago I would have said “no way” on this kid. A 2B who can’t steal bases or hit with *any* power? But he keeps plugging along, dancing on that edge, doing just enough to keep himself in the conversation. If he can play great defense, get on base at a .350 clip, and show the kind of gritty, in-game leadership that he’s demonstrated in the minors, maybe there’s a place him. But it’s on the fringe, at best.

      I’ve gone from completely cynical to quietly becoming a fan, rooting for the guy against all odds.

    • Remember1969
      December 10, 2017 at 9:27 pm

      Agree 100% with this comment

  5. Jimmy P
    December 6, 2017 at 3:03 pm

    Just to take one more crack at this, you have to compare Neal Walker to Dee Gordon.

    Essentially, Gordon is owed $37/3 (if team buys out 4th season).

    I’d guess that same number lands Walker, or is approximately close.

    So then you start adding players to the cost of Gordon. Even if you want him more than Walker, the additional cost in talent makes it a challenging deal — so everyone in baseball.

    Marlins are seeking salary relief for Gordon. They can’t get a lot back in terms of talent, too. Not when a team could simply pivot and sign Walker, who is arguably the better overall player. For these particular Mets, I still prefer Gordon over Walker, but I can easily understand the other POV.

  6. Metsense
    December 6, 2017 at 3:47 pm

    Gordon is a drug test away from permanent suspension. That should end the discussion to give the Marlins anything of value. The Mets could find at much less risky alternative.

  7. Chris F
    December 6, 2017 at 5:15 pm

    I dont get the interest in Gordon at all. His defense is crappy (doubled the number of errors last year from GG year). Hes a light bat. He has a high OBP and steals bases. Im good with both, but I would like to see more bat than that, and better defense. He’s a doper that had his best season cheating. I personally dont see it.

    • Name
      December 6, 2017 at 7:12 pm

      It confuses the heck out of me too.

      Also, just like A-rod and Marlon Byrd, once a doper always a doper. It’s a shame the player’s union last year couldn’t agree on ripping up a player’s contract if he’s caught cheating and restrict future earnings.

      • Chris F
        December 6, 2017 at 10:39 pm

        For certain. A poz should equal ripping up contract. until then, this “tough on doping” is a crock of sh!t. In professional cycling, its negation of contract, and 2 years out of competition. Second offense is lifetime ban.

    • TexasGusCC
      December 6, 2017 at 10:13 pm

      To say that he wasn’t as good as his best year, is true. But, his defensive UZR was consistent with 2015 and his range was close. His offense was pretty good too.


      • Chris F
        December 7, 2017 at 8:02 am

        Gus, that list is a joke. Mike Zunino? David Wright?

        Anyway Gordon’s best season came while he was a cheating doper. There’s A hang over effect about his talent that goes right back there. He’s fast and gets on base. I don’t want to pay that much for that alone. I’d rather solve leadoff with Cain if it came to that.

  8. December 6, 2017 at 9:04 pm

    Why should the F.O. assume such a contract and have to give up any quality players if the risks are so high? i always thought that the more contract a team takes on the lower caliber of player(s) to expect in return. Let’s pass on this “deal”.

  9. TJ
    December 6, 2017 at 9:59 pm

    I think I concur with the majority position. I’d opt to sign Neil Walker over doling off talent to get a guy that cost as much and may not be a better player. While Walker has less speed, but provides more power and positional flexibility as he can potentially move to 3rd or 1st if the need arises for whatever reason. Not that I’m campaigning foe Walker as the 2B, just that I’d rather sign him and keep those players (or deal them for another asset) versus dealing those three for Gordon.

  10. Dave
    December 7, 2017 at 12:06 am

    All three for Gordon?? Way too much.

  11. Jimmy P
    December 7, 2017 at 10:15 am

    Two separate issues here.

    The price, as in cost to Mets, is one thing.

    The other is if Gordon is any good at all. I know that some folks here have hated him for a long time.

    My feeling is that he checks out several important boxes for this particular Mets team. He plays good defense at 2B; bats at the top of the order; can run the bases (not station to station); and is a new face in a dugout that needs a fundamental shift.

    Would I rather sign Cain? Sure. I’ll take both.

    But I like Gordon and think he’d be good for the three years of the deal, which doesn’t seem particularly onerous to me. Would I rather have him for the next three years than Flores, Guillorme, and (fill in the blank) RH reliever? Yes. I think the Mets get better that way.

    As I said all along, the Mets have so many problems that there’s a host of different ways they can go to address them. I don’t see the *one move* that must be made. I see that in order to compete at a high level 4-5 moves need to be made.

  12. Chris F
    December 7, 2017 at 6:02 pm

    Irrelevant now, Gordon on the way to Seattle to play, wait for it….

    center field.

    • Name
      December 7, 2017 at 6:43 pm

      I actually think they made this deal for… Ohtani. It’s the only way that this deal makes any sense.

      I think the Mariners know that they are probably #1 or #2 or Ohtani’s list and wanted to put the bow on the present. They went to the Marlins and asked for pool money and the Marlins said that if they wanted it, they had to take Gordon’s contract off their hands. Why else would a team trade for an overpaid player whose only tool is his defense at 2b to try him at another position? It had to be because they are certain they can get Ohtani.

      Now, with the $1m they added from the Marlins and the $1m they got from the Twins earlier in the day, they overtake the Rangers for the highest possible offer at $3.557m

      • Chris F
        December 7, 2017 at 7:21 pm

        sure. although its not clear $$$ are moving Ohtani’s needle. Angels and Ms are all in to be sure.

        • Name
          December 7, 2017 at 8:13 pm

          Let’s be honest here. Money is always some sort of factor in any decision. It may not always be the #1 factor, but it matters. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying.

          I’m sure every other team is telling him and promising exactly what he wants to hear. GMs, managers, players, staff come and go and he’s delusional to sign with a team because of people with the only exception being because of a terrible owner. The only real differentiating factors here are money and city.

          • Name
            December 8, 2017 at 2:45 pm

            Looks like i was wrong and that extra 1m didn’t help. The Mariners took a huge gamble and are now stuck with a piece of turd.

            Maybe Ohtani really wants to play the OF and not DH and having Pujols on the roster pretty much guarantees that. Having the best player in baseball on the team also lessens the burden of him being the savior.

      • Chris F
        December 7, 2017 at 7:34 pm

        Dee Gordon admits he’s surprised at being asked to move from 2B to CF. But says he understands and will do what’s best for team and is eager to play with Cano. “If it’s anybody I’d move for, it’s Robbie.”

        Cash availability indeed.

  13. December 7, 2017 at 8:52 pm

    What happens the year after Ohtani signs? Is he then able to sign a contract for x amount of dollars for x amount of years?

    • Name
      December 7, 2017 at 11:39 pm

      Not allowed. I’m sure MLB would come down hard, probably even worse than what the Braves suffered (maybe a complete ban on participating in a draft?), if it came to light there was handshake agreement for an extension down the road. Any team that signs him probably shouldn’t try to extend him until he’s at most 1 year away from FA to prevent this possibility.

    • December 8, 2017 at 8:05 am

      “Because last year’s CBA raised the age of international prospects covered by the bonus-pool system to 25, Ohtani isn’t eligible for true unrestricted free agency for two more years. Rather than wait that long — and as a pitcher, two more years of good health is no guarantee — Ohtani will reportedly be posted this winter and then sign under the same rules by which 16-year-olds are bound. He’ll receive a signing bonus of some size (up to about $10 million) depending on which club he ultimately joins and then sign a standard uniform player contract that binds him to the arbitration system until he accrues six years of service time.”


  14. TexasGusCC
    December 7, 2017 at 11:31 pm

    Now we go get Gordon: offer them Lagares for Gordon, then sign Cain.

  15. December 7, 2017 at 11:41 pm

    Gus wouldn’t that put the payroll for the Mets at about 150 million dollars?

    • TexasGusCC
      December 7, 2017 at 11:57 pm

      And? They can’t afford it?

  16. December 8, 2017 at 12:13 am

    What do you think Gus? I’m being realistic with this inept ownership. Maybe if Wright doesn’t play they’ll be able to recoup more from their insurance company again? If you look at the fire sale from last season of Walker, Bruce, Granderson, Duda and Reed the Wilpons probably saved close to 20 million? If you average out a ticket for Citifield at 50 dollars multiply it by 2.5 million fans you get 125 million which is interestingly close to what the “true” payroll for this past season would of been. Pure speculation on my behalf. Finally if its true how much of the insurance policy did the Wilpons get back for Wright not playing this past year? 75%? Then subtract that from the 154 million dollar opening day payroll we keep reading about and the payroll comes down to about 120 million

    • NormE
      December 8, 2017 at 5:51 am

      What about revenue from tv, merchandising?

    • December 8, 2017 at 8:08 am

      After the Walker trade, the AP reported that the Mets saved $9.3 million – trading away Walker, Bruce, Reed and Duda and taking on Ramos.

      We have to add in the savings from the Granny deal, too. A quick Google search did not provide the final amount that the Mets sent to LA but supposedly they were going to pay more than half of the $3.5 million he was still owed. Let’s say they paid $2 million and the Dodgers paid $1.5 million. That would mean the Mets saved $10.8 million.

      • December 8, 2017 at 8:31 am

        Thanks Brian. And what about the insurance policy the Wilpons have on David Wright’s contract?

      • Name
        December 8, 2017 at 11:31 am

        Technically, if we wanted to look at the full picture, the net cash flow savings should also be netted against the lost revenue for not having a team in the playoffs.

        In 2016 the Mets drew 2.789m fans and had revenue of $332 mil, about $119 per fan.
        In 2015 the mets drew 2.57m fans and had revenue of $313 mil, about $122 per fan
        In 2014 the Mets drew 2.15m fans and had revenue of $263 mil, about $122 per fan.
        Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/196671/revenue-of-the-new-york-mets/

        So let’s say the Mets expected to draw around 2.75m fans again this year, since early season expectations were similar to last year. Because of poor performance, they only drew 2.46 million fans, about 300k less than expected. At an average price per head at $120, that equates to ~$36 million in lost revenue.

        So yes they were about to save $10-15 million in player salaries, but they also lost $30-40 mil in revenue they were probably expecting.

        • December 8, 2017 at 12:11 pm


          But you better be careful because soon they’ll label you a Wilpon apologist for suggesting that we look at the big picture.

          • Jimmy P
            December 8, 2017 at 12:22 pm

            By putting out a winning team, the Mets would raise revenue. Instead they got trapped in a cycle of lowering expenses when the team disappoints, creating a cycle of failure.

            The vision for the franchise is deeply flawed.

            I don’t believe expectations — or season ticket sales — are nearly the same as they were a season ago.

            And I do think that some people here bend over backwards to defend the Wilpons, which I find weird. But we are all entitled to our opinion.

            • December 8, 2017 at 3:19 pm

              I think if you polled 1,000 Mets fans on Opening Day 2017 that 1,000 of them would have said the Mets would have been a winning team. Didn’t work out that way. The owners thought they were doing exactly what you prescribe and when it didn’t work out, they tried to recapture some lost revenue.

              I wish they would have prioritized getting talent back in their July/August trades but I understand why they didn’t.

  17. December 8, 2017 at 6:42 am

    What about the debt the Wilpons are carrying NormE? Doesn’t this tell you how badly off they really are? An assumption of 150 million dollars shouldn’t be such an unrealistic payroll if the team was in good financial shape. Isn’t SNY heavily in debt as well?

Leave a Reply

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

%d bloggers like this: