In Sandy Alderson’s press briefing on Thursday he touched on a number of trade related subjects. And, of course, we have to dismiss much of what he says because his history (and that of most of his fellow GMs) is that he will often say one thing and do another. After all, Michael Conforto wasn’t going to the majors this year, right? Or maybe just in September? And voila, here he comes.
One thing Alderson averred was that he definitely would not be trading any of his big four young starters. He means Matt Harvey, Jacob deGrom, Noah Syndegaard, and Stephen Matz. Not that there is much of a market for Tommy John rehabbers it is interesting to note that Zach Wheeler wasn’t included in that discussion. Therefore if a pitcher is to be traded it figures to be Bartolo Colon or Jon Niese.
As a veteran Strat-O-Matic (veteran means old) and someone who knows a lot of people deep into Fantasy/Rotisserie Baseball I wonder whether it is the right tactic to take those four young studs completely off the market.
Now don’t get me wrong. I am still smarting from the trades of Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, and Scott Kazmir. But in each of those disastrous cases the problem wasn’t that a good to great pitcher was traded but rather what came back, especially Jim Fregosi and Victor Zambrano.
Only Alderson knows what has transpired when he has spoken to the decision makers at Wrigley Field. If the Cubs are unable to land a top starter like Cole Hamels or Johnny Cueto would they be willing to dangle either Kris Bryant or Addison Russell in return for one of the Mets’ big guns?
I tend to think that the Cubs wouldn’t do Bryant for deGrom and the Mets would be too chicken to do it either. But would that kind of deal really be bad for both clubs? Maybe the PR backlash would be too harsh for either front office to deal with. Surely over the next few years one of those players figures to be more valuable than the other and therefore one of the teams wins the trade. And if they are both great then it’s win-win since the Mets desperately a big bat in the lineup, arguably more so than it needs a fourth ace.
What I think Alderson should be saying and thinking is that the only thing that unlocks the vault for one of the big four is a young, controlled, inexpensive player who can be a hitting star, maybe an All-Star, in the next few years. The biggest stars of the game like Stanton, Trout, and Harper would not be someone to get only because the Wilpon Mets wouldn’t pay them but guys like Bryant or Russell could be of greater use to the Mets than even one of their Cy Young candidates.
Pitchers break. Position players do too but less often. I’d rather place my bets on the hitter as long as he’s of the tip top grade.
As we have seen, starters get hurt which was the case with Wheeler and Matz. If the Mets trade 1 of the 4, it would mean that you can potentially end up short in your rotation in the near future.
Now why do I say this?
1. Once Harvey becomes a free agent do you see the Wilpons giving him 150M +?. Remerber who his agent is and you know that he will want the last dollar available for Harvey. To me that means that Harvey will end up with the Yankees. For this reason, I have always said Harvey is the one to trade for a major player under control.
So if the Mets trade Matz now and then lose Harvey that would leave deGrom, Syndergaard and Wheeler who so far has not pitched as expected. I think the Mets would be wiser to hold on to Wheeler and at least one from either Montero or Fullmer.
You leave one fact out of your argument, pitching wins pennants, offense doesn’t. Obviously you need a balance, however, a lineup that was just a bit more dynamic would make all the difference in the world. Your argument about fragile pitchers also speaks to the need for depth. I doubt very much the Mets will trade any of their starters, their plan is to build around them.
I can only address this topic theoretically, in the general.
Teams need offense and defense to win. The ratio of that changes and shifts, but those are the two elements. You need to score more than the other guys.
I’ve never believed in the “5 Aces” structure if it was going to sacrifice the offense.
I also think, as a separate issue, that offense is more fun to watch. More exciting. A pitching-heavy team with a feeble offense can be a bore to witness over time. It can win, but the entertainment value is not as great. If you want the stadium to rock, crash a double against the wall.
All that said, I don’t believe that this is the optimal time of year to trade away a primary asset such as, say, Syndergaard. There are not enough teams present at the auction. The winter is a much better time for that kind of huge deal, with many more teams in the bidding. I’m not advocating making that specific trade right now, just saying that yes, it is certainly worth considering.
Off-Topic: I still feel the way I felt in March. And the way I felt all of last year, in fact. The Mets would be very well-served in the short-term if Montero would fully embrace a role in the bullpen. I don’t think his trade value will be commensurate with his talent until he demonstrates a consistent ability to retire ML hitters. In addition, if the Mets do trade a young arm, he’d be a good guy to have around. I think the two pitchers who Sandy would have liked to trade are Wheeler and Montero, but injuries derailed those intentions. Now they are both at a fraction of the value they should have in the future.
Funny comment, related to me by my son: I guess they asked Craig Biggio the standard question of who in the ML now reminds you of yourself as a player.
He answered, “Mike Trout.”
Ha.
I would never have put those names together in a hundred years.
It hurts to think outside of the box like this, but as you mentioned “the Wilpon Mets” I can’t help but to wonder if these stud pitchers will be willing to sign far less valuable contracts to stay when their current deals are up. By that standard alone, perhaps examining trade scenarios for these pitchers is a valuable tool. Good article.
Here’s an interesting mind game to play. Let’s suppose a few things and see how you would react.
Suppose:
1- You are Sandy Alderson and your evaluation is that Kris Bryant is the next closest thing to GianCarlo Stanton to come along. You believe that over the next six years he will hit to a .280 or better batting average and even with CitiField as his home park that he will average 35 HRs per season.
2- Jed Hoyer (or Theo Epstein) calls you up and says they want a stud young inexpensive starter (that lets guys like Hamels out). As much as he loves Bryant he will trade you him for one of your big four.
3- Do you make a deal?
4- Which of the four are you most willing to trade? Who remains untouchable?
I think there’s only “a big Three” right now, if the idea is to package one of the top young Met arms for a hitter from a contending team- ie: Bryant/Cubs. The Cubs wouldn’t touch Matz right now due to his unknown availability down the stretch. But if the “search” for a trade partner extends to non-contending teams- then Matz and Wheeler enter the discussion. Those two, along with some of the good, but not heralded young arms (like montero), would certainly be my preference for trade for a bat. The Mets wouldn’t really be giving anything up which they are relying on in 2015.
Long term it will be impossible to keep the band together unless ownership changes. Short term, we’ve got a four year window to surround the aces with better offense and defense. I wouldnt trade any of them near term.
I agree, Matt.
Mets should have enough chips & money to support these young guns.
Sooner or later, the Wilpons are going to have to spend some money keeping most of these guys. But a lot happens between then and now, so it’s not really worth debating.
I’d love to see them extend deGrom this winter.
JP
If your’e not in favor of trading any of the top arms, does that mean you don’t think the Mets have to or should add a “big bat”? By the way, I think that’s a defensible argument. Otherwise- If you do think they need to add the bat- who’s the “trade-bait”?
Slightly off topic, but I would like to point out that of the 4 pitchers mentioned above, 2 of them are not young.
Young to me is 24 or younger.
Harvey is 26 and deGrom is already 27! Jason Heyward is younger than both of them. Even Matz won’t be considered young in my book next year.
For that reason, deGrom is the guy i’d be the most aggressive in listening offers for. I believe he’s pitching way over his head (but i’m probably alone) and could probably sell high on him. However, i would most likely wait until the offseason to move him (after he gets more national press and maybe wins some awards) but if a team really wowed with some offer at the trade deadline (like a Machado, JD martinez or Buxton) i think it would have to be seriously considered. .
At least that’s better than this offseason, when you were ready to deal him for Jean Segura.
Yes. He’s proved me wrong so far by keeping his strikeout rate above 9k/9 and dropping his walk rate, when i thought it would drop into the low 8s or even high 7s . But you can’t fault me (that much) for thinking that when his highest k-rate in the minors didn’t even hit 8k/9.
I thought he would turn out to be a one year wonder like Collin McHugh, Carlos Carasco, or Justin Masterson of a few years ago who had elevated K-rates for one season which dropped the following season.
Admittedly, I said the same thing last winter. He absolutely had to regress.
This has been a fascinating discussion and I really appreciate all the thoughtful and thought provoking comments.
I would have thought that everyone would say deGrom is the keeper or that Harvey is. But certainly arguments can be made for any of the four to be first out the door if a young stud hitter is coming back.
Point of view: I believe “young” is defined as much or more by “years of control” as opposed to specific age.
By that measure, Recker is young at the ripe old age of 31and Carlos Torres at 32 because they have the same number of controllable years as Harvey
Name- You’re the smartest guy in this forum. You know we were talking about controllable Top End talent- specifically pitchers- yes? Recker? 😉
I was proving a point that using years of control to define who is young is not a good measure. Whether you are young is determined by how old you are.
There is no way you can say Noah is young at 22, and then also say deGrom is young at 27.
Considering the average career of an average player is probably around 10 years, 5 years is half a career. Even if you have a 20 year career, 5 years is 25%.
The Mets have five young dominant pitchers in Matt Harvey (arb 2016, FA 2019), Zack Wheeler (arb 2017, FA 2020), Jacob DeGrom (arb 2018, FA 2021), Noah Syndergaard ( arb 2019, FA 2022) and Steve Matz (arb 2019, FA 2022).
The Mets also have a veteran starter, Jon Niese, signed until 2017 with a 2017 $10m team option and a 2018 $ 11m team option. The team options are equal to Colon’s 2014 -15 salary. Niese is a better pitcher in 2014 and 2015. Niese seems to have reduced trade value because of a perceived injury waiting to happen.
The Mets should offer each one of the dominant pitchers an extension as they enter their arbitration year. If they refuse, the Mets should offer it the second year and again the third year. If the pitcher refuses after the third attempt the Mets should trade him before his walk year. The Mets should never allow a controllable player to leave via free agency. They should always get something in trade.
This brings us back to Jon Niese, a player who the Mets can’t seem to get back fair market value in a trade. The Mets should not trade Niese under those circumstances. The fact that Wheeler should be ready sometime in the second half of 2016 would make him a logical choice for a current trade. If he were traded though, it should be for young controlled player and definitely not for a rental.
The Mets currently have a plethora of young starting pitchers in the minors with no rotation openings until 2019. They have Raphael Montero, Michael Fullmer major league ready in case of injuries along with Logan Verrett. Dillon Gee and Duane Belows are still more 2015 starting pitching insurance. Going forward, the Mets should continue to use the remainder of their minor league starters to fill the roster holes with rentals each July, just like they did in the recent Uribe/Johnson deal.
Rentals bring in proven major league talent for the pennant drive each year while sacrificing players that would not get
an opportunity to wear a Mets uniform.
The Mets can afford to trade any one of the five dominant pitchers for a dominant young controllable bat.
Metsense:
>> The Mets should never allow a controllable player to leave via free agency. They should always get something in trade. <<
I don't 100% agree with this.
Not an easy decision, but I'd be very, very reluctant to trade away any great pitcher, even in a walk year, unless my team was clearly not in the playoff hunt.
First, note that Sandy's historical record is to let the guys walk. Hudson, Mulder, Zito. And he has a point, particularly when that team has a shot at a World Series ring.
The Mets have won 2 World Series in their entire history. It's been 30 years since the last one. Those teams, those memories, are revered.
Let's take Matt Harvey as a for instance. Imagine if the Mets are in a position to win a division, make the playoffs and a run at the series. Having a guy like Matt Harvey gives them a much better shot than not having him. This is a guy who can help carry you there.
Also, you get the draft picks if he walks. Plus the value of that final year. It's not nothing.
I think there's a way that a team might "lose" in the long term, but in the process win a World Series. To me, that has a tremendous value. Much different from letting Reyes walk when the team was going to suck anyway.
I'd hate to trade Harvey for future prospects, only to see the club lose a game 7 NLCS with Matt pitching for a different team.
JP, we suffered through four years of building the farm. We have other stud pitchers on the roster and maybe a stud or two still in the minors. When you have only one star then your point is well taken but the abundant riches allows the Mets to keep moving players and keep the franchise strong for years to come. These trades would not be just for prospects but needs. If they can’t extend Harvey then what prevents him from beating you a year later? I prefer to pick a known return than an unknown draft choice.
Can we trade one of the stud pitchers for new ownership?
Just had the troubling thought that if the Mets included Montero & Herrera in the same deal, then our fearless leader Brian Joura just might clutch his heart and fall over in a lump.
I’d do it for Gomez. Maybe even throw in a Bowman.
But not at the risk of losing Joura!!!!!
People can you feel it – love is everywhere!
If we were getting 2013 Carlos Gomez, I’d be in favor of that deal. But I fear that guy’s gone and isn’t coming back. He’s fallen off considerably offensively, defensively and on the basepaths, too.
Another point to be made regarding using a top pitcher for a top hitter is that the Mets’ history, even long before Alderson and the Wilpons came along, has always been one where the team has had no difficulty drafting and developing pitchers. Meanwhile the club has never been particularly good at drafting and developing hitters. If we consider this and realize the team is unlikely to spend big on free agent bats (especially after the Bay and Cuddyer recent debacles) then perhaps the only way to markedly improve the offense is to trade off good pitching for good hitting. The pitching seems to be more replenishable for this organization.
The Mets have enough pitching depth in the minors to, theoretically, make a trade for a solid bat. That’s not a Bryant, or Tulo, etc, but another professional hitter. The issue is whether there is a team that is willing to do that right now.
Beyond that, I really don’t know how I’d feel about a young-stud-pitcher-for-young-stud-hitter trade. How often does that happen? It’s an interesting thought, but really it takes the two sides to take a chance. Like you said, though, pitchers break. That also works against a team trading away one of it’s elite arms.
See? I’m talking in circles. Ha
The last hitting prospect for young stud starting pitcher that I can recall was when the Yankees traded Jesus Montero, one of the three top hitting prospects in the minors, for Michael Pineda who had just completed an exceptional rookie major league season.
Montero was a total bust while Pineda’s jury is still out. He fought injuries but now looks like he’ll settle in as a solid #2 or #3 type starter.
Redirect- The Mets Have/Are about to add; Uribe, Johnson, d’Arnaud, and Cuddyer. Trying-out Conforto. I *love* the acquisitions of Uribe and Johnson. Cuyddyer, d’Arnaud are also very positive upside. Conforto?- who knows? If the Mets get expected production out of all these guys- I think they can do some damage. Question- Has any team added as much to their team than the Mets with these acquisitions &
upcoming re-instatements ?
And now Sandy has landed Clippard, another good acquisition.
One more reasonable bat like a Parra and I’m ready to take back a lot of my Sandy bashing. Great job so far.
No playoff guarantees here but finally putting some semblance of a major league team around the young starting pitchers.
Kudos.
From MLBTRADERUMORS tonight:
The Dodgers have informed rival clubs that they would be willing to move outfielder Yasiel Puig “in the right deal,” Bob Nightengale of USA Today reports on Twitter. Thus far, however, Los Angeles has received more trade inquiries on their higher-end prospects.
The Blue Jays have struck a deal to acquire star Rockies shortstop Troy Tulowitzki, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports on Twitter. Needless to say, the move constitutes one of the most stunning deadline deals in recent memory.
——————
Two things I wanted to write about, but the second one first.
After listening to Harold Reynolds tonight on MLB Network explain why the Rockies have to trade Tulo and CarGo, I realized that all those “Rockies don’t want to trade Tulo” headlines were smokescreens and he was moving. Didn’t know however, if the Mets should ante up, even though he looks so perfect for this team.
However, on Puig, there is no doubt. I like Name’s rationale about age and realize that human nature is the same throughout. Hence, if the Dodgers want to trade a cornerstone offensive player that can be our Mike Trout, it’s a no brainer. The Mets have to do it. Forget Nimmo, Conforto, Lagares, or Buccera. This guy is proven legit, and just like the Cardinals traded Hernandez because they perceived he was insubordinate, that is what usually makes a player like this available; and the team that traded him away regrets it every time. His contract is perfect. His talent is upper tier. His abilities are exactly what this team needs.
As for my second favorite team, good luck guys with Tulo because I don’t trust him, although I always liked him. I have seen him take too many vacations in season to expect that to change. This move will make or break Anthopoulos because he has a ton of hitting but needs pitching. Alex, what the heck are you doing?
Ok, now we learn that Reyes went to Colorado. So, the Blue Jays made this deal to upgrade their SS. The Rockies now got a SS that they have to trade because why would a rebuilding club get a 32 year old high priced SS? They now absolutely have to move Reyes and thus lose leverage.
Upon further review, while I still disagree with the move, I understand Toronto’s motivation but Colorado’s doesn’t make sense because now they need to flip Reyes and everyone knows it.
Was Tejada/Niese/Montero too steep a price to pay the Jays for Reyes with some salary relief included? Could the Mets have obtained Tulo for Tejada/ one stud pitcher/ and Montero? Is Reyes available for Montero/Niese/Tejada from the Rockies? My gut feeling is that Reyes isn’t worth $22m a year.
I agree with your gut feeling and tend to doubt that Tejada has much trade value at all. If the Mets offered Niese/Montero/Nimmo and the Rockies paid down 20% or more of Jose’s contract I could see it happening. But it’s more likely that the Mets won’t try to bring Reyes.
After all they didn’t call Toronto about Reyes when the Jays looked desperate for a better 5th SP.