Everyone’s seemingly talking about trades. The good news is that the Mets are in the trade market as buyers and not sellers. There’s healthy debate about what the team needs most. Is it a third baseman or a starter or possibly even a reliever? You can make a case for any of these. The issue is: What should you be willing to give up to fix whatever you view as the team’s top issue?
A favorite ploy of people that predates both the internet and sports talk radio shows is to package a bunch of stuff that you don’t want – Bill Simmons lovingly referred to this as the Pu Pu Platter – for the item of your affection. Let’s send Miguel Castro, Jeurys Familia and Robert Gsellman to the Cubs for Craig Kimbrel!
Maybe your imagined trade proposal is better than that one. But my guess is that it doesn’t include one of the Mets’ top five prospects in it. And the reality is if the Mets are going to get a difference maker, either at or before the trade deadline, they’re going to have to give up a pretty good prospect or two to make that happen.
No one wants to be the team that trades Jeff Bagwell for a middle reliever or John Smoltz for an ancient starter. But that middle reliever put up a 1.23 ERA in 22 innings and that ancient starter went 9-0 with a 1.53 ERA. Those teams that made the deals were chasing a playoff spot and got exactly what they could have hoped for with their mid-season acquisitions. They just didn’t expect they were dealing future Hall of Famers in the process.
Now, it’s very likely that those teams chasing the playoff spot didn’t accurately value what they had with those minor league players. It’s also possible that their farm systems weren’t deep enough to keep those players “off limits” to other clubs. Because at the end of the day, you have to give up something to get something. Or, rather, you have to give up the illusion of something to get something.
My favorite example of this came back in 1993 when the Braves sent three minor leaguers to the Padres for Fred McGriff. Now, the Braves’ farm system at this point was absolutely loaded. The three guys they gave up were all well regarded. But the Braves were able to keep their top prospects – guys like Chipper Jones and Javy Lopez and Ryan Klesko. Additionally, they kept the prospect who some believed was the best of them all – Mike Kelly, a guy the Mets drafted out of high school but who went to college and became the second overall pick of the 1991 Draft.
Because the Braves’ system was so loaded, they were able to protect the guys they really wanted yet still had enough firepower left over to acquire the biggest impact bat available at the time. And that’s absolutely the goal with your farm system. Some guys – good players – will be scouted, drafted, signed and developed and ultimately provide value by being traded for something else.
And not a panic deal like trading Jarred Kelenic for an old guy and a reliever. But for real value, a guy like McGriff, who ended up playing five years with the Braves, making three All-Star teams and getting MVP support in two seasons. Is there a guy like that available at the deadline? Kris Bryant seems like he would fit the type. Of course, the Mets would have to re-sign him. But the Braves had to re-sign McGriff, too, even if not right after they got him.
In a way, it’s too bad Tylor Megill is needed in the rotation right now. Otherwise, he’d be a perfect guy to put in a trade for someone like Bryant.
Regardless, the bottom line is that if you think the team needs to add a player and you want to shop in the top of the market – you’d better be prepared to give up at least one top prospect. In the Mets’ system that means one of their top five guys. You can’t pawn off David’s ninth-rated guy – whoever that may be – and expect that’s going to be the lead chit in a deal to get you Jose Berrios.
The Mets’ farm system just isn’t as strong as the Braves’ system was at this point in 1993. That’s not a put down, it’s just reality. Of course, the Braves got that great farm system thanks to very high picks. Starting in 1987, they drafted sixth, third, second, first and second in five consecutive years. In the equivalent five-year span for the Mets, which would have started in 2015, they didn’t have a first-round pick in the first year (Michael Cuddyer, you know), 19th, 20th, sixth and 12th.
And the two switches in GMs here recently hasn’t helped any, either. It’s very common for a new GM to come in and have no attachment to picks from a previous era. Brodie Van Wagenen traded tons of recently-drafted players, including the sixth and 19th overall picks referenced above. And it’s not like Sandy Alderson didn’t return the favor, as he’s sent away Van Wagenen selections Isaiah Greene and Josh Wolf in the Francisco Lindor deal and international signee Freddy Valdez in the Khalil Lee trade. For what it’s worth – Wolf has a 7.03 ERA and 1.750 WHIP, while Greene and Valdez are doing quite well.
If Alderson could turn Lee into anything that would help the current club, that deal should be made immediately, if not sooner. It’s hard to imagine that Valdez wouldn’t be a more valuable chit to have right now. Maybe it’s not too late for Lee, although those “tools” guys always look better in the lower minors when more-experienced pitchers aren’t making them look foolish in either Spring Training games or in their MLB debut.
Perhaps in an alternate 2021 reality, the Mets could have packaged Mark Vientos, Megill and Valdez to the Cubs for Bryant. Of course, we’d all want the alternate reality where our players stayed relatively healthy and performed more like the back of their baseball cards. Oh well. Unfortunately, that alternative reality doesn’t exist. And neither does one where a Pu Pu Platter without a top prospect is going to bring back an impact player at the trade deadline.
The Mets do have some interesting decisions and choices to make this deadline, and these are good “problems” to have. Ultimately, the market will dictate the price, and the Met brass will need to determine their taste for the prices. I suspect that the market prices will dictate which need they fulfill. They are somewhat handicapped by the injured prospects within their top 10. Megill and Peterson are clearly trade chips, especially for acquiring a starter, and most certainly for a controllable guy like Berrios. However, I would be very reluctant to deal either for a rental. Not that either is a can’t touch, or that either is a certainty to be a rotation regular. However, these young, controllable guys with years of options now have value much greater than their performance capability, as they can be shuttled up and down based on need…in today’s game, even getting 4 decent innings from a 5th starter that you can then farm is much better than an opener that handicaps the pen for the next few days.
I think the cost for trading players has decreased a lot over the past 10 years, aside from our former fake agent GM.
Poo poo deals seem to be the norm, especially when it comes to deadline deals. The Dodgers got Machado without giving up their coveted top prospects. The Mets acquired Stroman without parting with their top guys. It took the Padres 2 controllable and productive players in Hand and Cimber to pry top propsect Mejia from the Indians.
To be fair, there are still occasionally quality prospects given up such as Darvish for Calhoun and Archer for Meadows but the overall trend seems to be a much higher valuation on prospects, and so you will rarely see something like a Dilson Herrera for Marlon Byrd these days.
We have to distinguish between deadline deals for upgrades and deadline deals for guys at the top of the market. When the Mets got Stroman in 2019, Zack Greinke and Trevor Bauer were ranked above him. And even then, the Blue Jays got what became their 5th and 7th prospects.
https://www.mlb.com/news/every-deal-made-during-2019-trade-deadline-season
The Indians got 5 players for Bauer and the D’Backs ended up getting Houston’s 3rd, 4th, 5th and 22nd prospects. Pretty significant hauls
I think the Mets can get by this season with the third base situation where it is. Rotating Villar, Guillorme and Peraza with JD and McNeil should be productive enough.
But JD Davis is a long-term problem. You simple cannot go into next season with him as your 3B… unless he can play LF (because the Dom Smith problem is solved), he has to be sent elsewhere. I don’t know why we haven’t seen Escobar (from AZ) mentioned for the Mets at 3B… a very good-hitting switch-hitter, a clubhouse guy, a good defender… shoot, he’d fit right in. I know Bryant makes a bigger splash, but I’d be willing to compare Escobar’s potential effect on this team with Bryant’s potential any day.
I wouldn’t trade for anyone, unless l am getting a good deal ans some upside. Get your team healthy and let’s see what happens. Everyone wants their team to have 26 all-stars, but that isn’t necessary. What they need is the guys they do have to start hitting and the pitchers to come back. If Corasco is back in three weeks, you add him to JDG, Stroman, Walker and Megill. Do we really need to get another starter just to have another starter? Isn’t Yamamoto due back soon too?
As for the bats, can you find a better hitter than Davis at the time of his injury? You can get Bryant, but if Lindor, Conforto, McNeil, and Smith don’t join Nimmo in producing, Bryant isn’t going to be any difference.
As for the relief help, well, take a number and get on line because every team needs that.
The good deal with upside play I still like is Quintana from the Angels, who has good metrics and can be gotten for a prospect in the 25-30 range.
Gus,
I agree…I believe it would be wisest to refrain from spending prospect capital despite the temptation given sitting atop the NL East. I essentially think this is what Cohen means when he says he won’t exceed the salary cap unless he blows by it. If they can get some rental help for a lower prospect, as you suggest with the Quintana deal, fine. If not, so be it. The current roster’s performance is what will drive the team one way or another, and then they can proceed over the winter based on what transpires. Sustained winning at times requires some discipline, even if it is unpopular in the moment.
In year one of the Steve Cohen era, I’d caution not to part with prospects for a rental, let alone a player on the bIg team. We are not a few pieces away from being a championship club. If we were hitting on all cylinders I might think we were moving closer to an elite spot. But we are not. At one point tonight I believe they were 0 for 13 with RISP. If they pull off a trade then let it be a big one that really improves the team. Like Hernandez in 1984 and Carter in 1985. Big trades but big additions. Would Bryant be that kind of acquisition? Sure, but not for a rental. He’d have to agree to a three year deal or he might move on to another contender. If only our bats would come alive on a consistent basis like we envisioned in spring training we would not be agonizing about adding more than supporting role players. Just happy we are potential buyers and not sellers as the deadline approaches. Tomorrow’s another day and we are still in first place.
6986, Bryant’s agent is Scott Boras. What does that tell you?
He will be playing somewhere else
We need a controllable pitcher, especially with deGrom being shut down gain. Rentals are a bad idea.