Trade Deadline Thread: How Far Would You Go to Add an Ace?

 

I really want Syndergaard and think he can become an ace, but I don't think he is an ace right now. I'd guess if other clubs were willing to pay for future ace potential, he'd already be dealt. I'm not sure who, if any team will get him, but my money is on nobody meeting anything close to the Mets asking price. 

 

Not that it would impact my desire for Syndergaard, but I really liked Mickey Calloway as Cleveland's pitching coach, so the overall regression of the Mets' staff does have me a bit concerned. Maybe it's all the organizational dysfunction, or was there some kind of gimmick last year that the rest of the league figured out?

Sometimes guys are great positional coaches because it allows them to specialize on one facet of the game but make them the head honcho and they can't focus on what they're really good at. Kinda like in the NFL. You can have a guy who's a great defensive coordinator but he's not very successful as a head coach. Then he goes back to being a D.C. and he's great again (ex. Wade Phillips)

If I am the GM I am not giving up a player on the 25 man roster to get someone in return.  If someone is demanding Buxton, Sano, Garver, etc, then I look at another avenue.  If that limits the teams that want to trade with me, then so be it.

Honestly this would all be a heck of a lot easier if we could assume that the Mets are making these moves because they have a plan. I have to say that I'm not too confident that they actually know what they are doing.

Edited July 30, 2019 by TFRazor

Honestly this would all be a heck of a lot easier if we could assume that the Mets are making these moves because they have a plan. I have to say that I'm not too confident that they actually know what they are doing.

What's the problem with what the Mets are doing, aside from the Cano trade? They extended deGrom through 2022-2024; they seem to have made a good deal for Stroman who has 2020 control; they salary dumped the mediocre Vargas; they are shopping Wheeler who is a pending FA; and they have a high asking price for Syndergaard and his 2.5 years of control, and likely Diaz and Lugo with their 3.5 years control, for whom there is no urgency to deal.

 

Is it because they inquired about Buxton, after the Twins quite possibly said neither Lewis or Kirilloff were on the table for Syndergaard?

 

Look, I would have never hired Brodie as my GM, and I glad he is not the GM of my team, but I think some of this "Mets are crazy/bad/crazybad" talk is rather exaggerated, at this point in time.

I'd like an ace, but I don't know that one is available this year. Give me a reasonable Syndergaard deal; I'd be OK with Robbie Ray or Zack Greinke, but all of them would be slotting in behind Berrios.

Concur. But if a real ace were available, I'd go far in terms of prospects. Because an ace is almost never available.

 

In the draft, I'm constantly told it is better to draft hitters and trade for pitching..... And that that is the Twins plan. Let's see.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Mike Sixel

The window is just opening. It could be open for a good long while, especially if there is a steady stream of MLB ready prospects in the pipeline, which is not quite yet the case. Next year it might be, but not if you trade away all the best ones.

That's what people said about the beginning of the M and M era. There are no guarantees of health. This team has one legit starting pitcher under contract for next year....

 

What's the problem with what the Mets are doing, aside from the Cano trade? They extended deGrom through 2022-2024; they seem to have made a good deal for Stroman who has 2020 control; they salary dumped the mediocre Vargas; they are shopping Wheeler who is a pending FA; and they have a high asking price for Syndergaard and his 2.5 years of control, and likely Diaz and Lugo with their 3.5 years control, for whom there is no urgency to deal.

Is it because they inquired about Buxton, after the Twins quite possibly said neither Lewis or Kirilloff were on the table for Syndergaard?

Look, I would have never hired Brodie as my GM, and I glad he is not the GM of my team, but I think some of this "Mets are crazy/bad/crazybad" talk is rather exaggerated, at this point in time.

The problem is that there seems to be no decision on whether they are buyers or sellers. You trade prospects during the offseason for Diaz/Cano. That would indicate that you are in "win now mode". For the last month you're in sell mode as you're actively looking to move Syndergaard, Wheeler and Diaz. Then you turn around and grab Stroman for prospects. Then you flip Vargas. Taken in a vacuum all these moves make sense. But they're not in a vacuum. One leads to another and you've got a team flipping back and forth between selling and buying. THEN you've got players and coaches going after reporters, you've already fired one of your coaches and your manager is probably out at the end of the year. Now maybe I'm reading too much into it but there definitely doesn't seem to be a current strategy to make the Mets organization better. As someone posted earlier, another exec has compared their organizational strategy to "a kindergarten student finger painting". You can disagree with that characterization if you want, but I feel pretty comfortable with stating that I'm not sure they have a plan.

 

Also don't know why you brought the buxton thing up. I've never mentioned it.

Edited July 30, 2019 by TFRazor

Since they're asking for Buxton, I'd respond by letting them know they'd have to throw in Wheeler/Seth Lugo and Pete Alonso in addition to Thor. Basically give them a dose of their own medicine in asking for something unrealistic.

Have you considered the possibility that asking about Buxton was perhaps the Mets way of giving the Twins "a dose of our own medicine"? It's still quite possible the Twins were unwilling to commit two top prospects to a Syndergaard package, you know. (Especially given the delayed, Twins-sided reporting of this Buxton thing.)

The problem is that there seems to be no decision on whether they are buyers or sellers. You trade prospects during the offseason for Diaz/Cano. That would indicate that you are in "win now mode". For the last month you're in sell mode as you're actively looking to move Syndergaard, Wheeler and Diaz. Then you turn around and grab Stroman for prospects. Then you flip Vargas. Taken in a vacuum all these moves make sense. But they're not in a vacuum. One leads to another and you've got a team flipping back and forth between selling and buying. THEN you've got players and coaches going after reporters, you've already fired one of your coaches and your manager is probably out at the end of the year. Now maybe I'm reading too much into it but there definitely doesn't seem to be a current strategy to make the Mets organization better. As someone posted earlier, another exec has compared their organizational strategy to "a kindergarten student finger painting". You can disagree with that characterization if you want, but I feel pretty comfortable with stating that I'm not sure they have a plan.

 

Also don't know why you brought the buxton thing up. I've never mentioned it.

The Mets were buyers last offseason, and are still buyers for 2020 and beyond, but have become sellers for 2019 as they have fallen out of the race. Every move they have made is perfectly consistent with that. Buyer/seller doesn't have to be a static, binary thing.

 

Keep in mind they're not "actively shopping" Syndergaard with any kind of urgency -- they are looking for an elite return on him (i.e. Mackenzie Gore, or Lewis/Kirilloff), which again makes sense given their position.

 

Sorry for mentioning the Buxton thing, but a lot of posters seem to be using that as a cue to bash the Mets FO right now.

 

Have you considered the possibility that asking about Buxton was perhaps the Mets way of giving the Twins "a dose of our own medicine"? It's still quite possible the Twins were unwilling to commit two top prospects to a Syndergaard package, you know. (Especially given the delayed, Twins-sided reporting of this Buxton thing.)

Sure, but my overall stance is if the Mets are engaging in conversations about Syndergaard, just keep things moving. The way La Velle's source painted it is the Mets asked for Buxton and the Twins disengaged and view him as no longer viable. 

 

I'm not trying to suggest that plan I laid out would work, but if I'm the Twins I'm going to be talking to the Mets for as long as they're willing to listen. 

Sure, but my overall stance is if the Mets are engaging in conversations about Syndergaard, just keep things moving. The way La Velle's source painted it is the Mets asked for Buxton and the Twins disengaged and view him as no longer viable.

 

I'm not trying to suggest that plan I laid out would work, but if I'm the Twins I'm going to be talking to the Mets for as long as they're willing to listen.

That's fine, but I strongly suspect the Buxton inquiry came after the Lewis/Kirilloff question. If you want to re-engage, I suspect the Twins just need a different answer to the Lewis/Kirilloff question, rather than a counter to the Buxton thing.

 

That's what people said about the beginning of the M and M era. There are no guarantees of health. This team has one legit starting pitcher under contract for next year....

2002-2010 was a pretty long window and I enjoyed it immensely.   The starting pitching is concerning so I would be willing to give up some minor league quality depth to get Thor and/or Lynn and resign Pineda and maybe Gibson if reasonable.  

I can only say this isn't even s negotiation it is a discussion of a robbery. Pitchers are so volatile I'm always concerned about how they will turn out on any kind of way trade or long-term signing. The Mets know he has not performed as expected. If he had the discussion wouldn't even happen.

 

I am surprised at how many list Garver in their trade scenarios. I value a catcher as high as a pitcher.

 

Looking at Lewis and Kiriloff The question is which of them will we need in the next 3 years? Both of their positions are well covered right now, but do we expect Sano to stay at 3rd? Both are extremely valuable but if there isn't room for them on the roster then they become expendable. Right now they both have a potential to be that which makes them more available for trades. However putting both in one trade is not something I would consider

Wow, Mets asked for Buxton in the Syndegaard deal? Seriously that's just wrong on so many levels.

 

And the Blue Jays' asking price for Stroman demanded that one of either Lewis or Kiriloff be included? And then they took the garbage pile prospects from the Mets? I don't get it.

 

MLBTradeRumors article says Twins have pivoted to look for more bullpen arms now. Okay, okay, let's get some already and play ball!

Of course, actual scouting services rate Kay as a pretty good prospect, not garbage.

 

Most people seem to think the Mets did all right in the Stroman trade, even if the timing was a bit of a surprise. The Vargas salary dump seems fine. The deGrom extension is all right in its early stages.

They did poorly in the Cano trade for sure, although that was basically just a massive overpay for a closer.

 

It's not just the Cano/Diaz trade, but Lowrie and Familia; the stuff with Callaway, Vargas, and the reporter; the chair throwing meeting a few weeks back; tossing the pitching and bullpen coaches from the already sinking ship, only to not have improved results. 

 

If you look at the New York media's coverage, it's pretty much been a train wreck aside from committing to some of their younger talent (Alonso and McNeil, more specifically).

 

Of course, actual scouting services rate Kay as a pretty good prospect, not garbage.

 

Neither are listed in the Top 100 prospect list from MLB pipeline. I think Kay is just outside the top 100, and you're right he's not garbage. But still a shocker from my perspective and I don't think I'm alone.

I was going to post what a difference it is to have a minor league system like we have now vs the system we had back in 2012 and then I was going to compare and contrast but that system had Sano, Rosario, Hendriks, Hicks, Dozier, Gibson and Kepler.   Little of it was major league ready on a team that really needed major league players but still does serve as a counter to those that say you can't count on prospects.   That was a poorly rated system back then.

I was going to post what a difference it is to have a minor league system like we have now vs the system we had back in 2012 and then I was going to compare and contrast but that system had Sano, Rosario, Hendriks, Hicks, Dozier, Gibson and Kepler. Little of it was major league ready on a team that really needed major league players but still does serve as a counter to those that say you can't count on prospects. That was a poorly rated system back then.

https://twitter.com/jjcoop36/status/1156232160845729797?s=09

 

It's also about context. You can reasonably count on good prospects, but how many playoff wins do they have from not trading? There aren't likely many years where this franchise will be on pace for 95 wins.

It's not just the Cano/Diaz trade, but Lowrie and Familia; the stuff with Callaway, Vargas, and the reporter; the chair throwing meeting a few weeks back; tossing the pitching and bullpen coaches from the already sinking ship, only to not have improved results.

 

If you look at the New York media's coverage, it's pretty much been a train wreck aside from committing to some of their younger talent (Alonso and McNeil, more specifically).

There wasn't anything confusing about the Lowrie and Familia deals, though.

 

They haven't worked out well, which might be a strike against the Mets evaluators, but the motivations behind the deals were fairly clear and sensible.

 

The off-field stuff was a circus, for sure, but to date it hasn't really affected their transactions.

Neither are listed in the Top 100 prospect list from MLB pipeline. I think Kay is just outside the top 100, and you're right he's not garbage. But still a shocker from my perspective and I don't think I'm alone.

It's fair to speculate, and have opinions, we all do and should.

 

But we have no idea where the Jays rank these guys.

For all we know, the Jays have him as a top 50 prospect.

 

Again, totally fair to have opinions and speculate, but far too many people across multiple threads are making declarative posts like, "the Twins could have easily beat that deal with prospects x and z".

 

I think you'd have been shouting the same thing about Gerrit Cole in his last year with the Pirates. Look at him now. Syndergaard has one of the most elite arsenals in the game. Put him in a situation to be comfortable and give him the information he needs to succeed and you've got an ace on your hands.

 

With the Twins infield defense being what it is, I question Minnesota being the right place to transform a pitcher into an ace.

 

On the other hand, put Berrios in front of a good defense and see what happens.....

 

It's fair to speculate, and have opinions, we all do and should.

But we have no idea where the Jays rank these guys.
For all we know, the Jays have him as a top 50 prospect.

Again, totally fair to have opinions and speculate, but far too many people across multiple threads are making declarative posts like, "the Twins could have easily beat that deal with prospects x and z".

 

Yeah, I agree - don't think the Twins could have beat that deal: primarily because the Jays didn't think our deal was any good. They wanted either Lewis or Kiriloff, and if they were firm on that, Twins had no chance to make a trade.

 

With the Twins infield defense being what it is, I question Minnesota being the right place to transform a pitcher into an ace.

 

On the other hand, put Berrios in front of a good defense and see what happens.....

 

Berrios ERA is outperforming his FIP by nearly a run and his BABIP sits at a below league average .281.  In terms of total defense fielding percentage and errors, the Twins are just a shade lower than league average.

 

https://twitter.com/jjcoop36/status/1156232160845729797?s=09

It's also about context. You can reasonably count on good prospects, but how many playoff wins do they have from not trading? There aren't likely many years where this franchise will be on pace for 95 wins.

Of course, it is the age we live in.   No one tries to build solely from the farm anymore since free agency.   I always looked at the lack of playoff wins being due to our highly rated guys not doing the job rather than not being able to do the job.      We had a highly rated bull pen those years and if you look back the losses were ofteny due to guys like Rincon, Nathan, and Santana   giving up runs.    You can trade all you want but Nathan is still going to be your closer.        

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but I think the ask from the Mets is ridiculous to the point I'd be wondering if it's really worth dealing with them. 

 

I think it would be pretty close to, "Nice chatting with you and good luck with your future endeavors" and then move on.

Yeah, I agree - don't think the Twins could have beat that deal: primarily because the Jays didn't think our deal was any good. They wanted either Lewis or Kiriloff, and if they were firm on that, Twins had no chance to make a trade.

This earlier report suggests the Jays may not have required Lewis or Kirilloff, and/or the Twins reticence extended beyond Lewis and Kirilloff:

 

https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/1154889022000340992?s=20

 

Of course, it is the age we live in.   No one tries to build solely from the farm anymore since free agency.   I always looked at the lack of playoff wins being due to our highly rated guys not doing the job rather than not being able to do the job.      We had a highly rated bull pen those years and if you look back the losses were ofteny due to guys like Rincon, Nathan, and Santana   giving up runs.    You can trade all you want but Nathan is still going to be your closer.        

Highly rated like Jason Tyner taking DH ABs in the post season?

 

 

Is it possible that asking for Buxton was done in response to a equally ridiculous, low-ball offer from the Twins? Just saying, we don't know the whole conversation. 

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but I think the ask from the Mets is ridiculous to the point I'd be wondering if it's really worth dealing with them.

 

I think it would be pretty close to, "Nice chatting with you and good luck with your future endeavors" and then move on.

It's been mentioned.

 

How would you feel about it, if the Mets only asked about Buxton *after* the Twins said neither Lewis nor Kirilloff were available, as suggested by previous reports?

 

I agree a trade match is unlikely to be found in that situation, but I wouldn't call the Mets side ridiculous in those circumstances.

 

Of course, it is the age we live in.   No one tries to build solely from the farm anymore since free agency.   I always looked at the lack of playoff wins being due to our highly rated guys not doing the job rather than not being able to do the job.      We had a highly rated bull pen those years and if you look back the losses were ofteny due to guys like Rincon, Nathan, and Santana   giving up runs.    You can trade all you want but Nathan is still going to be your closer.        

 

I'd argue with you and say those losses were due to the Twins not scoring enough runs. I will add the Twins faced a lot of HOF caliber pitchers in that run.  Pettite, Mussina, Clemens, Sabathia, Rivera all multiple times.   Going back to 2002, here are the runs the Twins scored in playoff games in losing series:

 

2002: 2, 3, 1, 1, 5

2003: 3, 1, 1, 1

2004: 2, 6, 4, 5  (screw this series particularly) 

2006: 2, 2, 3

2009: 2, 3, 2

2010: 4, 2, 1

 

I don't know how you can just look back and pin those losses on the pitching staff.  21 games, scored 5 runs or more 3 times.  13 times 2 or less runs.  

 

Edited July 30, 2019 by SwainZag