info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Ripping off mets fans
62 views
Skip to first unread message
ruben safir
Dec 3, 2018, 7:22:01 AM12/3/18
to
Mets, Closing In On Cano Trade, Continue Rolling The Dice When They
Should Be The House
Howard MegdalContributor
SportsMoney
I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB and much more.
Robinson Cano of the Seattle Mariners throwing to Lucas Duda of the New
York Mets during an exhibition game in Tokyo in 2014. (Photo by
YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)Getty
About the best one can say about the nearly completed trade between the
New York Mets and the Seattle Mariners, which would bring Robinson Cano
and Edwin Diaz to New York for a basket of undesired salaries and some
of the best prospects in the Mets’ organization, is that, hey, at least
they’re trying.
Here’s Jeff Passan of Yahoo, hardly a Mets apologist, on the deal:
“Any anger over the trade goes back to Kelenic and Dunn, and it
would be disingenuous to say it isn’t risky. It is. Know what, though?
Everything in baseball is risky. The best-looking on-paper deals can
fall prey to the whims of the game. The physical, the mental and every
vagary that exists between the two. Baseball is difficult. Predicting
the future is impossible.
“And yet, because this trade does not hew to the modern paradigm of
running a baseball team – wait for a window of opportunity, try to win
then, do not deviate, and if so find scorn – the anger is palpable. It’s
also terribly misplaced, because to view the Mets inside of that vacuum
would ignore just how counter this runs to the standard witlessness of
the Wilpon family’s ownership of the franchise.”
I have nothing but respect for Passan, but I just don’t see it. This is
precisely how the Wilpons operate. The Cano deal is nothing less than
standard operating procedure.
Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the Mets, in July. (Photo by
Drew Angerer/Getty Images)Getty
Consider that we’ll never truly know how much the current ownership has
cost the Mets in opportunity costs, particularly over the decade since
their massive losses in the Bernie Madoff scam led to massive borrowing
by ownership against its own holdings in the Mets and SNY and,
subsequently, using revenues from both to finance their own debt on an
annual basis.
The reason this matters is twofold—revenue that other teams use for
building a baseball team instead went to keeping ownership afloat. And
the smaller decisions made by the baseball team have been held hostage
to outside financial concerns.
This has been apparent in large ways—a payroll that consistently falls
well below what the market would support—and in small ones, too, like
the annual trading of veterans, with baseball ops giving them away
instead of assuming the contracts and bringing back better prospects to
increase the talent base.
And so it is with this Cano/Diaz deal. Rather than going out and
signing, say, Manny Machado or Bryce Harper, 20-something stars far
likelier to age well on long-term deals, the Mets go get a 36-year-old
Cano, playing a position that has been unforgiving to players in their
mid-30s. Rather than paying the going rate in free agency for a closer,
the Mets get Diaz instead, so it costs them a treasure in their own
young talent.
It’s the kind of seeking-an-edge thinking that led ownership to not one
but two Ponzi schemes. It’s how the Wilpons always operate.
The other major argument for the deal is that the Mets are “trying to
win now,” and only the sum total of the winter will tell us if that’s
true. But the team typically does precisely this—a big, early splash
that requires moves around it to truly matter, only to see the Mets fold
up and go home. Think Chris Young. Think Michael Cuddyer.
Now, there is a different general manager in town, which matters to the
extent that Brodie Van Wagenen is empowered in a way Sandy Alderson
simply wasn’t. But oddly, for a team supposedly trying to win now, the
Mets have been shopping Noah Syndergaard, an in-prime co-ace alongside
Jacob deGrom. The price has supposedly been set at the elite prospect
level, and we’ll see if the Mets can get such a return, but other teams
around baseball are rightly suspicious about why the Mets would be
trying to trade one of their frontline starting pitchers, and a former
client of Van Wagenen, at that. Moreover, it certainly defies logic for
a win-now team to deal Syndergaard for prospects.
Consider this, too: operating in New York, even if the Mets merely used
the luxury tax level as a de facto salary cap the way many other teams
do around the league, the roster can and would look very different. The
Mets have $92 million in committed money for 2019, before arb decisions.
And even that number is artificially inflated—$44 million of it is due
to David Wright, who is certain not to play next year, and Yoenes
Cespedes, who is highly unlikely to play next year, so roughly $33
million of it should come back to the Mets.
Had the Mets really been going for it, as the parlance would describe
it, this means they could have kept their best prospects, gone out and
spent, on both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, added Craig Kimbrel to
the back end of the bullpen, and you know what their payroll would have
been in 2019? If we take MLB Trade Rumors’ predictions as the standard,
that puts them at $169.5 million before arbitration. And for a team
without a single contract on the books past 2020, the long-term risk
would be minimized as well.
It’s eye-opening just how much talent the Mets could afford to truly add
simply by playing by the same economic rules as the rest of the league’s
large-market teams.
Consider that lineup:
CF Nimmo
LF Conforto
RF Harper
3B Machado
1B Frazier
2B McNeil
SS Rosario
C Plawecki
Consider that rotation, fronted by Syndergaard, Zack Wheeler and deGrom,
and that bullpen, with a three-man finishing crew of Seth Lugo, Robert
Gsellman and Craig Kimbrel.
Sounds like a championship contender, right?
Alas, that is what trying to win—not in some fantasy baseball sense, but
simply by the Mets operating in good faith—would look like. It’s how the
Yankees do it, in a way that amusingly enough, Fred Wilpon persists in
calling “unsustainable”.
No. Unsustainable is double-digit returns on your investment with no
risk. The Yankees are the essence of sustainability, continuing to build
their farm system, embracing sabermetrics, and using the economic
advantages of New York to both keep payroll at the luxury tax level and
turn a handsome profit for their owners.
They’ve made the playoffs all but four years since 1995 doing it this
way. The Mets? They’ve made the playoffs roughly as often over that time
(five times) as the Yankees have missed it.
There’s no mystery to it. The Yankees are like the House in Vegas.
They’ve stacked the odds in their favor.
The Mets could do this, too, with less financially compromised
owners—either by circumstances, or perhaps the Wilpons no longer are
compromised, and have simply figured out they’ll never pay a public
price for continuing to spend the way they did at the lowest ebb of
their post-Madoff woes. Either way, revenue that ought to be going
toward the baseball team, your ticket money, your monthly fee to the
cable company for SNY, is being diverted elsewhere.
As long as it’s the Wilpons, the Mets will never be the House in Vegas,
the way a New York team that owns its own television network in a salary
cap-free league should be. They’ll be the suckers rolling the dice and
hoping it comes up eleven.
But hey: at least they’re trying.
I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB/NCAA women's, men's basketball
and more. I've worked to equalize coverage between men's and women's
sports, both in my own work…MORE
Should Be The House
Howard MegdalContributor
SportsMoney
I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB and much more.
Robinson Cano of the Seattle Mariners throwing to Lucas Duda of the New
York Mets during an exhibition game in Tokyo in 2014. (Photo by
YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)Getty
About the best one can say about the nearly completed trade between the
New York Mets and the Seattle Mariners, which would bring Robinson Cano
and Edwin Diaz to New York for a basket of undesired salaries and some
of the best prospects in the Mets’ organization, is that, hey, at least
they’re trying.
Here’s Jeff Passan of Yahoo, hardly a Mets apologist, on the deal:
“Any anger over the trade goes back to Kelenic and Dunn, and it
would be disingenuous to say it isn’t risky. It is. Know what, though?
Everything in baseball is risky. The best-looking on-paper deals can
fall prey to the whims of the game. The physical, the mental and every
vagary that exists between the two. Baseball is difficult. Predicting
the future is impossible.
“And yet, because this trade does not hew to the modern paradigm of
running a baseball team – wait for a window of opportunity, try to win
then, do not deviate, and if so find scorn – the anger is palpable. It’s
also terribly misplaced, because to view the Mets inside of that vacuum
would ignore just how counter this runs to the standard witlessness of
the Wilpon family’s ownership of the franchise.”
I have nothing but respect for Passan, but I just don’t see it. This is
precisely how the Wilpons operate. The Cano deal is nothing less than
standard operating procedure.
Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the Mets, in July. (Photo by
Drew Angerer/Getty Images)Getty
Consider that we’ll never truly know how much the current ownership has
cost the Mets in opportunity costs, particularly over the decade since
their massive losses in the Bernie Madoff scam led to massive borrowing
by ownership against its own holdings in the Mets and SNY and,
subsequently, using revenues from both to finance their own debt on an
annual basis.
The reason this matters is twofold—revenue that other teams use for
building a baseball team instead went to keeping ownership afloat. And
the smaller decisions made by the baseball team have been held hostage
to outside financial concerns.
This has been apparent in large ways—a payroll that consistently falls
well below what the market would support—and in small ones, too, like
the annual trading of veterans, with baseball ops giving them away
instead of assuming the contracts and bringing back better prospects to
increase the talent base.
And so it is with this Cano/Diaz deal. Rather than going out and
signing, say, Manny Machado or Bryce Harper, 20-something stars far
likelier to age well on long-term deals, the Mets go get a 36-year-old
Cano, playing a position that has been unforgiving to players in their
mid-30s. Rather than paying the going rate in free agency for a closer,
the Mets get Diaz instead, so it costs them a treasure in their own
young talent.
It’s the kind of seeking-an-edge thinking that led ownership to not one
but two Ponzi schemes. It’s how the Wilpons always operate.
The other major argument for the deal is that the Mets are “trying to
win now,” and only the sum total of the winter will tell us if that’s
true. But the team typically does precisely this—a big, early splash
that requires moves around it to truly matter, only to see the Mets fold
up and go home. Think Chris Young. Think Michael Cuddyer.
Now, there is a different general manager in town, which matters to the
extent that Brodie Van Wagenen is empowered in a way Sandy Alderson
simply wasn’t. But oddly, for a team supposedly trying to win now, the
Mets have been shopping Noah Syndergaard, an in-prime co-ace alongside
Jacob deGrom. The price has supposedly been set at the elite prospect
level, and we’ll see if the Mets can get such a return, but other teams
around baseball are rightly suspicious about why the Mets would be
trying to trade one of their frontline starting pitchers, and a former
client of Van Wagenen, at that. Moreover, it certainly defies logic for
a win-now team to deal Syndergaard for prospects.
Consider this, too: operating in New York, even if the Mets merely used
the luxury tax level as a de facto salary cap the way many other teams
do around the league, the roster can and would look very different. The
Mets have $92 million in committed money for 2019, before arb decisions.
And even that number is artificially inflated—$44 million of it is due
to David Wright, who is certain not to play next year, and Yoenes
Cespedes, who is highly unlikely to play next year, so roughly $33
million of it should come back to the Mets.
Had the Mets really been going for it, as the parlance would describe
it, this means they could have kept their best prospects, gone out and
spent, on both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, added Craig Kimbrel to
the back end of the bullpen, and you know what their payroll would have
been in 2019? If we take MLB Trade Rumors’ predictions as the standard,
that puts them at $169.5 million before arbitration. And for a team
without a single contract on the books past 2020, the long-term risk
would be minimized as well.
It’s eye-opening just how much talent the Mets could afford to truly add
simply by playing by the same economic rules as the rest of the league’s
large-market teams.
Consider that lineup:
CF Nimmo
LF Conforto
RF Harper
3B Machado
1B Frazier
2B McNeil
SS Rosario
C Plawecki
Consider that rotation, fronted by Syndergaard, Zack Wheeler and deGrom,
and that bullpen, with a three-man finishing crew of Seth Lugo, Robert
Gsellman and Craig Kimbrel.
Sounds like a championship contender, right?
Alas, that is what trying to win—not in some fantasy baseball sense, but
simply by the Mets operating in good faith—would look like. It’s how the
Yankees do it, in a way that amusingly enough, Fred Wilpon persists in
calling “unsustainable”.
No. Unsustainable is double-digit returns on your investment with no
risk. The Yankees are the essence of sustainability, continuing to build
their farm system, embracing sabermetrics, and using the economic
advantages of New York to both keep payroll at the luxury tax level and
turn a handsome profit for their owners.
They’ve made the playoffs all but four years since 1995 doing it this
way. The Mets? They’ve made the playoffs roughly as often over that time
(five times) as the Yankees have missed it.
There’s no mystery to it. The Yankees are like the House in Vegas.
They’ve stacked the odds in their favor.
The Mets could do this, too, with less financially compromised
owners—either by circumstances, or perhaps the Wilpons no longer are
compromised, and have simply figured out they’ll never pay a public
price for continuing to spend the way they did at the lowest ebb of
their post-Madoff woes. Either way, revenue that ought to be going
toward the baseball team, your ticket money, your monthly fee to the
cable company for SNY, is being diverted elsewhere.
As long as it’s the Wilpons, the Mets will never be the House in Vegas,
the way a New York team that owns its own television network in a salary
cap-free league should be. They’ll be the suckers rolling the dice and
hoping it comes up eleven.
But hey: at least they’re trying.
I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB/NCAA women's, men's basketball
and more. I've worked to equalize coverage between men's and women's
sports, both in my own work…MORE
tmp
Dec 3, 2018, 9:06:47 AM12/3/18
to
This Date in Mets History
1969 – The Mets trade Amos Otis to the Kansas City Royals in exchange for third baseman Joe Foy.
Ruben Safir
Dec 3, 2018, 3:39:52 PM12/3/18
to
tmp <tmps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 7:22:01 AM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
>> Mets, Closing In On Cano Trade, Continue Rolling The Dice When They
>> Should Be The House
>> Howard MegdalContributor
>> SportsMoney
>> I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB and much more.
>>
>> Robinson Cano of the Seattle Mariners throwing to Lucas Duda of the New
>> York Mets during an exhibition game in Tokyo in 2014. (Photo by
>> YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)Getty
>>
>> About the best one can say about the nearly completed trade between the
>> New York Mets and the Seattle Mariners, which would bring Robinson Cano
>> and Edwin Diaz to New York for a basket of undesired salaries and some
>> of the best prospects in the Mets??? organization, is that, hey, at least
> On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 7:22:01 AM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
>> Mets, Closing In On Cano Trade, Continue Rolling The Dice When They
>> Should Be The House
>> Howard MegdalContributor
>> SportsMoney
>> I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB and much more.
>>
>> Robinson Cano of the Seattle Mariners throwing to Lucas Duda of the New
>> York Mets during an exhibition game in Tokyo in 2014. (Photo by
>> YOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)Getty
>>
>> About the best one can say about the nearly completed trade between the
>> New York Mets and the Seattle Mariners, which would bring Robinson Cano
>> and Edwin Diaz to New York for a basket of undesired salaries and some
>> they???re trying.
>>
>> Here???s Jeff Passan of Yahoo, hardly a Mets apologist, on the deal:
>>
>> ???Any anger over the trade goes back to Kelenic and Dunn, and it
>> would be disingenuous to say it isn???t risky. It is. Know what, though?
>> Everything in baseball is risky. The best-looking on-paper deals can
>> fall prey to the whims of the game. The physical, the mental and every
>> vagary that exists between the two. Baseball is difficult. Predicting
>> the future is impossible.
>>
>> ???And yet, because this trade does not hew to the modern paradigm of
>> fall prey to the whims of the game. The physical, the mental and every
>> vagary that exists between the two. Baseball is difficult. Predicting
>> the future is impossible.
>>
>> running a baseball team ??? wait for a window of opportunity, try to win
>> then, do not deviate, and if so find scorn ??? the anger is palpable. It???s
>> also terribly misplaced, because to view the Mets inside of that vacuum
>> would ignore just how counter this runs to the standard witlessness of
>> the Wilpon family???s ownership of the franchise.???
>> would ignore just how counter this runs to the standard witlessness of
>>
>> I have nothing but respect for Passan, but I just don???t see it. This is
>> precisely how the Wilpons operate. The Cano deal is nothing less than
>> standard operating procedure.
>>
>> Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the Mets, in July. (Photo by
>> Drew Angerer/Getty Images)Getty
>>
>> Consider that we???ll never truly know how much the current ownership has
>> standard operating procedure.
>>
>> Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the Mets, in July. (Photo by
>> Drew Angerer/Getty Images)Getty
>>
>> cost the Mets in opportunity costs, particularly over the decade since
>> their massive losses in the Bernie Madoff scam led to massive borrowing
>> by ownership against its own holdings in the Mets and SNY and,
>> subsequently, using revenues from both to finance their own debt on an
>> annual basis.
>>
>> The reason this matters is twofold???revenue that other teams use for
>> their massive losses in the Bernie Madoff scam led to massive borrowing
>> by ownership against its own holdings in the Mets and SNY and,
>> subsequently, using revenues from both to finance their own debt on an
>> annual basis.
>>
>> building a baseball team instead went to keeping ownership afloat. And
>> the smaller decisions made by the baseball team have been held hostage
>> to outside financial concerns.
>>
>> This has been apparent in large ways???a payroll that consistently falls
>> the smaller decisions made by the baseball team have been held hostage
>> to outside financial concerns.
>>
>> well below what the market would support???and in small ones, too, like
>> the annual trading of veterans, with baseball ops giving them away
>> instead of assuming the contracts and bringing back better prospects to
>> increase the talent base.
>>
>> And so it is with this Cano/Diaz deal. Rather than going out and
>> signing, say, Manny Machado or Bryce Harper, 20-something stars far
>> likelier to age well on long-term deals, the Mets go get a 36-year-old
>> Cano, playing a position that has been unforgiving to players in their
>> mid-30s. Rather than paying the going rate in free agency for a closer,
>> the Mets get Diaz instead, so it costs them a treasure in their own
>> young talent.
>>
>> It???s the kind of seeking-an-edge thinking that led ownership to not one
>> instead of assuming the contracts and bringing back better prospects to
>> increase the talent base.
>>
>> And so it is with this Cano/Diaz deal. Rather than going out and
>> signing, say, Manny Machado or Bryce Harper, 20-something stars far
>> likelier to age well on long-term deals, the Mets go get a 36-year-old
>> Cano, playing a position that has been unforgiving to players in their
>> mid-30s. Rather than paying the going rate in free agency for a closer,
>> the Mets get Diaz instead, so it costs them a treasure in their own
>> young talent.
>>
>> but two Ponzi schemes. It???s how the Wilpons always operate.
>>
>> The other major argument for the deal is that the Mets are ???trying to
>> win now,??? and only the sum total of the winter will tell us if that???s
>> true. But the team typically does precisely this???a big, early splash
>> that requires moves around it to truly matter, only to see the Mets fold
>> up and go home. Think Chris Young. Think Michael Cuddyer.
>>
>> Now, there is a different general manager in town, which matters to the
>> extent that Brodie Van Wagenen is empowered in a way Sandy Alderson
>> simply wasn???t. But oddly, for a team supposedly trying to win now, the
>> up and go home. Think Chris Young. Think Michael Cuddyer.
>>
>> Now, there is a different general manager in town, which matters to the
>> extent that Brodie Van Wagenen is empowered in a way Sandy Alderson
>> Mets have been shopping Noah Syndergaard, an in-prime co-ace alongside
>> Jacob deGrom. The price has supposedly been set at the elite prospect
>> level, and we???ll see if the Mets can get such a return, but other teams
>> Jacob deGrom. The price has supposedly been set at the elite prospect
>> around baseball are rightly suspicious about why the Mets would be
>> trying to trade one of their frontline starting pitchers, and a former
>> client of Van Wagenen, at that. Moreover, it certainly defies logic for
>> a win-now team to deal Syndergaard for prospects.
>>
>> Consider this, too: operating in New York, even if the Mets merely used
>> the luxury tax level as a de facto salary cap the way many other teams
>> do around the league, the roster can and would look very different. The
>> Mets have $92 million in committed money for 2019, before arb decisions.
>> And even that number is artificially inflated???$44 million of it is due
>> trying to trade one of their frontline starting pitchers, and a former
>> client of Van Wagenen, at that. Moreover, it certainly defies logic for
>> a win-now team to deal Syndergaard for prospects.
>>
>> Consider this, too: operating in New York, even if the Mets merely used
>> the luxury tax level as a de facto salary cap the way many other teams
>> do around the league, the roster can and would look very different. The
>> Mets have $92 million in committed money for 2019, before arb decisions.
>> to David Wright, who is certain not to play next year, and Yoenes
>> Cespedes, who is highly unlikely to play next year, so roughly $33
>> million of it should come back to the Mets.
>>
>> Had the Mets really been going for it, as the parlance would describe
>> it, this means they could have kept their best prospects, gone out and
>> spent, on both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, added Craig Kimbrel to
>> the back end of the bullpen, and you know what their payroll would have
>> been in 2019? If we take MLB Trade Rumors??? predictions as the standard,
>> Cespedes, who is highly unlikely to play next year, so roughly $33
>> million of it should come back to the Mets.
>>
>> Had the Mets really been going for it, as the parlance would describe
>> it, this means they could have kept their best prospects, gone out and
>> spent, on both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, added Craig Kimbrel to
>> the back end of the bullpen, and you know what their payroll would have
>> that puts them at $169.5 million before arbitration. And for a team
>> without a single contract on the books past 2020, the long-term risk
>> would be minimized as well.
>>
>> It???s eye-opening just how much talent the Mets could afford to truly add
>> without a single contract on the books past 2020, the long-term risk
>> would be minimized as well.
>>
>> simply by playing by the same economic rules as the rest of the league???s
>> large-market teams.
>>
>> Consider that lineup:
>>
>> CF Nimmo
>> LF Conforto
>> RF Harper
>> 3B Machado
>> 1B Frazier
>> 2B McNeil
>> SS Rosario
>> C Plawecki
>>
>> Consider that rotation, fronted by Syndergaard, Zack Wheeler and deGrom,
>> and that bullpen, with a three-man finishing crew of Seth Lugo, Robert
>> Gsellman and Craig Kimbrel.
>>
>> Sounds like a championship contender, right?
>>
>> Alas, that is what trying to win???not in some fantasy baseball sense, but
>>
>> Consider that lineup:
>>
>> CF Nimmo
>> LF Conforto
>> RF Harper
>> 3B Machado
>> 1B Frazier
>> 2B McNeil
>> SS Rosario
>> C Plawecki
>>
>> Consider that rotation, fronted by Syndergaard, Zack Wheeler and deGrom,
>> and that bullpen, with a three-man finishing crew of Seth Lugo, Robert
>> Gsellman and Craig Kimbrel.
>>
>> Sounds like a championship contender, right?
>>
>> simply by the Mets operating in good faith???would look like. It???s how the
>> Yankees do it, in a way that amusingly enough, Fred Wilpon persists in
>> calling ???unsustainable???.
>>
>> No. Unsustainable is double-digit returns on your investment with no
>> risk. The Yankees are the essence of sustainability, continuing to build
>> their farm system, embracing sabermetrics, and using the economic
>> advantages of New York to both keep payroll at the luxury tax level and
>> turn a handsome profit for their owners.
>>
>> They???ve made the playoffs all but four years since 1995 doing it this
>> No. Unsustainable is double-digit returns on your investment with no
>> risk. The Yankees are the essence of sustainability, continuing to build
>> their farm system, embracing sabermetrics, and using the economic
>> advantages of New York to both keep payroll at the luxury tax level and
>> turn a handsome profit for their owners.
>>
>> way. The Mets? They???ve made the playoffs roughly as often over that time
>> (five times) as the Yankees have missed it.
>>
>> There???s no mystery to it. The Yankees are like the House in Vegas.
>>
>> They???ve stacked the odds in their favor.
>>
>> The Mets could do this, too, with less financially compromised
>> owners???either by circumstances, or perhaps the Wilpons no longer are
>> The Mets could do this, too, with less financially compromised
>> compromised, and have simply figured out they???ll never pay a public
>> price for continuing to spend the way they did at the lowest ebb of
>> their post-Madoff woes. Either way, revenue that ought to be going
>> toward the baseball team, your ticket money, your monthly fee to the
>> cable company for SNY, is being diverted elsewhere.
>>
>> As long as it???s the Wilpons, the Mets will never be the House in Vegas,
>> their post-Madoff woes. Either way, revenue that ought to be going
>> toward the baseball team, your ticket money, your monthly fee to the
>> cable company for SNY, is being diverted elsewhere.
>>
>> the way a New York team that owns its own television network in a salary
>> cap-free league should be. They???ll be the suckers rolling the dice and
>> hoping it comes up eleven.
>>
>> But hey: at least they???re trying.
>>
>> I am a writer/editor on WNBA/NBA/NWSL/MLB/NCAA women's, men's basketball
>> and more. I've worked to equalize coverage between men's and women's
>> sports, both in my own work???MORE
>> and more. I've worked to equalize coverage between men's and women's
>
>
> FWIW:
>
> This Date in Mets History
>
> 1969 ??? The Mets trade Amos Otis to the Kansas City Royals in exchange for third baseman Joe Foy.
>
> FWIW:
>
> This Date in Mets History
>
At the begging for Gil Hodges who had a personality clash with Otis
matt....@gmail.com
Dec 5, 2018, 8:57:35 AM12/5/18
to
Hey, they traded Nolan Ryan too, and I don't remember too many people complaining bitterly at the time.
Matt
tmp
Dec 5, 2018, 9:58:51 AM12/5/18
to
I didn't realize that they were offered Torre for him at one point. That could have been interesting if that had happened. As it turned out, Torre had his best year in 1971.
>
> Hey, they traded Nolan Ryan too, and I don't remember too many people complaining bitterly at the time.
matt....@gmail.com
Dec 5, 2018, 11:43:50 AM12/5/18
to
>
> I didn't realize that they were offered Torre for him at one point. That could have been interesting if that had happened. As it turned out, Torre had his best year in 1971.
>
>
> >
> > Hey, they traded Nolan Ryan too, and I don't remember too many people complaining bitterly at the time.
>
> Well, at least not until they saw Fregosi play for the Mets <sigh>
*ernie
Dec 5, 2018, 4:10:59 PM12/5/18
to
Ryan. She was furious the day they traded him. Every spectacular thing
he did in his career ate at her craw a little more. The only trade she
would have approved of was Ryan for my dad. LOL!!
matt....@gmail.com
Dec 5, 2018, 7:04:53 PM12/5/18
to
I still remember that one. I was at Atlantic Beach, a place called Silver Point Beach Club, listening on this tiny transistor radio. And the deadline was going by and I thought we'd make it and then ...
Ugh.
ruben safir
Dec 5, 2018, 10:43:31 PM12/5/18
to
On 12/5/18 8:57 AM, matt....@gmail.com wrote:
> The Mets were actually offered Joe Torre for him when he was in the minors and turned down the deal. They desperately needed a third baseman, and had a decent center fielder :) so they made a dumb trade for a washed up third baseman.
Wayne Garret was actually a good 3rd baseman
> The Mets were actually offered Joe Torre for him when he was in the minors and turned down the deal. They desperately needed a third baseman, and had a decent center fielder :) so they made a dumb trade for a washed up third baseman.
his 1973 season was flat out allstar caliber
*ernie
Dec 5, 2018, 11:02:58 PM12/5/18
to
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 22:42:42 -0500, ruben safir <ru...@mrbrklyn.com>
wrote:
He was under-rated, for sure. The red-head was tough; he could field
his position and his hits were timely.
wrote:
his position and his hits were timely.
*ernie
Dec 5, 2018, 11:06:33 PM12/5/18
to
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 16:04:52 -0800 (PST), "matt....@gmail.com"
Of all the low points in Mets' history (and there are many), the
Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
fiasco.
Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
fiasco.
ruben safir
Dec 6, 2018, 12:07:08 AM12/6/18
to
On 12/5/18 11:06 PM, *ernie wrote:
>
> Of all the low points in Mets' history (and there are many), the
> Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
> fiasco.
From a fandoms perspective, not necessarily from a baseball perspective...
>
> Of all the low points in Mets' history (and there are many), the
> Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
> fiasco.
I know that is sacrilege.. so be it.
Seaver's best days were behind him and the Mets dis-invested from him at
the right time, if they were going to get anything back.
From 1978 to 1982 in Cincinati he pitched well, but not Seaver like with
a 109 ERA+, averaging 12-9 composite, 28 starts a year, and 184 innings
pitched.
77 was his last truly great season. If Pat Zachery didn't suck so much,
they could have recovered a decent return on that deal.
matt....@gmail.com
Dec 6, 2018, 8:41:16 AM12/6/18
to
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 12:07:08 AM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
> On 12/5/18 11:06 PM, *ernie wrote:
> >
> > Of all the low points in Mets' history (and there are many), the
> > Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
> > fiasco.
>
>
> From a fandoms perspective, not necessarily from a baseball perspective...
>
> I know that is sacrilege.. so be it.
>
> Seaver's best days were behind him and the Mets dis-invested from him at
> the right time, if they were going to get anything back.
Two real problems. First, Tom was the face of the franchise, and this move cost them a lot of fans. When all is said and done, fans bring in the money for the team. Secondly, they didn't get anything back for him. Zachry never did anything worthwhile, and the other two flamed out.
> On 12/5/18 11:06 PM, *ernie wrote:
> >
> > Of all the low points in Mets' history (and there are many), the
> > Seaver trade was the lowest. Dick Young played a big role in that
> > fiasco.
>
>
> From a fandoms perspective, not necessarily from a baseball perspective...
>
> I know that is sacrilege.. so be it.
>
> Seaver's best days were behind him and the Mets dis-invested from him at
> the right time, if they were going to get anything back.
>
>
> From 1978 to 1982 in Cincinati he pitched well, but not Seaver like with
> a 109 ERA+, averaging 12-9 composite, 28 starts a year, and 184 innings
> pitched.
>
>
> 77 was his last truly great season. If Pat Zachery didn't suck so much,
> they could have recovered a decent return on that deal.
Ruben Safir
Dec 6, 2018, 3:57:38 PM12/6/18
to
*ernie <already...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 05:57:34 -0800 (PST), "matt....@gmail.com"
> <matt....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 9:06:47 AM UTC-5, tmp wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW:
>>>
>>> This Date in Mets History
>>>
>>> 1969 ? The Mets trade Amos Otis to the Kansas City Royals in exchange for third baseman Joe Foy.
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 05:57:34 -0800 (PST), "matt....@gmail.com"
> <matt....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 9:06:47 AM UTC-5, tmp wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW:
>>>
>>> This Date in Mets History
>>>
>>
>>This trade was not as simple as it looked. The Mets badly wanted Otis to play third base, he didn't want to. He played a bit there and looked awful (I remember watching those games on WOR back in the day). The Mets were actually offered Joe Torre for him when he was in the minors and turned down the deal. They desperately needed a third baseman, and had a decent center fielder :) so they made a dumb trade for a washed up third baseman.
>>
>>Hey, they traded Nolan Ryan too, and I don't remember too many people complaining bitterly at the time.
>>
>
>
> You didn't know my mother. She thought the sun rose and set on Nolan
> Ryan. She was furious the day they traded him. Every spectacular thing
> he did in his career ate at her craw a little more. The only trade she
> would have approved of was Ryan for my dad. LOL!!
>
Your mother was right even at the time Fergosi was OLD and sliding
>>This trade was not as simple as it looked. The Mets badly wanted Otis to play third base, he didn't want to. He played a bit there and looked awful (I remember watching those games on WOR back in the day). The Mets were actually offered Joe Torre for him when he was in the minors and turned down the deal. They desperately needed a third baseman, and had a decent center fielder :) so they made a dumb trade for a washed up third baseman.
>>
>>Hey, they traded Nolan Ryan too, and I don't remember too many people complaining bitterly at the time.
>>
>
>
> You didn't know my mother. She thought the sun rose and set on Nolan
> Ryan. She was furious the day they traded him. Every spectacular thing
> he did in his career ate at her craw a little more. The only trade she
> would have approved of was Ryan for my dad. LOL!!
>
downhill. He injured himself and played only half a season before the
trade with a .233 .317 .326 stat line. The Angles were looking
for somone to dump him on and the MEts stepped right up! Idiots
*ernie
Dec 6, 2018, 11:00:12 PM12/6/18
to
Leroy Stanton, pitcher Don Rose and catcher Francisco Estrada; each a
major leaguer to a varying degree.
0 new messages