Post subject: Re: Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz are Mets
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:36 am
Practically A Wilpon
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:03 pm Posts: 9307
Two weeks in:
Relic Cano (WAR -0.3) AB 60, H 11, HR 2, R 6, RBI 6, BA .183, OBP .234, SLG .317, OPS .551, OPS+ 49
Edwin Diaz (WAR 0.3) ERA 1.59, G 7, SV 5, IP 5.2, SO 10, WHIP 1.235
Jay Bruce (WAR 0.2) AB 59, H 10, HR 7, R 12, RBI 13, BA .169, OBP .265, SLG .559, OPS .824, OPS+ 122
Anthony Swarzak (WAR 0.4) ERA 0.00, G 5, SV 2, IP 4.1, SO 6, WHIP 0.692
Justin Dunn (AAA) ERA 3.12, G 2, GS 2, IP 8.2, H 9, R 4, ER 3, HR 0, BB 2, K 13, WHIP 1.269
Jarred Kelenic (A) AB 37, H 8, HR 1, R 4, RBI 3, BB 8, K 12, BA .216, OBP .370, SLG .351, OPS .721
Gerson Bautista (Injured)
_________________ Cano/Diaz for Kelenic/Dunn will go down as the worst trade in franchise history.
"I think the best owners always are the ones who understand that they really don't own the team. The fans own the team. For a period of time, you are a steward, and you'll be judged on how well you manage that." - Warriors COO Rick Welts
Post subject: Re: Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz are Mets
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:19 am
General Manager
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:09 pm Posts: 7274
The trade was a poor use of money and prospect resources
Machado cost about 10 more per than Cano
Getting Machado - you could then pass on Lowrie (who cost 10 per)
If you were determined to trade a Kelenic/Dunn package - do it in a separate deal for Diaz or for some other closer where its a straight up deal
Having said that, I expect Cano to be good this year. I expect him to turn it around and put up some big numbers.
But its not going to be enough to make up for what I expect to be 2-3 bad years at the end of the contract which will suck up payroll for a team that has a limited budget anyway
Post subject: Re: Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz are Mets
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:21 am
Veteran Presence
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:31 am Posts: 4613 Location: Fairview Township, PA
bygranddesign wrote:
The trade was a poor use of money and prospect resources
Machado cost about 10 more per than Cano
Getting Machado - you could then pass on Lowrie (who cost 10 per)
If you were determined to trade a Kelenic/Dunn package - do it in a separate deal for Diaz or for some other closer where its a straight up deal
Having said that, I expect Cano to be good this year. I expect him to turn it around and put up some big numbers.
But its not going to be enough to make up for what I expect to be 2-3 bad years at the end of the contract which will suck up payroll for a team that has a limited budget anyway
I get it, but you then need to lock into Machado for ten years. Not saying it was the BEST use of resources, but I also don't think it was a BAD use of resources.
It was a bad use of resources. I generally don’t like paying old players lots of money for a long term. It doesn’t usually work out. But if I am paying an older player, they had better be lifelong Mets or they better be young when they sign and the backend is looked at like a sunk cost anyway. I mean really. This is crazy. They traded for an old as hell 2B coming off PEDs getting paid 25M until he’s 42. And don’t give me the contracts of Bruce and Swarzak. The Mets don’t do accounting like that. Robinson cano gets paid 25, he counts for 25 against the payroll, and we got years to go.
You wanna trade for a reliever? Fine. Give up two prospects. Fine. I don’t agree with it. Relievers are too volatile, but that’s ok. Diaz is quality and young and even though he plays like 2% of the season, whatever. Blow up the farm and get him. But Cano. Cmon. Really. Come the eff on.
_________________ Run it up, Herman! Leave no doubt! -Coach Yoast
Post subject: Re: Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz are Mets
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 1:14 pm
Legend of NYFS
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:11 am Posts: 31135 Location: NYC
MikeH wrote:
It was a bad use of resources. I generally don’t like paying old players lots of money for a long term. It doesn’t usually work out. But if I am paying an older player, they had better be lifelong Mets or they better be young when they sign and the backend is looked at like a sunk cost anyway. I mean really. This is crazy. They traded for an old as hell 2B coming off PEDs getting paid 25M until he’s 42. And don’t give me the contracts of Bruce and Swarzak. The Mets don’t do accounting like that. Robinson cano gets paid 25, he counts for 25 against the payroll, and we got years to go.
You wanna trade for a reliever? Fine. Give up two prospects. Fine. I don’t agree with it. Relievers are too volatile, but that’s ok. Diaz is quality and young and even though he plays like 2% of the season, whatever. Blow up the farm and get him. But Cano. Cmon. Really. Come the eff on.
Yeah, it is Bruce and Swarz plus $20M. That's a huge offset... just about half the amount contractually due to Cano. RC will still have to earn the 5/$63M net he's going to get from the Mets, which is about 8 war over the 5 seasons..? I'm not too concerned about that.
The more risky part to the deal is whether Dunn/Kelenic blow up. I may be in the minority, but I dont think the ceiling is that high for either. And since we really needed Diaz pretty badly, we'd have been backed into a corner to sign Kimbrel to a worse deal instead IMO... at the time, I could see that having been maybe 4/72M (plus the loss of the pick). And Jay Bruce would still be in the pix here.
All in all, I think it was a fair roll of the dice.
Post subject: Re: Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz are Mets
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2019 1:53 pm
NYFS Staff
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:15 pm Posts: 39530 Location: The District
There's also the not-insignificant possibility that when we look back at this trade, it evokes almost no emotional response.
_________________ “Patience is not a virtue unless you take advantage of it by exercising it well,” Alderson said. “Patience is only part of a strategy.”
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum