• Welcome Guest
New York Mets

Welcome to the New York Mets.
Before posting, please review our Message Board Guidelines

    • Dickey, Wheeler, Flores, Gorski, Satin, Lutz
Message 545899.1 was deleted
  • 12/5/12
  • bbjmparis
Wheeler, and maybe a mediocre prospect like Flores for Myers is a fair deal. Why would we add Dickey? I am against trading Dickey for anything less than a proven major league player. Dickey for a prospect, any prospect, is just dumb.
  • Reply to this Message
Message 545899.3 was deleted
  • 12/5/12
  • DFAB
...............................
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • DFAB
Wheeler for Myers is a fair deal...nothing more nothing less...
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • brianinwi

"Wheeler for Myers is a fair deal...nothing more nothing less... "

Fair, maybe. But still stupid.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • Matt H
Wheeler for Myers is as fair as it gets pretty much. It is a deal you definitely have to consider on both sides. Seems that Royals would rather have major league pitching already though.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • bucknerismyhero
Trades like this do not happen in real life, however I would actually consider this. This would free us up to trade Ike Davis for another top pitching prospect to replace Wheeler. We would completely turn this lineup over with talented, highly thought of, young players. Most of the guys you list are either garbage prospects or are blocked by a long-term commitment (Flores).
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • DFAB

"Fair, maybe. But still stupid."

Hey, I want to keep Wheeler as much as anyone but what if we agreed to 2 trades, and BOTH happened:

Wheeler for Myers

Dickey for Taijuan Walker/Trevor Bauer/Gerrit Cole/Danny Hultzen....a player like that. Bascially, we would be trading Dickey for another Wheeler. All of these guys are top 10 prospects.

Indirectly, it would be Dickey for Myers. Trading Wheeler would make sense ONLY if he is replaced by a pitching prospect of equal or better value.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • DFAB
If I'm trading Ike, I want someone YOUNG and PROVEN....not a prospect. I want someone like Stanton in return if I'm trading Ike...that is the ONLY way trading Ike makes sense. Ike is our biggest power threat and really our only true power hitter for that matter. We need MORE power so trading Ike would have to bring back a ridiculous package for me to consider it.
  • Reply to this Message
Message 545899.11 was deleted
  • 12/5/12
  • DFAB
nice mature response...do you know what speculation is? Do you know what a message board is? Please stop trolling.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/5/12
  • Kranesback
You should talk to kherub.
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/6/12
  • bbjmparis

Calling Flores mediocre is probably generous. The guy is the TENTH RATED THIRD BASE PROSPECT. That means nine teams have a higher rated third base prospect. Since most of them will be busts...what does that make Flores? Not great.

Flores used to be 98 0r 99 on the top 100 list, but has since dropped off. They guy is not highly thought of by people who are paid to know such things. Losing him is no big deal.

  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/6/12
  • 4545_ajd

"Flores used to be 98 0r 99 on the top 100 list, but has since dropped off. "

Actually he was Pre-2009: Rated #47 Prospect Pre-2010: Rated #88 Prospect Pre-2011: Rated 59 Prospect.

He had a down year in 2011 but this year he actually had his best season of his career and hit better at AA which is the highest level he has been at than he has at any other level in his career.

I would not be one bit surprised to see him back in the top 100 when it comes out before next year, and once he gets to Vegas I expect him to put up ridiculous numbers.


Edited 12/6/12   by  4545_ajd
  • Reply to this Message
  • 12/6/12
  • beingfrank
By no means am I sold on Flores, but he's gone up and down on the prospect list and it's easy to see the correlation....bad year, he goes up, good year he moves down. He had a really good 2012 so I would expect to see him back on there
  • Reply to this Message