What is the point of having a great pitcher when basically the rest of the team is made of AAA+ players.
Dickey is a great player, but to become competitive we need MORE than one good player, Dickey can give us that.
I'd love to keep Dickey, and I'm sure Sandy would too
But if you can get a possible Amazing Player at a weak position, Come ON!
I agree. Trading Dickey for minor league players is just plain dumb. The last time we traded a Cy Young winner for prospects it was Tom Seaver going, a bunch of nobodys coming. Most people couldn't name them today without looking it up. We were the laughing stock of baseball for giving away a star pitcher for nothing. Now, apparently, we are going to do it again. The Seaver deal got us years of horrible teams. So will this dumb deal. I'm convinced that the "trade everyone for prospects" brigade here are mostly masochists who enjoy watching minor league players stink the place out, and paying major league prices to watch. Fred and Jeff love those guys. They wanted to trade Wright too.
Here's my questions to the trade everybody crowd. 1- How do you get better trading away one of the few really good players you have for a lottery ticket.
2-If a minor league player is worth a Cy Young winner. Then why not trade Wheeler, a lottery ticket, for a proven star? That's how you get better. Trading prospects for stars, not stars for prospects. Ask the Yankees. Wouldn't you like to win every year like they do? Then forget prospects. Trade them for stars, and sign free agents (good ones) keep your stars, and win, and win, and win.
3-Isn't this nonsense being done only because Fred and Jeff won't spend anything on the team and want players who work for food? Why pretend otherwise? Why fool yourself into thinking the strategy used by stinking teams like the Royals is going to work better here? That's what KC, Pittsburgh, and other teams that always have around 90 losses do. Trade real players for prospects, and lose with them.
4-Don't we already have enough bad minor league players on the team? Thole, Tejada, (yes Tejada, he isn't very good) Duda, Mejia, Familia, Kirk, Valdespin, Baxter, and others. Do we really need more? You want to see minor league baseball, watch the Cyclones.
5-Why is trading Dickey different from trading Seaver. Why will this be any better? Cause this bag of magic beans we're getting is better than the bag we got for Seaver? How do you know?
If we trade Dickey, and unfortunately it looks like we will. We can look forward to 4-5 years ofbad, losing teams. We are not going to contend in 2014-15-16-17 or any other year. Fred and Jeff don't care, but we should.
You do trade prospects for stars when you can afford all those stars. You also trade prospects when after years of building, you feel you are a few very good pieces away from being a serious contender ala "all in" teams.
The Mets right now are in a rebuild mode. We can't bounce back without major luck from signing cheap mid-tier level players due to payroll restrictions.
So while yes Dickey is cheap and an amazing pitcher, we wont be able to contend for a couple years anyway, which in my opinion is the limited window of high level pitching that Dickey has to offer. If we can't use Dickey in this limited window for the purpose of "Serious October Baseball" TM -Steve Somers, then we are really just wasting his current value through and paying the high opportunity cost of keeping him.
The way I see it, just to put out a number in supposition - we have a 75% chance of not making the playoffs with Dickey performing at a high level, so why not trade that talent for 2 or 3 potential guys that will be under affordable team control for years to come with very high ceilings.
Is it a sure thing? No, but its more likely that a top prospect will turn into a good player than the Mets making the playoffs if we keep Dickey.
This is a risk assessment at the end of the day. Which is more likely to happen? The Mets making the playoffs with Dickey in 1 of the next 3 upcoming seasons, or the chance that this team will be competitive in a couple years with at least one of those prospects becoming a contributing factor?
Sorry, but you're wrong!
Someone else said the Mets finished 4th with Dickey. True, but Dickey had nothing to do with that. There are 24 other guys who can and should be blamed. About 20 of those 24 should be replaced, not Dickey.
Now for your comments.
Good BIG MARKET TEAMS always trade prospects for stars. They fill in holes by signing good free agents, not by playing a long shot and praying that some minor league nobody beats the odds and becomes a real major league star.
Nobody hates the Yankees more than I do, but you have to admit they are the most successful franchise in baseball. They are in the playoffs every #%$@& year. The only reason they don't win the WS every year is that in a short series anything can happen and the best team doesn't always win. The Yankess don't trade stars for prospects. They trade prospects for stars and sign good free agents. That's what we should be doing. We are a BIG MARKET TEAM, not Kansas City or Pittsburgh. The Yankees don't rebuild...ever...and when they don't make the playoffs, everyone is shocked. KC and Pittsburgh and other trade for prospects teams are perpetually rebuilding, and when one wins, everyone is shocked.
If the Yankees had Dickey would they trade him for prospects? No! If he were a FA, would they sign him? You bet your buns they would.
Our problem is the Wilpons. They're broke and won't sell the team. When they spent money in the past we put some pretty good teams on the field. I know we can't do anything about them, but let's be realists and understand that what they're doing is for their financial benefit and is not what's good for the team. To pretend all is well is just being blind.
Wake up, open your eyes, and realize what they are doing. It's not good...for the fans, or the team...for them...sure.
I root for the Mets. Not Fred's wallet.
Naturally you would be right if we had ownership that could spend like the Yankees. But you aren't dealing in reality. I would be singing an entirely different tune if I knew that the Mets could spend.
On the Mets being in 4th place. We aren't saying the Mets were so bad with Dickey, they only won 74 games; we are saying Dickey had EVERYTHING to do with winning that many games, so what difference does it make with him or without him. The Mets aren't going to improve the team without trading him, all indications to the contrary, sorry. And if the team isn't about to be improved, where do you see 16,17,18 more wins coming from? Magic, optimism? If you want to look at probabilities, since you seemed to claim that prospects rarely "beat the odds" the less likely probability is the Mets turning into a competitive team vis a vis 2 or 3 prospects facing 50/50 odds. So even the "odds" card doesn't help your argument, it actually weakens it.
You have to plan according to what the reality is. We aren't a big market team right now, as aggravating as this may be, the limitations on payroll are very real.
So, yes I'm right.
are you serious? they trade him because he's 38 and by the time the mets are good, he won't be a cy young caliber pitcher anymore.
Trading Dickey is the right move.