Yesterday on WFAN Omar Minaya was interviewed by Mike Francesa on the “Mike and No More Mad Dog Show”.
Francesa asked Minaya if he went after Manny Ramirez, knowing full well that Omar is a big fan of the big bopper. Minaya’s first response was that Theo Epstein needed a replacement for Manny’s bat, and Omar didn’t have .
“Right but they used a third team in the mix. Couldn’t you have used a third team in the mix?”
” … when it was all said and done, it was going to cost me three prospects, and for all we know it could have been the kids playing there right now … and it was gonna be a rental. And I just cannot, coming off the trade for Santana … for me to give up three good prospects for a rental, I just couldn’t do that.”
Interesting admission. It’s easy to say now that the Mets shouldn’t have given up Daniel Murphy, Nick Evans, and, say, Jonathan Niese in a deal for Manny, looking at how well Evans and Murphy are playing lately. Or is it?
Seriously now, do we really believe the Murphy and Evans platoon is a difference maker in the pennant race, in the way Manny Ramirez is a difference-maker? Will Jon Niese be the next Sandy Koufax?
Ramirez is currently hitting .406 with 21 RBI in 19 games with the Dodgers, with a 1.024 OPS. Murphy is actually doing nearly as well, hitting .404 with 11 RBI and a 1.108 OPS in 18 games. Add Evans’ 5 RBI and .695 OPS and you could argue that the two kids are keeping pace with Manny.
However, when the playoffs begin, who do you want at the plate with runners on base in a tight ballgame? Murphy, Evans, or Ramirez?
Remember too, that if the Mets were unable to re-sign Manny in the winter, they would receive two compensatory #1 draft picks to help rebuild their farm system.
Personally, I’m torn, but only because I’m seeing what Murphy has done. Back on July 31st, I wouldn’t have hesitated — even if the deal had to include F-Mart.