Comments on: Manny Revisited http://www.metstoday.com/trades/2008/manny-revisited/ New York Mets news, game recaps, opinion, and analysis Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:57:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: joe http://www.metstoday.com/trades/2008/manny-revisited/#comment-12375 joe Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:17:58 +0000 http://www.metstoday.com/?p=1875#comment-12375 It's not really a hang-up with me, as I'm enjoying the Evans-Murphy platoon and will be excited to see what Niese (or Parnell) can do. But I would have never believed on July 31 that Evans and Murphy would have matched Manny's output to this point. The thing that bugged me about Omar's comments -- which you can hear on WFAN.com -- is that he revealed the approach to building the Mets. He admitted that after 2004, they "traded away the kids for veterans" in order to "get the fans back" ... and now, "we're going to draw four million fans or more, the ratings are up ... so now it's about winning not only with the veterans but also the kids". So in other words, the Mets traded away their future in '05, '06, and '07 in order to "win now" and sell tickets, but now that they're selling tickets like crazy and opening a new stadium, the need to get to the postseason is not as urgent as it was two years ago. Or at least, that's what I get out of it. I may have to think about this over the weekend and re-post ... not sure I'm stating my frustration correctly. It’s not really a hang-up with me, as I’m enjoying the Evans-Murphy platoon and will be excited to see what Niese (or Parnell) can do.

But I would have never believed on July 31 that Evans and Murphy would have matched Manny’s output to this point.

The thing that bugged me about Omar’s comments — which you can hear on WFAN.com — is that he revealed the approach to building the Mets. He admitted that after 2004, they “traded away the kids for veterans” in order to “get the fans back” … and now, “we’re going to draw four million fans or more, the ratings are up … so now it’s about winning not only with the veterans but also the kids”.

So in other words, the Mets traded away their future in ‘05, ‘06, and ‘07 in order to “win now” and sell tickets, but now that they’re selling tickets like crazy and opening a new stadium, the need to get to the postseason is not as urgent as it was two years ago. Or at least, that’s what I get out of it.

I may have to think about this over the weekend and re-post … not sure I’m stating my frustration correctly.

]]> By: isuzudude http://www.metstoday.com/trades/2008/manny-revisited/#comment-12373 isuzudude Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:00:15 +0000 http://www.metstoday.com/?p=1875#comment-12373 Joe, I understand your hang-up over losing out on the Manny trade sweepstakes. He's easily a top-10 hitter in the game and a feared postseason performer. But look at it this way: as you say, Manny would have been no guarantee to stick around after '08. Likewise, Oliver Perez and Pedro Martinez are free agents this winter and who knows where they wind up. Add to the mix that the short-term futures of Ryan Church and John Maine are very much up in the air, and you can see why Omar is being so picky in giving up prospects for "rental" players. Yes, Manny would have at least brought back 2 draft picks, but that does diddly squat to help the Mets in 2009 - when they embark on their first season at a new stadium. So if acquiring Manny would have (hypothetically) cost FMart, Neise, and Murphy, suddenly the team no longer has their insurance policies if Manny and Perez were to leave, and if Church's concussion woes were to require additional, more lengthy time off. And then you're looking at a rotation in 2009 of Santana and Pelfrey with 3 newcomers, and an OF with Beltran and who knows what flanking him on either side. But, by passing on Manny, not only do the Mets still retain a competitive team in 2008, but also plenty of room to operate in 2009 in case free agency and injury take their toll. If Maine didn't have any issues with his arm, and if it was assured that Perez would re-sign, and if Church were 100% healthy and functional, I'd be much more inclined to agree with you that the trigger should have been pulled on acquiring Manny. But as things currently stand, I truly think it made the most sense to stand pat. It might cost us a WS visit this year, but it at least ensures a better chance to compete in 2009 and onwards. Joe, I understand your hang-up over losing out on the Manny trade sweepstakes. He’s easily a top-10 hitter in the game and a feared postseason performer. But look at it this way: as you say, Manny would have been no guarantee to stick around after ‘08. Likewise, Oliver Perez and Pedro Martinez are free agents this winter and who knows where they wind up. Add to the mix that the short-term futures of Ryan Church and John Maine are very much up in the air, and you can see why Omar is being so picky in giving up prospects for “rental” players. Yes, Manny would have at least brought back 2 draft picks, but that does diddly squat to help the Mets in 2009 - when they embark on their first season at a new stadium. So if acquiring Manny would have (hypothetically) cost FMart, Neise, and Murphy, suddenly the team no longer has their insurance policies if Manny and Perez were to leave, and if Church’s concussion woes were to require additional, more lengthy time off. And then you’re looking at a rotation in 2009 of Santana and Pelfrey with 3 newcomers, and an OF with Beltran and who knows what flanking him on either side. But, by passing on Manny, not only do the Mets still retain a competitive team in 2008, but also plenty of room to operate in 2009 in case free agency and injury take their toll.

If Maine didn’t have any issues with his arm, and if it was assured that Perez would re-sign, and if Church were 100% healthy and functional, I’d be much more inclined to agree with you that the trigger should have been pulled on acquiring Manny. But as things currently stand, I truly think it made the most sense to stand pat. It might cost us a WS visit this year, but it at least ensures a better chance to compete in 2009 and onwards.

]]>