Comments on: Omar’s Worst Trade

By: Micalpalyn

Micalpalyn — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:09:06 +0000

It is destined for me to stop posting…..

By: Matt Himelfarb

Matt Himelfarb — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:04:23 +0000

Even with all the hype stemming from his performance last year, I still don’t think Brian Bannister is anything more than a back-of-the-rotation starter. He might just have the whole BABIP thing figured out himself, but since I am admittedly unfamiliar with some of the particulars he goes into during his interviews, I’d like to him outperform his FIP. Anyways, I don’t see how he’ll get away this year with his mediocre stuff and striking out as few as batters as he does.

By: joe

joe — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:44:36 +0000

Mic, what’s up with Ken Davidoff stealing your idea and calling it his own?

As I’ve been saying — I’m on board with Tejeda for AAA depth — let’s get anyone … now!

By: Micalpalyn

Micalpalyn — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:50:01 +0000

Joe- Soory I could not help it- from MLBrumors

Davidoff: Tejeda Makes Sense For Mets
Newsday’s Ken Davidoff has an idea for the Mets: 26 year-old recently DFA’d starter Robinson Tejeda of the Rangers. Davidoff notes that the Mets have had interest in him in the past, and now he could be had for very little via trade or even a waiver claim.

Tejeda’s main problem has been control. Back in ‘05, Baseball America compared Tejeda to Carlos Silva “in build and repertoire.” One big difference - Tejeda averages almost 95 mph with his heater.

By: MetsBlog.com » Opinion: Bannister, Burgos and Minaya

MetsBlog.com » Opinion: Bannister, Burgos and Minaya — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:55:51 +0000

[...] a post to Mets Today, Joe Janish writes that it may still be premature to fully evaluate the Bannister-for-Burgos [...]

By: RockStar78

RockStar78 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:27:40 +0000

You got it right Joe, hindsight is 20-20. At the time of the Bannister trade, Bannister was viewed as a back of the rotation starter with ordinary stuff whereas Burgos had tremendous upside. And also at that time, the Mets had a lot of starting pitching depth with Pelfrey, Humber, Guerra, etc, but didn’t have a lot of bullpen depth (Sanchez injured, Mota out for 50 games). Who would have thought that Bannister would start looking like a young Greg Maddux and Burgos would blow out his elbow?

By: isuzudude

isuzudude — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:15:58 +0000

Well, it should come as no surprise that Malusis takes every opportunity to slam Omar and the Mets. He is, after all, an understudy of Mikey F. & Chrissy R. - aka the two biggest Mets haters on the planet.

And agreed, Joe…it’s WAY too early to cast judgment on that trade at this point. Burgos clearly has better “stuff” than Bannister, and despite TJ surgery, could very well have a brighter future, as he’s 4 years younger and has more time to develop. Also, at the time of the trade (on Dec. 6, 2006) the Mets were facing the likelihood of Duaner Sanchez missing the entire 2007 season (which would happen), so another arm for the bullpen was needed. Yes, starting pitching depth was also needed as Pedro had already been declared out for 2007 as well, but at least the Mets knew they had Glavine, Duque, Maine, Perez, Pelfrey, Humber, and Vargas coming back. Whereas in the bullpen, Bradford and Oliver had left via free agency, Bell, Lindstrom, and Owens were traded, Joe Smith was an unknown, and Mota was coming off a PED-laiden postseason trip. The need for a strong bullpen was greater than that of what projected to be a back end of the rotation starter.

I think the fact that they don’t even know the correct parameters of the Burgos trade is enough to dismiss all credibility amongst these morons.