Comments on: Buzz: Will Joe Blanton be Available for Trade

By: juunit

juunit — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:18:34 +0000

Yeah the top of your post makes no sense, what are you saying no to? And you completely avoided my questions.

By: easycroc

easycroc — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 02:44:15 +0000

Its funny how the marlins mgmt always seems to aquire a young pitcher here and a young pitcher there.

By: 4JoeOrsulak

4JoeOrsulak — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:52:34 +0000

Fair enough. I must admit that I am undervaluing Blanton. He seems to have up and down years. 4.11 career E.R.A. .555 winning % More hits than IP…It’s OK, above innings eating.

I just think Gomez has more potential than that, and that he and someone else could bring back more. But I will admit to being biased about keeping prospects.

Remember that even Dan Haren put up Pelfrey-like #s his first year too…3-7 with a 5+ E.R.A. Mets fans are being impatient. And Dan Haren is a .500 pitcher who basically had a John Maine year. Mets fans seem to undervalue their own talent and overvalue that of others. This is a fairly good team as it is, gentlemen.

By: The Stache

The Stache — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:01:44 +0000

Your argument is fair. I just think you have to balance youth and trading youth for established. Blanton I believe would help the team for at least the next 2-3 years. Pelfrey has the fastball, but needs the secondary pitches. Innings eaters are guys like Silva with a 5 ERA. Guys with ERAs under 4 that throw 200 IP every year are not a a dime a dozen however IMO. I am not one of the posters spouting off trading our entire farm system for Santana and Nathan. Beltran is locked up LT, and the true value for Milledge and Gomez is as CF. Gomez is good in the OF and if he can develop a bat he could slide in nicely on many teams that need a CF. The Mets, however, do not need a CF, which is the same argument I make when I hear the Hunter, Rowand, Andruw Jones arguments. Similar production from different positions could net more or less money. Soriano has more value as a 2b than an OF, even though he stinks defensively because not many 2b could hit the way he does.

Gomez does not strike me as a corner OF type on the Mets.

By: 4JoeOrsulak

4JoeOrsulak — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:37:39 +0000

I just prefer that they have a shot at dominating the league by ’09 or ’10 than be mere contenders in ’08 and hurting their longer term prospects.

Pelfrey is more Halladay than Blanton. Hard sinking fastball. He’s got a shot at being Halladay and a very good shot at being considerably better than Blanton.

I just don’t think Blanton is good enough to give up anything. Like I said, innings eaters are a dime a dozen; the are worth far less than potential All-Star OFs. So why get the short end of the stick for marginal short-term gain. That’s the clincher IMO, marginal short-term gain. So what if we don’t get him in ’08. I don’t see us winning a title in ’08 even with him.

Just my opinion

By: keithc

keithc — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:33:59 +0000

If we’re trading those three (a topline reliever/backend starter [Heilman], high-potential 2B and potential replacement for Huston Street [Humber]), I’d try to get Haren or Harden

By: The Stache

The Stache — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:27:51 +0000

You only get value for prospects when you trade them when their values are high.

I know Blanton and Halladay are different pitchers, but they put up similar results. There is no reason why Blanton can’t improve and he is at least proven. I would not characterize Blanton has mediocre or league average. I believe he is above average but clearly not a 1 or 2 pitcher. He would fill a need for innings that the Mets desperately need.

In regards to the playoffs, you have to be in it to win it. This trade would not involve trading all of those players, just 2 of them probably. You are not mortgaging your future, you are using what you have to get what you need. Blanton would be in the rotation at least a few more years. Soft tossers typically get hurt less than hard throwers. I would be more concerned about Pelfrey’s teeth falling out than Blanton’s arm falling off.

The NL is a weak league, so I am not sure why you believe the Mets need to improve dramatically to beat other teams. Every team has holes.

By: 4JoeOrsulak

4JoeOrsulak — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:13:45 +0000

Look; nobody knows anything really.

But we have to look at probabilities here.

Milledge, Gomez, F-Mart, Maldonado, Pelfrey, Humber, Mulvey, Muniz. Who thinks that they will all bust? The one guy who got a real shot in the majors is Milledge and he did very well. (Pelfrey got a shot, and initially did rather poorly–during the Met’s losing binge in June/July when they couldn’t put up any runs–but he turned a corner in that Braves game.)

What is the greater probability? That they will all bust or that Blanton tanks or gets hurt?

Will Blanton turn into the next Halladay? I doubt it. They were similar in ’07, but did they have the same stuff/upside?

The Halladay argument actually reinforces the case for Pelfrey/Humber. Here is a young pitcher with great potential and mediocre performance who became an All-Star.

Will having Blanton instead of Gomez make us better team and a playoff team in ’08? Probably. Will it make us into a bigtime WS contender in ’08? No. This team is nowhere near as good as Omar’s propaganda machine would have us believe.

If we think ’09 and ’10, we will be serious perennial contenders, possibly as early as ’09. If we make hasty trades for mediocre pitchers, we will have an outside shot in ’08 and may weaken ourselves in the long term. What do you prefer?

By: The Stache

The Stache — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:45:54 +0000

it is Ciao.

By: The Stache

The Stache — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:32:49 +0000

Allegiance to our prospects…well said. Not easy to find 200 IP with an ERA under 4.

Go to a stat page, and look at Roy Halladay 2007 and Blanton 2007 numbers. They look eerily similar.

So who doesn’t want Roy Halladay on the team?