Comments on: eMailbag: Pagan’s Options

By: BringBackDaveTelgheder

BringBackDaveTelgheder — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:00:34 +0000

Say we trade Church, Gomez and Guerra for Johan.

Who would play RF for us? Endy is obviously not the answer, I wonder who else Omar would shoot for.

By: hotrodkanehl

hotrodkanehl — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:56:07 +0000

I agree that if they trade both FMart and Gomez , they’ll have two minor league OF spots to fill. I hope they don’t do it though.

Much as I’d love to have Santana, I think we need to keep one our two blue chip prospects. And, remember that while their turning from prospects into stars is far from certain, so is the notion that Santana will take us to the Promised Land or that he will stay healthy and dominating for 8 years (since he wants a new 7 year contract). I still remember Frank Robinson saying that the Mets’ acquisition of Bret Saberhagen meant they had a lock on the NL East in the coming season (the early 90s, a truly dark period in Mets’ history. Same thing for Frank Viola.

By: napes22

napes22 — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:42:30 +0000

Actually, Gomez, F-Mart and Guerra are not laughable. In fact they want both Gomez and F-Mart. It’s beyond those three where it becomes laughable.

By: Kalihan42

Kalihan42 — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:35:20 +0000

I just want the twins to make a decision so we can get on with planning for next year. I do not think it is the end of the world if we just fill holes and get a back of the rotation pitcher…disappointing, but not the end of the world…I just want the agony of the Santana story to end…

By: Go Bro

Go Bro — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:31:07 +0000

I mentioned this last week in the comments and got my butt kicked by “peretzNYC”.
Still, I agree with “pezoa” above that this move could mean that the Mets are still seriously in the hunt for Santana and they will need some outfield inventory to support AAA or the Mets bench should they have to trade Gomez, Famart, and or Church.
The fact that Gammons mentioned this shows that he is covering his butt if a deal does go down.
Anyway, In Omar we trust!!!!!! Go get Santana on the phone from Isreal.

By: HeBeGB

HeBeGB — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:24:36 +0000

you make a very good point…the Mets still have to field minor league teams at every level…if half-a-dozen players leave the organization, they have to be replaced – in quantity if not quality…that’s what these minor signing are for – to plug holes, if needed.

By: pezao

pezao — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:14:46 +0000

It could be that the inventory they’re trying to build up is intended to leave the farm not so decimated after a certain big trade. Do you want guys who last year played A play AAA this year just to fill in holes? Pagan might not be as good as Gomez, but at least he’s a replacement….

By: MetFanInDC

MetFanInDC — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:11:06 +0000

I think the writers are just trying to justify the Mets’ moves, much like we do. Unfortunately, these fools get to post it on their own blog, and on a major website.

If you ask me, my peace of mind is deteriorating because of all of the rumors. I never used to follow it as closely, but now that I am. I wish I hadn’t. Yet still, I am here again, typing.

By: coyote

coyote — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:07:15 +0000

I think that pretty much puts the Kibosh on any hope of getting Santana:

Once Gammons says it “might happen”, you know the deal is dead.

By: hotrodkanehl

hotrodkanehl — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:03:19 +0000

I like Peter Gammons, and his fellow sportswriters think highly enough of him that I guess he must have been pretty good at one time. But I swear that I can’t remember the last time he wrote anything that wasn’t pure hogwash.

Let me see if I’ve got this right: the Mets’ prospects (Gomez, FMart, Pelfrey, Humber, Goera) are laughably unattractive to the Twins, but the Mets can put together “inventory” of unwanted journeymen like Pagan that the Twins will accept for Santana?