Reading Into The Matthews Jr. Deal
January 23, 201011 Responses to Reading Into The Matthews Jr. Deal
-
Pingback: Art Shamsky Rekindled : Mets Today
-
-
I also think that if he plays well he could provide some nice flexibility as he can play the corner OF spots and give the starters a day off here and there as well (when Beltran is back)
-
-
mo reese says:
The Part of this Trade I don’t Understand is why Didn’t Omar tell the Angels that they Had to Take Castillo in the Deal Since the Angels are Paying 21.5 Million of the 23.5 Owed to Matthews Jr.,Then What Would have been the Big Deal! That would Have opened Up the Door For the Mets to finally Sign Orlando Hudson,But Of Course They Missed the Boat Again! Terrible Job By Omar,who Once Again Showed A lack Of Foresight and A Stunning Lack Of Creativity.
-
Peter says:
No one wants Castillo, it's that simple. Jeez
-
I understand your desire to move Castillo and go after Hudson but let's remember that trades have to make sense for both teams. Why would the Angels want Castillo? They certainly don't need him. From their standpoint, moving Matthews Jr. was strictly a move to get rid of an unhappy/under achieving player who they don't have room for anymore. It would not make sense for them to take on an aging Castillo who's best days are behind him. I would be very surprised if the Mets find a taker for Castillo. It's a bad contract that they may just have to live with.
-
-
Very well said.. I personally would have rather kept Stokes and signed Jeremy Reed or Reed Johnson. I don't think Matthews Jr. will be significantly than either to warrant giving up a pitcher – albeit only an average reliever. I know Stokes has no options left, but he has shown he can be effective. Plus, you can never have enough arms to compete for spots come spring training. Like you said, we just have to wait and see how this one pans out.
-
I guess from the Mets standpoint, Matthews Jr has shown in the past that he can have a big year, which means he has the potential to do it again. Highly unlikely but it's possible. I could be wrong but I think defensively he's better than Reed or Johnson as well. Let's not forget that's important, especially in Citi Field. So giving up Stokes and only having to pay about $2million over the next two seasons isn't bad at all. With guys like Escobar (if he pans out), Parnell and Feliciano I'm not going to miss Stokes all that much.
-
-
Pingback: I’m Reading: about Matthews, Tatis vs. Garko, Comments, Overviews — NYFSBlogs
-
riccardino says:
Castillo is the least of our problems. I must be the only Met’s fan that doesn’t have a problem with him at second. My main concern is who is going to get us into the 7th inning into games besides Santana and Pelf?
-
Parnell and Stokes are basically the same pitcher. Gary had nice clutch numbers last year…I hope that trend continues.
I like the trade because the Mets aren’t paying Matthews much. And I agree with you that this is an insurance move in case Beltran is out for longer than they’re expecting. Plus F-Mart just didn’t look ready for the big league last season. He was good in the outfield but totally overmatched at the plate.