Personally, I was very angry. They traded away a 5 tool potential superstar for a below average catcher and a decent outfielder. They should have kept Milledge and tried to develop him.
2007-12-02 13:50:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
As a Mets fan i am very dissapointed that we traded one of our top prospects for basically nothing. With all the trade rumors flying around for a top ace, we trade for a catcher(which now we have 3), and a 29 year outfeilder who Minaya thinks still has potential. Milledge is 22 and HAS potential, not to mention the fact we traded him within our own division. Hopefully Minaya has something up his sleeve!
2007-12-02 13:58:57 · answer #1 · answered by Phil 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a non-Mets fan, I can't speak for any small story that escaped the national headlines as far as his behavior was concerned. However, I remember that just last season there were trade rumors about the Mets acquiring Barry Zito, and the player gumming up the works was none other than Lastings Milledge. He could have fetched any number of star veteran players a season ago. To see him dealt for two very average players is almost a tragedy. Minaya better hope for one of two things: either an instant return to the playoffs next season, or the complete collapse of Milledge's career.
2007-12-02 16:20:33 · answer #2 · answered by baseball_is_my_life 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I posted a question similar to this a couple days ago. I thought Omar went nuts. Now we have three catchers and one less of a very important trading chip. We could have used Milledge to get Santana, Haren, Blanton,...who knows! What will they do now? I never really saw Milledge as being a Met forever though, and Fernando Martinez and Carlos Gomez look good enough to keep as our future team, not to mention 29-year-old Ryan Church.
2007-12-02 14:31:35 · answer #3 · answered by #1MetsFan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not a bad trade when it comes to Milledge's potential or whatever, because they got 2 decent pieces in return.
What was REALLY stupid about the trade was that Milledge was their most attractive trading piece, and the Mets blew him on a catcher and an OF when they could have used him in a trade for a starting pitcher. Now who's their most attractive trading piece? Carlos Gomez rofl?
Last of all, what's MOST surprising is that there was not 1 single Latino player Minaya got in return...
2007-12-02 14:26:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I was upset cuz miledge does have potential and we got basically nothin for him. however milledge was the ******** player the mets have seen in a long time. hes thinks hes all that when really hes still a rookie and if he doesnt change that he will never be a good player just a headache 4 the team he plays with. we could have tried to work with him but im sure the mets were sick of his attitude
2007-12-02 17:52:31 · answer #5 · answered by Chip 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't get it, I will never get it, and I am tired of it. Milledge wasn't great at all but people saw something good in him. The Mets could have recieved much more for him, but don't forget that the Mets usually add a big free agent because Omar likes big names, expecially spanish players. (Johan Santana) just a thought.
2007-12-02 14:40:30 · answer #6 · answered by Reyes&Ricky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its not a good trade but its not a terrible one either. However, I think they could have gotten better for Milledge. I also don't understand why they got Brian Schnieder.
2007-12-02 14:14:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i individually did not understand the commerce. procuring and merchandising a one time "cant miss" guy in Milledge, for a under mediocre catcher, and a appropriate outfielder. Bringing in a 0.33 catcher for what reason? i can purely see that in line with possibility Minaya has some thing cooking the place he thinks he can equipment Castro in a commerce of fee. Now Church is a appropriate participant, yet i don't understand the addition of him. Do they actually improve? could desire to Milledge have placed up only as sturdy of numbers? possibly... i assume you Mets followers gets a typical hand glimpse with the inter-branch play.
2016-12-10 10:45:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. The Mets had no real need for Schneider or Church. Church is solid, but he won't really help the Mets. The Mets aren't in any need of offensive help. They need pitching, especially after Tom Glavine's departure. They should've kept him and dealt him as part of a package for Haren or Blanton. Or even keeping him and developing him would have been a good choice. Schneider and Church are already as good as they are ever going to be, which is not that good.
2007-12-02 16:55:25 · answer #9 · answered by dude_in_disguise2004 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am ok with it. It just shows how bad the mets wanted this out of the clubhouse
2007-12-02 15:43:17 · answer #10 · answered by mpasnick 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋