Rosenthal: Mets Could Trade Milledge For Zito

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

FWIW, here are some trade rumblings as reported by Ken Rosenthal.

 

The Mets have insisted for months that they won't trade their top position prospect, Class AAA outfielder Lastings Milledge. But a growing number of major-league executives believe that the Mets will indeed part with Milledge, 21, if they can get the right starting pitcher in return.

 

 

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

[goonys evil twin]

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

 

If the rumors of bad blood between Colletti and the Cubs are true, I don't see much happening on this front.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

 

If the rumors of bad blood between Colletti and the Cubs are true, I don't see much happening on this front.

 

It's become quite funny to me. We have all of their missing pieces.

[grassbass]

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

 

If the rumors of bad blood between Colletti and the Cubs are true, I don't see much happening on this front.

 

It's become quite funny to me. We have all of their missing pieces.

 

They could use a third baseman, too. Not that I advocate trading Ramirez, but one could really put together a blockbuster deal with Walker, Ramirez and Maddux to the Dodgers. Even to a lesser extent, Walker, Maddux, and Nevin. Nevin could play some third, or they could put him at first and move Nomar to third.

[davearm]

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

 

If the rumors of bad blood between Colletti and the Cubs are true, I don't see much happening on this front.

 

It's become quite funny to me. We have all of their missing pieces.

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

[goonys evil twin]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved.

[Neuby]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most

definitely get involved.

 

Maddux to the Dodgers with everyone knowing that if Maddux intends to suit up next season at all it will be as a Cub is more likely.

[grassbass]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved.

 

I would also imagine the Dodgers would do everything within their power to get Ramirez to waive the opt-out if LA was giving the Cubs anything of value in exchange for him. They could renegotiate his current contract, offer another guaranteed year, perhaps offer him an opt-out clause after 2007 in exchange for a little more money next year.

[abuck1220]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most

definitely get involved.

 

Maddux to the Dodgers with everyone knowing that if Maddux intends to suit up next season at all it will be as a Cub is more likely.

 

if maddux comes back to the cubs in '07 i'm going to be oh so disappointed.

[ManCrushOnNomar]

Here's the trade I've been hoping for:

 

Maddux, Howry, and Walker for Lastings Milledge

 

I'd even throw in Eyre or Dempster if they demanded.

[RynoRules]

Prior and Walker for Milledge and Heilman.

 

This would basically be Prior for Milledge and Heilman.

[Rob]

I really don't like Milledge that much, in response to the previous two offers.

[beowulf28]

FWIW, here are some trade rumblings as reported by Ken Rosenthal.

 

The Mets have insisted for months that they won't trade their top position prospect, Class AAA outfielder Lastings Milledge. But a growing number of major-league executives believe that the Mets will indeed part with Milledge, 21, if they can get the right starting pitcher in return.

 

 

The Dodgers' biggest need is pitching, but the team isn't ruling out a move to improve its offense, especially now that second baseman Jeff Kent is on the disabled list with a sore muscle on his left side.

 

The Cubs have a lot the Dodgers could use at the moment. They've reportedly expressed interest in Maddux. They have the middle relief help that LA could use. Dempster may interest them as a closer. And with Kent out Todd Walker might even interest them.

 

All I can say is...I HATE THE METS! :x

[soccer10k]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved.

 

Just to play devil's advocate, how would the commissioner's office know? If nothing came out to the press and this scenario happened, how would anybody know that it wasn't just Aramis wanting to return to Wrigley in 2007?

[CubsBullsBears]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved.

 

Just to play devil's advocate, how would the commissioner's office know? If nothing came out to the press and this scenario happened, how would anybody know that it wasn't just Aramis wanting to return to Wrigley in 2007?

They'll suspect something fishy. That Ramirez viods his contract, the Cubs make the excat same offer, and he pounces on it. That is very fishy. And any trade w/ the Dodgers needs to involve breaking Furcal's wrist.

[CP_414]

Jayson Stark said on BBTN the Mets are considering sending Milledge to PHI for Abreu. Imagine adding Abreu to that lineup.

[ChiCubsFan]

Abreu on the Mets would be sick. Delgado, Wright, Reyes, Abreu, Beltran...not bad.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The Mets need pitching much more than they need another bat.

[jjgman21]

Jayson Stark said on BBTN the Mets are considering sending Milledge to PHI for Abreu. Imagine adding Abreu to that lineup.

 

I heard that too. that makes no damn sense. I remember criticizing Jocketty for getting Rolen when the Cards needed pitching to put them over the top, but this trade takes that similar theory to it's absolute extreme. not only do the Mets get a guy they really don't need (don't forget Floyd is really heating up too), they add a ton of payroll and gets rid of a potentially great player (Jocketty didn't go that far).

 

all of the rumors I have heard the past couple of days make no damn sense. then again, the one trade that went down (Nats-Reds) made no damn sense either.

 

maybe Hendry is playing the Mets against the Dodgers for Maddux, and this is the Mets posturing to gain some leverage in that situation? either Ethier or Milledge coming our way? hey, I can dream, can't I?

[soccer10k]

Here's a question.

 

What would prevent Hendry from sitting down with Aramis Ramirez and saying, "you've got this opt-out clause, so here's what we'd like to do. We'd like to trade you to the Dodgers, and then have you opt out, so we can re-sign you. On the first day of free agency, I'll put on the table the exact same 4/$45 deal with a 2-year void option."

 

And then everything goes down just like that. Cubs send Ramirez for, say, Joel Guzman, play him at 3B for the next couple months, then re-up with Ramirez after the season, and move Guzman to the OF in 2007.

 

Is there anything to prevent this sort of handshake agreement?

 

Besides general business ethics, yes, the commissioner's office would most definitely get involved.

 

Just to play devil's advocate, how would the commissioner's office know? If nothing came out to the press and this scenario happened, how would anybody know that it wasn't just Aramis wanting to return to Wrigley in 2007?

They'll suspect something fishy. That Ramirez viods his contract, the Cubs make the excat same offer, and he pounces on it. That is very fishy. And any trade w/ the Dodgers needs to involve breaking Furcal's wrist.

 

Again, say Ramirez voids his contract but in every interview he gives before (but after the season) he says he wants to return to the Cubs. Then say they offer him close to (not exactly) the same type of deal. If Ramirez says he wants to return to the team, and the Cubs say they want him to return, how is that fishy? That situation - maybe not the voiding of a contract part - has happened before. Player is on a losing team. Player gets traded to winning team at the deadline. Player returns to original team in the offseason. Obviously it doesn't happen all the time but it has happened before.

 

Again, devil's advocate.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Jayson Stark said on BBTN the Mets are considering sending Milledge to PHI for Abreu. Imagine adding Abreu to that lineup.

 

I heard that too. that makes no damn sense. I remember criticizing Jocketty for getting Rolen when the Cards needed pitching to put them over the top, but this trade takes that similar theory to it's absolute extreme. not only do the Mets get a guy they really don't need (don't forget Floyd is really heating up too), they add a ton of payroll and gets rid of a potentially great player (Jocketty didn't go that far).

 

all of the rumors I have heard the past couple of days make no damn sense. then again, the one trade that went down (Nats-Reds) made no damn sense either.

 

maybe Hendry is playing the Mets against the Dodgers for Maddux, and this is the Mets posturing to gain some leverage in that situation? either Ethier or Milledge coming our way? hey, I can dream, can't I?

 

You think Hendry is smart enough to pit one team against the other, in the persuit of a mediocre starting pitching?

 

I love Maddux, and he is a HOF, but any team---in this case LA and NY---an Andre Ethier or a Lastings Milledge (shades of Kazmir for V. Zambrano ringing loud in NY, perhaps?) should be laugh at. I take a solid package of Willy Aybar and Joel Hanrahan/Jonathon Broxton for Maddux right now, tho.

[goonys evil twin]

Jayson Stark said on BBTN the Mets are considering sending Milledge to PHI for Abreu. Imagine adding Abreu to that lineup.

 

I heard that too. that makes no damn sense. I remember criticizing Jocketty for getting Rolen when the Cards needed pitching to put them over the top, but this trade takes that similar theory to it's absolute extreme. not only do the Mets get a guy they really don't need (don't forget Floyd is really heating up too), they add a ton of payroll and gets rid of a potentially great player (Jocketty didn't go that far).

 

all of the rumors I have heard the past couple of days make no damn sense. then again, the one trade that went down (Nats-Reds) made no damn sense either.

 

maybe Hendry is playing the Mets against the Dodgers for Maddux, and this is the Mets posturing to gain some leverage in that situation? either Ethier or Milledge coming our way? hey, I can dream, can't I?

 

You think Hendry is smart enough to pit one team against the other, in the persuit of a mediocre starting pitching?

 

I love Maddux, and he is a HOF, but any team---in this case LA and NY---an Andre Ethier or a Lastings Milledge (shades of Kazmir for V. Zambrano ringing loud in NY, perhaps?) should be laugh at. I take a solid package of Willy Aybar and Joel Hanrahan/Jonathon Broxton for Maddux right now, tho.

 

I can't see them trading Milledge for Maddux, but maybe if the Cubs added something to the package to make it more enticing?