Mets & Jays Deal Done (Dickey Signs for 2yrs/25 Million)

[mtf]

It's a debate of opinion/thoughts so there is no need to snap unnecessarily (not calling you out).

You know what I'm talking about- I'm trying to justify my thinking through this. We gave the mets our top prospects to take on Dickey. The purpose of the trade is to achieve the main goal, which the Jays have a better chance at now then say in however many years it takes them to develop into what they might become. I'm saying this based on how old Bautista or Edwin will be (I'm assuming at this point they are going to be a very significant pieces). Should the goal be achieved (playoff berth maybe a WS) then I believe whatever value was traded away is no longer relevant since that value would not have brought a playoff berth or possible WS today. It's been said many times, time will tell.

dw, I got that.

You're stating a lot of the obvious.

"The Blue Jays made this trade so they have a better chance of winning now"

Yes, that's quite clear.

It's also irrelevant to whether or not they overpaid, and whether or not overpaying was justified.

If the Jays had given up Travis D'Arnaud, Noah Syndergaard, Aaron Sanchez, Anthony Gose and Roberto Osuna for R.A. Dickey, that would also fit your argument of giving up prospects to "win now" but I highly doubt you'd be dismissing the value of prospects in a trade that ridiculous. R.A. Dickey is a great pitcher, but he has an approximate price/value, and that's the issue you don't seem to want to acknowledge.

Also, saying that the trade is justified if the Blue Jays win the World Series is a ridiculous way to evaluate trades. What if Dickey is horrible and they win in spite of him? You can't legitimately evaluate the trade of specific individuals by extraneous factors.

If you think that they gave up proportional value, that's a legitimate opinion. Jeffy25 basically said that's his opinion. That's different than what you're saying, which is "Who cares what the Jays gave up because they're a better team short-term". Look at what Atlanta gave up for Mark Texiera as an example of why that logic can be bad for an organization.

[Lifted]

From a Jays' fan perspective I view all the moves we made as a 3-team trade. The Jays win, Mets win, and Marlins lose.

Jays acquired Dickey, Johnson, Buehrle, Reyes, Bonafacio and two low-value catchers with experience catching Dickey.

Mets received two top-line prospects from the Jays, one at a premium position(catcher), for an older pitcher who was not going to re-sign.

Marlins acquired an *** raping.

[mtf]

From a Jays' fan perspective I view all the moves we made as a 3-team trade. The Jays win, Mets win, and Marlins lose.

Why? They're completely separate trades.

[miller74]

lol good haul for the marlins

[LeperMessiah]

You're stating a lot of the obvious.

"The Blue Jays made this trade so they have a better chance of winning now"

Yes, that's quite clear.

It's also irrelevant to whether or not they overpaid, and whether or not overpaying was justified.

If the Jays had given up Travis D'Arnaud, Noah Syndergaard, Aaron Sanchez, Anthony Gose and Roberto Osuna for R.A. Dickey, that would also fit your argument of giving up prospects to "win now" but I highly doubt you'd be dismissing the value of prospects in a trade that ridiculous. R.A. Dickey is a great pitcher, but he has an approximate price/value, and that's the issue you don't seem to want to acknowledge.

Also, saying that the trade is justified if the Blue Jays win the World Series is a ridiculous way to evaluate trades. What if Dickey is horrible and they win in spite of him? You can't legitimately evaluate the trade of specific individuals by extraneous factors.

If you think that they gave up proportional value, that's a legitimate opinion. Jeffy25 basically said that's his opinion. That's different than what you're saying, which is "Who cares what the Jays gave up because they're a better team short-term". Look at what Atlanta gave up for Mark Texiera as an example of why that logic can be bad for an organization.

Indeed!

Justification can only come with time.

But it wasn't that ridiculous, the trade stands as is- We can credit AA that much.

I do, but that clearly went out the window when the trigger was pulled for him- at a decent price to.

Not really when that is the End goal. Dickey can't be any more horrible then those prospects waiting in AAA purgatory, but he's been around so it's a better chance he'll preform than he won't. You even know this, Dickey's likelihood of preforming the higher level he has been in the past few season is better.

That's clearly the direction the team took a pretty decent price (not just prospects here). But giving all that up for Mark hasn't stop them from really competing today.

[mtf]

Indeed!

Justification can only come with time.

But it wasn't that ridiculous, the trade stands as is- We can credit AA that much.

I do, but that clearly went out the window when the trigger was pulled for him- at a decent price to.

Not really when that is the End goal. Dickey can't be any more horrible then those prospects waiting in AAA purgatory, but he's been around so it's a better chance he'll preform than he won't. You even know this, Dickey's likelihood of preforming the higher level he has been in the past few season is better.

That's clearly the direction the team took a pretty decent price (not just prospects here). But giving all that up for Mark hasn't stop them from really competing today.

Okay, so by your logic where the ends justify the means, how about this hypothetical scenario. What if the Blue Jays are a complete bust in 2013 and end up flopping like Boston did a couple years ago, meanwhile Travis D'Arnaud and Syndergaard go on to be hall of famers? Now the trade that you've deemed a success is suddenly a failure right?

This is why your logic is so flawed. The trade should be evaluated based on the current information at the time of the trade; on the value of the assets involved and the relative position of the organizations.

R.A. Dickey could go on to play as well as expected/hoped, and I personally believe he will, but the Blue Jays still overpaid in my opinion. The relative value of the assets that they gave up, at the time of the trade, was more than they received.

[LeperMessiah]

Okay, so by your logic where the ends justify the means, how about this hypothetical scenario. What if the Blue Jays are a complete bust in 2013 and end up flopping like Boston did a couple years ago, meanwhile Travis D'Arnaud and Syndergaard go on to be hall of famers? Now the trade that you've deemed a success is suddenly a failure right?

This is why your logic is so flawed. The trade should be evaluated based on the current information at the time of the trade; on the value of the assets involved and the relative position of the organizations.

R.A. Dickey could go on to play as well as expected/hoped, and I personally believe he will, but the Blue Jays still overpaid in my opinion. The relative value of the assets that they gave up, at the time of the trade, was more than they received.

Then the gamble didn't pay off, but both examples are the extreme ends and therefore the least likely scenario for either case. I didn't deem it a success, I have stated several times that the chance of success falls more favorably on the Blue jays than the potential of either of those guy's careers. Which is what the gamble is. But this trade won't really cripple the Jays foundation and ability to compete in coming years.

That's fine if you believe that, but going back to your example- will that over payment matter if it does leads to more success for the Blue jays? I'm sure you won't care at that point.

[mtf]

That's fine if you believe that, but going back to your example- will that over payment matter if it does leads to more success for the Blue jays? I'm sure you won't care at that point.

Don't be so sure. I've said all along, since this trade was just a rumor, that I believed that R.A. Dickey would do very well with the Blue Jays but that the asking price was far too high and not worth doing because of it. What Travis D'Arnaud and Noah Syndergaard turn into is irrelevant. It's what the Blue Jays could have got for them at this time which is relevant. I thought they're far too valuable to package for a 38 year old player of any quality.

If the Blue Jays had won the World Series in 2011, I still would have said the Mike Napoli for Frank Francisco trade was awful for them.

[LeperMessiah]

Don't be so sure. I've said all along, since this trade was just a rumor, that I believed that R.A. Dickey would do very well with the Blue Jays but that the asking price was far too high and not worth doing because of it. What Travis D'Arnaud and Noah Syndergaard turn into is irrelevant. It's what the Blue Jays could have got for them at this time which is relevant. I thought they're far too valuable to package for a 38 year old player of any quality.

If the Blue Jays had won the World Series in 2011, I still would have said the Mike Napoli for Frank Francisco trade was awful for them.

Ok, fair.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

Okay, so by your logic where the ends justify the means, how about this hypothetical scenario. What if the Blue Jays are a complete bust in 2013 and end up flopping like Boston did a couple years ago, meanwhile Travis D'Arnaud and Syndergaard go on to be hall of famers? Now the trade that you've deemed a success is suddenly a failure right?

This is why your logic is so flawed. The trade should be evaluated based on the current information at the time of the trade; on the value of the assets involved and the relative position of the organizations.

R.A. Dickey could go on to play as well as expected/hoped, and I personally believe he will, but the Blue Jays still overpaid in my opinion. The relative value of the assets that they gave up, at the time of the trade, was more than they received.

This might be true, but it was likely the only way they were going to get the guy they wanted (Dickey).

They had to overspend to make it happen, and it seems pretty clear to us all that they really wanted to make it happen.

Alderson played the waiting game and new he had a large market of interest for his 38 year old Cy Young knuckleballer.

He held all the cards after Grienke and Sanchez came off the market.

[mtf]

This might be true, but it was likely the only way they were going to get the guy they wanted (Dickey).

They had to overspend to make it happen, and it seems pretty clear to us all that they really wanted to make it happen.

Alderson played the waiting game and new he had a large market of interest for his 38 year old Cy Young knuckleballer.

He held all the cards after Grienke and Sanchez came off the market.

Maybe, although the only serious suitors at the time (discussed publicly anyway) were the Angels, Blue Jays and Rangers. The Angels didn't really have the assets to get it done, the Rangers decided that the Mets were asking too much (Olt + Buckel iirc) and backed out of trade talks. I don't think the legitimate interest was as great as you do, but neither of us really know for sure I suppose.

[YoungStuna]

Wow this thread is still going on? lol.

[YoungStuna]

I haven't commented too much on this deal.


That's mainly because I think it's a good deal for both sides. No clear winner.

The Jays get a great front end, top 20 pitcher in the game for pennies and got him to a team friendly deal that minimizes risk.

The Mets get solid prospects at important positions for one year of Dickey who wasn't going to do them any good this next season any way.

I like the deal for both sides. The Jays gave up some good prospects, but it's okay considering what they got and the position of their team.

So that's why I haven't said much. When a deal is so even, I don't really comment on it

/thread

It's a great deal for both sides, as both got exactly what they wanted.

[Imwrong]

Don't be so sure. I've said all along, since this trade was just a rumor, that I believed that R.A. Dickey would do very well with the Blue Jays but that the asking price was far too high and not worth doing because of it. What Travis D'Arnaud and Noah Syndergaard turn into is irrelevant. It's what the Blue Jays could have got for them at this time which is relevant. I thought they're far too valuable to package for a 38 year old player of any quality.

If the Blue Jays had won the World Series in 2011, I still would have said the Mike Napoli for Frank Francisco trade was awful for them.

What could the Blue Jays have gotten for them at this time, other than Dickey?

[Lifted]

Why? They're completely separate trades.

wow really?

I'm looking at what the Jays gave up to acquire all the players we received from both trades.

Jays gave up a bunch of high-ranking, unproven specs for a **** load of proven, high-calibre veterans. That's why the Jays win. It doesn't matter what we gave up to the Mets because the overall haul we received was far greater than what we lost.