"... the Mets offered different packages of prospects that included either outfielder Carlos Gomez or outfield prospect Fernando Martinez but not both, declining to include the one extra prospect the Twins requested to clinch the deal according to people familiar with those talks." -Jon Heyman/SI.com, on a potential Johan Santana dealOf course, the Mets aren't willing to but both players in the deal. They're holding them back for five years from now when they make that inevitable Martinez for Mark Mulder (after his fifth rotator cuff surgery) deal to fill a hole in the bullpen, after trading Carlos Gomez for Jose Molina deal to fill that back-up catcher hole. That's called forward thinking, my friends.
There's going to be a large contingent of you that will say that after trading Lastings Milledge, to trade the other two outfield prospects in any deal ... whether it be for Johan Santana or Carlos Zambrano or Sandy Koufax stepping out of the time machine ... is insane, especially when you still have to sign Santana to a seven year, $800 gazillion deal. There will be others that say that the price for Santana is going to come down with each passing day. And there will be still more of you that will preach the virtue of patience. If you are in this large group, your reasoning is sound.
But let me ask you this:
If the Mets have a history of "over-hyping" their prospects, rushing them up the ladder too quickly or what have you, and you have an opportunity to turn these prospects into the best pitcher in baseball, then doesn't history teach you that you should do it? Have the Mets forgotten this quickly that Lastings Milledge was once a major chip to get Manny Ramirez or Roy Oswalt, and wound up getting them Brian Schneider and Ryan Church? Are we all going to be on this space five years from now sighing "you know, we could have had Johan Santana for Gomez and Martinez, and all we got in a trade was John Patterson, Ronnie Belliard, and Paul Lo Duca?" History tells us that this is exactly the predicament that we'll be in come 2013. So when will the Mets learn from history rather than be eternally doomed to repeat it?
Trading the two remaining outfield prospects would be a huge risk. Sure, the Mets can play it safe as they always do, and be that team that stands in the corner at the party eating chips all night, afraid to ask the homecoming queen to dance. Or, they can show their fans that they're interested being the mouthwash that rinses out the taste of disaster and bringing in (and paying for) the best pitcher of his time frame, while willing to take a big risk to improve the here and now...while actually making an effort to change the fortunes of the future by changing the way they draft and develop players (another rant for another time)? When will this franchise step off the carousel of safety and mediocrity and actually walk in a straight line towards that brass ring?
Food for thought. Disagree at will.