TAKE A GUESS
When it comes to trades, nobody knows the verdict
HERE’S the thing about predicting trades in real time:
It’s like the way the late William Goldman once so perfectly described Hollywood: “Nobody knows anything.” We think we know. Fans do. Agents do. Sportswriters do. Talk radio does. We think we can spot a heist a mile away. But we can’t. Not every time.
You may recall a column I wrote a few days ago that tore open the anxiety closets of Mets fans everywhere, detailing some of the worst trades in franchise history. But here’s the thing: In the moment, when they happened, most people thought the Mets had done wisely in both 1969 and 1971 when they traded away Amos Otis and Nolan Ryan — 13 All-Star Game appearances between them — for Joe Foy (from Kansas City) and Jim Fregosi (from the Angels).
David Wright helped make this phenomenon go away, but the Mets searched for years — for decades — to find a reliable everyday third baseman. It was that obsession that made them pine for Foy and moon over Fregosi. And in the moment it seemed the Mets had done well — Otis never responded to Gil Hodges (who was certain to be in charge for a decade or more), and Ryan could never keep his blister-infested fingers out of Gus Mauch’s pickle jar.
And … well. That isn’t how either trade is remembered now.
Even trades that work out well for the Mets — Keith Hernandez-for-Neil Allen-and-Rick Ownbey — aren’t always what they seem. Yes, there was excitement when Frank Cashen pulled off that deal June 15, 1983, but there were also plenty of red flags: Allen was believed to be on the verge of stardom. Hernandez had been an MVP but was known to have his off-field demons and if Whitey Herzog didn’t want him on his team … well, what did that say?
The fact is, the overwhelming number of trades aren’t Brock-for- Broglio. Some trades look like steals up front but over time look more and more balanced (which is, after all, what a good trade is supposed to do). In truth, the very best trades should elicit the kind of debate this Mets-Mariners trade has: Is Robinson Cano worth it? Is he still productive? Did the Mets give up too many prospects, not get enough cash? Does Edwin Diaz make all the rest of it secondary noise?
We can shout now, and we can feel like we’re right.
But we won’t know. Not after a month. Not after a year. Maybe not until five or six years are past. And even then … This has always been one of my favorites:
Many Mets fans jumped at a big omission from my column the other day: when they traded Rusty Staub to the Tigers for an all-but-finished Mickey Lolich. One reader, Lou Ventura, could even cite the date of the trade — Dec. 12, 1975 — instantly, as a date that will live in Mets infamy. And yes, that trade was crushing for the Mets. Lolich was 8-13 in his only year as a Met, and his physique made David Wells’ look like Kent Tekulve; Rusty was an All-Star in Detroit and finished fifth in the MVP vote in 1978 when he drove in 121 runs. But I ask you: As popular as Rusty was as a Met (and it was earned; not only was he a key cog in the drive to the ’73 pennant, but his charity work will forever be remembered and his good will forever revered), the Mets got 3 ½ years of Rusty’s prime (he missed 96 games in ’72 with a broken hand) in exchange for all but 184 games of Ken Singleton’s decidedly borderline Hall of Fame career (his lifetime OPS was .824; Rusty’s was .793, and as a Met it was .778).
Couldn’t that be considered a steal, too?
Maybe, maybe not. The fact is, it’s a definitely a point of conversation. Which, at their base, is what every trade should be. Like this one.