Would you deal Pagan?

I’m throwing this out there for you to mull over, much like Omar Minaya will be asked to do in the upcoming weeks.

PAGAN: Teams like him.

Other teams aren’t stupid, they see what is going on with the Mets rotation and in their outfield. They see, like most of us here, that the rotation, although going well now is not a sure thing. We don’t know how long Hisanori Takahashi and RA Dickey will continue this run. They also have no interest in sending a veteran pitcher to the Mets for the likes of John Maine and Oliver Perez.

The Seattle Mariners are on record for saying they want major league ready hitters; players they can immediately plug into their lineup.

The Mets have precious few of those to offer, but there is one whose trade value is high. Don’t think about Carlos Beltran. With his injury history and salary, he’s not going anywhere.

The Mets are on record saying they won’t deal Ike Davis, Jennry Mejia or Jon Niese in a package for Cliff Lee as a rental.

The Mets’ best major league ready chip is Angel Pagan, whose role will be severely limited when Beltran returns. While there’s no disputing his current value to the Mets, that value might be what it takes to land a Lee or Roy Oswalt.

The scouting reports say Pagan is the Mets’ best athlete, but he doesn’t have a long track record. He was good enough last year to warrant a chance this season, but would be languishing on the bench if Beltran were healthy, or perhaps platooning in center if Gary Matthews hadn’t forgotten to hit.

Fact is, this is Pagan’s first extensive test and he’s passing. The Mets aren’t the only ones to notice. Seems incomprehensible after last night, but Pagan is no longer a non-descript player. Teams covet his athleticism and talent. Teams will be asking about him next month. Minaya’s decision must be to determine if this is Pagan’s ceiling with the Mets or if this guy is a budding star.

I wouldn’t deal Pagan for a rental, but if I could lock down that pitcher, I might make that move depending on the other participants in the deal.

So, would you do it? Would you deal Pagan for an ace pitcher, especially if you could get that pitcher long term, say like an Oswalt?

Two years ago, the Mets eschewed dealing Daniel Murphy, keeping him for his potential upside. How did that work out for the Mets? Minaya has a lot of decisions to make, and this will be one of them.

18 thoughts on “Would you deal Pagan?

  1. No deal. if we lose Pagan and Beltran doesnt come back. we are done in center field.
    Currently its our outfield gloves and bats keeping us in the running.
    Yes we need a pitcher, buts too high a price in my book.

  2. Good question JD. I’m always a big fan of “selling high.” But in this case like Steve C said, there is just too big of a question mark in Beltran making it back. In addition, since F-Mart again has showed he is incapable of staying healthy for a full season, it would be hard to use him as a fall back.

  3. Guys. Undoubtedly the biggest variable in the equation is Beltran’s health. It’s only speculation on whether he’ll come back whole. That’s why these trades are so difficult to make. There’s input from so many different people, from scouts to coaches to front office types. Rarely do these things go smoothly where everybody is on the same page.-JD

  4. 3. exactly and based on past health issues and outages I would not sell a high performer at this stage of the game. give away mejia/tejada/cora(I cringe to even say that)

    But dont touch the stars that have earned that name..

  5. “Major league ready”? Pagan will turn 29 in nine days. While he’s performing well and can be contractually controlled, he’s not exactly a prospect. What’s more, considering his advancing age, he’s already, arguably, in his prime years; in other words, he’s not likely to get much better than this.

    But, besides that, the Mets will need Pagan to play RF, because a pennant-contending team can’t afford the offense (or lack thereof) being provided by Frenchy. In short, trading Pagan would be among the silliest things they could do right now.

    The real issue being danced around here is Mejia: Are they suddenly sending him to AA to be a starter because they’ve been absorbing the wisdom of the Delcos blog or are they using these next four weeks to showcase his ability as a starter for a trade-deadline deal?

  6. Also JD, I doubt that Pagan’s contribution will be “severely limited,” once Beltran comes back. I’m sure Beltran is not going to play every day when he returns and Pagan like Tiffany said will be called upon to play RF often in replacement of Frenchy. So there will be plenty of AB’s for Pagan, IMO.

    (5) As far as Mejia goes, it’s about 95% of the blogs, not JD’s only. LOL. Mejia from what I have read still has a bunch of fans in Major league front offices throughout. So I don’t think they are showcasing anything, he would be a wanted commodity in any trade given he’s still considered the Met top pitching prospect.

  7. (6) But which has more trade value: Mejia demonstrating he can retire big-league hitters in mop-up relief situations or Mejia dominating AA hitters as a starting pitcher?

  8. Tiffany (5): Can’t it be both? Can’t they be sending him down to train him as a starter, while at the same time keeping their minds open if they are blown away with a trade proposal? That would answer, in part, your question in Comment 7. Personally, I think he demonstrates more value in the minors than in sporadic mop-up roles. Assuming, of course, he dominates in the minors. … All that being said, my get tells me Mejia isn’t going anywhere but back to the Mets later this summer.-JD

  9. Regarding Francoeur, he provides a better arm and perhaps a little pop, but other than that, Pagan has proven to be the superior player. Four doesn’t go into three well, and in the end I believe it will be Francoeur’s time that is cut the most.-JD

  10. (6) I don’t think either is effected. He was/is regarded as the Mets best pitching prospect. Even if he started and pitched mediocrely (is that even a word?) in AA, it wouldn’t effect his trade value IMO.

  11. (10) I think there’s a big difference between a kid who projects to be a reliever and one who projects to be a starter, particularly so if it’s front-end-of-the-rotation potential.

    (8) It’s the sudden change of direction that piques my interest. It’s not like Mejia wasn’t cutting it or that they needed a fresh arm in the pen; rather, it was a roster move they didn’t have to make. And it begs the question “Why now?” Certainly, you could make the argument that it’s better for Mejia’s development, but are they a better bullpen with Parnell there instead of Mejia? If the answer is no, then it begs the question why the sudden interest in making Mejia a starter.

  12. (12) I would think there are some GM’s who view him as a starter, and some who view him as a top bullpen guy. It comes down to how the Mets value him. If they truly project him to be a pen guy, then I would deal him in the right trade.

  13. 13. it would be nice to have this young pitcher grow in the organization. but i think they put him in way too quick. it showed in his fizzling the last several times out.
    they need to nurture.. whether they deal him or not is anyone’s guess.

  14. (14) I don’t think long term it’s much of a big deal. But I am glad they put him back where I think he belongs. But just remember his last time out:

    Jeter: Groundout to 2nd
    Swisher: Fly out to CF
    Texiera: Strikeout

    So he certainly ended on an excellent note

  15. I don’t think it can be underestimated that part of the reason the Mets chose to promote Mejia at the start of the season was job security. Because they had a hole in the eighth inning, and with that arm, they thought he was worth the gamble they could catch lightning in a bottle the way the Yankees did initially with Joba Chamberlain.-JD

  16. (13) I think there’s a big difference, in terms of what other GMs value, between a reliever and a starter. Typically, relievers are starters who don’t have enough of a repertoire to go through an order multiple times. I think the Mets are showcasing Mejia’s talents as a starter to lift his value accordingly.

    (17) So, why the change now? Are they better with Parnell rather than Mejia in their bullpen?