Here is another way to look at this: The Yanks felt similarly after the 1995 season about a young corner infielder with power (Russ Davis) and a talented lefty starter (Sterling Hitchcock) as the Mets feel now about the powerful Ike Davis and lefty Niese. The Yanks turned their duo into dynasty cornerstones Tino Martinez and Jeff Nelson.
This is not advocating trades, but is a suggestion not to close avenues in favor of a marketing strategy.
Let’s focus a bit more on Davis to make this point. What do you think will be his best year, something like .275 with 30 homers? That is good. But it probably never makes him one of the 10 best first basemen in the game.
A couple of people emailed me about this column so here’s this.
OK, on that last point first: By WAR, Davis is the 11th best first baseman in the league this season, right now. A lot of that is due to his defense per UZR, a stat known to fluctuate pretty wildly from year to year, but to the eye Davis has undoubtedly been pretty sharp at first base.
But even by offense-only stats like OPS, Davis falls right near the middle of the pack of Major League first basemen, though a bit on the short side. Of course, he’s doing it while playing half his games in Citi Field, while only 23 years old, and with only half a season above A-ball under his belt.
Davis may never be the best hitting first baseman in the Majors, but it is far too early to say he’ll never be among the best hitting first basemen in the Majors, nor that his defense won’t be enough to mitigate the difference between him and the top-tier offensive players at the position.
Also, for what it’s worth, if Davis hits .275 with 30 home runs and maintains his penchant for the base on balls, he almost certainly will be among the 10 best first basemen in the game offensively, provided the offensive environment remains anything like the way it is this year.
Now, all that said, I agree in some way with the general thrust of Sherman’s piece: Yes, the Mets should focus on winning over marketing. I write that all the time. 100% on board with that thesis. And yes, they should keep an open mind to all trade possibilities, even the ones including popular young players like Davis.
But though I recognize that comparing current players and situations to similar ones from the past is a fun and persistent part of sports analysis, it’s difficult to follow Sherman’s Davis/Niese:Davis/Hitchcock analogy through to its conclusion without realizing its massive faults.
Russ Davis was indeed a well-regarded prospect, but he was two years older than Ike Davis and had only 123 Major League plate appearances when the Yanks dealt him. Hitchcock, too, was older than Niese and, though his pedestrian 1995 showed promise, did not have a season in the bag as impressive as Niese’s 2010.
Plus, it should be noted that the Yankees held onto a different lefty in 1995: Andy Pettitte. They also neglected to trade Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada or Mariano Rivera, all of whom debuted that season, for Tino Martinez and Jeff Nelson.
And that’s the thing, really: Drawing the comparison between the two is to ignore how the Yanks’ core of young players carried the team to championships, and to say that the Mets are only a Tino Martinez and a Jeff Nelson away from a World Series berth. Neither seems reasonable.
Besides, the Yankees have a luxury the Mets don’t, like it or not: a near-unlimited payroll.
It seems almost unconscionable to me that anyone could write an entire column suggesting the Mets consider trading their young players and not mention even once that those young players are all cost-controlled for the next several seasons, providing the Mets potentially productive players to field while they get out from under their albatross contracts and payroll flexibility once those contracts expire.
But all that said, again, Sherman’s right that they should consider everything. Plus he advocates trading for pieces that will help the club in the long term, which I support. The Mets should just think long and hard before they consider trading young, cost-controlled players that have proven they can hold their own in the Majors, since those aren’t all that easy to come by.
Tedquarters 
I never understand these types of articles. The Mets should trade this guy, or that guy blah blah blah.
How about, like you said, the Mets should make any moves available that improve the team now and in the future.
If that means trading prospects, do it, trading vets, do it, whatever.
I understand it. There’s space to fill in papers, blogs that need updating, airwaves that need filling. There’s only so many times you can say, “the Mets should make any moves available that improve the team now and in the future.”
Well I understand it too, I guess I should have said I dont understand why people take these articles seriously.
Yeah, that’s a much better question.
Hee. “Long and hard”.
Whether or not that’s a Beavis and Butthead reference, I agree.
I heard Beavis and Butthead is comming back, and that MTV is producing new episodes.
Who exactly does he think we’re going to get for Ike and Niese that will turn into long-term cornerstones? When was the last time somewhat established young major league players were traded for more than a rental?
Honestly not sure what you would get for Ike, but certainly something worthwhile.
But, you should get a ton back for Neise. After the year he is putting up as a rookie, and being a lefty, he is probably the single most valuable palyer (trade wise) on the team right now.
Every team needs SP. And young, effective, lefties under cheap team control for many years to come? super valuable.
If anything, the Mets should be looking to trade for another Neise (maybe a RH one), not get rid of the one they have.
But what exactly are you going to get back for Niese that’s better than Niese. The question isn’t whether you get something worthwhile it’s whether you get something more worthwhile than they are. Exactly who/what are these worthwhile pieces that you’re going to get that would make trading them make sense. Yeah every team needs a young effective lefty under control for many years, every team including the Mets.
well, that is a different question.
logically, you only trade someone like Neise if you are getting something just as good back, but ofr a different position. And of course, you have a surplus of SP to replace him!
The garza deal was a classic case. 1 team had extra SP but needed OFs. The other team had OF but needed SP. So, a excess for excess deal gets done, and in theory, both teams get better.
If the Mets trade neise, they will get better at some spot hopefully, but create a giant, gaping chasm in the rotation.
The Garza deal is an example in theory but in practice the Twins didn’t actually gain they traded Garza for a piece that’s been easily replaceable for them at this point and well less valuable. Plus Garza wasn’t anywhere near established, a big reason he was traded was because of his struggles. It’d be more akin to swapping F-mart for someone like James McDonald, not a players who have established they’re regular big leaders like Niese and Ike. (Plus Sherman is talking about trading them for actually established all-star type talent, which Delmon Young was/is no where near)
I mean I understand the point you’re trying to make but my biggest issue with the original article is that once you actually get outside of “theory” there’s not many, if any, realistic scenarios. Sure it’s nice to say trade Davis/Niese for cornerstone players…but when someone actually attempts to name realistic examples o these types of moves it’s pretty much impossible.
I should say it’s nearly impossible to come up with realistic trades where we’re actually better off.
Davis and Niese would land us Prince Fielder, but then we’d have to overpay Fielder when he becomes a free agent. But that’s the kind of trade that is plausible. Two good, young players under team control for years to a small or mid-market team for a great player who the team will soon no longer be able to afford.
And for the record, I see no reason to trade either Davis or Niese at this time, particularly the latter.
Well said. I would just add one point. This isn’t fantasy baseball, and it’s not only about winning. As you say, the Yanks traded their 4th and 5th best prospects but kept Jeter, Posada, and Rivera. There’s tremendous value to the franchise and to the fan base of having lifetime Mets. Not that we would know. We’re still cursing the Seaver trade and thinking about what might have been with Dwight & Darryl.
Fun fact: According to Fangraph’s wOBA, Davis is tied 14th among firstbasemen, so his 11th place in WAR isn’t all UZR/defense inflated.