Mets- Indians trade

Discussion in 'New York' started by Cheater, Dec 11, 2001.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Cheater

    Cheater

    Messages:
    304
    The problem is the Mets apparently have a budget. If there were no budget, they could just sign Tino and sit Zeile on the bench.
  2. Bill Furniture

    Bill Furniture Flounder

    Messages:
    10,182
    I'm surprised that the Mets were able to get alomar. Who did he piss off?
  3. Crazyphingers

    Crazyphingers

    Messages:
    117
    Ozzy

    Egypt as been around much longer then the US has, you wanna go live there??

    I am just fuckin with ya cause I hate the Knicks & Giants. I like the Rangers and Yankees.
  4. lapdancefan

    lapdancefan

    Messages:
    262
    You can unload anybody if you're willing to pick up his salary. Someone will take him if they only have to pay him the minimum. It looks like Minnesota and Montreal are going to be forced to field teams for 1 more year so they are good candidates.
  5. Slinky Bender

    Slinky Bender The All Powerful Moderator

    Messages:
    19,709
    "Mets- Indians trade"

    Yes, I'd do that.
  6. Cheater

    Cheater

    Messages:
    304
    They won't get Tino b/c no one wants Zeile, and they plan on moving Piazza to 1B in a couple of years.
  7. lapdancefan

    lapdancefan

    Messages:
    262
    Good deal for the Mets if they can keep Alomar and Justice in a good mood. Both have been head cases in the past. Let's hope their bad moods don't feed on each other (see Bonilla and Henderson).

    Assuming they will be OK (and I have to be optimistic, I'm a Met fan) this essentially replaces Ventura with Alomar in the Met infield (definitely an improvement) and Lawton with Justice in the Met outfield (break even or better).

    Now have they begun negotiating with Tino Martinez yet?
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2001
  8. Cheater

    Cheater

    Messages:
    304
    No wonder they can't skate.
  9. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    you're missing the point...

    if you think the nets, islanders and jets are on the same level as franchises as the knicks, rangers and giants....than you will never get the point. the browns never won a super bowl....but as long as modell owned them and kept them in clevland...they were considered a great franchise. why do you think the NFL bent over backwards to award them another team and to force modell to leave the name...it's about their history. the yanks, giants, knicks and rangers all have it....... the others don't. the cubs and redsox are no different. they have history. lack of championships doesn't make them lower than the diamondbacks or marlins who have both won in recent years. the yankees have it all that's why theres no comparison to them.
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2001
  10. Crazyphingers

    Crazyphingers

    Messages:
    117
    Ozzy

    No team in sports compares to the yanks, lets just make that clear!

    It is all about the championships. Just becasue the Knicks and Rangers have been around a long time does not give them anything. Look at the cubs or redsox, they have been around forever and never win shit

    There is a difference between having a history and having a history steeped with greatness. The yanks have both.

    The Knicks have a history of comming close and then bragging about being second best.

    The Rangers sold thier soles for the last cup.

    and the Giants just flat out bore there opponents to death and occasionally win.
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2001
  11. robnotbob

    robnotbob

    Messages:
    2,912
    Why wasn't I informed??

    A sports thread that mentions "mileage" and "cups" definitely gets my attention.

    I guess Fonzie moves to 3rd, like it or not. I think Escobar is gonna be a good one. So now the Mets have two of the best second baseman in the game. Unfortunately, they have the worst outfield.
  12. Cheater

    Cheater

    Messages:
    304
    I guess there is something to be said for blind loyalty.
    Look at Red Sox fans.
  13. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    it's not always about championships.

    the giants who were for a long time a sub par team, were always considered one of the landmark franchises in the NFL. same goes for the rangers and knicks. and you have to admit...the rangers and knicks got a lot of mileage from those two or three titles they won. the islanders won 4 straight cups that most forgot about already. you don't even know if they'll be here in a year. and lets not forget that they hold their parades in a parking lot. the mets...just don't even compare them to the yankees. the knicks...they win by default anyway.
  14. Crazyphingers

    Crazyphingers

    Messages:
    117
    Actually other then the yankees that is not exactly true. While the Knicks, rangers and Giants have been around forever they are not exactly standouts in there sports. In fact the Islanders have more cups then the Rangers and the the devils have the same amount in 70 less years.

    Go yanks
  15. Ozzy

    Ozzy

    Messages:
    15,725
    ok enoughs enough...

    we all know that the mets, jets, nets and islanders are the poor step children of new york. the yankees, giants, knicks and rangers have all the tradition and are considered among the legendary franchises in their respective sports, while the stepchildren are usually the laughing stock of their sports.
  16. Crazyphingers

    Crazyphingers

    Messages:
    117
    good trade for the mets, as long as Alnfonso doesn't mind the move to third, I mean leave to the mets to move there best young player out of his position yet again.

    Getting rid of escobar was a good move, considering he could not even become an everyday player in the worst outfield in the majors last year,
  17. Cheater

    Cheater

    Messages:
    304
    Mets get Roberto Alomar plus scrubs for Lawton, Riggan, Escobar and minor leaguers. Discuss.
    (At least the Mets "asshole" quotient has taken a significant leap upward with the acquisitions of Justice and Alomar)