3 Mets trades we immediately questioned and turned out to be as bad as expected

New York Mets v Washington Nationals
New York Mets v Washington Nationals / Jamie Squire/GettyImages
1 of 3
Next

When you know, you know. There are certain New York Mets trades the fans just have a sense about being bad ones. Something like the deal with the Seattle Mariners for Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz didn’t look so hot after one year. It was a highly-debated deal that has actually benefited the Amazins far more.

Then there is a stack of trades of a completely different kind. These are the ones that before the player even puts on a Mets uniform we question it. Where was logic when this deal was made?

Taking three examples from over the years, these are three bad Mets trades that fans already knew would turn out poorly.

1) NY Mets fans knew the Victor Zambrano trade was a dud

The day was July 30, 2004, when the Mets acquired Victor Zambrano and Bartolome Fortunato from the Tampa Bay Devil Rays for Jose Diaz and Scott Kazmir. The latter was a top pitching prospect in the system. He would go on to have a successful career with several teams, including Tampa Bay who first benefited from this deal.

Zambrano, on the other hand, wasn’t the right addition for the 2004 Mets hoping to sneak into the postseason. He had never been more than average during his days in Tampa Bay. Not much changed with the Mets.

Zambrano would make 35 starts and 4 relief appearances with them over the course of three seasons. He made just 3 in 2004 and 5 more in 2006. Injuries took their toll on him as they did Fortunato. Oddly, they both had a 3.86 ERA in 2004 for the club. However, Fortunato missed all of 2005 due to an injury and would only appear in 3 more big league innings when he returned the following season.

What made this a worthy trade for this list is how poorly Zambrano was pitching at the time of the deal. He was 9-7 with a 4.43 ERA for the Rays. His 6.8 walks per 9 should have been enough to stay clear.

2) NY Mets fans rightfully felt wrong when they saw the Darin Ruf trade

From 2004 to 2022, we have a trade that continues to linger with Mets fans because of how recently it took place. The Darin Ruf trade with the San Francisco Giants was questionable from the moment we saw it cost the team J.D. Davis. The two players are similar in some ways. Was Ruf even an upgrade?

Ruf was batting .216/.328/.373 for the Giants at the time of the deal. He’d go on to bat .152/.216/.197 in 74 plate appearances for the Mets. Ruf, who was brought in to mash lefties, was put in the ultimate position to succeed. He couldn’t have performed much worse.

Meanwhile, the Giants acquired Davis and three prospects. Thomas Szapucki, Carson Seymour, and Nick Zwack all went to San Francisco in the deal. Even if Ruf replicated his numbers he had with the Giants whilst in blue and orange this is such a bad trade on paper.

We all remember where we were when we saw the trade announced. With each name added by the MLB insiders, our disdain grew.

There was no way Billy Eppler thought this was the right move to make. For the prospects, okay. For Davis plus three minor leaguers made this a trade doomed before Ruf’s jersey began production. It will live in infamy—but maybe not as much as this other trade.

3) No NY Mets trade will ever compare to the Tom Seaver deal

Even if you weren’t alive for the Tom Seaver trade, it’s still possible to understand why this would have torn social media apart when it happened. Trading Seaver away for anything would have enraged fans back in 1977. For it to bring back four average players at best only made things worse.

Doug Flynn, Steve Henderson, Dan Norman, and Pat Zachry will forever remain tied to the Seaver deal. Despite different levels of success from the foursome during their time with the Mets, they didn’t compare to The Franchise.

Trading a big league star for younger players works less than it does. Remember how mad fans were when the Mets traded Anthony Kay and Simeon Woods-Richardson for Marcus Stroman? Before many of us digested the deal, many pounced to criticize the move.

The Seaver deal was much different and came during a time period when prospects were much less known by the fans. The Cincinnati Reds could have sent the Mets their four most promising prospects and this would have been a trade with a bad feeling behind it.

There was no chance of salvaging this trade in the eyes of the fans. The Mets were undergoing a major rebuild with no intention of winning. The Seaver deal was a money-saving move. It accomplished that while alienating the fans.

Next. 5 surprising Mets playoff heroes. dark

Next