I would say it's slightly better than typical Metsblog chatter, but not much better. As it's essentially Reyes for 2 average players of the type that are easily obtainable without sacrificing superstars and two prospects, one of which is a Niese-type that isn't particularly difficult to find, you're essentially betting Reyes on Bucholtz, and that's far too steep a bet for one prospect, regardless of how strong he is. What surprises me is that no one considered the more reasonable option: redo the deal with Beltran instead of Reyes and Anderson instead of Bowden.
Beltran is a bona-fide superstar signed for 2 more years at a contract that, while certainly not cheap, is not outrageous. As he is not home-grown, much older than Reyes, and had expressed a desire to play for the Yankees, there is little reason to consider him an essential component of the team's identity as is Reyes, whose phenomenal growth Met-fans watched lovingly for years (before many turned on him and Wright for the most retarded reasons imaginable like the piss-ant fairweather friends we all know several Met-fans to be). He is a huge upgrade over Ellsbury and would lock the Sox up as a favorite in the division--and give them a good shot at humiliating the Yanks in 14 straight games. Plus, the New York media would overlook the fact that the trade almost punts 2009, since they are stupid enough to think that Ellsbury's whiteness and grission compensate for Beltran's unbelievable awesomeness. ("WHooOOOo's kidding whOOOoooOOOoo? Of coa's Ellsbury's bedda' than Beltran!!")
Beltran for Lars, Bucholz, and Elsbury is a deal. Easily leveraged around Murphy and certain other lower-level Red-Sox prospects.
Ironically, though the Yanks and Mets don't do deals, their needs and resources seem to compliment each other. Every word I said about the above trade could be said regarding Beltran for Austin Jackson, Phil Hughes, and Melky. ("WHooOOOo's kidding whOOOoooOOOoo? Of coa's Melky's bedda' than Beltran!! He's got like 10 clutch hoemuhs")
This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.