Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Monday, December 05, 2005

Mets - Acquired Lo Duca

New York Mets - Acquired C Paul Lo Duca from the Florida Marlins for P Gaby Hernandez

Honestly, I’m not sure that Lo Duca’s really all that significant an upgrade from Ramon Castro, who finally hit when he was given regular at-bats.  2 years and $12 million or so is a cheaper deal than Ramon Hernandez is going, but considering Lo Duca is a lot older and regularly breaks down late in the season (though this was not the case in 2005, where he was just bland and middling the whole year), I’d much prefer Hernandez.  Even if Lo Duca’s preferable to Hernandez, I don’t think the size of the upgrade and the loss of Gaby Hernandez, who, while still a low-level pitching prospect, has a lot of talent, is worth making this trade.  I don’t like this as nearly as much as I liked the Delgado signing - the Mets gave up a top prospect, but they got a legitimately excellent player there.

2006 ZiPS Projection - Paul Lo Duca
————————————————————————————-
AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
————————————————————————————-
496 53 140 29 1   7 53 37 44   2 .282 .338 .387

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:05 AM | 45 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. mommy Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:24 AM (#1760549)
how many unfinished sentences are in that paragraph?
   2. AROM Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:27 AM (#1760560)
The big losers here are Ramon Hernandez and Bengie Molina. I don't know if any other team was considering paying them as much as the Mets would have. If the market for Molina disappears, I could think of worse things than him accepting arbitration from the Angels.

I'd like Bengie back for one year, just not for 2.
   3. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:27 AM (#1760561)
Can't argue with this TO. The Mets made a move that they absolutely had no reason to want to make and in doing so restricted their ability to acquire talent down the road by dealing a solid pitching prospect. Factoring in defense, there's no doubt in my mind that LoDuca 2006 will actually represent a *downgrade* over what Castro 2006 could have contributed.
   4. Michael Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:28 AM (#1760563)
Just 2 unfinished sentences. One for each remaining fan of the Florida Marlins.
   5. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:29 AM (#1760570)
I would have rather have had Castro start but I'm not going to blame Minaya for not wanting to start the season with a guy who was picked up off waivers last year as the starting catcher. I know some people are going to say that it was stupid to give up Gaby Hernandez for him but I don't think this is mortgaging the future anymore than signing Ramon Hernandez or Monlina would have considering the Mets would have had to give up their second round pick. In addition, the Mets don't have to give either free agent catcher a 3-5 year commitment. I don't really like this move all that much but I think some people are overreacting. Is Gaby Hernandez that much better than a 2nd round pick? I don't think he is.
   6. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:47 AM (#1760615)
Is Gaby Hernandez that much better than a 2nd round pick? I don't think he is.

TINSTAAPP, but Hernandez is quite a bit better than a second-round pick (to whom the team will have to pay a signing bonus).

Also, Hernandez would not have cost them a pick had Minaya waited until after the deadline to offer him a contract. No way could Towers risk Hernandez accepting arbitration.
   7. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:54 AM (#1760652)
No way could Towers risk Hernandez accepting arbitration.

Why not? Even if he accepted, he wouldn't get more than 10 million and there are plenty of teams willing to trade pay him that much for one season. Is there a rule that a player who has accepted arbitration can't be traded until a certain date. Polanco got traded last season after accepting. Either way, there is no way San Diego doesn't offer him arbitration.
   8. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 05, 2005 at 01:59 AM (#1760673)
If Hernandez isn't signed before 12/20/05, I'll wager that the Padres do not offer him arbitration. Since getting stuck with Randy Myers after a waiver claim to block a possible trade to the Braves, Towers has been very conservative when it comes to risking having to take on payroll that he doesn't want and/or can't afford. Even an $8M arbitration award would represent a serious budget problem for the Padres, and one that I don't see them risking.
   9. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:11 AM (#1760705)
Even an $8M arbitration award would represent a serious budget problem for the Padres, and one that I don't see them risking.

But they can trade him, right? Let's say he accepts and gets 8-9 million next season. Do you seriously believe that there isn't one team that wouldn't give up something for him at that price and for only a one year commitment? I don't and that's why I'm absolutely sure he will be offered arbitration.
   10. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:12 AM (#1760707)
Do you seriously believe that there isn't one team that <strike> wouldn't</strike> would give up something for him at that price and for only a one year commitment?
   11. JC in DC Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:15 AM (#1760716)
I agree w/Zim's intro and the general "eh, whatever" reaction to this deal. Unless LoDuca's got some amazing "clubhouse presence", they probably would have been as well off w/o LoDuca. This is by no means a terrible deal, but I agree that it's nice to keep around the young tradeable arms for something more substantial.
   12. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:18 AM (#1760721)
They can try to trade him, but there's no guarantee that he'll be able to offload him without either taking on unwanted salary or having to accept a deal where they'd be paying a portion of Hernandez's contract. Teams are pretty good at sticking it to another when a trading partner has no leverage, a position that Towers would be if he absolutely had to trade Hernandez.

Let's wait and see. If Hernandez doesn't get signed before the deadline (December 20th, IIRC), I'm willing to bet that Towers forgoes the draft pick rather than risk being stuck with him next year. Not saying that's the decision that I'd make, but based on his post-Myers conservative tendencies, I'm pretty sure that's what we'll see.
   13. Mister High Standards Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:23 AM (#1760731)
I actually like this trade for the Mets as I would have gotten hives if I had to give a catcher a 4 year deal. The fact that your done with Loduca after 2 years is worth giving up a B pitching prospect relative to a second round pick.
   14. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:28 AM (#1760742)
The deadline tp pffer arbitration is actually December 7th.

Speaking of that deadline, according to several posters at MG, the Mets are waiting until after that date to sign Grudz. Since the Cards can't offer arbitration due to a clause in Grud'z contract, they figure to be okay by that date. Assuming thats true, Here's how more or less the team looks for 06:

1. Reyes
2. LoDuca/Grudz
3. Beltran
4. Delgado
5. Wright
6. Floyd
7. Nady/Diaz
8. Grudz/LoDuca

1. Pedro
2. Glavine
3. Benson
4. Seo
5. Trachsel/Zambrano

1. Wagner
2. Heilman
3. Hernandez?
4. LOOGY?
5. Padilla
6. Bell

Basically, I guess Minaya is going for it in these next two years. Now that he's locked up the starting lineup for next year, expect him to try to improve the rotation and look for other relievers.
   15. AJMcCringleberry Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:35 AM (#1760757)
This sucks. I would much rather have had Hernandez.
   16. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:40 AM (#1760768)
Basically, I guess Minaya is going for it in these next two years.

Obviously. The question that needs to be asked is did he destroy their chances to win after those two years? I don't think he did.
   17. J. Cross Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:42 AM (#1760775)
Now that there's no one to block we'd might as well just sign Burnett to 5/$55M. Right?
   18. Шĥy Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:47 AM (#1760792)
Now that there's no one to block we'd might as well just sign Burnett to 5/$55M. Right?

Now that I have lung cancer, I might as well continue to smoke. Right?
   19. Honkie Kong Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:48 AM (#1760795)
Has any team ever had a more active offseason in the FA era? And it is not over by any means!
On the lineup posted above, why not Beltran in the 2hole, Wright, Delgado, Floyd....
   20. Famous Original Joe C Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:49 AM (#1760798)
Obviously. The question that needs to be asked is did he destroy their chances to win after those two years? I don't think he did.

I don't either, but while the Mets look the favorite in the NL East for the next two years if they manage to keep everyone healthy, this team could get old and expensive very fast in 2007-08-09, and perhaps take a year or two to come back from it.

But it's already idle speculation from our relatively uninformed points of view to wonder that the Mets will look like in 2008 right now.
So, basically, WTF knows.
   21. Famous Original Joe C Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:50 AM (#1760802)
On the lineup posted above, why not Beltran in the 2hole, Wright, Delgado, Floyd....

I'm guessing OFF is guessing what Willie's lineup will be?
   22. The District Attorney Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:20 AM (#1760893)
Now that there's no one to block we'd might as well just sign Burnett to 5/$55M. Right?
Well, c'mon, I don't think even the most farm system-loving organization would turn down a player solely because he'd be "blocking" a 19-year-old in A ball.
   23. 1k5v3L Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:23 AM (#1760899)
it's gaby and a ptbnl, right? anyone know who the ptbnl will be?
   24. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:23 AM (#1760901)
I'm guessing OFF is guessing what Willie's lineup will be?

Yeah, pretty much.

2008 Mets?

1. Reyes ss
2. Milledge rf
3. Beltran cf
4. Delgado 1b (last year of deal)
5. Wright 3b
6. Nady/Diaz lf (doubtful)
7. ?? c
8. ?? 2b

1. ???
2. Pedro (last year of deal)
3. ???
4. Seo
5. Pelfrey?

1. Wagner (Two years to go. Ouch)
2. Heilman
3. ??

As you can see above, there are a lot of question marks about the 08 Mets. The positions they do have penciled in by then appear to be more or less solid as Wright, Reyes, Milledge, Heilman, Seo will all be in the prime of their career and be relatively inexpensive. As a result, there will be a lot of payroll flexibility even with Delgado, Wagner, and Pedro in the twilight of their careers. After Milledge, the farm is pretty empty, but you have to assume that by then some of the drafees and international signings the Mets have and will make in the following two years will start paying some dividends. Who knows, maybe by then Pelfrey and Humber are ready to be the horses the team will need, or maybe Fernando lives up to the hype. Its really difficult to determine whether or not the Mets will be in a black hole in 08, but right now, judging by the information we do have and assuming Milledge stays, and nothing catastrophic happens with some of the young talent of the ballclub, 2008 doesn't look half bad for the Metropolitans.
   25. 1k5v3L Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:32 AM (#1760920)
rotoworld reports the ptbnl is another pitcher. any guesses?

who's left in the mets system who's worth having? bah humber?
   26. J. Cross Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:36 AM (#1760936)
well, it would make sense for it to be someone for last year's draft who we can trade yet thus the ptbnl status. Assuming/hoping that it's not Pelfrey maybe a pitcher taken in a later round.
   27. 1k5v3L Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:38 AM (#1760938)
you can't trade pelfrey; you haven't even signed him yet.
   28. J. Cross Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:39 AM (#1760943)
you can't trade pelfrey; you haven't even signed him yet.

oh, good. Then I don't even have to hope. so, I'm guessing a pitcher (who's signed) from later in that draft.
   29. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: December 05, 2005 at 03:41 AM (#1760948)
I'm guessing its going to be some low-level reliever or someone like that.

God, now I'm really hoping the Mets decide to offer arbitration to both Piazza (no way he accepts) and Looper. Otherwise, it's gonna be tough to write about the Mets' farm next year.
   30. Sam M. Posted: December 05, 2005 at 04:04 AM (#1760990)
Otherwise, it's gonna be tough to write about the Mets' farm next year.

Daily Milledge updates from Norfolk. Hopefully, it'll get old talking about 2-5 with a double and a home run day after day after day . . . .
   31. 1k5v3L Posted: December 05, 2005 at 04:10 AM (#1761017)
the red sox are moving their affiliate to norfolk?
   32. Shalimar Posted: December 05, 2005 at 05:35 AM (#1761148)
That's not nice. Manny will probably end up in Anaheim, they have far more to offer in trade than the Mets do.
   33. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: December 05, 2005 at 02:07 PM (#1761396)
The Mets are just going after Lo Duca so they can trade him to the Doggers for Jason Phillips, and everything will come full circle.
   34. DEF: hates freedom Posted: December 05, 2005 at 04:34 PM (#1761511)
so, I'm guessing a pitcher (who's signed) from later in that draft.

You can't trade a recently drafted player until a year after he signs (the Pete Incaviglia rule, instituted after Incaviglia wouldn't sign with the expos unless they traded him elsewhere immediately), and PTBNLs have to be named within 6 months of the date the deal is made. The pretty much rules out any player from the 2005 draft being the PTBNL.
   35. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 05, 2005 at 04:55 PM (#1761545)
2008 Mets? 1. Reyes ss 2. Milledge rf 3. Beltran cf 4. Delgado 1b (last year of deal) 5. Wright 3b 6. Nady/Diaz lf (doubtful) 7. ?? c 8. ?? 2b


So, in 2008 the Mets will have openings for C, 2B, and questions about an outfield position and 1B(if Delgado's production falls significantly). In other words, the 2008 offseason will look like the 2006 offseason. But the Mets are pretty much set for 2006 and 2007 without the need for significant upgrades until then.
   36. David Wrightwing obstructionist Posted: December 05, 2005 at 05:18 PM (#1761584)
Like I said earlier, last year was a fluke season for Castro he has always shown flashes of power I expect his average to nose dive next year, he is the Met I am most worried about not repeating

Now LoDuca, not so sure other than you saved us a draft pick Omar, this one bothers me, but not too much
   37. Rob Base Posted: December 05, 2005 at 05:18 PM (#1761586)
I hope Beltran bounces back, and I just noticed this age-29 season from his most similar player through age 28:

.248/.301/.409

Dawson went on to post a (rather underserved) MVP season at age 32:

.287/.328/.568.

He was also a very good player until his late-mid 30's, posting this line at 35:

.310/.358/.535

I think we'd all breathe a sigh of relief if Carlos did that in his age 29 season coming up.
   38. David Wrightwing obstructionist Posted: December 05, 2005 at 05:22 PM (#1761596)
Oh a HS school buddy of mine played with and against LoDuca in many summer leagues, he was also a catcher

Not that it means anything to the sabermetric crowd, but I like him coming home, he is exactly the type of player that could thrive off that
   39. Hurdle's Heroes (SuperBaes) Posted: December 05, 2005 at 06:36 PM (#1761723)
The Mets won't acquire Grudz because he plays adequate defense. Wright is superb, Beltran is solid, and Reyes is overrated. What other plus defenders play for the M-E-T-S Mets Mets Mets?
   40. 1k5v3L Posted: December 05, 2005 at 06:38 PM (#1761726)
that's a great argument, superbaes. i'm sure you aced logic 101.
   41. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: December 05, 2005 at 07:51 PM (#1761872)
You know, as a Braves fan, I'm thinking the Mets just might have a chance to win a few ballgames in '06.
   42. David Wrightwing obstructionist Posted: December 06, 2005 at 03:41 AM (#1762965)
SuperBaes, yep, Lets Go Mets! =)

Quilvio, don't worry we also have a chance of completely collapsing under our fans expectations

it looks like Omar has a plan that doesn't suck, i like that he can now direct some resources to more important things, like pitching

now remember I said this pre-Manny, post I might have a different IP
   43. Sam M. Posted: December 07, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1764635)
What other plus defenders play for the M-E-T-S Mets Mets Mets?

He does.
   44. David Wrightwing obstructionist Posted: December 07, 2005 at 01:56 AM (#1764796)
careful Sam, Mets fans including myself may finally start giving the guy the respect and credit he deserves
   45. fables of the deconstruction Posted: December 07, 2005 at 02:55 AM (#1764855)
...this team could get old and expensive very fast in 2007-08-09, and perhaps take a year or two to come back from it.

You... hmmm... mean... they're not already...?!!!

-------
trevise

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5195 seconds
66 querie(s) executed