Master Index of Archived Threads


Ramon Castro for Lance Broadway

Me lovey

0 votes

Me likey

10 votes

Leave me alone

12 votes

Me no likey

5 votes

Me hatey

4 votes

Edgy DC May 31 2009 06:02 PM

Get it on record.

Elster88 May 31 2009 06:09 PM

Dislike. The only reason I don't hate it is because at the end of the day he's just a backup catcher that gets hurt too often.

Nymr83 May 31 2009 06:12 PM

dont like it, Schneider will get hurt or Santos will turn back into a pumpkin and then what? Robinson Cancel? I know Santos has hit a little lately but as the guy with options he should have been sent down (unless they want to carry an 11-man pitching staff, thats fine too)

Kong76 May 31 2009 06:12 PM

I have no feelings on this trade.

attgig May 31 2009 07:50 PM

1) Santos' track record isn't good. 600ish ops in minors? whend oes that catch up to him. 2) very high possibility of schneider/santos getting hurt sometime during the rest of the year. who's our call up then?

Rockin' Doc May 31 2009 08:01 PM

I don't care much for this trade. I think the Mets undersold Castro in order to clear roster space in a hurry. I understand that Castro was only a back up catcher and he was injured far too frequently, but he could was a pretty damn good back up even if he wasn't the most dependable. I worry that the Mets will need Castro's services far more than they will Broadway's this season. Lance Broadway will turn 26 in August. He is a converrted starter who has only 40 innings of work at the major league level. He has never posted an ERA of better than 4.65 since leaving AA level.

Elster88 May 31 2009 08:04 PM

We've got three threads on this now. Who voted for like?

Edgy DC May 31 2009 08:35 PM

Yeah, but my thread is the best. Its' the shit.

Fman99 May 31 2009 08:43 PM

I like it. If Castro was going to seize an opportunity to play 5x a week and hit he'd have done it by now. Of course if they had traded Schneider that'd have been the best. But I prefer to say goodbye to Ramon than Omir, given recent circumstances.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 31 2009 08:54 PM

I'm not under any illusion that Santos will ever be the kinda offensive force Castro at his best was, but you can't convince me that Castro's best is yet to come anymore. And Santos to me looks like what he is: A hacky catcher with decent skills behind the dish and a short quick swing that can be dangerous. And I'm glad at least to be rid of the unsteadiness of relying on a backup catcher who can't himself stay healthy. That's every bit as counterproductive as his bat was a plus. Javier Valentin at AAA is a perfectly adequate replacement if Schnied or Santos go down. Lance Broadway? Word is he has marginal stuff but some talent at least. That's like a lottery ticket or soemthing.

Frayed Knot May 31 2009 08:54 PM

The thing with this deal is that it can't be looked at in a vacuum but rather under the conditions that spawned it. The alternatives were: 1) keep three catchers - none of which (realistically) can play elsewhere 2) send down Santos - presumably until either Sept 1 or another injury occurs lest we go back to condition #1 Yeah, that one would have gone over great! 3) trade one of the other catchers. Nice idea, but Schneider's probably less tradable than Castro at this point (coming off injury, more money owed, wasn't playing well when not injured) and, again, is dumping the younger/more athletic/hotter Santos the way we want to go (particularly coming off a game-winning hit)? Add to this that both Castro & Schneider can be FAs at the end of the year and will both likely be lost anyway. So it becomes a deal where you weigh the risk of having to live with Cancel/Thole/whoever as backup if an injury occurs during the next 113 games or solve the current log-jam by getting a still-youngish 1st round pick now against getting nothing at the end of the year. So while I'm not jumping up and down screaming, 'Oh Boy, we got Larry Broadway!!!!' it's a deal I can certainly live with. I have no idea what choice above that translates to.

Elster88 May 31 2009 08:56 PM

Why must we say goodbye to anyone? Santos has a career .650 OPS in the minors in 2500 plate appearances. [url:vhtx2byo]http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=santos001omi[/url:vhtx2byo] He's 28 years old. He is what he is. We caught lightning in a bottle with him for a .770 OPS in 86 plate appearances, so send him back to the minors and let him come up for Schneider's next injury. The more I think about this trade the less I like it. I hope I'm wrong. I hope he keeps this up. But I don't think 28 year old .650 OPS minor league hitters often turn into good major leaguers. Switch my vote to hate. Maybe we can get by with him as a backup for 3/4 of a season and then get some catchers in free agency. But I think that third catcher will be necessary before the year is over. Maybe Omar has a trade for Joe Mauer in the works. They gave us Santana after all. But unless that's happening there's no reason to trade away a guy for nothing.

metirish May 31 2009 09:07 PM

I think the internet would have exploded if it were around when the Mets traded Ryan or Seaver , all this angst for Castro?

Swan Swan H May 31 2009 09:24 PM

Bah. Santos has outperformed Castro this season, and I refuse to support the message that sending him down would deliver, i.e., you've played better, you've worked harder, you have a higher batting average and OPS, and you've hustled more in a month than the other guy has in four years, but we're sending you down to warehouse you because the other guy has never really been in shape and is bound to get hurt eventually. I'm not being touchy-feely on Santos' behalf, I just think that if a guy grabs a job you don't take it away under these circumstances. Castro has been presented with the opportunity that Santos has at least three times in his tenure, and every time he was unable to hold the job. Incidentally, folks are talking about Castro's hitting like he's a latter day Smoky Burgess. The guy is a career .237 hitter with a .311 OBP and a more respectable .729 OPS thanks to the odd longball.

Edgy DC May 31 2009 10:11 PM

It's worth noting that a little extra pitching depth is not to sneezed at. Certainly not right now.

Edgy DC May 31 2009 10:48 PM

="Frayed Knot"]So while I'm not jumping up and down screaming, 'Oh Boy, we got Larry Broadway!!!!' it's a deal I can certainly live with. It's good that you're not screaming that, because we got Lance. Larry is the Pirate prospect, I think.

Triple Dee Jun 01 2009 04:31 AM

My take: It's not a trade which is likely to define the Mets' season (as opposed to say, the acquisition of Sheffield)

Frayed Knot Jun 01 2009 06:33 AM

="Edgy DC"] ="Frayed Knot"]So while I'm not jumping up and down screaming, 'Oh Boy, we got Larry Broadway!!!!' it's a deal I can certainly live with. It's good that you're not screaming that, because we got Lance. Larry is the Pirate prospect, I think. I had a feeling I'd mess that one up before too long. Larry was a pretty good prospect at one time with the Expos after being a 3rd round pick in 2002 -- I think that makes him on Omar pick so maybe Omar (say it with me) has an obsession with him and mistakenly traded for the wrong Broadway (y'know, like the time we thought we were getting Carlos Zambrano in the Kazmir deal). From what I can tell, the two similar-aged, baseball-playing Broadways aren't even related.

Edgy DC Jun 01 2009 07:04 AM

It's not like I could ever keep Lance Parrish and Larry Parrish straight.

RealityChuck Jun 01 2009 08:04 AM

Like it only because there was no way Castro would be back next year, so we're at least getting something for him.

Edgy DC Jun 01 2009 10:24 AM

Say what you will about Lance Broadway, he does not tolerate a crooked jock. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VNkhaFVlZaA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VNkhaFVlZaA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Fman99 Jun 01 2009 10:27 AM

This guy's a ballplayer.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 01 2009 10:36 AM

His junk has significant movement. (Insofar as the Mets seemed to be edging toward moving Castro for a while, and it's something for Castro, I'm in favor. But I wasn't so in favor of trading Castro.)

Benjamin Grimm Jun 01 2009 11:18 AM

I didn't want to see Santos sent down, so I'm okay with the trade. I would have preferred that Schneider was the one dealt, but trading a guy who hadn't played in over a month would have been nearly impossible.

willpie Jun 01 2009 12:50 PM

Put me down for an empahtic 'ehhhh.' I don't love it, but I don't hate it. I'll miss Castro's antics and his striking resemblance to Shrek. I don't have any illusions that Santos is the second coming of Johnny Bench or anything, but he's been swing the stick ok and calling good games. They weren't going to get anything for Schneider anyway, and Castro is too injury-prone/disinterested to be an everyday catcher. I'm not convinced they had to make a trade, but there's nothing wrong with getting a promising(ish) young pitcher for a known-quantity-but-redundant backup catcher. Ehhh.

Edgy DC Jun 01 2009 12:54 PM

<img src="http://myphotos.nyfuturestars.com/albums/userpics/10029/shrek-castrowned.jpg">

smg58 Jun 01 2009 01:53 PM

I'm squarely in the middle on this one. The one guy left in Buffalo who's hitting at all is Javier Valentin, an experienced backup catcher, so we won't be in trouble in the event of another injury. Demoting Santos wouldn't make any sense if you think he's your best guy, which I suppose is debatable but it's pretty clear Manuel is leaning that way. On the other hand, I personally think the three catchers are more or less interchangeable, so if other teams are undervaluing Castro I'd have seen what one of the other two would have gotten me.