Master Index of Archived Threads


Ramon Hernandez Signed

Elster88 Dec 08 2005 04:32 PM

....with the Orioles. 4 years, 27.25 millions. [url]http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2252475[/url] ______________ This post had the designation 102) Jose Vizcaino :-x

Yancy Street Gang Dec 08 2005 04:33 PM

Which means that Paul LoDuca is considerably cheaper than Ramon Hernandez. If the Mets were still involved in the bidding he may have gone for even more.

Elster88 Dec 08 2005 04:34 PM

Javy to DH?

Rotblatt Dec 08 2005 04:45 PM

Hernandez only makes about $0.5M more than LoDuca per year, and he's four years younger. Shit, man, we should've jumped into the bidding even with LoDuca under our belt. We could've spun LoDuca off to someone--maybe Arizona.

abogdan Dec 08 2005 04:45 PM

]Which means that Paul LoDuca is considerably cheaper than Ramon Hernandez Hernandez is getting less than a million per year more than LoDuca. And he's four years younger. I would have much rather seen the Mets sign Hernandez to the deal the Orioles made than make the LoDuca deal. On edit: Jinx.

Yancy Street Gang Dec 08 2005 04:51 PM

Me too. I guess my at-a-glance math was faulty: I read that as over $8 million per year. My bad. The real difference is in the remaining amount on the contract, a difference of about $14 million. But unless the Mets have a young guy who's poised to be their 2008 catcher I would have preferred to see Hernandez settle the issue for the four years.

Elster88 Dec 08 2005 04:52 PM

RMPL, Elster.

Vic Sage Dec 08 2005 05:18 PM

Ugh. The LoDuca deal looks even worse now, and i didn't like it to begin with. This is exactly what i was afraid of. We trade for an aging mediocrity, costing us a significant prospect (maybe 2), because he "only" costs $6.25/yr for 2 yrs, instead of signing the younger, better Hernandez who ends up costing less than $7m/yr for 4 yrs (an avg of $6.8M). Length of contract is irrelevant here. Both Loduca and Hernandez would be about the same age at the end of their respective deals. If its ok to pay LoDuca $6.25m at age 34-35, why isn't it ok to pay Hernandez $6.8m at that age, when Hernandez still has the potential for good years ahead and he costs you only a draftpick, not one of your top prospects. bad, bad, bad. this is like trading Cameron for Nady. You save a little $, but surrender a valuable chip without improving. twice, Omar. You've done it twice now. 3 strikes and yer out, Assface.

OlerudOwned Dec 08 2005 05:21 PM

The thing is, had the Mets (being the biggest potential suitor for a catcher) not traded for LoDuca and instead persued a free agent, Hernandez's contract would probably be worth a lot more than it wound up being. The LoDuca and Estrada trades really threw a wrench in the market for Hernandez and Molina, making it easier for a team like Baltimore to step up and get him cheaper.

Vic Sage Dec 08 2005 05:37 PM

so, if he cost the Mets $8m/4yrs? Wouldn't they still be a better team with: R.Hernandez - draftpick rather than LoDuca + 1.75m/2yrs - Gaby Hernandez - PTBNL?

Centerfield Dec 08 2005 05:48 PM

This is awful. Meaning Bengie Molina will likely sign for even less. Which means Piazza should look like an absolute steal when all is said an done. Omar must feel like an asshat today.

rpackrat Dec 08 2005 06:24 PM

]so, if he cost the Mets $8m/4yrs? Wouldn't they still be a better team with: R.Hernandez - draftpick rather than LoDuca + 1.75m/2yrs - Gaby Hernandez - PTBNL? I don't think anyone can answer that question right now. Gaby Hernandez had a very nice partial season in low A ball. Lots of guys do really well in low A without ever becoming impact players in the majors. Meanwhile, by trading for LoDuca instead of signing a free agent, we keep a second round draft pick who could very well turn out to be as good as, or better than, Hernandez will ever be. And, yes, the length of contract does matter. Neither LoDuca nor Hernandez is a franchise player. I'd rather have the financial commitment for 2 years than 4.

KC Dec 08 2005 06:58 PM

Asshattin' and facin' and second strikin' seems a little excessive to me. We needed a decent catcher and aren't saddled with another 4-5 year contract. At worst I'm feeling neutral on the position - with a leaning towards positive.

Zvon Dec 08 2005 07:25 PM

OlerudOwned wrote: The LoDuca and Estrada trades really threw a wrench in the market for Hernandez and Molina, making it easier for a team like Baltimore to step up and get him cheaper. This is a huge factor, as well as the draft pick. Im okay with this. Hernandez would not have become this cheap if the Mets were still in the market for him. He goes to the AL,..I like that. Im still happy with Lo Duca for 2 years.

Elster88 Dec 08 2005 10:46 PM

Centerfield wrote: Which means Piazza should look like an absolute steal when all is said an done. Me too. :-(

Rotblatt Dec 09 2005 09:52 AM

Especially when he puts up over a .850 OPS while DH'ing half the time. Hopefully for the Twins.

Frayed Knot Dec 09 2005 10:05 AM

Which, of course, is irrelevent as far as we're concerned since he can't DH half the time for us. The problem with the idea of resigning Piazza is that he's simply worth more to teams that have the DH option than he would be here. So this notion that we should have kept him ignores that fact that he has a say in things also. The two sides did talk after all so maybe that's a sign he thinks he can get a 2 year deal somewhere (wouldn't surprise me) or that he wanted a bit more of a committment than some vaugue notion that he'd catch about as often as he did last September. .