oh well ... thankfully it's only one year

Wise investment for one year. This should give Flores time to develop whether it is as the starter, reserve, or at AAA. Of course, with GM Jim around this may be just the first of a whole series of moves. It is fun to watch him operate when he has a budget to work with.

Is a Lo Duca singing that more significant than Johnny Estrada? Both are (relatively) good hit, average defense catchers beginning the twilight portion of their careers.

Basically, the Nationals traded Schneider and Church for Lo Duca and Milledge.

Not seeing a downside here, especially considering the short length of the contract.

Just keep him away from the rookies...

So they've swapped (if not traded) Schneider, whom they liked, for Lo Duca, whom the Mets don't want (but they too like Brian).
Hmmm.
Oh, and he's gonna cost more? Swell.
Let's hope he regresses toward that .288 mean, and not away from it.

...and from 19 year-old girls.

_______________________________

Just keep him away from the rookies...

Posted by: CE | December 10, 2007 02:54 PM

More significant would be if Bonds' trainer signs...

Is a Lo Duca singing that more significant than Johnny Estrada?

and of course, that was supposed to be "if he SINGS"
duh.

Sign Estrada as well. Let Flores play full time in the minors and hopefully trade both of them mid-season for whatever you can get.

unless he's hitting .300

********
...and from 19 year-old girls.
_______________________________

Just keep him away from the rookies...

Posted by: CE | December 10, 2007 02:54 PM

Posted by: Not LoDuca | December 10, 2007 02:57 PM

Couldn't we just give him money like everybody else?

With this clubhouse, you might have your follow-up to Nationals Pastime (still available at all of your favorite book sellers). Between the clubhouse turmoil, potential for arrests, and on the field suspensions, I smell a New York Times best seller

Relax, just a stop gap, no big deal. Though I have to say, this puts quite a bit of pressure on guys like Nick Johnson, Dimitri Young, Zimm and Kearns to really step it up in the clubhouse.

All these new personalities, some of which are real volatile could be a problem. I'd love to see them trade Felipe Lopez and get that ego/attitude out of there. There are only so many combustibles you can have in one space before it explodes in your face.

Barry, these moves are starting to make Bob Klapisch jealous!

Lo Duca was a type B free agent. Did the Mets offer him arbitration? If so, we just lost a draft pick.

Barry, you are without peer. I was going to praise you for an excellent post-meetings article on the Nats future, and then you bring us a scoop.

Baseball fans of America, our beat writer is better than your beat writer.

(All of this praise, while deserving, also serves the ulterior purpose of distracting everyone while I hem and haw over the acquisition of Lo Duca.)

I'm happy with any Jim Bowden signing that doesn't involve signing a former Red. I'd love for them to get rid of Lopez, too, but is Bowden really gonna part with the guy? I doubt it. And Lopez and Dukes, together, could be bad news.

"Lo Duca was a type B free agent. Did the Mets offer him arbitration? If so, we just lost a draft pick."

No draft pick was lost! Lo Duca was not offered arbitration

(not to mention, even if he was, as a Type B, it's a supplemental first round selection created as compensation and NOT one of the Nationals picks)

Rats!

Never mind- the Mets did not offer him arbitration.

Also, we may be hearing a *lot* more of "Volare" (I think it was his at-bat music for some of the time last year).

When reached for comment today, Lastings Milledge said "Oh Cr@p"

We'd be willing to offer up 'Seventeen' for Mr. Lo Duca

What are the odds that Pfizer (makers of Xanax) joins PNC and GEICO as one of the Nationals Diamond sponsors?

I wonder how much the Nats told him he would play. Doesn't seem like the type to sit down in favor of a (near) rookie.

"I'm happy with any Jim Bowden signing that doesn't involve signing a former Red."
------------

Y'all sure there's no six-degrees-of-separation thingie there with the Reds that was JimBow's primary (yet unpublicized) reason for grabbing Lo Duca?

I heard the District was going to take the naming rights for the interim, until they sell it. They would divide it up among Water & Sewer Authority, Metro, and UDC, and call it WASA-MATA U

Why? He can't hit (his .OBP was worse than Schnieder's), he can't field, he's a jerk, and he's 35. Why would we want Flores to learn from this loser?

Seems to me the Nationals are more likely to sign another catcher and let Flores play full time and more importantly develop in Columbus or Harrisburg.

Flores is likely to get a (well earned) shot at making the big club this spring, and play his way down, if that happens. He did more than anyone expected last year. They only way to tell if he's ready is to play him.

I am not so worried about his attitude... Our clubhouse is going to be a very different place than the Mets clubhouse... the expectation will be different. If you're going to be the kind of jerk we think LoDuca is, you need jerky friends, and you just won't find them on the Nats. LoDuca's peers on the Nats are people that totally buy into "The Plan" (Boone and Young and Belliard).

I could be wrong, but I think the attitude is the least of the problems. The left-handed bat thing is becoming more of a problem.

LoDuca is my "socks and underwear" for Christmas. Who's gonna be my Ipod?

flores has to be happy about this signing. He's got a better arm and bat and everyone in the clubhouse is gonna be pulling for him...

This is a great acquisition. I watched LoDuca for several years in LA. He's a no-nonsense, hard-playing guy. DC will love him!

If they didn't pay a lot, it's not a bad signing. LoDuca won't help the Nats win, but the Nats weren't going to win anyways (not yet at least). So, if he hits .288 or even better .300 that'll please the casual fan plenty. And with the new stadium and weak chances for a winning season, that goes a long way.

I always love a Bullwinkle reference

"WASA-MATA U"

It was his alma mater.

Lo Duca is the best available. And there is a good chance he will be traded in July.

Speaking of Schneider, what do you all think of Bill Ladson's comments slamming him today, and stating that he was far from a team leader? Here is the link:
http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071210&content_id=2322190&vkey=news_was&fext=.jsp&c_id=was

On a related front, this is a perfect example of what 419 was talking about over the weekend in suggesting that increased coverage of the team would help us as Nats fans have a better understanding of what is going on behind the scenes--i.e., is Felipe dogging it, or not? is Schneider a clubhouse leader, or not? While one can debate whether this type of material would be appropriate for Barry to cover as the beat reporter, there's no question that this is the type of thing that a real baseball columnist (one who actually investigates and covers a team) could write about.

Whether Ladson is right or not about Schneider might be subject to debate. It is at least nice to see someone address this type of thing, though in Schneider's case I would say it's a bit late. It's kind of sad though that we only see this from the writer in charge of the Nats' own propaganda arm, and not from the Post.

Who seed Meat Hook letting LoDuca be a bully in the clubhouse?

I look at it as we traded Church for Milledge (we win, at least for now based on upside) and Schneider for LoDuca (we lose, almost identical offense numbers last year but Schneider was Mr. Nat and played very good defense).

Maybe you can't separate them though. We certainly wouldn't have gotten Milledge straight up for Church. Lo Duca does save us $5m as Schneider was signed for '09 also at $5m. And while it saves $5m, it clears the decks for Flores to get a shot. He can take his time in '08 and if he's not ready in '09, we haven't really lost anything and we start over on catchers.

I like it.

Intriguing way to look at it Avar. Only, we never would have taken Schneider for LoDuca. We took LoDuca because he was there.

Or Kearns or Zimmerman or Cordero or Rauch or even WMP? I think that's like 1,200 pounds of good attitude to "counsel" LoDuca if he wants to play the bully. What would you do if that crowd all came over to your locker and told you to do something? I think we'd do whatever they said.

Who seed Meat Hook letting LoDuca be a bully in the clubhouse?

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | December 10, 2007 04:00 PM

RE: Clubhouse Coverage

I'd be all for more of it, if it was possible to make it less 'sensational'. I am trying to figure out how you'd do it without it sounding like a gossip column...

I like this signing...Giving up Church and Schneider for a rising superstar in Milledge, and signing Lo Duca as a free agent for one year and not having to pay Schneider's salary for 3 more years at an astromical for a below average hitting catcher...makes this a great move for the Nastrols...

Seems like a diversion from the plan--overpaying for short-term vets.

I would have been happier just living with Damian Miller.

Re: More clubhouse coverage

Sure, but how do you do it? Who's going to talk to the reporter? They'll say bad things anonymously, but not on the record. On the record they'll only say good things.

So what do you cover? Opinion. All you can write about is what you THINK the atmosphere is based on circumstantial evidence. Maybe you see a bunch of guys play a prank on a rookie. Does that mean they're fun loving guys? Veterans with attitudes? Self-interested sharks?

Yes, I'd love to have more coverage, but how do you do it without simply spewing opinions. Like Ladsen.

You disrespected da Bing.

at least lo duca is familiar with NL East. that will give Flores more perspective on Mets hitters as well as rest of division. Maybe he can help Flores with the bat a bit too. I'm trying to be positive here. I'm fine with it. I mean who really cares about this move. If anything it's salt in the wound for the Mets. Ouch turn into OUCH.

I do worry about the clubhouse chemistry (especially between Milledge and Lo Duca) for this coming year, but I am going to give this all a shot. I'm seeing a rose-colored scenario whereby the Veteran Nats tell Lo Duca (should he decide to be a jerk), "Look, you may be a veteran player in the Majors, but you're a "rookie National" and this is way that things are in our clubhouse. Shape up!"

I'm still worry that we lost Schnieder, especially if this is what we get instead. On the otherhand, if he can get some hits going in the bottom of the order and isn't a problem in the clubhouse, 1 year of him isn't bad, especially if it helps Flores mature into the catcher role (playing maturity, personality is QUITE fine).

Now, can we get some left-handed hitters?

That was "sorry that we lost Schneider" Darn "w" near the "s".

Good point, longterm. Between Lo Duca and Acta maybe that counterbalances Schneider's perspective on Nats hitters?

---

at least lo duca is familiar with NL East. that will give Flores more perspective on Mets hitters as well as rest of division.

the nats wont lose a draft pick because the mets didnt offer lo duca arbitration because they were horrified at the prospect of lo duca agreeing and being stuck with him for another year.

this is a horrible move, as lo duca is an absolute zero. he has no power or speed, his arm is completely dead and he never takes walks. all he can do is hit grounders, so expect a lot of GIDP, or if he's lucky, an batting average that also equals his OBP and SLG. he's also a degenerate gambler and likes to date teenagers now that he's 35 and got dumped by his exwife.

on the plus side, i look forward to heckling him at the new stadium. way to follow up the milledge heist with this turd, bowden.

People say we wouldn't have traded Lo Duca straight up for Schneider, but I'm not so sure. Look at Lo Duca's batting avg's the past few seasons (everyone has been talking about last year only): .286, .283, .318, and .272 with OBP's about 40-50 points higher. Meanwhile Schneider has hit .257, .268, .256, and .235 with OBP's between .320-.330. So Lo Duca has generally hit about 30 points higher and had an OBP 10-15 points higher. If he can keep his mouth relatively shut and keep the rest of him away from the 19 year olds, I think he could be decent. Especially for one year.

I, for one, think "turd" is a hilarious word, regardless of whether or not I agree with this sentiment.

-----

on the plus side, i look forward to heckling him at the new stadium. way to follow up the milledge heist with this turd, bowden.

506, have you ever read--on a daily basis--a newspaper's coverage of the home town team in, say, Boston, New York, Philly, or Chicago? They have plenty of on-the-record quotes from players about other players, both anonymous and not. Just to take one example, do you think Carl Pavano was given a free pass in the Yankees' clubhouse the past 2 seasons? Do you think fans in NY read stories about how he was treated in the clubhouse, and do you think players talked to the press about him (both on the record and off)? Of course they did. Sammy Sosa in Chicago would be another example. Do people in the Nats' clubhouse have similar feelings about Patterson, for example, and his legion of injuries? Who knows, because that stuff isn't covered here in DC.

As to your reticence to read opinion, I'm not sure why that troubles you. The purpose of a columnist--as opposed to a news reporter like Barry--is to provide opinion. Columnists are allowed in the clubhouse on a daily basis. They can observe what goes on, as well as talk to players and coaches. So any columnist worht his salt who were to cover the Nats on a regular basis could provide us with an informed opinion. There's nothing wrong with that. I would love to have known that Schneider was rarely in the clubhouse post-game (as Ladson has now told us), and if the Post had an actual baseball columnist who covered the Nats regularly, I would love to have gotten his take on this and how Schneider impacted clubhouse chemistry, if at all.

For some reason, you seem to think that the only baseball news that is fit to print in the Post is what hits writers in the face--for example, what happened in the game, who is injured, and who is traded. That's just not true. There's a lot more information and informed opinion that a paper with good baseball coverage can provide, and we are losing out by not getting it.

Well, he *did* play in Flushing...

---

I, for one, think "turd" is a hilarious word, regardless of whether or not I agree with this sentiment.

I just don't get this move unless the org is unsure of Flores's potential.

It's not like the Nats will be able to compete with the Mets and Phillies next year so why not just play the kids and see what they can do.

From most accounts LoDuca has had clubhouse problems for years. The fact the he wasn't offered arb should be a red-herring.

Why not save money and sign a veteran catcher who could actually be a role model for Flores.

Unless they signed LoDuca just as trade bait in July.

The link to this scoop on the main Sports page of wapo.com read "Nats Snatch Lo Duca."

I'm just leaving that one alone. Eesh.

I have no problem reading opinion, and in fact, I prefer it to just straight reporting. The problem I have is when opinion is substituted for reporting, which is, I think, the complaint that people might have with some people's writing.

I don't enjoy reading Ladson's stuff. The writing is usually devoid of insight (that I don't already have access to), and the typos and omissions make the quality of the content suspect.

It's like getting a resume with typos in it. The person might be a good worker, but if they don't have the good sense to spellcheck and proofread, why trust them as an employee?

I think this is a decent move considering it's one-year deal.

Can anybody name a better catcher that we could have signed? There really aren't decent FA catchers available. So let's deal w/ having Lo Duca for 1 year and let Flores develop for '09.

I just hope that Lo Duca goes back to the basics: hitting the ball, throwing runners out (at least some), and keeping his mouth shut.

Let's see who Toronto winds up getting. Maybe we can unload Lo Duca on them if he doesn't work out here?

**********
Can anybody name a better catcher that we could have signed? There really aren't decent FA catchers available.
Posted by: Tim | December 10, 2007 05:12 PM

To "lacking" re: Schenider-bashing....

Trusting a guy like Bill Ladson of Nationals.com is a lot like trusting the salesman at the local used car lot that the Chevy you're about to plunk 15K down on was only driven by Grandma to church on weekends.

Ladson wants to talk about team leaders? Yeah, Bill... let's talk. Schneider (and St. Claire) were the only reason our '07 revolving door pitching staff didn't go completely south with an ERA around 10.

I don't know why I should reply, coverage is lacking, you seem to know awfully well what I do and don't think.

As a fan, you never like to see rent-a-players that aren't going to help you win a championship, but this move seems consistent with The Plan...

The focus of all the team's moves has been on the long term, but last week's moves left the Nats with a gaping hole at catcher. With no young stud left-handed catcher prospects out there for the taking, they needed to sign a free agent just to get through the year, but not get locked up into anything long-term.

So my only concern now is whether he will get in the way of Milledge. It's been rumored that he was one of LM's antagonizers on the Mets.

Sooooo ...

Lopez 4
Guzman 6
Zimm 5
Johnson 3
Lo Duca 2
Dukes 7
Kearns 9
Milledge 8
Hill 1

Be ready, CC, you'll probably get boo'd here, too.

Posted by: CrazyCrab | December 10, 2007 05:08 PM

Having watched Lo Duca for the past two years as a Mets fan (me), you all are getting a terrific presence and a lot of experience. I looked at LoDuca's theatrics in the last months as acts to energize a fading ball club as the season ended (badly as we know).

I love Lo Duca and planning on watching a lot more Nats games on Extra Innings.

Also, I hope he sticks it ini Minaya's eye by batting .300 or more. One year ago he was the team leader at .317. He's still capable believe me. If they had kept him in the two hole, Reyes might not have caved.

I really, really hope we can discourage heckling and booing our own guys. I don't want us to be THOSE kinds of fans.

Alternatively

Lopez 4
Lo Duca 2
Zimm 5
Johnson 3
Dukes 7
Kearns 9
Guzman 6
Milledge 8
Hill 1

You've posted many times and I think made your views pretty clear. If I'm getting something wrong, by all means, tell me what it is. I'm not sure, though, why you are getting nasty (snarky?) again when you've previously stated that we all should try to have a healthy, productive, and fun debate rather than lodge attacks at each other. I've certainly tried to do that on my end.

----------------------------

I don't know why I should reply, coverage is lacking, you seem to know awfully well what I do and don't think.

Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | December 10, 2007 05:18 PM

By booing and heckling our guys, I meant the players.

Booing and heckling commenters on this blog is encouraged for entertainment purposes only.

From what I've seen, NN, they're mostly too laid back, and the Veeck Rule implies more expensive seats down low won't help that.

*****
I really, really hope we can discourage heckling and booing our own guys. I don't want us to be THOSE kinds of fans.

Posted by: NatsNut | December 10, 2007 05:26 PM

and by "they're too laid back" I meant the fans.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

but it doesn't bode well that the most positive thing anyone here has to say about Lo Duca comes from a Mets fan.

I have to say that a year or 3 ago I would have been really excited to get Lo Duca. Part of the heavy coverage that New York brings is the exposure of every single wart a man could have. Lo Duca has more than his share, but it wasn't all that long ago that folks in LA couldn't believe they would be stupid enough to let him go.

Let's hope he starts fast, and bats the way he did in some previous recent years. We could trade him, or ride him for one year. He would have to be really good that first have for a trade, since he is old and on a one-year contract.

all he has is batting average. NCPearl, are you familiar with BABIP? basically, when lo duca gets lucky, his grounders go for singles and his average goes up. but he doesnt walk and has no power, so when his grounders dont squirt thru, he hits 270 with no power or OBP. he is a 36 year old catcher. he is going to be completely useless next year, just watch.

what a failure that idiot is. what a stupid jerk. i hope everyone else boos him to, so that he is reminded of what a complete waste of life he is. the booing will be so harsh he will literally cry in the dugout. cry like the pathetic moron that he is.

cant wait for next year.

Now, for a rational, trenchant, and well-written account, we go to ...

No snark, Coverage, just pure sulk. I'm sorry, I was sulky and discussion stifling. No need to be moody. The paragraph that got me was the one that started with "for some reason, you seem to think that the only baseball news that is fit to print in the Post is what hits writers in the face" which is inaccurate. Unfortunately, I did the same thing I was annoyed by and assumed that based on your previous posts that I knew you will enough to infer contempt for that opinion (one that is not mine) and thereby for me.

Let's do over.

"While one can debate whether this type of material would be appropriate for Barry to cover as the beat reporter..." you begin. I don't see how a beat reporter would be able to get this information unless someone is willing to talk. Said talkers are necessarily people with an agenda, either in boosting the club or in trashing the club (or countering someone who has either boosted or trashed).

I think you agree, which is why you suggest that Post needs a "beat columnist" to surmise these things. But I still wonder about the efficacy of such surmising. As I said "All you can write about is what you THINK the atmosphere is based on circumstantial evidence. Maybe you see a bunch of guys play a prank on a rookie. Does that mean they're fun loving guys? Veterans with attitudes? Self-interested sharks?" The previous stipulations about reports from players apply here too: they're always interested parties (also, FYI, I have the same skepticism about things that purport to have an inside view of business or government).

I'm drifting closer and closer to the conclusion that in terms of a fan's relationship with the team, the clubhouse is a neutral entity. Clearly they make a difference, but short of hidden cameras, how are we to really believe any coverage of it?

"No snark, Coverage, just pure sulk. I'm sorry, I was sulky and discussion stifling. No need to be moody."

No need for ME to be moody, to clarify...

And one further clarification....

"I'm drifting closer and closer to the conclusion that in terms of a fan's relationship with the team, the clubhouse is a neutral entity."

"Clubhouse" chemistry seems to have more to do with fan-player chemistry than anything inside the clubhouse.

I'll weigh in here.
That's what columnists are for, as you both well know and said. Nobody's opinion is fact, by definition, so we do what we do with everything else: pick what supports our own preconceptions.
OK, maybe some of us consider the preponderance of the information we have, and try to create some narrative equilibrium. But it's always open to revision (unless you're one of that first group, but they probably aren't reading this far into the blog anyway).

that was supposed to be in response to

how are we to really believe any coverage of it?
Posted by: Section 506 (Before moving) | December 10, 2007 05:46 PM

The signing of a catcher could bring to a close the Nationals' major moves of what has already been a busy offseason.

Ladson wants to talk about team leaders? Yeah, Bill... let's talk. Schneider (and St. Claire) were the only reason our '07 revolving door pitching staff didn't go completely south with an ERA around 10.

I am too lazy to look it up myself but I am pretty sure that the Nats had a lower ERA with Flores behind the plate than with BS.

AS for LoDuca, I'll go with Casey Stengal and say if you don't have a catcher, you'll have a lot of passed balls.

This is a good signing. Finally, the Nats made a move with this year in mind. They owed at least that much to all the folks lining up for season's tix.

Next off-season, we will probably be in the market for another catcher, and likely a middle infielder or two. If we can get real quality, the Nats might even contend in 2009, assuing the outfield dartboard game yields a solid starting trio.

Right now, LoDuca gives us a major leauge product. Can we expect more?

There's no such thing as too much pitching, but that's not what cost them last year. Even mediocre run support would've left them close to or above.500.

Can't argue with the Ol' Perfessor.

*********
AS for LoDuca, I'll go with Casey Stengal and say if you don't have a catcher, you'll have a lot of passed balls.

Posted by: PseudoStats | December 10, 2007 06:05 PM

Fair enough 506, thanks for the response.

Here is my take on this. I was raised on baseball coverage in other cities. Perhaps you were as well, but my point is that I have seen this and know it can be done, and I believe that it really does round out our appreciation of the team as fans. In the modern high-tech era where we can see first-hand every pitch of every game, I think a fair argument can be made that the inside access that journalists--both reporters and columnists--are afforded is the biggest thing that separates them from us. As fans and readers, we should benefit from that access. A major aspect of access is what happens in the clubhouse.

A reporter could cover this stuff with facts. A columnist could too, with facts and his opinions. I hear your point about circumstantial evidence and points-of-view, but discernment comes with reporting experience and years spent in the clubhouse. And we are of course free to disagree with writers' characterizations, but at least we will know the facts underlying them.

Back in 2005, we heard vague insinuations that, as the season was falling apart, the clubhouse was falling apart too. We heard about Frank's no-music edict. But nothing more, we had no real idea what was going on. Who was a cancer? Was Frank losing the team? Who tried to hold things together? Dunno...the Post didn't tell us. That was important, and I would have liked to (and I think deserved to) know more as the season was playing out. By contrast, in NY, back several years ago fans read about Chad Curtis getting in a fight with Derek Jeter about his friendship with A-Rod, to cite just one example. Fans in Chicago read about the Cubs' lockerroom turning on Sosa too. Which player(s) in those instances were right, and which were wrong? I don't know, but a columnist could at least give us his view, which we are free to disagree with. In any case, I think that just knowing the facts that such rifts exist is valuable information. I certainly would have liked to have known how Guillen was viewed in 2005, for example. We shouldn't have had to wait for Barry's book (which still didn't go far enough, IMO) to hear any detail whatsoever about this stuff.

To really bring this home, a long time ago a certain columnist reported on a longstanding feud between two Dodger greats: Steve Garvey and Don Sutton. That columnist even interviewed and quoted Sutton's comments about Garvey. Who was that columnist? The Post's own Tom Boswell. 30 years later, the Post needs a new Boswell to cover this stuff and regularly give us his views of the Nats as a team.

Sounds good to me.

Speaking of columnists, I guess I have to give up on Wibon for good. In his "Chat House," he talked Redskins and Wizards, as always. I wrote the simple question, "What do you think about the Milledge and Dukes signings?". He of course ignored that, and any other Nats question any of you wrote him.

He did, however, answer a question on Ultimate Fighting.

Just can't believe Ladsen comments on Brian. Wasn't he the team player rep and the last major league link to Montreal?
Could the fact that Brian probably left early since his wife was waiting with their newly born daughter after most games affect the reporter's view of a catcher who was coming in early working his ass off trying to keep up with who he was catching and struggling through a season long slump?

Yeah, Two more months... talking baseball with Mike is a waste of typing.

please don't mention Wilbon here.

here's a nice thought: What if Flores crushes the ball next year?

I don't get the negativity about Lo Duca. This guy is a 4 time all star who has been a very good big league catcher for a long time. He had a great rep as a team leader when he was in Florida and LA.

Sure his skills have deteriorated some, but I'm guessing he'll contribute as much if not more to winning with the improved offensive output.

Lastly can we please stop the moralizing. I don't care if he gambles or if he sleeps with 19 year olds. I feel like I'm in a Pat Robertson chat room.

okay, so we have a catcher. now what?

my opening day lineup is as follows, still:

4 lopez
8 milledge
5 zimmerman
3 meathook
7 wily mo
9 kearns
2 lo duca
6 guzman
1 hill

i'm really pulling for dukes. he's by far the best pure athlete on this team. not long ago i figured wily mo was the most important piece of the puzzle going into this year. now he's third, after milledge and dukes.

next trade deadline will get real interesting with some of our pitching getting called up. we'll have plenty of options for interested teams...

the depth of this team is very much improved. i hated having fick, batista, jimenez on the bench.

flores and dukes should see 100 games each next year. i hope nick johnson can work his way back in also...

the depth of this team is very much improved. i hated having fick, batista, jimenez on the bench.

flores and dukes should see 100 games each next year. i hope nick johnson can work his way back in also...

Everyone in the chat seems to enjoy being a negative nancy for now. I think they just need some baseball to cheer them up. I myself have been known to fraternize with 19 year old girls (i may have been 19 at the time though).

-------------------------------------------
Lastly can we please stop the moralizing. I don't care if he gambles or if he sleeps with 19 year olds.I feel like I'm in a Pat Robertson chat room.

Is there any potential to Lastings leading off? I think that lopez would be better in the two hole. Granted Lastings isnt known for base stealing, but he does have a decent projected OBP and he's got some speed so there wont be a logjam if he gets on. Could give us some of the explosiveness up top that got everyone excited when soriano was here.

8 Lastings
4 Lopez
5 Zim
9 Willy Mo
7 Kearns
3 Nick/Meathook
2 Lo Duca
6 Guz

Not really any chances that Lastings is given a chance to lead off Acta was pretty clear he wanted him somewhere from 2 on down

The leadoff situation must be addressed, period. We can't go through another season essentially without someone who can get on base ahead of Zimm et al. Another significant move must be in the works, I hope.

I agree VT. Lastings should lead off. He's had good BB numbers in the minors. He can run and won't clog the bases. SB's are overrated. However Nick or the Hook need to bat higher. While I think too much is being made of the lack of LH hitters - they'll have three v RHP - they shouldn't have that many RH batters in a row. Casey Stengel used to say to never have three in a row. I'd go with something like this:

9/8 Milledge
4 Lopez
5 Zim
7 Pena
3 Young/Johnson
8/9 Dukes/Kearns
2 Lo Duca
6 Guzman

They really need one more LH hitting substitute so that when they rest Lopez or Guzman and play Belliard, they can get one more LH bat in the line up.

Position player wise, we're looking at

C: Flores, Lo Duca

INF: Johnson, Young, Belliard, Lopez, Guzman, Boone

OF: Dukes, Pena, Kearns, Milledge

The last spot would go to a LH hitting OF - Langerhans, the rule V guy who's name escapes me at the moment, or someone else.

I worry also. Risk of bad chemistry with an aging catcher. A couple of reasons for optimism, at least about chemistry -

1. LoDuca was on hte Mets for one year when Manny was coaching. I trust JimBo sought his advice, and Manny knows what he's doing.
2. We were visiting in LA when he was traded in 2004, and the fans were in an uproar and as I recall the season went downhill after a hot month. He "bled Dodger blue," and was felt by the fan base to be the hard-nosed soul of the team, hoped to be a lifetime Dodger. Of course, who knows what the truth was? Did he change from 04 to 07, or was it the situation? Or was he a jerk all along?

I don't have much optimism about productivity on the field unfortunately, but a stopgap catcher is probably a reasonable part of the price to pay for Milledge. If Milledge excels, this deal works.

as a met fan, i can say that lo duca was nothing but help to the team. forget what the newspapers and tabloids say, he was beloved by his teammates and most mets fans are very disappointed that he is gone. he has a fire and passion for the game that is hard to find today. sure, he gets out of line once in awhile, but do not think for a second that he is gonna hurt your team or its chemistry

Geezer,
Dodger fan here...
I, for one, was not upset by the trade of Lo Duca in 2004. He was set for FA and always fades from August onward. The situation was that the Blue Crew lacked both a front-line starter, lacked a first-baseman with power (Shawn Green was at first with Juan Encarnation in right), and there were two very good catching prospects due up the next year. Lo Duca was packaged with a setup man and Encarnacion, for Hee Seop Choi, Brad Penny and a AA pitcher (Andy Brown) who was traded for a catcher. It was a good trade because although Penny pitched 10 innings that year and was a non-factor for the playoffs, he's been the Dodgers most consistent starter over the last couple of years. It would have been a great trade except that Tracy basically mutinied against his boss and refused to play Choi (who showed flashes of being a decent, cheap Three True Outcome type of player, but never got a fair shake).

As for Lo Duca - He's BA and BABIP dependent, doesn't have much power, isn't fast, doesn't walk or strikeout much and calls a good game. He'll be good for the first three months of the season and close to replacement level in September.

Oh... One thing I forgot:
After the Mets beat the Dodgers in the '06 Playoffs, he told SI, "F--- the Dodgers."

I thought it a little ungrateful. No one who had anything to do with him being trade was still around.

Should have kept the bastard catching for the Vegas 51s.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.