November 12, 200520 yr I will be FURIOUS if this team trades LoDuca. so would i.... unless we got someone better :hat Pudge. Only guy I would get rid of LoDuca for. Anyone else... big fat no.
November 12, 200520 yr MLB4U is guessing Molina for 3/$11 mil. We could afford that couldn't we? we could.
November 12, 200520 yr I figured he made more than that. I would like to see us give him that contract, hoping we draft a catcher that is close to being MLB ready in next years draft.
November 12, 200520 yr .... good. Unlike some, I don't think Loria has any intention of fielding a sub-par ball club. I don't think this is simply to clear salary. These players haven't gotten the job done. Of course, Delgado only hit 33 homers and drove in 115 rbi's, and Lo duca is a little sissy who couldn't produce because of a hamstring injury. :plain
November 12, 200520 yr .... good. Unlike some, I don't think Loria has any intention of fielding a sub-par ball club. I don't think this is simply to clear salary. These players haven't gotten the job done. Of course, Delgado only hit 33 homers and drove in 115 rbi's, and Lo duca is a little sissy who couldn't produce because of a hamstring injury. :plain problem is Lo Duca has been a walking injury ever since we got him. We don't have a suitable replacement for him as of now so, there's not much we can do. Although ideally we could pick up a young catching prospect in the Delgado deal.
November 12, 200520 yr if they are legitimately shopping Paul Lo Duca, does that mean the FO thinks that Josh Willingham is adequate enough to play catcher?
November 12, 200520 yr .... good. Unlike some, I don't think Loria has any intention of fielding a sub-par ball club. I don't think this is simply to clear salary. These players haven't gotten the job done. Of course, Delgado only hit 33 homers and drove in 115 rbi's, and Lo duca is a little sissy who couldn't produce because of a hamstring injury. :plain problem is Lo Duca has been a walking injury ever since we got him. We don't have a suitable replacement for him as of now so, there's not much we can do. Although ideally we could pick up a young catching prospect in the Delgado deal. Look man, prospects are prospects, they are not proven players. Lo Duca had a subpar year last season because of the injuries, but he still batted close to .300 and gave us a lot of clutch performances. Unless we can get a prospect a la Brian MacCan who is ready to play right now, i'm not up for getting rid of Lo Duca. The guy is a warrior. Lets not make the same error we made with Pudge, shall we?
November 12, 200520 yr if they are legitimately shopping Paul Lo Duca, does that mean the FO thinks that Josh Willingham is adequate enough to play catcher? Probably not. We should use Willy in LF or trade him to the AL.
November 12, 200520 yr if they are legitimately shopping Paul Lo Duca, does that mean the FO thinks that Josh Willingham is adequate enough to play catcher? Probably not. We should use Willy in LF or trade him to the AL. and while I agree on him playin the OF, the fact is that the front office had him play mostly catcher at all levels last season(besides his few innings in Spring Training)
November 13, 200520 yr .... good. Unlike some, I don't think Loria has any intention of fielding a sub-par ball club. I don't think this is simply to clear salary. These players haven't gotten the job done. Of course, Delgado only hit 33 homers and drove in 115 rbi's, and Lo duca is a little sissy who couldn't produce because of a hamstring injury. :plain problem is Lo Duca has been a walking injury ever since we got him. We don't have a suitable replacement for him as of now so, there's not much we can do. Although ideally we could pick up a young catching prospect in the Delgado deal. Catcher is the toughest position in baseball, of course there is going to be injuries. I'm enthused that we got almost 450 at-bats out of our starting catcher.
November 13, 200520 yr I figured he made more than that. I would like to see us give him that contract, hoping we draft a catcher that is close to being MLB ready in next years draft. Even with some of the more advanced promotion schedules you seem to support, they won't be ready by the time LoDuca's contract is up.
November 13, 200520 yr .... good. Unlike some, I don't think Loria has any intention of fielding a sub-par ball club. I don't think this is simply to clear salary. These players haven't gotten the job done. Of course, Delgado only hit 33 homers and drove in 115 rbi's, and Lo duca is a little sissy who couldn't produce because of a hamstring injury. :plain problem is Lo Duca has been a walking injury ever since we got him. We don't have a suitable replacement for him as of now so, there's not much we can do. Although ideally we could pick up a young catching prospect in the Delgado deal. Catcher is the toughest position in baseball, of course there is going to be injuries. I'm enthused that we got almost 450 at-bats out of our starting catcher. yeah, but it doesn't do us any good if he's ineffective due to injuries, which was the case half the time he wa in there this year.
November 13, 200520 yr Catcher is the roughest and most physically demanding position there is, and I'm as big a supporter of LoDuca as there is here, but that said, his injury rate is troubling. On the otherhand, his leg injury last season, that left him impaired down the stretch, was the result of running the bases, not catching. We can't be sure if it had been the result of a catcher-related previous injury or not but nonetheless he seems less rugged that I expected. Does anyone follow the Dodgers who could comment on healthy he was when he was still there?
November 13, 200520 yr Catcher is the roughest and most physically demanding position there is, and I'm as big a supporter of LoDuca as there is here, but that said, his injury rate is troubling. On the otherhand, his leg injury last season, that left him impaired down the stretch, was the result of running the bases, not catching. We can't be sure if it had been the result of a catcher-related previous injury or not but nonetheless he seems less rugged that I expected. Does anyone follow the Dodgers who could comment on healthy he was when he was still there? someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think Paul was usually healthy for LA, he would just slump in the 2nd half each year
November 13, 200520 yr someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think Paul was usually healthy for LA, he would just slump in the 2nd half each year Correct Ramp, this year he didn't slump the second half though. He was pretty clutch and I think a certain someone predicted that to you before the season once Paulie had a chance to spend a full year out of the up and downs of the NL West travel schedule.
November 13, 200520 yr someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think Paul was usually healthy for LA, he would just slump in the 2nd half each year Correct Ramp, this year he didn't slump the second half though. He was pretty clutch and I think a certain someone predicted that to you before the season once Paulie had a chance to spend a full year out of the up and downs of the NL West travel schedule. great, he didnt slump... instead he got hurt
November 14, 200520 yr someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think Paul was usually healthy for LA, he would just slump in the 2nd half each year Correct Ramp, this year he didn't slump the second half though. He was pretty clutch and I think a certain someone predicted that to you before the season once Paulie had a chance to spend a full year out of the up and downs of the NL West travel schedule. The time off to injury probably had a greater effect.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.