You’d have to eat most of Castillo’s contract for anyone to consider him.

Kunz and Gee aren’t enough for Willingham.

simply too risky at five years. Only been on the DL twice? Sure but it is the last two years in a row and with elbow injuries both times. Missed 41 games last year. And while he is very good, he is not as dominant as Santana or Halladay for example. He has averaged 4 WAR over the last four years but only 2 WAR the last two and he is 31. Over four years a contract that expects 4 WAR worth of performance is worth roughly 18 million dollars a year but I bet he won’t average that. So give him a three WAR average over four years and it comes to something like four years at 56 million. Since he is the best pitcher out there I might offer him that as my final bottom line. Not a penny more. And I think I would rather wait and see if I could get Halladay or Cliff Lee if the Phillies fail to extend his contract.

I don’t know about Lackey or Pavano. That commits a lot of money on 30-something pitchers. And this lineup doesn’t solve our power problem.

I applaud the gutsy move not to get Holliday though. And I like N Johnson and Beimel pickups. And starting Pagan in RF to save some $ is not a bad idea, either.

But I think the lineup needs more pop.

I’d disagree about your assessment of Wolf as well, ERA+ just means his ERA was below average not that he was a below average pitcher. There are a crapton of reasons an ERA+ could be below average other than just pitching below average.

And to me a rotation of Pavano, Perez, Lackey with his age/injury problems, is setting yourself up for too many headaches, not that I’m sure there are many other options out there that wouldn’t result in headaches.

I’ll respect your comparison to Burnett and analyze it.

Let’s agree on the fact that Lackey is steadily regressing as he is already 31.

Your thought is that we should sign Lackey to a 5 year 80 mil contract (16/yr)

Now with that in mind, (and using Burnett as our equivalent)

Burnett’s 2009 season was worth exactly 14 million dollars in salary.

Assuming Lackey puts up a similar performance if he signs (which is a big enough if), we’d be paying him 2 million over what he produces.

Combine that with a steady regression of Lackey’s performance and potential for injury (and this potential increases with age), and we get anywhere from 15-40 mil overspent, at best.

Worst case scenario: see Darren Dreifort contract.

Overall, I know you have good intentions, but you have to do more research.

sounds like you should work for Minaya.

You’re right, I was harsh, I’m sublimating my anger from the news about Francoeur today

Gregg Zaun is not a starting catcher, Period, and where the heck did you get those numbers you listed. He is career .344 OBP and .388 SLG, has been used almost exclusively as a backup, and is not at all an improvement over last years catching pairs. Looking back (though I said this at the time), the Mets should have kept Santos and Castro, not Schneider, and played whoever was fresher.
Josh Willingham is not a solution in LF. Dude does not hit enough and has not lived up to the expectations (too much pressure?).
Carl Pavano is interesting, but I am certain teams will be interested in him so that he costs more than 4 mil. Everyone saw him pitch down the stretch.
Why do we want Nick Johnson? He will probably sign with us and then never play again. Just not worth signing people who are always getting injured. Sure, Lackey represents that risk too since he has been injured the past two years, but you don’t have anyone available who could replace Lackey; whereas Johnson is not that much of an upgrade for what he will cost.
We learned last year that when Pagan is on the bench we want him to be playing, but when he is starting we want him on the bench. He is a fourth outfielder on a good team, and starter on a bad team. I can see him platooning with the corner guys to get plenty of playing time, but we shouldn’t pencil him in to start.
I do not want Hinske (DH-league only player) or Valdez on my major league team wasting bench space. Where can Hinske play? An awful LF or maybe an awful 1B, and he is not like a super great hitter, so why? Valdez was great defensively and can work on his hitting for Buffalo, but does not start the season on the big team. I agree we need someone with his skills on D, but I think Everett is a much better choice.
This teams pitching is a little better, but somehow they manage to score just as few runs and still underwhelm in the power department-except now we are losing speed too!
I like Lopez at second, Lackey, Calero, Maine in the pen and that you didn’t break up the core or the prospects, but this team is still fourth best in the NL east, sorry.
Grade: C-

He isn’t a starting catcher because he usually hasn’t been used that way in his career and is turning 39 next year

Willingham just hasn’t been what everyone expected, an all-star, he strikes out a decent amount, and he doesn’t hit enough to make the lineup you present good enough to win. That was the whole point of the C-, this team would maybe make it to .500, it wouldn’t make the playoffs. That was my main problem with him, he doesn’t hit enough for what we need.

You say Pagan is better than Francoeur, but why? Francoeur has been a starting RF since he came up, Pagan has been injured a lot and a fourth outfielder. Francoeur rarely makes a defensive miscue, Pagans head is somewhere in the clouds every other game it seems. Both are useful to have around, and both shouldn’t be playing all the time, which is why the work well together.

Everett has been just as bad a hitter as Valdez, you’re right, I just assumed he was better. I still feel more comfortable with him there because he has been around in the majors and given the opportunity before, and that is what I want in my bench guys, so they know their role.

Hinske is a wasted roster spot if he is never going to start, like Reed last year.

Johnson, when healthy, is a massive upgrade over Murphy when struggling. Johnson is no guarantee to be healthy, and Murphy no guarantee not to be struggling, but one makes league minimum and leaves open options during the year to maybe try for A-Gon or maybe even D-Lee if the Cubs flop again, while the other will take a multi-year deal. Johnson is no guarantee and he is slowing down.

I was saying that about my bench guy Everett over Valdez; I wouldn’t use that as a metric for the young people who are starters, but I want my bench guys to have ML experience starting. I should’ve elaborated saying that I still feel Valdez has room to grow offensively; I thought I read he was a good prospect before his true age was revealed, or something, at which point his value slipped some or something.
I am not saying that because this guy has been a starter and this other guy has not, so I will choose the starter. I am saying this guy, Everett for instance, has been a starter because of his defense is good, and I want someone coming off my bench to play awesome defense at short (probably second too), so do I want Valdez who seemed to play good D for us last year but w.o much experience or Everett who has always played good D for teams, and even found a job as a starter because of that D. Think back a few years when A-Hern got called up. Everyone thought he was a vacuum at short, but couldn’t hit. We saw him again just what, 2-3 years later and we think he can’t handle short at all. Small sample sizes are misleading, big ones are a better measure of ones future impact.