Mets Target Torrealba, Eric Cries Into His Hands

by Eric Simon on Nov 14, 2007 12:38 AM EST

Several hours ago, rumors surfaced indicating that the Mets will present a multi-year offer to former Rockies catcher Yorvit Torrealba, and tomorrow's New York Times will feature a Ben Shpigel column to the same effect. The Mets were already closing in on a perfectly reasonable two-year deal with Ramon Castro, and I find myself utterly mystified by the idea of pursuing Torrealba at all, let alone on a multi-year deal.

I have no idea who started the rumor that Torrealba was anything special in the first place, but I'm more than happy to put an end to it here. Yorvit Torrealba is not a good baseball player. ESPN's Keith Law recently unveiled his Top 50 Free Agents of this offseason and Mr. Torrealba appears nowhere on the list. Paul Lo Duca comes in at #32, thirty spots beneath the only other catcher on the docket, the recently signed Jorge Posada.

Torreaba turned 29 in June and has 1332 career at-bats to his credit. His composite batting line for those at-bats is .251/.313/.391 and an underwhelming OPS+ of 80. That line includes the .255/.323/.376 he hit in 2007 while playing half of his games in Coors Field. His 2007 OPS+ was 75, worse than his career mark! How exactly is this guy an attractive free agent target? He appeared in only 113 games this year, destroying his previous career high in games played of 76, split between San Francisco and Seattle in 2005.

The one thing he has going for him is his throwing arm. Despite nailing fewer than 20% of attempted basestealers in 2007, he has nabbed better than 32% of them over the course of his career. Great. He sounds like a wonderful backup catcher who can spell your real catcher by shoring up the defense on the starter's days off. This is the sort of commodity you could pluck from a list of minor league free agents or even from your own farm system, not someone you should feel compelled to pay good money for multiple years.

If the plan is to sign Castro, pray for good health, and bring in a second catcher to fill in the gaps, fine. But shouldn't that second catcher be able to hit a little bit and not cost an arm and a leg? Further, if the intention is to make Torrealba the starting catcher, the Mets would be better off -- and I can't believe I'm saying this -- just bringing Paul Lo Duca back for another go-round.

Are you happy, Mets? You made me say something nice about Paul Lo Duca. I hope you're proud of yourself.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Boo!

Ugh.

I already know the answer, but his name just cries out for it, so I have to ask the question: Who the fuck is Yorvit Torrealba?

We've got ourselves a ball club, the Mets of New York town!

by kingcritical on Nov 14, 2007 9:27 AM EST reply actions

omar has been good about free agent smoke screens

hopefully this is just to keep castro's price down.

by kendynamo on Nov 14, 2007 9:48 AM EST reply actions

i also just checked lo duca's career v torrealba's

lo duca had a career OPS+ of about 70 when he was 28. he then had a career year and hit 142, after which he averaged about 90ish the rest of the way. torrealba just finished his last season as a 28 y.o. and has a OPS+ of 80.

not that lo duca is a model C but i dont think this is as bad as it sounds.

by kendynamo on Nov 14, 2007 10:14 AM EST reply actions

This would be an awful awful move.

If Omar does this, then his credibility takes another hit with me.

"I got my pregnant wife (the Yankee fan) with me. Hoping my kid learns to kick her everytime the Mets score." -Schifftis-

by future on Nov 14, 2007 12:21 PM EST reply actions

What's more...

...the rumor du jour is that the contract is really a three-year, $15 million deal. Cripes!

by Eric Simon on Nov 14, 2007 12:44 PM EST reply actions

Lo Duca

I was thinking the same thing. I'd rather have him than Torrealba, who just flat out sucks.

God, the catching market is thin.

Keep A-Rod in New York! Bring him to Queens!!!

by Greenpoint Ian on Nov 14, 2007 12:57 PM EST reply actions

but if you rearrange the letters in his name

you get Lavatory Orbiter. (Get that man some Imodium.)

by Simons on Nov 14, 2007 1:22 PM EST reply actions

uhhm i dont think so

this guy hit .212 in 55 road games last year.

And has a career .251 batting average,now if i didnt know any better i'd say this was only a ploy to drive down the cost for our 2 catchers.

But from what im hearing were going to go threw with this deal. YIKES!

yeah thats what we need another hitter in the .200 to .250 range and hes supposed to be in his prime at 29. Where is the upside here?

What happens when he declines? You have got to be F...... kidding me!

hey........ maybe we can suit up and start playing for them. I'm sure if i close my eyes and swing at decent pitches i can hit close to .200.

by sincethebeginning @ Amazin' Avenue on Nov 14, 2007 2:17 PM EST reply actions

Interesting

Maybe it's not so bad. Ken Rosenthal:

The Mets are expected to re-sign Castro on Wednesday, probably to a two-year deal. They also are pursuing Torrealba, another free agent, but not to be a 120-game starter.
Castro, 31, would play more frequently under the new arrangement, perhaps starting 80 to 90 games, according to sources. Torrealba, 29, would play the rest, saving wear-and-tear on his right shoulder.
For Castro, the new role would amount to a breakthrough -- he has never started more than 57 games in a season, and started only 32 and 35 games, respectively, the past two years behind Lo Duca.

Under this arrangement, Torrealba makes much more sense. I just pray it works out that way.

by Alex Nelson on Nov 14, 2007 2:22 PM EST reply actions

Great

But why sign him for two or three years at $5 million per?

by Eric Simon on Nov 14, 2007 2:26 PM EST up reply actions

I still say keep Duke

And Castro both alike last year. Use that damned saandwhich pick we're keeping without Yorvit and use it to get the best looking catcher in the draft. Once 2 years is over, we can look at trades or free agents to replace either Duke, Hipo, or both.

"As for 1966--oy. Chilcott was a catcher who never reached the majors. The number two pick was held by the Kansas City A's. They picked Reggie Jackson"

by NewMet5 on Nov 14, 2007 3:35 PM EST up reply actions

Picks

I think you're confused; the Mets would not be losing a draft pick by signing Torrealba. The Rockies would just get the sandwich pick.

As for why the Mets should prefer to Torrealba to Lo Duca? Because Lo Duca may cost nearly as much. It's quite conceivable that Lo Duca will get a multiyear deal at 5-6 million per. Barrett will get something similar.

And given Torrealba's age and defense, I might actually prefer him for the next 2-3 years than those two.

by Alex Nelson on Nov 14, 2007 3:50 PM EST up reply actions

anyone but lo duca for me

isnt quite sucky enough for me to want big pud back over him.

by kendynamo on Nov 14, 2007 4:04 PM EST up reply actions

*torrealba isn't quite sucky enough

by kendynamo on Nov 14, 2007 4:04 PM EST up reply actions

Guess I am heh...

Still, if we pay the same, why not get Duca? Thenumbers speak for themselves.... Am I the only one that wants The Duke Back?

"As for 1966--oy. Chilcott was a catcher who never reached the majors. The number two pick was held by the Kansas City A's. They picked Reggie Jackson"

by NewMet5 on Nov 14, 2007 5:36 PM EST up reply actions

Duke/Torrealba

If Lo Duca is guaranteed to hit like he did in 2007, then he would be worth it. However, he's just as likely to fall further into decline, given his advanced age. I have no idea what to expect in 2008.

Torrealba, on the other hand, won't outhit his Coors inflated numbers, but I wouldn't expect him to hit .212, either. I'd say he'll likely hit .230-.250 with otherwise PLD-type numbers. Those numbers should be fairly stable.

The question is, would you rather have two seasons of Lo Duca hitting .250-.270 with little patience and power and terrible defense at $5-6 million per, or three seasons of Torrealba hitting .230-.250 with little patience or power and solid defense?

My answer, provided those are my only real options, would be Torrealba. If Lo Duca is available at just one year, that changes, but I would take three years of Torrealba over two of Lo Duca. I think Torrealba's youth and defense makes him an option I could do more with.

Of course, I'd first investigate whether any team would be interested in trading undervalued young catchers. Miguel Montero, Jason Jaramillo, Brayan Pena, or J.R. House immediately spring to mind.

by Alex Nelson on Nov 14, 2007 6:34 PM EST up reply actions

hmm

I'm ok with that arrangement, but it's too much money to pay a bad second-string catcher.

by Josh @ Amazin' Avenue on Nov 14, 2007 4:38 PM EST up reply actions

I'm fine with Torrealba

I think he's as good an option as the highly overrated Lo Duca. His bat is slightly worse and his fielding is much better.

I'm more upset that the Mets had another shot at A-Rod and again spit the bit. Yorvit would have been a lot easier to hide in the lineup if the best hitter in baseball was there too.

But we never learn.

by JC @ Amazin' Avenue on Nov 14, 2007 5:41 PM EST reply actions

So

The best hitter in baseball would go where? What happens if we did sign Arod and we moved wright or reyes? If te season begins and either of them do horrible, fans and media alike will spit on the decision that Arod was added to the mets when pitching should have been there need.

WHen people say that "His bat is slightly worse and his fielding is much better". Lo Duca had a down year, we all know this. Yorvit had a good year, with good perforrmances in the Postseason, except the NLCS (2-12 or something like that). Duca was better in average, I know this, but I don't know about the others. Yorvit was a great hitter.... at Colorado. Away from it? Not really.

And there are reports Yorvit has shoulder problems. Is it because of him playing more often? Or something worse? Lo Duca -did- have a better year throwing out runners then Yorvit.

Last thing, though I might suspect why. Why are most people convinced delgado will have a bounce back year while Duke won't? I'm not going to go compare career numbers, but isn't one doing the other just as likely?

It's not so much I want Duke back, it's I dont think Yorvit is any good. Oh well, we'll wait a see.

"As for 1966--oy. Chilcott was a catcher who never reached the majors. The number two pick was held by the Kansas City A's. They picked Reggie Jackson"

by NewMet5 on Nov 14, 2007 5:59 PM EST up reply actions

Devil's Advocate:

Or Arod could be signed, and Wright/Reyes flourishes at Second base, and Arod becomes a carrier of all the mets problems.

Yorbit becomes a great player with Castro and Lo Duca continues with his decline.

And Theres no devil's advocate with my third statement... Heres Hoping Delgado has his bounce back year!

"As for 1966--oy. Chilcott was a catcher who never reached the majors. The number two pick was held by the Kansas City A's. They picked Reggie Jackson"

by NewMet5 on Nov 14, 2007 6:03 PM EST up reply actions