Our Next Trade

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

My bad. Carry on.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: especially considering Nady played at Petco. You'd have to consider them more or less comparable.

No, I don't have to, actually, unless "more or less" covers most MLB outfielders, who are "more or less" comparable. Diaz is considerably younger, which is HUGE, and he has better stats AFTER ballparks are taken into account (OPS+ assumes ballpark factors) and his defensive stats in RF are actually better than Nady's, not that either of them are either definitive or superior.

I'd be much more comfortable with Nady as the 4th outfielder (he has more experience than Diaz in CF and in LF) and as the backup to Delgado at 1B. But that's not how it's shaking out at this point. And not only isn't that right, or fair, but it's stupid. It hurts the Mets and, as far as I can tell, makes almost no sense (other than having a greater potential to boost Omar's reputation) to be pushing Nady for the job.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Just speaking out of my ass here (bring that microphone a tad closer, guys) I'd estimate that Diaz has perhaps a 25% or 30% chance of becoming a big star, while Nady's chances are something on the order of 5 to 10%. Both are unlikely to happen, but to favor Nady over Diaz at this point is just wildly self-destructive for the Mets. And yet...

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

And just for a frame of reference, I'm talking about a big star being someone who peaks at over 25 WS in a season AND accumulates over 250 career WS (examples: Keith Hernandez 29 peak/311 lifetime WS, Tom Seaver 32/388) while a small star gets one of the two but not both (Cleon Jones 30/141, McReynolds 31/202) and a regular non-star gets neither (Millan 20/152, Harrelson 19/141).

I'd put Diaz at say 25% chance for Big stardom, 30% for small stardom, and 45% chance to be a regular non-star (or worse). For Nady, I'd say, the figures would be more like 5%, 25% and 70%. If this seems too extreme for you, let me just remnd you that for every single day that Nady doesn't emerge as a giant star, the chances of it ever happening decline. Diaz still has another year or two to dick around before making his move towards stardom. Three years at this stage of his career are tremendous.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Uh, defensively, y'all should remember that Diaz is a converted 2B. He's still learning. That being said, let's see what BP's FRAA think of Diaz, then Nady.

2003 AA JAX: 2B, 77 Games, -10 FRAA
2003 AA BIN: 2B, 43 Games, -7 FRAA
2004 AAA NOR: 125 Games, RF, 5 FRAA
2005 AAA NOR: 25 Games, 1B, 1 FRAA
2005 MLB NYN: 74 Games, RF, -3 FRAA
TOTAL 2B: 120 G, -17 FRAA (-.14 FRAA/G)
TOTAL RF: 199 G, 2 FRAA (.01 FRAA/G)
TOTAL 1B: 25 G, 1 FRAA (.04 FRAA/G)

So Diaz was justifiably moved from 2B and he did quite well at RF in Norfolk. The following year, but struggled a bit in the outfield but seemed to do okay at first.

Nady
2003 POR AAA: RF, 32 G, -2 FRAA
2003 SDN MLB: RF, 96 G, -6 FRAA
2004 POR AAA: RF, 39 G, -2 FRAA
2004 SDN MLB: LF, 12 G, -2 FRAA
2005 SDN MLB: 1B, 33 G, 0 FRAA
TOTAL RF: 167 G, -10 FRAA (-.06 FRAA/G)
TOTAL LF: 12 G, -2 FRAA
TOTAL 1B: 33 G, 0 FRAA

Nady has been reliably below average in right field. If we're going to write anyone off defensively, shouldn't it be the guy who's 3 years older, has been playing his position for years, and is consistently below average?

Offensively, it's not even close, at least if you're taking age into account, which, IMO, we absolutely should.

Age 23 years:

Nady: A, 169 AB, .278 AVG/.382 OBP/.580 SLG/.962 OPS
AAA, 315 AB, .283 AVG/.329 OBP/.422 SLG/.751 OPS

Diaz: AAA, 184 AB, .300 AVG/.353 OBP/.541 OPS/.894 OPS
MLB, .257 AVG/.329 OBP/.468 SLG/.797 OPS

Against tougher competition, Diaz kicked Nady up and down the field. It's just no contest.

PECTOA forecasts (cumulative between 2006-2010)

Diaz:
Mean VORP: 95.9; Upside: 99.8; MORP : $19.4M

Nady:
Mean VORP: 45.6; Upside: 43.6; MORP: $6M

One more time--no contest.

Nady MIGHT be a better bet for this one year (although I really don't think so), but long term, Diaz is the far, far better guy to have.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

Crazy? Well, I've been called far worse.

Okay, I will admit that I haven't seen much of Nady. So I shouldn't have stated that he was "most definitely better" than Diaz as a defender. I guess I just couldn't imagine that Nady was as bad as Diaz. I do however, stand by my assessment of Diaz' defensive ineptness.

Hell, if neither of them can catch cold in a blizzard, then go with whichever one of them offers the most offense. Maybe Diaz can learn to play right field satisfactorily, but that remains to be seen. I don't doubt that he can hit.

[Frayed Knot]

Anyone who doesn't believe that Diaz has shown that he's a very, very shaky outfielder to date hasn't been paying attention.

[nymr83]

I'm not doubty he is "shaky" but Nady is older, just as shaky, and doesn't have the excuse of having started playing the position recently.

[DocTee]

Let's move Diaz back to second-- (sarcasm content-- high)

[Frayed Knot]

I haven't seen enough of Nady to form an independant opinion but I don't think the Mets (or anyone I've heard for that matter) view him as "just as shaky"

[Guest cleonjones11]

You don't HAVE to do anything. Let Diaz and Nady share right