Hi. Thanks again for your wisdom.
It looks like Hudson just signed with the Twinkies for one year, $5 million.
Which leads me to ask... why are we blowing money on has-beens when we could get a (really) useful part instead?
I know, I know, I've asked before and was told we have a viable option at 2nd in Jeff Baker. But Hudson would be an excellent candidate to lead off, and this would leave Baker as an option for super utility guy in case of injuries at 1B, 3B, or corner outfield position.
We are paying 3.3 million for a guy who just had shoulder surgery and a career OBP of .330. I am assuming we will retain at least one of Chad Tracy or Kevin Millar who will make at least 1 million.
Why not use (essentially) the same money for Hudson, have a superior utility player in Baker who hasn't been injured, and use Fuld as an OF backup?
I am not sure why there isn't a bigger uproar about the signing of Nady. I thought everyone was sick of signing over 30 year old has beens... ?
For those who mention that Hudson was benched by Torre last year, maybe that's because they were playing him way too much... (?) With Baker to provide a spell or two, I would think he might perform better. Anyways, would seem a better gamble than Nady (who was never that good) and Tracy/Millar.
Thanks for your input.