Hope y’all had a great Thanksgiving! We went out to a killer buffet at this place called the 94th Aero Squadron. Sat out on the patio, watched the planes take off from and land at Montgomery Field. Very relaxing, very filling.

So the long-awaited trade with the A’s finally happened. Was that like pulling teeth, or what? No matter, the Pads finally have a legit catcher. Now it’s time to start working on the bullpen. Rod Beck is still a possibility, as is Japanese reliever Akinori Otsuka: Padres Look To Sign Otsuka (Baseball America).

Meantime, Terrence Long is rumored to be nearing the end of his brief tenure as a Padre. The latest has him going to the Mets along with Kevin Jarvis for Roger Cedeno, the theory being that one bad contract is better than two. That’s gotta make you feel pretty good if you’re involved in a trade that is made for the sole purpose of exchanging players that nobody really wants.

What else. Gary Matthews Jr. was claimed on waivers by the Braves, which makes the Eugene Kingsale signing look good, or at least palatable. Kingsale and Matthews are roughly exchangeable parts, and generally you want the one that costs less either in terms of money or roster space. Right now that is Kingsale.

Geek moment. I just discovered Crimson Editor, which is what I’m using to compose today’s blog entry. It color codes stuff, gives line numbers, and generally rocks. Adios, Notepad. Anyway, if you’re looking for a good, free text editor, you could do a lot worse.

But enough about that. Mail has been piling up, so now would be a good time to respond to letters.

First up, in response to my somewhat dismissive analysis of the Billy Wagner trade, Howard Lynch writes:

[In the Nov. 4 entry, you said:] “I don’t think the Astros got enough for a pitcher of Wagner’s caliber.”

That strikes me as “old school” thinking … a great player paid a great salary will not bring much in trade … because good/young/underpaid players are more “valuable.” Why is Manny Ramirez available? Probably for “nothing” in trade (isn’t that what it meant when he was waived?)

Also, if you really think the Astros didn’t get enough, then you’re also slamming all the other teams (including the Padres) for not offering more than the Phillies. OK, maybe not the Padres, if they are committed to Trevor … but each team that has a “closer” already (which presumably includes the Astros since they were willing to part with Wagner) reduces the demand and therefore value of Wagner.

Finally, do you think Phillies could have got ARod for the guys they gave up for Wagner? You bet! ARod is available … but he’s not valuable … because he’s overpaid.

Just wanted to let you know I/we are still out here

Thanks, Howard, for writing. So, is there one of you or is it a plurality?

But seriously, you’re dead on here. I didn’t provide much of an analysis of the trade, frankly because I didn’t know enough about the pitchers coming to Houston. I’m not a big fan of Brandon Duckworth, but I’ve since learned that Taylor Buccholz is quite highly regarded (Baseball America has just rated him the Astros’ #1 prospect).

There are really two points I want to make. One is that my initial "analysis" was very off-the-cuff and not carefully considered. It was a gut reaction. And now that I have more information, I think the Astros actually did okay from a talent standpoint.

The other point has to do with the larger issue that Howard raises. Evaluating trades solely on the basis of talent exchanged is very much "old school" and isn’t practical in the current environment. I have to say, I hate that. But it is what it is, and I don’t see it changing anytime soon.

So, back to Wagner, I think that both the Astros and the Phillies accomplished what they hoped to with this trade. The Astros shed themselves of significant salary at a position where they are relatively deep (Octavio Dotel, Brad Lidge, etc.) and brought in some good young arms. And the Phils addressed their single greatest deficiency (well, on the field anyway) without making a real dent in their 2004 squad.

As for A-Rod’s contract, that’s a different animal. He may well be overpaid, but the fact remains that someone was willing to pay him that amount of money. I do find it more than a little ironic that now that he’s finally won the MVP award, he is essentially untradeable. If that isn’t a sign that something is seriously wrong with the economics of Major League Baseball, then I don’t know what is. How these owners can continue to spend irresponsibly and then cry about salaries is beyond me.

Next up, Jason Christopherson asks:

I have a question for you. I’m 32 years old and have been playing or watching baseball since I was 4. Never in those 28 years have I ever, EVER heard the term “ducksnort”. The word needs a boost. I plan on putting it in my daily lexicon. But I need to know what it is. Can I assume a little weak line drive or grounder that somehow finds its way to the outfield? Help me out. Ducksnort deserves more publicity.

Jason, you’re on the right track. The name “Ducksnorts” refers to a bloop base hit and is one of my favorite baseball-related phrases. I first heard it used by Ken Harrelson and Tom Paciorek on WGN several years ago, and I know that Mark Grant occassionally drops it into Padre telecasts.

If you’re serious about putting it in your daily lexicon, I’m sure there are ways the phrase could be applied to non-baseball aspects of life. A lot of sports metaphors have found their way into other areas, why not "ducksnort"? It could be used as a substitute, perhaps, for "it’s better to be lucky than good" or even "right place, right time."

For example, about George W. Bush’s victory over Al Gore in the presidential race (not the most topical example, but bear with me), we might have the following exchange:

Joe: Did you hear, Bush won the election?
Steve: Yeah, but it wasn’t exactly a landslide.
Joe: No kidding. In fact, he was lucky to win at all.
Steve: Totally. But sometimes you only need a ducksnort.
Joe: No doubt.

I’m sure you can think of other ways to use this excellent word in all kinds of situations, including business, food preparation, dating, and much more. Thanks for writing, Jason, and get the word out on the street. You don’t have to tell the whole world, but a ducksnort here and there couldn’t hurt (hey, there’s another possible usage–an idea that you pop into people’s heads intermittently; a catch phrase, a slogan, or a commercial jingle could be a ducksnort).

Finally, E.B. chimes in with this gem:

I just found your site through Baseball Primer and was very happy to find it. After being an intern for Channel 4 last summer, my interest in the Padres has grown exponentially (I’m from San Francisco so I’m a Giants fan). Watching almost every home game since late April, I’ve learned a lot about this team and come across a lot of stupid and useless stats. One of them is this. This is the difference between a team’s qualified catcher’s ERA and the team’s actual ERA.

Positive Effect
1) Gary Bennett    -1.03
2) Greg Myers      -0.46
3) Paul LoDuca     -0.43
4) Brent Mayne     -0.36
5) Miguel Oliva    -0.36
6) A.J. Piezynski  -0.26
6) Brian Schneider -0.26

Negative Effect
1) Eddie Perez     +0.33
2) Vance Wilson    +0.24
3) Josh Bard       +0.12
4) Jorge Posada    +0.10
5) Toby Hall       +0.06

This probably speaks to the incompetence of the other catchers. Also the games played varies from catcher to catcher but still. Thought I’d pass it on even though Bennett’s an out machine and gone.

Wow, thanks E.B. We love stupid stats, but we really love stupid and useless stats. Seriously, I knew the Pads had a much better ERA with Bennett behind the dish but I wasn’t sure the exact number. As for competence of Padre catchers, I dunno. But I do know that Bennett didn’t routinely drop strikes nor did he forget how many outs there were. As much as it pained me to watch the guy flail at 2-0 pitches out of the zone, I think he does have something to offer a ballclub, especially if that team is smart enough and in the position to limit him to 120-150 at-bats in a season.

Speaking of Bennett, I’d like to thank the Astros for re-signing Brad Ausmus and closing that door for the Padres while the A’s deal was in limbo. Nothing against Ausmus, but as with Kingsale vs Matthews, you take the cheaper guy. That would have been Bennett.

Next time we’ll look at the Curt Schilling trade and how it impacts the Padres.