@AnthonyDiComo 2m2 minutes ago
Can confirm @Joelsherman1 report that #Mets are talking contract extension with Lucas Duda. He's under team control for three more years.
Opening Day they will pick it up next off season. I like idea of tying up guys
long term. The thing is Duda is 29 and he did it for 1 year. If they don't get it done and Duda has similar numbers this year, his leverage increase. I like
the Mets being proactive with Duda, hooefully its a sign of things to come
I think Duda's year last year was for real, but I'm not positive he's a core guy beyond the 3 years they will already have him under control. Maybe they're only buying a year or two of FA at a reasonable number, that gives Duda some added security? Looking at it objectively, the prospect of cashing in big as a FA at age 32 isn't exactly a slam dunk 3 years from now.
How much of a discount can the mets possibly get vs the risk of guaranteed deal (injury, regression etc)?
Earl 30's 1b don't tend to do well in free agency so I just don't see such a huge risk of letting him play out his arbitration years.
If he was blocking someone I can see the hesitation, but there is no one on the immediate horizon at 1B and Smith needs to show something this year or the long-term horizon looks bleak too.
I'm not so sure about free agent 1B's either, I think someone like Napoli's deal is the best you'll get.
I'm expecting Duda to sign for less and hopefully outperform those numbers in a pitchers park.
Just brought this up last week. Get it done. The one irreplaceable on this team and he will cost a fortune if he has another 30 homerun season. Power is the rarest commodity in baseball.
6 year, 100 million dollar deal right now. Would give him a nice bump in salary now, and it gives us essentially a three year cost effective extension. 18 million per would be real nice.
I like Duda and have wanted him over Ike from the beginning
So I don't have a problem if they get him wrapped up for the right price but I believe he isn't going to be a free agent until 2018 so there isn't anything wrong with just letting things play out either.
6/$100m? You like Duda a heck of a lot more than I do
Let's assume the Mets have no 1b in the pipeline. How is that important for 1B, the position anyone can get moved to? 1B are rarely groomed, but moved. A Billy Butler, Adam Laroche etc is ALWAYS available.
Second, let's assume Duda 2014 is repeated. Do you expect him to do that for the next six years? Personally I can see one or two, not six.
Third, let's assume the mets have no one in the pipeline, and Duda keeps repeating. Mets have him cost controlled the next three seasons - what did they gain going six? Basically a 3/$60mm contract after his cost control is done. That's some serious coin reserved for the top, top first baseman. The risk - a massive commitment that the Mets have finally figured out to avoid.
Lastly, just an opinion. Best way to ruin Dudas 2015 is the pressure of living up to a massive contract in NYC.
I don't think the Mets have figured out how to avoid those commitments
I'd use the Duda money to lock up Legares and DeGrom ASAP.
Then shoot my load and be the first to talk Boras into an early extension while TJS is fresh on everyone's mind.
Last - I'd pull an Astros and sign recent promoted kids to immediate extensions. We've been patient with the kids in the minors and know everything that you need to know about them alreadyy
Duda repeats this year at 29 he would be done at 31or 32? That is ludicrous
Of course he wouldn't be done. Duda doesn't have a lot of wear and tear on him for his age. His game doesn't rely on speed either so there is no reason to believe that he would be done at such an early age.
If they can sign him for the right price they should, but there is no reason to have to rush this either and IMO it will sort itself out one way or another. They have plenty of time with Duda.
To what it really is. Not is Duda good or not. Whether he will repeat. How easy it is to find a 1B, etc.
The question is do you want to sign Duda to three one year non obligated contracts at the tail of his prime to 3/$30? Or do you lock in now at 6 $100 today, if you can? To me personally, it is a no brainer. To others it is a no brainer for the opposite decision.
6 year, 100 million dollar deal right now. Would give him a nice bump in salary now, and it gives us essentially a three year cost effective extension. 18 million per would be real nice.
$18 mil per year for a 29 year old first baseman thats had one quality year? You are out of your mind.
"The only concern we have is the sinker's not there right now," Collins said. "The velocity's good, the sinker's not working and I think it's a mechanical thing. We've got to go back to what works and not try to get too fancy."
"The only concern we have is the sinker's not there right now," Collins said. "The velocity's good, the sinker's not working and I think it's a mechanical thing. We've got to go back to what works and not try to get too fancy."
6 year, 100 million dollar deal right now. Would give him a nice bump in salary now, and it gives us essentially a three year cost effective extension. 18 million per would be real nice.
$18 mil per year for a 29 year old first baseman thats had one quality year? You are out of your mind.
It's not an extra 18 per. He's going to be getting 7, 11, and 13 in arbitration in the next 3 years anyway so it's a bump up in the next three years yes and a bargain the last three years. Maybe 100 is a little high, 85 for 6, but there has to be motive for Duda to do the deal. Your talking about extending him through his only big money payday.
I mentioned the Napoli contract as one I'd be comfortable with, I think Duda is a 12 - 13M player TODAY. Of course if he explodes this year into a .900+ OPS guy he can be a 20M player, but the same risk is that he has a worse year and becomes a lesser player.
Which is why I think it's fair for him to sign say a 5 year 60 - 65M deal.
I'd use the Duda money to lock up Legares and DeGrom ASAP.
Then shoot my load and be the first to talk Boras into an early extension while TJS is fresh on everyone's mind.
Last - I'd pull an Astros and sign recent promoted kids to immediate extensions. We've been patient with the kids in the minors and know everything that you need to know about them alreadyy
And I'm sorry but DeGrom and Lagares aren't even close to as valuable to extending as Duda at this time. Lagares's game is built on speed. He is controlled on the Mets until he is in his 30s. Is he really going to be a gold glover then? Will his defense erode like Reyes? DeGrom? We control deGrom until 2021. He will be Way in his 30s. With the way pitchers erode over time, do we really think deGrom is going to be throwing 95 mph 6 years from now?? I doubt it. I'd have no problem extending them, but Duda is far more crucial with only three years left.
RE: RE: Collins isn't on the same page as anyone...
"The only concern we have is the sinker's not there right now," Collins said. "The velocity's good, the sinker's not working and I think it's a mechanical thing. We've got to go back to what works and not try to get too fancy."
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
I mentioned the Napoli contract as one I'd be comfortable with, I think Duda is a 12 - 13M player TODAY. Of course if he explodes this year into a .900+ OPS guy he can be a 20M player, but the same risk is that he has a worse year and becomes a lesser player.
Which is why I think it's fair for him to sign say a 5 year 60 - 65M deal.
Yup, that is much more in the range of a fair deal. Duda gets the 30M he will presumably make the next 3 years guaranteed, plus another 30M or so on top of that. Passes up the chance the be a 32 year old FA, but considering it would take 3 great seasons to get there and be worth a massive contract I think it's a good deal for both sides. If I were him I'd rather have the guaranteed 60M than 30M tied to performance + the chance at more later. I'd probably want to some incentive clauses in there also (MVP voting, all star games, WS, etc.) but obviously that's all part of the CBA and i'm not an agent so not even going to speculate on that.
If Duda is willing to sacrifice some AAV for security...
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Duda has always had a better eye, better on base percentage, and a much purer swing. If you think Duda was a fluke last year, that's fine. I do not. And you can't let one weird case influence all future financial decisions.
Obviously for Sandy to be discussing extension, he shares my sentiment.
RE: RE: RE: Listen, I'm all for extending Duda but 6 for 100
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Again, your not giving him an "extra" 100 million. You are tearing up his contract and giving that to him in liu of his current arbitration years. So it's only an extra 60-70 million. After thinking about it 100 million is a little high I agree, but you have to make it worth his while. If he proves he is legit, he's getting 30 per in three years on the open market hands down.
Duda has always had a better eye, better on base percentage, and a much purer swing. If you think Duda was a fluke last year, that's fine. I do not. And you can't let one weird case influence all future financial decisions.
Obviously for Sandy to be discussing extension, he shares my sentiment.
I don't think he was a fluke, but I really don't know. He wouldn't be the first guy to have a career year and not duplicate that success.
And I'm definitely not going to pay him like he's a sure thing for 30 HR's/100 RBI every year based on one season.
by starting out as hot as a house of fire the next season until he collided with DW and came down with Vallley fever and was never the same. Does that mean you don't invest and lock guys up until they do it multiple times? If yes, then don't go composing they could of signed him cheaper if they did it one year earlier. You got to trust your staff to evaluate the player's career path or why have a staff in the first place?
RE: RE: RE: RE: Listen, I'm all for extending Duda but 6 for 100
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Again, your not giving him an "extra" 100 million. You are tearing up his contract and giving that to him in liu of his current arbitration years. So it's only an extra 60-70 million. After thinking about it 100 million is a little high I agree, but you have to make it worth his while. If he proves he is legit, he's getting 30 per in three years on the open market hands down.
Oh stop it...Duda is getting nowhere near 30 mil per year "hands down" if he proves to be legit. And legit meaning he's hitting 30+ HRs/100+ RBIs/.900+ OPS. There are currently TWO players making 30 Mil next year (Kershaw and Lester). Everyone else in the 20mil to 30mil range is either MUCH better than Duda could ever be or in the twilight years of a contract of a player that WAS much better than Duda will ever be.
Come on now, Duda will never be in that tier of players and certainly will not command 30 mil "hands down." Plus, that's kind of a hypercritical statement since you are always killing Dan for using his "100%"...just saying.
a replica of his 2014 season in 2015 I'd guess he'd be looking at 5-6 for 18-20 per. Docked for depth at 1b and zero defensive value, boosted by a rare tool (power), docked years wise for his age (he'd be 30 in year one). I'd guess 5 for 95 or so if I had to guess.
by starting out as hot as a house of fire the next season until he collided with DW and came down with Vallley fever and was never the same. Does that mean you don't invest and lock guys up until they do it multiple times? If yes, then don't go composing they could of signed him cheaper if they did it one year earlier. You got to trust your staff to evaluate the player's career path or why have a staff in the first place?
You have that backwards...Ike started off HOT in 2011 (although only for 36 games) and then followed that up with the 32 HR season. Also, I don't know if Ike Davis is the example you want to use. Ike Davis hit 32 HRs in 2012 but the rest of his stats were garbage. Plus he wasn't exactly burning down the house before that year.
Sure, you can blame the whole valley fever thing but the reality is that Ike didn't have a great swing (the hitch) as mentioned by MANY people and was a malcontent. He didn't have a history of being open to change and thought he was better than he actually was. Not surprisingly, he hasn't done much since that glimpse earlier in his career.
This is EXACTLY why you don't hand out 100 mil contracts to every player that "flashes" ability just to lock them up. Of course, there are times when you should and will...but Ike wasn't a great example to prove your point.
a replica of his 2014 season in 2015 I'd guess he'd be looking at 5-6 for 18-20 per. Docked for depth at 1b and zero defensive value, boosted by a rare tool (power), docked years wise for his age (he'd be 30 in year one). I'd guess 5 for 95 or so if I had to guess.
IF he replicated his 2014 #s, I'd still think that 20 mil per is high. I just don't see him in the same conversation as those upper tier 20+ mil per year type of first baseman. He doesn't have a long history of success like a lot of those players do and it took him until 29 to get there (or close to there)?
In the end, I think we want the same thing (extending) but we're just quibbling over the worth of the contract.
His 2014 three more times or God forbid improved even a little, he IS one of the best players in the game. Period.
You couldn't be any more wrong and it hurts. When has he ever been even close to .900 OPS? Four years ago with a half a season's worth of at bats? Come on dude, I like Duda but, as usual, you waaaay overboard with this.
long term. The thing is Duda is 29 and he did it for 1 year. If they don't get it done and Duda has similar numbers this year, his leverage increase. I like
the Mets being proactive with Duda, hooefully its a sign of things to come
Depends on the numbers, if it's team friendly (like our discussion last week) I like it.
.. - ( New Window )
This should give us a little peace of mind regarding that Long feels he can help Duda adjust and hit lefties better.
This will be fun to watch over the season
Earl 30's 1b don't tend to do well in free agency so I just don't see such a huge risk of letting him play out his arbitration years.
Lagares is the guy they need to be doing this with first if they're interested in doing it, though.
Earl 30's 1b don't tend to do well in free agency so I just don't see such a huge risk of letting him play out his arbitration years.
If he was blocking someone I can see the hesitation, but there is no one on the immediate horizon at 1B and Smith needs to show something this year or the long-term horizon looks bleak too.
I'm not so sure about free agent 1B's either, I think someone like Napoli's deal is the best you'll get.
I'm expecting Duda to sign for less and hopefully outperform those numbers in a pitchers park.
Second, let's assume Duda 2014 is repeated. Do you expect him to do that for the next six years? Personally I can see one or two, not six.
Third, let's assume the mets have no one in the pipeline, and Duda keeps repeating. Mets have him cost controlled the next three seasons - what did they gain going six? Basically a 3/$60mm contract after his cost control is done. That's some serious coin reserved for the top, top first baseman. The risk - a massive commitment that the Mets have finally figured out to avoid.
Lastly, just an opinion. Best way to ruin Dudas 2015 is the pressure of living up to a massive contract in NYC.
Then shoot my load and be the first to talk Boras into an early extension while TJS is fresh on everyone's mind.
Last - I'd pull an Astros and sign recent promoted kids to immediate extensions. We've been patient with the kids in the minors and know everything that you need to know about them alreadyy
Of course he wouldn't be done. Duda doesn't have a lot of wear and tear on him for his age. His game doesn't rely on speed either so there is no reason to believe that he would be done at such an early age.
If they can sign him for the right price they should, but there is no reason to have to rush this either and IMO it will sort itself out one way or another. They have plenty of time with Duda.
So if Duda doesn't repeat 2014 that means he is "done? Lol
The question is do you want to sign Duda to three one year non obligated contracts at the tail of his prime to 3/$30? Or do you lock in now at 6 $100 today, if you can? To me personally, it is a no brainer. To others it is a no brainer for the opposite decision.
$18 mil per year for a 29 year old first baseman thats had one quality year? You are out of your mind.
Who is he talking about?
Quote:
6 year, 100 million dollar deal right now. Would give him a nice bump in salary now, and it gives us essentially a three year cost effective extension. 18 million per would be real nice.
$18 mil per year for a 29 year old first baseman thats had one quality year? You are out of your mind.
It's not an extra 18 per. He's going to be getting 7, 11, and 13 in arbitration in the next 3 years anyway so it's a bump up in the next three years yes and a bargain the last three years. Maybe 100 is a little high, 85 for 6, but there has to be motive for Duda to do the deal. Your talking about extending him through his only big money payday.
I mentioned the Napoli contract as one I'd be comfortable with, I think Duda is a 12 - 13M player TODAY. Of course if he explodes this year into a .900+ OPS guy he can be a 20M player, but the same risk is that he has a worse year and becomes a lesser player.
Which is why I think it's fair for him to sign say a 5 year 60 - 65M deal.
Then shoot my load and be the first to talk Boras into an early extension while TJS is fresh on everyone's mind.
Last - I'd pull an Astros and sign recent promoted kids to immediate extensions. We've been patient with the kids in the minors and know everything that you need to know about them alreadyy
And I'm sorry but DeGrom and Lagares aren't even close to as valuable to extending as Duda at this time. Lagares's game is built on speed. He is controlled on the Mets until he is in his 30s. Is he really going to be a gold glover then? Will his defense erode like Reyes? DeGrom? We control deGrom until 2021. He will be Way in his 30s. With the way pitchers erode over time, do we really think deGrom is going to be throwing 95 mph 6 years from now?? I doubt it. I'd have no problem extending them, but Duda is far more crucial with only three years left.
Quote:
"The only concern we have is the sinker's not there right now," Collins said. "The velocity's good, the sinker's not working and I think it's a mechanical thing. We've got to go back to what works and not try to get too fancy."
Who is he talking about?
Familia.
I mentioned the Napoli contract as one I'd be comfortable with, I think Duda is a 12 - 13M player TODAY. Of course if he explodes this year into a .900+ OPS guy he can be a 20M player, but the same risk is that he has a worse year and becomes a lesser player.
Which is why I think it's fair for him to sign say a 5 year 60 - 65M deal.
Yup, that is much more in the range of a fair deal. Duda gets the 30M he will presumably make the next 3 years guaranteed, plus another 30M or so on top of that. Passes up the chance the be a 32 year old FA, but considering it would take 3 great seasons to get there and be worth a massive contract I think it's a good deal for both sides. If I were him I'd rather have the guaranteed 60M than 30M tied to performance + the chance at more later. I'd probably want to some incentive clauses in there also (MVP voting, all star games, WS, etc.) but obviously that's all part of the CBA and i'm not an agent so not even going to speculate on that.
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Quote:
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Obviously for Sandy to be discussing extension, he shares my sentiment.
Quote:
In comment 12209001 PhiPsi125 said:
Quote:
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Again, your not giving him an "extra" 100 million. You are tearing up his contract and giving that to him in liu of his current arbitration years. So it's only an extra 60-70 million. After thinking about it 100 million is a little high I agree, but you have to make it worth his while. If he proves he is legit, he's getting 30 per in three years on the open market hands down.
Obviously for Sandy to be discussing extension, he shares my sentiment.
I don't think he was a fluke, but I really don't know. He wouldn't be the first guy to have a career year and not duplicate that success.
And I'm definitely not going to pay him like he's a sure thing for 30 HR's/100 RBI every year based on one season.
Quote:
In comment 12209033 ZGiants98 said:
Quote:
In comment 12209001 PhiPsi125 said:
Quote:
is insanity. His good year last year can be just as much a fluke as it was a precursor of things to come. And the fact that he just "found it" at 29 years old doesn't exactly invoke the confidence that he will be a stud moving forward. Especially coming off of his spectacularly craptastic spring training (I know he had the injury, but still).
2 homeruns in two weeks after an injury isn't exactly "crappy". Nevertheless, if he hits 25-30 HR this year, and I believe he will, the negotiations are over. He'll have no reason to extend in a year when he'll be worth a boatload on the open market in two years.
Yes, 6 for 35 with 17 Ks is pretty crappy. Small sample size? Of course, but still crappy.
If you want to extend him for a more reasonable contract, then fine. Otherwise, you want to go into the 100 mil territory then prove that it wasn't fluke.
Again, your not giving him an "extra" 100 million. You are tearing up his contract and giving that to him in liu of his current arbitration years. So it's only an extra 60-70 million. After thinking about it 100 million is a little high I agree, but you have to make it worth his while. If he proves he is legit, he's getting 30 per in three years on the open market hands down.
Oh stop it...Duda is getting nowhere near 30 mil per year "hands down" if he proves to be legit. And legit meaning he's hitting 30+ HRs/100+ RBIs/.900+ OPS. There are currently TWO players making 30 Mil next year (Kershaw and Lester). Everyone else in the 20mil to 30mil range is either MUCH better than Duda could ever be or in the twilight years of a contract of a player that WAS much better than Duda will ever be.
Come on now, Duda will never be in that tier of players and certainly will not command 30 mil "hands down." Plus, that's kind of a hypercritical statement since you are always killing Dan for using his "100%"...just saying.
You have that backwards...Ike started off HOT in 2011 (although only for 36 games) and then followed that up with the 32 HR season. Also, I don't know if Ike Davis is the example you want to use. Ike Davis hit 32 HRs in 2012 but the rest of his stats were garbage. Plus he wasn't exactly burning down the house before that year.
Sure, you can blame the whole valley fever thing but the reality is that Ike didn't have a great swing (the hitch) as mentioned by MANY people and was a malcontent. He didn't have a history of being open to change and thought he was better than he actually was. Not surprisingly, he hasn't done much since that glimpse earlier in his career.
This is EXACTLY why you don't hand out 100 mil contracts to every player that "flashes" ability just to lock them up. Of course, there are times when you should and will...but Ike wasn't a great example to prove your point.
IF he replicated his 2014 #s, I'd still think that 20 mil per is high. I just don't see him in the same conversation as those upper tier 20+ mil per year type of first baseman. He doesn't have a long history of success like a lot of those players do and it took him until 29 to get there (or close to there)?
In the end, I think we want the same thing (extending) but we're just quibbling over the worth of the contract.
2014 was a career year for him by far and he was 64th in MLB hitters in WAR.
Maybe if you jut mean HR's in which he was 11th, but being 64th in WAR is not one of the best players in the game unless that's your bar.
I like Duda, but I think you overestimate his 2014.
You couldn't be any more wrong and it hurts. When has he ever been even close to .900 OPS? Four years ago with a half a season's worth of at bats? Come on dude, I like Duda but, as usual, you waaaay overboard with this.