Guzman, Pedroza for Lugo

This is a very good deal from the Devil Rays' perspective, and I think it's difficult to argue that Guzman isn't likely to be more valuable than the two picks in the 16-65 range the Rays would get from keeping him. I doubt that the Red Sox or Blue Jays had more impressive packages, although getting a couple of eventual average major league starters might have more value for the Rays than betting on Guzman. Pedroza could turn out to be relevant, too, although his defense is likely bad enough that the margin for failure with his bat is quite low.

On the other hand, it's perhaps disconcerting that the Rays have so many high ceiling hitters with reported 'makeup' issues. But I can't really see how stockpiling that type really hurts. Guzman might find himself playing first base for the Rays given their attempts to move Bankston to third, and perhaps that's where he should be.

From the Dodgers' side, I don't really like the trade, but it's not as offensive as most of their recent moves. I'd like to think that the Dodgers have made a scouting decision based on sound empirical research in deciding that Guzman just won't ever amount to much because of his poor command of the strike zone. If the Dodgers have decided that they need to get something for Guzman before his value shrinks, then this isn't too bad of a way to do so. On the other hand, though, there's reason for concern that the Dodgers made this move either because a) they felt they simply had to add somebody and/or b) they've panicked because Guzman hasn't been that impressive in 2006. Any prospect holding his own at age 21 in AAA - and Guzman is certainly doing fine - is very likely to be a good major league hitter. Unless he's just completely indifferent as a fielder, you'd have to think that someone as athletic as him would be able to be an average major league corner outfielder in the majors within a few years. Six years of that at low prices is, in all but extraordinary cases, more valuable than two months of a very good but not great shortstop. I'm tempted to take this decision on faith, but don't really think I should.

Given that the Dodgers do have Ethier, Drew, and Kemp in the bag and fringe regulars like Jason Repko and Delwyn Young already on board (and, hopefully, Jayson Werth), it's certainly fair to say that Guzman doesn't have as much value to them as he does to another team. While Guzman's path might be another year in AAA followed by a year as a RHB platoon partner and injury fill-in, the Dodgers don't look like they're starved for that particular piece, and Guzman would probably have a better shot at developing as a major league regular elsewhere.

The value beyond Guzman and the two to three months of Lugo evens out, since I think Pedroza's value covers the draft picks the Dodgers would get; he was a 2005 third rounder who's done well so far, and the Dodgers already paid his bonus. And given that the Dodgers already have a full infield (outside of first base) under contract for next season - with both Betemit and LaRoche legitimate options assuming Mueller isn't back - I don't think there's any meaningful value in the right to negotiate with Lugo a bit more. Sure, they might end up signing Lugo and trading Furcal, but that's a long shot and that little bit of flexibility isn't worth all that much.

So for the Dodgers the question is whether Lugo's contribution playing out of position for a third of a season is more valuable than 6 or so years of Guzman. Lugo is worth maybe 3-4 wins per season above Robles and Martinez, but then again Kent may be back with the team before too long. I'd say he's worth about one win, although I do agree that one marginal win has substantial value to the Dodgers this season.

I think I know what the answer is, but this time I'm willing to hope I'm wrong.