A different reason to avoid Dan Uggla
Matt Cerrone from MetsBlog.com says he doesn’t think the Mets should sign Dan Uggla because of Uggla’s free-swinging ways. 
While Matt’s right that Uggla is an unrepentant whiffer, he does manage to get on base adequately enough to be a valuable hitter. Uggla posted a .360 on-base percentage in 2008 and a .354 mark in 2009, so he is by no means Jeff Francoeur.
The problem is, he’s a bad defender by just about every standard. The Mets already have one of those at second base in Luis Castillo, so one could argue that Uggla’s offensive upgrade over Castillo — assuming it’s a wash defensively — makes him a nice fit for the Mets.
But with the team’s defense being as bad as it was, it’d be good to upgrade defensively if they were able to somehow move Castillo, especially if they hope to see some improvement out of ground-ball guy Mike Pelfrey.
The Mets seem more likely to acquire Uggla and move him to left field, but that would essentially sap him of his value by moving him away from a premium position. Because Uggla’s actually probably about 5’9″, tops (he’s listed at 5’11″), I’d be surprised if any team put him at first base.
Regardless, moving Uggla to any corner that’s not third base (which, in the Mets’ case, is occupied) makes him little more than a league-average hitter for the spot. Plus there are no guarantees he could field it adequately.
Granted, the 2009 Mets could have benefited from a few more league-average hitters, but not at the cost of the prospects it’ll take to acquire Uggla.
