Kevin, my daughters said it was OK to respond.

My sense of it is that Hudson is an ideal player for the Mets. Good glove, as you noted. A legit No. 2 hitter who would provide what Paul Lo Duca provided in 2006. Hudson is a terrific clubhouse guy; for all accounts, quite stand-up. Moreover, he wants to play for the Mets.

But Hudson's not going do pro bono work at second base. And the Mets have said they have no intention of adding more high-profile personnel. He would be an impact player for them, in my estimation; the kind of player who helps make a team greater than the sum of its parts. The Mets were that way in 2005 and '06 and not so much since then.

The Mets' $18 million obligation to Castillo is blocking second base the way Mike Scioscia used to block the plate. The club is counting on a renaissance season from Castillo.

I don't understand the concept of allowing a player to play just because he is owed a lot of money, other than the fact the Mets don't want to pay double the salary for a second baseman. If Castillo is not performing, ship him to Triple-A and bring in somebody who is performing, such as Hudson or Ty Wigginton (a personal favorite). Underperformance is underperformance, regardless of how much you make!
-- Robert M., Hackensack, N.J.

First of all, Wigginton just signed with the Orioles. Secondly, a player with five years of service -- Castillo has more than 11 years -- can not be assigned to the Minor Leagues without his consent. So if the Mets were of a mind to sign Hudson, they'd have a 25-man roster with at least one member of no use and still be obligated to pay him as a highly-compensated wallflower.

Pedro Martinez came back from surgery, and we all know it takes a while for a player to be back a full strength, so after a year and a half, wouldn't you take a chance on him again? I believe he has a lot to prove to himself and others and that he'd be a better-than-expected fourth or fifth starter.
-- Daniel G., Naples, Fla.

I agree with you about Oliver Perez, but I still think the Mets should sign Martinez, even if he had to come out of the bullpen. What do you think of this idea?
-- Pat H., Pompano, Fla.

Have a question about the Mets? E-mail your query to MLB.com Mets beat reporter Marty Noble for possible inclusion in a future Inbox column. Letters may be edited for brevity, length and/or content. First Name, Last Initial: Hometown: Email Address: Question:

The time for the Mets to remove Pedro from their plans has come and gone -- probably last year. If you recall, Pedro said he was in terrific condition last spring, and he broke down in his first start. I'm certain he has the will and acumen. I wouldn't be surprised if he had the stamina. But his velocity was greatly diminished when he returned last summer, and without it, his other offspeed pitches were less effective, too.

At this point, Pedro isn't a viable candidate to pitch in relief. He doesn't warm up quickly, he would need more rest after he pitches than most other candidates and, if you recall, he was most ineffective in the first inning -- his ERA in the first innings of his 20 starts was 10.35, not a good attribute for a reliever.

Why don't the Mets show more appreciation for past players? In all their years, Tom Seaver is the only player to have his number retired by the Mets. What about Jerry Koosman, Gary Carter, Keith Hernandez and Mike Piazza? Also, every other stadium I have been to has a nice monument or statue of their most famous player. Is there a statue of Tom Seaver at Citi Field?
-- Tony C., Lakeland, Fla.

The Mets do have a Hall of Fame, and Koosman, Carter and Hernandez have been inducted. I'd be stunned if Piazza were not inducted at some point in the not-too-distant future. They have saved the retirement of numbers for their most elite -- that is Seaver. And you may have noticed, No. 8, Carter's signature number, has not be assigned since he departed following the 1989 season. No one has worn Piazza's 31, either.

Hernandez's No. 17 have been assigned 15 times since he left, also after the 1989 season. Other than the incessant "Sign Manny" drum beat of the past weeks, no topic is mentioned more in e-mails I receive than retiring No. 17 for Hernandez.

I favor that. No player in the franchise's history other than Seaver had more positive impact than Hernandez. Piazza was a more accomplished hitter, Carter produced more runs and Darryl Strawberry and Edgardo Alfonzo were the best offensive position players the club has developed. None did as much to help their teams win as Hernandez from mid-June 1983 through the end of '89.

In the five-year period beginning with 1984, no player in the National League amassed more points in the balloting for the Most Valuable Player Award than Hernandez. That wasn't by accident.