a700hitter

But he's on the DL and they need a catcher.

He's hitting .248, but he only has 125 ABs. He is a .272 lifetime hitter with 143 Homers.

Wang is hurling another gem. He has very quietly become the Yankee ace. 0 runs and 4 hits after 6innings so far.

Especially if you created the holes.

What about Lieberthal? He's on waivers.

Yeah, but he's no Jason Johnson.

Yes, in your bizarre world it is safe to assume that.

My sentiments exactly. Theo came out of the trading deadline two years in a row having done nothing to help the current team. We heard the talk about preserving the future for two years in a row. My question for Theo is when will the future be here? Does Theo realize that even when the future is here, he'll probably have to make some moves at the trading deadline to shore up the team for the stretch run and the playoffs? Does he realize that he'll need to trade prospects to make those moves? Theo, ieffectively threw in the towel for this Year. It was a big screw you to the sold out houses for the remainder of the year. When they won in 2004, I thought the FO said that the new ownership was not about winning a single championship but their goal was to win multiple championships. They did not do what it takes for 2006.

I felt bad for that bird. Couldn't someone on the grounds crew have come out between innings and help it get airborne.

It says that eveyone asked for that package. Would the Astros be included in "everyone?" Let's have an exercise in logic here for you slow learners: The article states that the Red Sox offered 1 or 2 of the 3 kids plus Crisp to the Astros for Oswalt. I think it is safe to assume that the Astros would have opted for Lester as one of the two. This means that the offer was either Lester plus MDC or Hansen plus Crisp or it was just Lester plus Crisp, depending on whether the Red Sox offered one or two pitchers. Clearly the offer was not accepted by the Astros which means that the Astros asked for something additional or different players. One conclusion would be that if the Sox offered only Lester plus Crisp that Houston asked for something additional and asked for either MDC or Hansen. Another logical conclusion based on the article was that they asked for all three kid pitchers and dropped Crisp from the package. Afterall they have Taverez in CF. This would be a very logical conclusion based on the article. I cite you to the oft-quoted sentence that references "everyone." There is no evidence in the article nor can any logical inference be drawn from the article that the Stros asked for the 3 kids plus Crisp. Until someone in authority comes out and definitively says otherwise, based on the clear statement in the article that multiple teams asked for the 3 kids in a package (and the Sox thought it was too rich), it has too be concluded that the Stros asked for the 3 kids. This is what is known as deductive reasoning.

I think Schilling, Oswalt and Oswalt would be 3 studs. You are counting a guy with 13 wins as a half stud? You are seriously going to compare Oswalt to Lester? You know what they would call a matchup of Oswalt vs. Lester? A mismatch. I really don't think that I would be sacrificing all that much with the two relievers, bot of whom have ERA's over 4. Hansen has yet to pitch an effective second inning and MDC is probably heading for a seat next to Varitek and Nixon on the DL.

Explain to me how you were responding to my post. Where did I suggest that the Stros asked for 4 players?

Once again, please read the article. Here is the quote:

Do you have a link that Houston asked for all 4? Again, here is the quote from the article: Where does the article say that the Stros asked for these 3 plus Crisp?

It could just be a straight slide down out of the playoffs. The latest rash of injuries and FO inactivity could devastate this team.

Crisp is a bat? And if they asked for Crisp and the article says we offered Crisp, then why don't we have Oswalt today?

3 prospects only 1 of which is a starter for a stud all-star major league starter at age 27 is a steal. We gave up the top prospect in the system plus Annibel Sanchez for a much less accomplished pitcher in Beckett. Relievers are just not that valuable, and we've got papelbon to hold down the closer role and we still have Timlin for the 8th. I know you disagree, but I will be reminding all of you Theo fanboys about this as these kid pitchers fall short of stardom one by one.

From the article:

Re-read or read post # 104 and read page 2 of the article where it said that the Braves wanted the same package that everyone else was asking for MDC, Hansen and Lester. That leads me to believe that the Astros asked for the same, but the Sox refused. The Sox were offering one or two pitchers, but apparently the Stros wanted all 3 and they didn't want Crisp.

You have to make a remark even when I point out that the Yankees are in first. Then you wonder why people despise Yankee fans.

I heard Nady's stats with men in scoring position. They were horrible, and he was a horrible fielder. Let's not make Nady the issue. There were other relievers that could have been targeted without giving up the farm. If you don't see that getting Oswalt who has a .680 winning % with more than 120 decisions under his belt and who has finished in the top 5 in the Cy Young voting 5 years in a row would have improved this team immensely now and in the future, then we have a fundamental disagreement. Let me remind you that Duke gave up his top two prospects that were starters for Pedro. Here, only Lester is a starter. The other two are relievers, and Hansen hasn't yet proved that he can pitch 2 innings and MDC has had major arm surgery at a very young age. Pavano and Armas were both starters and neither had yet experienced arm woes. Five years from now, we may be talking about what might have been if we got Oswalt.

Correction. They are in first place, and thanks to the Three Stooges in the GM's office we had better get used to it.

Minaya got Hernandez and Perez for Nady. I don't think a top level prospect would've been required to get a Hernandez.

And with one of the better curve ball's and changeup's in baseball, he is still a top pitcher. It is ridiculously unfair to expect Pedro to maintain his 1998-2000 level of performance, because no pitcher ever, ever, everhad three years like those--not in the entire history of the game. No, he was never going to be that Pedro, but he is still a top pitcher. Damon had a pattern of one strong half and one weak half. Look at his stats for the year. The fact that he wore down in the second half was indicative of injuries to his shoulders and not that he is on the decline. All you need to realize that is to look at what he is doing this year for the Yankees. And both of them are finished while Pedro is still an all star and Lowe is still a healthy competent starter. It seems that the guys we got declined precipitously while the guys that walked are still good.

The answer might be that Cashman is a better GM.