OrangeWhoopass.com Forums
General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: pravata on August 30, 2006, 01:10:24 pm
-
"Sure, in 5 years, we?ll all wonder why we signed Roy Oswalt to a 5 year deal, but it?ll be worth it."
In 5 years, if there is one peep in here about how the Astros overpaid for Roy, like a bunch of clowns have done about Bagwell, and now they're stuck and can't sign Albert Pujols' grandkid, cause they got no money, there will be hell to pay. If I'm posting in here in 5 years, also, there will be hell to pay.
-
They'll be posts in here in five years (and five days) about how the Astros won't spend money to compete.
-
I was just making a joke.
-
Quote:
If I'm posting in here in 5 years, also, there will be hell to pay.
The first step is admitting that you have a problem.
-
Quote:
I was just making a joke.
You wish. There will be complaints about Oswalt's contract in 5 years. Just as there are about Bagwell's.
-
Baseball Prospectus will criticise it tomorrow...or today.
-
Quote:
Baseball Prospectus will criticise it tomorrow...or today.
Astros likely to regret Oswalt's 5-year deal Ken Rosenthal / FOXSports.com
Posted: 2 hours ago
"The Astros likely view the contract as a necessary evil ? either they met Oswalt's demands or risked losing him as a free agent after next season when some other club surely would have met his price."
-
What a load of horseshit. "likely to regret..." What the fuck is that?
-
I think it means that a 5 yr contract is a long time and shit happens. (Draybeck/Swindell (sp)) I think the stros would regret it more if OZ continued to dominate for 5 yrs for another team.
-
Quote:
What a load of horseshit. "likely to regret..." What the fuck is that?
Why would someone regret signing one of the top pitchers in the game to a contract at or below market? He will be ages 30 to 35 in this deal, not 34 to 39 or something. Locking him down in his prime years.
-
I know what he's trying to say, just wondering why the fuck he thinks he can say it.
-
Because he's Ken Rosenthal for Christ Sakes!
-
Quote:
I know what he's trying to say, just wondering why the fuck he thinks he can say it.
Because he can say "his injury history and slight, 6-foot, 185-pound frame make him a long-term risk."
and then say
"Oswalt shows no overt signs of wear-and-tear ? he's headed for his third straight season of 30-plus starts despite missing time earlier this season with a back strain. He also has worked nearly 50 innings in the past two post-seasons."
And while Rosenthal knows that the back strain he's talking about was minor and he can recite "(Oswalt) made three trips to the D.L. in 2003 due to a recurring groin problem."
He hasn't caught up to the fact that it's 2006, and, after the surgery Oswalt had in 2003 to clear up the "recurring groin problem" it hasnt recurred. There's no attachment from his brain to his fingers. (eta) Also, he is somehow able to ignore that he knows that every other team that can would pay Oswalt that much and more if they had the chance. Yet it's the Astros who will regret it.
-
Quote:
Quote:
I know what he's trying to say, just wondering why the fuck he thinks he can say it.
Because he can say "his injury history and slight, 6-foot, 185-pound frame make him a long-term risk."
and then say
"Oswalt shows no overt signs of wear-and-tear ? he's headed for his third straight season of 30-plus starts despite missing time earlier this season with a back strain. He also has worked nearly 50 innings in the past two post-seasons."
I know as a society we are supposed to be growing more obese, but since when is 6' 0", 185 lbs. "slight"? In any context? Oswalt may not be David Wells, and thank goodness for that, but he is hardly a wraith.
-
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
-
Quote:
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
This would matter logically if the majority of Rosenthal's readers were ballplayers, which I doubt.
He didn't compare Oswalt to any specific group, I don't think. He just called him slight, which I suppose implies as compared to the whatever the assumed average is to the people who do read him. Personally, when I think of average height or size, I am not thinking of average as compared to professional athletes.
At any rate, Oswalt is in fact an inch taller and a few pounds heavier than the average American male.
But then that is not Rosenthal's point, or yours, or mine. What Rosenthal does seem to be implying is that Oswalt's size relative to whatever standard is in his head means he (Oswalt) is at greater risk for injury than someone with similar skills, but bigger.
A strapping Wade Miller type of guy, say.
-
Quote:
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
He's got it where it counts for a pitcher: from the waist down.
-
Quote:
Quote:
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
He's got it where it counts for a pitcher: from the waist down.
It's twue, it's twue!!
-
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
He's got it where it counts for a pitcher: from the waist down.
It's twue, it's twue!!
"Twelve's about my limit for schnitzelgruben."
Roy Oswalt
-
Quote:
Quote:
I think 185 might be a tad inflated... he certainly looks "slight" compared to today's ballplayers.
He's got it where it counts for a pitcher: from the waist down.
And he's country-strong!
-
Quote:
What a load of horseshit. "likely to regret..." What the fuck is that?
You know, like the Red Sox would have regretted a long term contract with Clemens or the Angels would have regretted a long term contract with Ryan. It's pretty obvious both those clubs were thanking their lucky stars they didn't fall into the same type of horrible trap that the Astros have. Those teams had visionary management.
I guess the Astros fucking doomed.