Author Topic: ESPN: Ensberg to Padres (Read 12723 times)

glad for him. one of my fave memories is at a fan fest where he sat and made faces whiile bagwell combed his hair... nothing to do with this i know .. but nice thing to think about

Astroholic · « **Reply #8 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:19:30 pm »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on July 31, 2007, 02:17:48 pm

Only if they threw in Qualls and Lamb. Then they could get Peavy.

I was thinking the Pads would have to give up more. Remember Our Crud for your Stars.

dirty steve · « **Reply #9 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm »

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

Astroholic · « **Reply #10 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:21:27 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

Fucking complain about a night with J. ALba

ckutac · « **Reply #11 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:21:42 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

If we can get a PROSPECT at all for Morgan Ensburg that would be amazing, even if it is a Low A ball level prospect.....

ybbodeus · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:21:52 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

Tell him, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Col. Sphinx Drummond · « **Reply #13 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:22:51 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:15:49 pm

seems like a win-win for both--like to see what the team received in return.

Anything is better than nothing. Hoping to be pleasantly surprised. Lowered Expectations.

pravata · « **Reply #14 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:23:48 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

Double A prospect, woo hoo! I can hear that conversation, Towers, "here, I've got this seat warmer in Mobile, I give him to you for Loretta." Purpura, "I wouldn't give you Ensberg for that guy." Towers "Deal!"

Frobie · « **Reply #15 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:26:42 pm »

I listen to a fair number of Padres games when they are playing at home or elsewhere out west and I'm at the computer after the Astros are done. Will have to remember to keep an ear out for MoNews.

BUWebguy · « **Reply #16 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:27:03 pm »

Will Carroll says the Padres are close to getting both Loretta and Lamb:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6526

Noe · « **Reply #17 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:27:29 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

Does he realize that MoBerg was designated for assignment and at the end of ten days is a free agent? (See: Wilson, Preston). Damn, this media ignorance when it comes to the MLB is incredible!

BudGirl · « **Reply #18 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:28:09 pm »

Is this confirmed somewhere?

And why would the Pads still be after Lamb and Loretta?

BUWebguy · « **Reply #19 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:28:36 pm »

Would be odd for them to get Loretta, Lamb, Ensberg and Mackowiak.

dirty steve · « **Reply #20 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:30:19 pm »

Quote from: BUWebguy on July 31, 2007, 02:27:03 pm

Will Carroll says the Padres are close to getting both Loretta and Lamb:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6526

throw in burke and they would have most of our available IF talent.

HPFRic · « **Reply #21 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:30:44 pm »

Quote from: dirty steve on July 31, 2007, 02:20:28 pm

guy on 790 is complaining that we might not get above a AA prospect for Mo--whatever.

the mongoloids of the midday don't allow callers to have larger IQs than lopez, so you get a grab bag of boderline functioning idiots - i actually heard a guy earlier today blame purpura for signing a guy like lee, who doesn't hustle and - wait for it: as a result, breaks teammates' legs.

i swear to f'ing god, i'm not making that up.

Bench · « **Reply #22 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:30:58 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:27:29 pm

Does he realize that MoBerg was designated for assignment and at the end of ten days is a free agent? (See: Wilson, Preston). Damn, this media ignorance when it comes to the MLB is incredible!

Or even, like PW, Ensberg may have been given his outright release in anticipation of SD making a move as a favor to Ensberg.

Noe · « **Reply #23 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:32:11 pm »

Quote from: HPFRic on July 31, 2007, 02:30:44 pm

the mongoloids of the midday don't allow callers to have larger IQs than lopez, so you get a grab bag of boderline functioning idiots - i actually heard a guy earlier today blame purpura for signing a guy like lee, who doesn't hustle and - wait for it: as a result, breaks teammates' legs.

i swear to f'ing god, i'm not making that up.

That is freaking outstanding! I hate listening to that show, especially the pet names they have for one another. It's rather uncomfortable to listen too actually.

Noe · « **Reply #24 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:32:43 pm »

Quote from: Bench on July 31, 2007, 02:30:58 pm

Or even, like PW, Ensberg may have been given his outright release in anticipation of SD making a move as a favor to Ensberg.

Eggszactly! (see: Castilla, Vinny) These guys complain about Ensberg and how he should be shot and the Astros should get rid of him. Then they complain about actually trading him for possibly a AA prospect? OMG!

BUWebguy · « **Reply #25 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:34:00 pm »

Rosenthal makes it sound like neither Mackowiak nor Ensberg is a done deal for SD:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7078858

Andyzipp · « **Reply #26 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:34:14 pm »

Quote from: Astroholic on July 31, 2007, 02:21:27 pm

Fucking complain about a night with J. ALba

Her face is kind of weird looking...It's nice, just a little pointy or something.

dirty steve · « **Reply #27 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:34:19 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:32:11 pm

That is freaking outstanding! I hate listening to that show, especially the pet names they have for one another. It's rather uncomfortable to listen too actually.

i heard the Carlos Lee idiot about a week ago talking about why people dogged because "he hit in clutch," not realizing he is being paid 16 mil annually to accomplish said task. then he tried to bring up bagwell/biggio's failure in the playoffs, etc.

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #28 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:34:32 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:27:29 pm

Does he realize that MoBerg was designated for assignment and at the end of ten days is a free agent? (See: Wilson, Preston). Damn, this media ignorance when it comes to the MLB is incredible!

The genius call I heard this morning was that Ensberg and Wigginton are the same player, so why'd they trade for Wigginton and cut Ensberg?

Bench · « **Reply #29 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:34:37 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:32:43 pm

Eggszactly! (see: Castilla, Vinny)

So, while we know that Ensberg may be headed to SD, that still doesn't mean the Astros are getting anything in return, much less a AA prospect.

Froback · « **Reply #30 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:37:34 pm »

Quote from: Bench on July 31, 2007, 02:34:37 pm

So, while we know that Ensberg may be headed to SD, that still doesn't mean the Astros are getting anything in return, much less a AA prospect.

I think the idea is SD doesn't want to risk not getting him when he is a FA, so trading for him would allow them to have him with no risk. The fact that the Astros were about to give him up for nothing, means they don't have to offer much to get him. Like has been stated probably some really low rated, low-level prospect type is the best you can hope for.

JackAstro · « **Reply #31 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:40:13 pm »

Quote from: Froback on July 31, 2007, 02:37:34 pm

I think the idea is SD doesn't want to risk not getting him when he is a FA, so trading for him would allow them to have him with no risk. The fact that the Astros were about to give him up for nothing, means they don't have to offer much to get him. Like has been stated probably some really low rated, low-level prospect type is the best you can hope for.

I've got dibs on PTBNL, if anyone's starting a pool.

Noe · « **Reply #32 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:41:33 pm »

Quote from: Bench on July 31, 2007, 02:34:37 pm

So, while we know that Ensberg may be headed to SD, that still doesn't mean the Astros are getting anything in return, much less a AA prospect.

If he gets claimed before the ten days, the Astros could be shitheads and allow the claiming team to grab him. Ensberg could wind up in Kansas City this way, so if San Diego wants him, they better talk trade or hope no one like Kansas City puts in a claim for him and Houston just allows it to go through.

The difference in making a claim and waiting is of course that Houston would only owe the part of the contract up to the point he was claimed. The claimant team would owe a pro-rated part of the contract. If Ensberg clears the ten days, he's a free agent and walks and the team he signs with will owe only a minor amount of money to Ensberg (league minimum 300K I think). It's a player all on Houston's nickel.

utastro · « **Reply #33 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:41:35 pm »

Quote from: JackAstro on July 31, 2007, 02:40:13 pm

I've got dibs on PTBNL, if anyone's starting a pool.

I love that guy. But he sure gets around doesn't he.

BUWebguy · « **Reply #34 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:42:51 pm »

ESPN says its Mackowiak for a Class-A pitcher, Jon Link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2956001

utastro · « **Reply #35 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:43:11 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:41:33 pm

If he gets claimed before the ten days, the Astros could be shitheads and allow the claiming team to grab him. Ensberg could wind up in Kansas City this way, so if San Diego wants him, they better talk trade or hope no one like Kansas City puts in a claim for him and Houston just allows it to go through.

The difference in making a claim and waiting is of course that Houston would only owe the part of the contract up to the point he was claimed. The claimant team would owe a pro-rated part of the contract. If Ensberg clears the ten days, he's a free agent and walks and the team he signs with will owe only a minor amount of money to Ensberg (league minimum 300K I think). It's a player all on Houston's nickel.

But if he signs with a team after today, is he still available for the post season?

JGrave · « **Reply #36 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:43:46 pm »

Quote from: BUWebguy on July 31, 2007, 02:42:51 pm

ESPN says its Mackowiak for a Class-A pitcher, Jon Link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2956001

610 reports Ensberg for PTBNL

Froback · « **Reply #37 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:44:14 pm »

Quote from: utastro on July 31, 2007, 02:41:35 pm

I love that guy. But he sure gets around doesn't he.

Imagine Milo trying to pronounce his name. Would he call him PiT-y?

Noe · « **Reply #38 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:45:11 pm »

Quote from: utastro on July 31, 2007, 02:43:11 pm

But if he signs with a team after today, is he still available for the post season?

Any player on your 25 man roster and also on the DL before Sept. 1 is available for the post season. The only way a player not on the 25 man roster can be on your playoff roster is if you petition the league to allow you to replace an injured player on your original playoff roster.

Matt · « **Reply #39 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:46:54 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on July 31, 2007, 02:45:11 pm

Any player on your 25 man roster and also on the DL before Sept. 1 is available for the post season. The only way a player not on the 25 man roster can be on your playoff roster is if you petition the league to allow you to replace an injured player on your original playoff roster.

Ala K-Rod in 2002.

Duman · « **Reply #40 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:50:42 pm »

MSNBC is quoting ESPN saying:

Quote

Ensberg, who finished fourth in the MVP voting in 2005, was designated for assignment on Monday after batting .232 with eight home runs and 31 RBI in 85 games. He was acquired for a player to be named.

Matt · « **Reply #41 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:52:55 pm »

I wonder if Purp can turn around and dangle Lamb at the Twins and Angels who were interested in Ensberg.

Lumpus · « **Reply #42 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm »

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

pravata · « **Reply #43 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:57:54 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

Purpura has been trying to trade Ensberg since the end of last season. He was lucky to get PTBNL.

BudGirl · « **Reply #44 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:57:57 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

The Padres must have better PTBNLs.

JackAstro · « **Reply #45 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:58:25 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

They were likely interested in large part specifically because he wouldn't require parting with much.

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #46 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:58:37 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

Do you know for a fact that San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, or, more specifically, that they were sufficiently interested to offer something more than a PTBNL?

dirty steve · « **Reply #47 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:58:43 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...
if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Ensberg did utterly destroy his trade value.

fixed. ensberg's cratering last year and his .232 BA this year didnt have anyting to do with that, did it?

Froback · « **Reply #48 on:** July 31, 2007, 02:59:00 pm »

Quote from: Lumpus on July 31, 2007, 02:56:43 pm

Color me very confused...

if allegedly both San Francisco and Minnesota were both very interested in trading for Ensberg, how is it that a PTBNL was absolutely the best deal we could get, even if Purpura did utterly destroy his trade value.

PTBNL could be a list of players the Astros can choose from but don't have time to figure that out just now cause of the other "deals" they are working on.

It could also be that the PTBNL has a deal where he cannot be traded until after this season (think there is a situation like that already that has occurred this season).

OR it could be that they have not made it official by naming said PTBNL, but the clubs know that person.

pravata · « **Reply #49 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:00:16 pm »

Quote from: Froback on July 31, 2007, 02:59:00 pm

PTBNL could be a list of players the Astros can choose from but don't have time to figure that out just now cause of the other "deals" they are working on.

It could also be that the PTBNL has a deal where he cannot be traded until after this season (think there is a situation like that already that has occurred this season).

OR it could be that they have not made it official by naming said PTBNL, but the clubs know that person.

If it really is a PTBNL, and not we're just not saying yet, the player can not be on the 40.

JGrave · « **Reply #50 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:00:46 pm »

Quote from: Froback on July 31, 2007, 02:59:00 pm

PTBNL could be a list of players the Astros can choose from but don't have time to figure that out just now cause of the other "deals" they are working on.

It could also be that the PTBNL has a deal where he cannot be traded until after this season (think there is a situation like that already that has occurred this season).

OR it could be that they have not made it official by naming said PTBNL, but the clubs know that person.

I remember hearing from Hunsicker that a lot of times, PTBNL becomes cash too.

Noe · « **Reply #51 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:17:47 pm »

Quote from: pravata on July 31, 2007, 03:00:16 pm

If it really is a PTBNL, and not we're just not saying yet, the player can not be on the 40.

The only time is when the PTBNL is switching leagues. Then they can be a 40 man roster guy.

otterjb · « **Reply #52 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:22:59 pm »

The Padres clubhouse better start stocking up on vaginal ointment.

pravata · « **Reply #53 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:39:42 pm »

colo(u)r me glad I'm an Astro fan,

"Tim gave me a call and said I was traded, and my heart dropped. Shoot, I could have gone anywhere."

"He said San Diego. I said, 'You're kidding me.' He said, 'No.'"
...
"It was a tremendous low, and an acceptance, and then an incredible high," Ensberg said. "Even though my mind isn't so sharp now, I'm positive this is a blessing from God. He allowed this to happen."
Link

Good luck to you Mo. But man, you gotta swing the bat.

TheWizard · « **Reply #54 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:54:20 pm »

Good for him. He's always come across as a good guy. Just too bad he wouldn't take his bat off his shoulder for us.

otterjb · « **Reply #55 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:54:40 pm »

Bizzare day-mare: Ensberg getting aggressive, focused and zoned-in, getting on fire down the stretch with the Padres, and hitting several huge home runs for them against the Brewers in the NLCS, en route to a World Series appearance against the Red Sox. Twilight zone-type stuff.

Twoniner · « **Reply #56 on:** July 31, 2007, 04:09:16 pm »

Good fit for Morgan. The effect of the big field should be negated by the fact that he never swings. When he does actually hit one, it usually goes a long ways... and is followed by some bullshit about how he "missed" it.

ybbodeus · « **Reply #57 on:** July 31, 2007, 04:11:34 pm »

Watched The Natural again the other night and couldn't help but think Morgan developed his dirt kicking prowess from watching himself in the mirror, pretending he was Bob "Roy Hobbs" Redford. Of course, Hobbs kicked the dirt BEFORE the pitch, not after it harmlessly went by.....just sayin'.

George's on the Cove, MoBerg. Best to ya'.

Author Topic: ESPN: Ensberg to Padres (Read 12723 times)

pravata

Noe

Noe

Noe

Andyzipp

Noe

Noe

pravata

pravata

Noe

pravata