Jennings

[otterjb]

Not to state the obvious, but, let's state the obvious:

He's been a huge disappointment. One of the worst starters in the entire league.

My question is, will the Astros even attempt to re-sign him?

[ThomasTx12]

Maybe it's for the best. Maybe we can get him for cheap, and his suckiness will pass.

Maybe not.

Let's hope so.

[Savage]

Not to state the obvious, but, let's state the obvious:

His ass is huge.

[Rebel Jew]

Not to state the obvious, but, let's state the obvious:

He's been a huge disappointment. One of the worst starters in the entire league.

My question is, will the Astros even attempt to re-sign him?

he is clearly injured, and to me the only real shame is that the roots of the injury go back to last year.  it's a tribute to his abilities that he has consistently been able to pitch into at least the 6th most times out despite the discomfort he must be experiencing.  i don't know the long-term rammifications of his injury, but if it's something he can get over in a reasonable amount of time then he could be a major steal if the astros can sign him at a depressed rate.

[MRaup]

The worst part is, is most of his starts, its only one bad inning that plagues him.

He either gives up 3-4 in the first then settles down or pitches great for 4 or 5 innings, then gives up a homer that generally costs the Good Guys the lead in the 6th.

His pitch location just completely goes out the window for an inning a start or so.

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

Someone will offer him 3 years at around 21 to 24 million. There just aren't that many free agent pitchers out there this year. At the price he'll get, I'd rather they use that money elsewhere and see what develops on the trade front, while also giving the minor league prospects a chance to earn a spot in the rotation.

[JimR]

i would not overpay, but i would not walk away from him either. he has been too good in the past for this to be what he is going to be. i think he's injured, also, and doing the best he can to fight through it.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

i would not overpay, but i would not walk away from him either. he has been too good in the past for this to be what he is going to be. i think he's injured, also, and doing the best he can to fight through it.

Agreed.  But they have to make damn sure he's healthy.  The premium on pitching is too high to let him walk outright.  However, if the Astros' mgmt collectively think he's injured, I bet they let him walk.

[ValpoCory]

Not to state the obvious, but, let's state the obvious:

He's been a huge disappointment.

My question is, will the Astros even attempt to re-sign him?

I'd ask the same thing about reverT.  The bigger the situation, the worse he does.  You can almost track the season on key reverT meltdowns.  He hasn't been this bad over this many innings since 1999, his last year in Houston the first time.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/5705/career;_ylt=AuQH16DEz3SoA.qQbF1BO.2FCLcF

[juliogotay]

I would run, not walk, away from Jennings. Unless he was willing to play for some make-good contract which he won't. I don't think he's looking at anybody throwing a big-time, multi-year contract at him either. I think you'll see a team, Rangers maybe as he lives up here, offer him a one-year deal at $3-4 million with an option (their option) on a second year. At this point, he's Kip Wells.

[SaltyParker]

I would run, not walk, away from Jennings. Unless he was willing to play for some make-good contract which he won't. I don't think he's looking at anybody throwing a big-time, multi-year contract at him either. I think you'll see a team, Rangers maybe as he lives up here, offer him a one-year deal at $3-4 million with an option (their option) on a second year. At this point, he's Kip Wells.

Sphinx has it right. As long as he goes out there and pitches 5 or 6 innings every 5th day, someone out there will come across with the big money ($20M for 3yrs). At these prices it would be prudent to develop your own talent not give it away. Taylor Buchholtz alone would be an improvement over Jennings. JJ can't go soon enough.

[Duman]

Arbitrate him.  The offer should not be as good as he can get on the FA market.  Let him make that choice and then get a comp. draft pick.

[JimR]

Sphinx has it right. As long as he goes out there and pitches 5 or 6 innings every 5th day, someone out there will come across with the big money ($20M for 3yrs). At these prices it would be prudent to develop your own talent not give it away. Taylor Buchholtz alone would be an improvement over Jennings. JJ can't go soon enough.

fos

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Sphinx has it right. As long as he goes out there and pitches 5 or 6 innings every 5th day, someone out there will come across with the big money ($20M for 3yrs). At these prices it would be prudent to develop your own talent not give it away. Taylor Buchholtz alone would be an improvement over Jennings. JJ can't go soon enough.

Uhh... I was going to respond with a long winded response... but Jim responded faster and more succinctly with 3 letters.  So much to learn... so very much to learn.

[WulawHorn]

Arbitrate him.  The offer should not be as good as he can get on the FA market.  Let him make that choice and then get a comp. draft pick.

agreed completely.

[I'm Richies Dad]

But if the Astros arbitrate him, there is a chance he'd sign, and then another year of the same old crap.

[pravata]

But if the Astros arbitrate him, there is a chance he'd sign, and then another year of the same old crap.

This years "crap" is mostly due to his being injured.  If he recovers, or has surgery, the crap will likely be different.

[Jacksonian]

But if the Astros arbitrate him, there is a chance he'd sign, and then another year of the same old crap.

But, if he accepts arbitration he can only deal with the Astros and kills his free agency.

[austro]

This years "crap" is mostly due to his being injured.

That's our supposition here. But don't both he and Purpura insist that he's not injured?

[pravata]

That's our supposition here. But don't both he and Purpura insist that he's not injured?

He was on the DL, so they had to think he was injured.  From the Astros recap "Ausmus said. "It's been a frustrating year for him, with the injury, with the ups and downs on the mound. I understand why he's frustrated."

[SaltyParker]

fos

fu

[JimR]

fu

fuck off, clarkie. come back in a few months.

[pravata]

he is clearly injured, and to me the only real shame is that the roots of the injury go back to last year.  it's a tribute to his abilities that he has consistently been able to pitch into at least the 6th most times out despite the discomfort he must be experiencing.  i don't know the long-term rammifications of his injury, but if it's something he can get over in a reasonable amount of time then he could be a major steal if the astros can sign him at a depressed rate.

I don't know about roots, but he thinks the injury is from throwing to much in the offseason,Link

[HPFRic]

he has been too good in the past for this to be what he is going to be. i think he's injured, also, and doing the best he can to fight through it.

i can't wrap my head around either one of these ideas. he was very good last year; he was a tick, maybe two above average his rookie year. otherwise, jason jennings has been a below average pitcher for his other three full seasons in MLB (he'll add a fourth this year) and that's after you adjust his numbers to accomodate coors field. i don't know how the astros could be "disappointed" - he's about what they should have expected.

his career road #s (ie anywhere but coors field) prior to this year: 4.36/1.43. his numbers overall this year (minus the SD shit sandwich): 5.16/1.41, which amounts to roughly one additional ER every two starts. pretty much as advertised, if you ask me.

further, why should we excuse him if he is indeed injured? this is laudable? or even acceptable? if he's injured, he needs to stop pitching, get healthy, and let someone else who's healthy take his spot. he's not doing himself or the team any favors.

[JimR]

i can't wrap my head around either one of these ideas.

no kidding.

[HPFRic]

no kidding.

typically engaging response. we can add how you continually find a deeper level of insight to share with us as another item my head can't wrap itself around. you're a magician!

[JimR]

typically engaging response. we can add how you continually find a deeper level of insight to share with us as another item my head can't wrap itself around. you're a magician!

and you are not worth my time.

[HPFRic]

and you are not worth my time.

...you mean after you read my post and then respond to it twice - THEN - and only then will i not be worth your time, right?

[Twoniner]

  If Jennings can finish strong and somehow convince the Astros he is healthy, I'd think 7 million for three years would be fine.   You are paying a 57 year old Woody Williams 6 million,  at least Jennings has "some" upside of being an above league average pitcher.    It all depends on his health.

[Noe]

It all depends on his health.

I think this is the key and not so much his ability.  I know that in terms of ability many have different opinions as to his talent level.  If we use the criteria of slotting him in the rotation, I'm sure we could all make cases for a #2 slot all the way down to a #4 slot on a very good team.  So our opinions will vary.

But if we just stick to the topic of health, I think we can all agree that he needs to show some semblance of consistency to put health concerns to rest.  That he has not to date, witnessed by his inability to maintain control of the strikezone effectively, is very much a concern with just about anyone who would look at him as an option for a high slot in the rotation.

Sure you could take a risk on the guy if you were rich in talent in your rotation already and were looking for just a guy at a lower slot in your starting five.  That would make sense and unfortunately, IMHO of course, that is not the Houston Astros profile right now.  They really need to concern themselves with a solid #2 guy in the rotation and Jennings does not fit that criteria no matter what he may do from here on out (*again, IMHO*).  If he is reasonable and wants to get a "make good" contract (one year), I would think the Astros would jump at that and still look for a solid #2.

Anything beyond that is for the rich clubs (in money and talent) to consider giving Jennings a home for the next several years.

[pravata]

... They really need to concern themselves with a solid #2 guy in the rotation ...

Considering what is available in FA, and what they can offer in trade, who?

[JimR]

Outstanding question. I look forward to the answers.

[Rebel Jew]

Considering what is available in FA, and what they can offer in trade, who?

according to this guy, alls it'll take is two top pitching prospects and johan santana will be back in the astro org where he belongs:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07292007/sports/deadline_daydream_sports_joel_sherman.htm

however, he does warn that THIS TRADE IS NOT BEING DISCUSSED IN ANY WAY

[Noe]

Considering what is available in FA, and what they can offer in trade, who?

I dunno, but it will be fun to watch the Astros have to work that one out.  Remember though, it's not just FA's that are what they need to think about.  They can target lame duck pitchers as well and see if other teams are willing to talk about trading them this offseason.  If not, the onus will be for Houston to tap the market at the trading deadline and hope for the best at the start of the season until then.  Remember in 1998 they did not have Randy Johnson on the team until mid-season.  They went from a contender with a rotation of Pete Schorek, Shane Reynolds, Mike Hampton, Sean Bergman and Jose Lima to a favorite to win the NL when they added Johnson.  Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline.  Preferably a lame duck guy that can cost you a little less than what they gave up for Unit.  Purpura already said that the days of giving up what Houston gave up in the RJ trade are over.  So expectations are lowered somewhat in what a team is willing to give up to get back a rental starter.

Should be interesting.

[MusicMan]

Purpura already said that the days of giving up what Houston gave up in the RJ trade are over. 

You can't give up what you don't have.

[Noe]

You can't give up what you don't have.

True, but what I meant that league wide (as in the entire MLB landscape).  The SOP changed from the time Houston traded three prime prospects for the veteran rental, to what is a league wide philosophy from most GMs.  Don't trade the prospects for rentals.

That helps the trade front a little, but then again what happened to Houston was they got offers of fringe minor league roster filler guys for Lamb and Loretta (their veteran rentals).  When mediots like Rich Lord said "I just can't believe that the Astros weren't offered *prospects* for either Lamb or Loretta" after Purpura was off the air (what a coward!), he was basically using 1998 philosophy and thinking it's still in vogue.

It's not.

So what I'm saying that any lame duck pitcher out there that needs to be moved won't bring back a huge haul similar to the RJ trade.  It. Just. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.  So that helps put the trading possibilities back into the hands of GMs willing to move major league ready players that are role players and under club control (See: Qualls, Chad and Scott, Luke this year).  That will be more the norm as far as trade fodder for the foreseeable future.  IMHO of course.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

I dunno, but it will be fun to watch the Astros have to work that one out.  Remember though, it's not just FA's that are what they need to think about.  They can target lame duck pitchers as well and see if other teams are willing to talk about trading them this offseason.  If not, the onus will be for Houston to tap the market at the trading deadline and hope for the best at the start of the season until then.  Remember in 1998 they did not have Randy Johnson on the team until mid-season.  They went from a contender with a rotation of Pete Schorek, Shane Reynolds, Mike Hampton, Sean Bergman and Jose Lima to a favorite to win the NL when they added Johnson.  Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline.  Preferably a lame duck guy that can cost you a little less than what they gave up for Unit.  Purpura already said that the days of giving up what Houston gave up in the RJ trade are over.  So expectations are lowered somewhat in what a team is willing to give up to get back a rental starter.

Should be interesting.

My money is on this outcome, go to ST with a list of starters that include Oswalt, Backe, Sampson, Rodriguez, Williams, Albers and maybe Patton (big maybe).  If Patton isn't in the initial consideration, then he's likely option 1 or 2 should the other's faulter.   Personally, I would not be dissappointed to see them solidify their every day player needs.  This team is in dire need of a defensive CF who can drive in some runs or lead off.   Like you said, it should be fun to watch. 

[HPFRic]

Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline.

if only they had dusted the sand off of this one last winter...

[ybbodeus]

Maybe if Garner ate a worm before every start--and not out of the mezcal bottle--some of that Baylor mojo $hit might pep him up a bit...add a little movement to his fastball.

[JimR]

Maybe if Garner ate a worm before every start--and not out of the mezcal bottle--some of that Baylor mojo $hit might pep him up a bit...add a little movement to his fastball.

if you are over 16, it is ok to type "shit" without a $ for the s.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

if you are over 16, it is ok to type "shit" without a $ for the s.

Mabye he's a catholic?

[JimR]

Mabye he's a catholic?

clearly a Baptist. Catholics cuss without blushing.

[Noe]

if only they had dusted the sand off of this one last winter...

Circumstantially speaking, they were more in need of the #2 because they knew or suspected (depending on who you ask, if it's the organization they will say *knew for a fact*, if it's the players then it's suspected) that Pettitte wasn't coming back.  When he went up to New York for a banquet to honor Torre, the word was put out that Andy came back into town with stardust in his eyes and the conversations of "gee... I wonder if I can go back there?" with friends and family began.  The Hendricks Brothers will tell you no such thing happened and that Pettitte fully intended to come back if the Astros treated their client nicely.  But then of course, there is that time that the Hendricks themselves publically said that the Astros should proceed as if neither of their clients was returning and in fact both were considering retirement.

I think they felt they could get Jon Garland so they went for it, so who can blame them?  When it become Jason Jennings instead, it was still not a bad idea.  We can argue all over again about the value of Jennings as a #2 (check that, no we can't because we won't agree), but the thinking was sound but the price was steep and one they were willing to pay.  Hirsh was the prospect, Willy T was the role player ready for the majors and Buchholz was really a throw in.    Willy T's performance this year and Jennings performance this year cloud the issue a bit, but at the time it was sound and not worth haggling over yet again.

[ybbodeus]

clearly a Baptist. Catholics cuss without blushing.

Catholic-Lite, actually....Epi$copal. 

[Jose Cruz III]

Catholic-Lite, actually....Epi$copal. 

I won't be impressed until you are Peneco$tal with a Timber Rattler held high above your head.

[JimR]

Catholic-Lite, actually....Epi$copal. 

can't even type pis without $

[ybbodeus]

can't even type pis without $

Wow, that had sailed right by me; nice call!

I was actually playing up to the alleged stereotype.....that a Baptist is a Pentacostal who learned how to read; a Methodist is a Baptist who learned how to think for himself; a Presbyterian is a Methodist who moved to the city; and an Episcopal is a Presbyterian who inherited money.

[MRaup]

Wow, that had sailed right by me; nice call!

I was actually playing up to the alleged stereotype.....that a Baptist is a Pentacostal who learned how to read; a Methodist is a Baptist who learned how to think for himself; a Presbyterian is a Methodist who moved to the city; and an Episcopal is a Presbyterian who inherited money.

Remember kids... If you have to explain your jokes, they're not funny.

[ybbodeus]

Remember kids... If you have to explain your jokes, they're not funny.

Oh, Big R (among others) has drilled THAT into my head, I assure you.  I was using the response as an excuse to post those undeniable religious truths of life.....which admittedly wasn't very funny, either.

If one's punch line includes "Episcopal" and "inheritance", you're probably a little too far out there, anyway.

[HPFRic]

Willy T's performance this year and Jennings performance this year cloud the issue a bit, but at the time it was sound and not worth haggling over yet again.

i never thought it was a "sound" decision and it has nothing to do with anyone's performance this year. they overrated their 2006 team and then compounded it by overrating jason jennings. both were wildly inaccurate evaluations.

frankly, i see no difference in the team they'll take into this offseason and the team they took into last offseason. the "sound" decision, both then and now, was to not panic, not throw players away to try and mend a gaping wound, and wait to see how everything shook out. if they thought this team could win 78-82 as it was, then they, as you suggested in relation to RJ, could have made a deal for jennings last month. there was certainly no need and less justification for doing it last december.

now we're going to need a top of the rotation starter (2, actually), find a taveras-type to plug into CF and we'll be relying on a bunch of unproven young arms to fill in the back of the rotation. like i said, not much has changed.....

jim, the "$" bit was fuck!ng priceless.

[geezerdonk]

Catholics cuss without blushing.

But not without consequences. You can build up a four or five figure portfolio of ave marias, pater nosters, etc. by habitual use of intemperate language. Plus I'm pretty sure I can still taste Sister Joseph Marie's Lifebouy. I got half a bar in an ear one day when I kept turning my head.

[JimR]

i never thought it was a "sound" decision and it has nothing to do with anyone's performance this year. they overrated their 2006 team and then compounded it by overrating jason jennings. both were wildly inaccurate evaluations.

frankly, i see no difference in the team they'll take into this offseason and the team they took into last offseason. the "sound" decision, both then and now, was to not panic, not throw players away to try and mend a gaping wound, and wait to see how everything shook out. if they thought this team could win 78-82 as it was, then they, as you suggested in relation to RJ, could have made a deal for jennings last month. there was certainly no need and less justification for doing it last december.

now we're going to need a top of the rotation starter (2, actually), find a taveras-type to plug into CF and we'll be relying on a bunch of unproven young arms to fill in the back of the rotation. like i said, not much has changed.....

jim, the "$" bit was fuck!ng priceless.

i love sentences that begin with "frankly." that means the rest of them are BS.

thank you sir.

[HPFRic]

i love sentences that begin with "frankly." that means the rest of them are BS.

frankly, i respect and admire your opinion and this online persona of yours, which rests comfortably between "astute" and "engaging."

[pravata]

i never thought it was a "sound" decision and it has nothing to do with anyone's performance this year. they overrated their 2006 team and then compounded it by overrating jason jennings. both were wildly inaccurate evaluations....

Then it had to do with the context of the situation they were in at the time.  Pettitte had just tried to hoist another $20 million from the Astros, the Garland deal fell through and the competition for pitchers was ridiculous.  FAs of dubious pedigree were getting this money,

Gil Meche (five years, $55 million), Ted Lilly (four years, $40 million) and Vicente Padilla (three years, $34 million).
Link

and several teams were bidding for Jennings,

Media reports have linked Jennings to the Cubs, Mets, Rangers and Twins, and the Mariners are among the clubs that are interested. By Monday afternoon, the buzz in the lobby at the Walt Disney World Dolphin seemed to center on the Twins' interest.
Link

Jason Hirsh didn't show them that he was reliable, in temperament or on the field and he certainly didn't look like he could plug the 200 inning hole that the Astros had in their rotation.  I think it was pretty reasonable to expect that a pitcher who had thrown near 200 innings almost every season, never had arm troubles, and didn't have any in 2006, could do the same in Houston.

[Noe]

i never thought it was a "sound" decision and it has nothing to do with anyone's performance this year. they overrated their 2006 team and then compounded it by overrating jason jennings. both were wildly inaccurate evaluations.

Goodness... are we going to talk about this yet again?  Can't we rehash OPS or something else instead?  Just say we disagree and be done with it because you're not going to be convinced by anything I say neither are you going to convince me.  Neither one of us is wrong, we're just blathering our own opinions in order to hear ourselves type.  Do I really want to do this again and again on the same tired subject?  Ahum... no.

"frankly", it's getting old.

frankly, i see no difference in the team they'll take into this offseason and the team they took into last offseason. the "sound" decision, both then and now, was to not panic, not throw players away to try and mend a gaping wound, and wait to see how everything shook out. if they thought this team could win 78-82 as it was, then they, as you suggested in relation to RJ, could have made a deal for jennings last month. there was certainly no need and less justification for doing it last december.

now we're going to need a top of the rotation starter (2, actually), find a taveras-type to plug into CF and we'll be relying on a bunch of unproven young arms to fill in the back of the rotation. like i said, not much has changed.....

Ahum... so?  Am I supposed to somehow jump off a bridge or something because of this?   Really, is it a big deal at all?

[HPFRic]

I think it was pretty reasonable to expect that a pitcher who had thrown near 200 innings almost every season, never had arm troubles, and didn't have any in 2006, could do the same in Houston.

but why, if you agree with noe's premise (and i do) that the 2008 astros might very well be OK going to florida without a jason jennings-type in their rotation, did the 2007 need a jason jennings-type in their rotation? doesn't the likelihood of losing him this winter essentially provide the same context as losing pettitte last winter?

and i'm sorry, but telling me other teams were throwing outlandish dollar totals at mediocre pitchers or that such historically astute organizations as the cubs and rangers were after jason jennings does not properly defend the deal.

they overrated their team and then overrated (compounded by overpaying for) jason jennings. frankly.

[HPFRic]

Just say we disagree and be done with it because you're not going to be convinced by anything I say neither are you going to convince me.

i agree; i prefer not to rehash it as well (ignoring that i'm chest-deep in doing just that...) - what i really wanted to focus on was what, iyo, has changed between this winter and last winter? "Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline."

why is this NOW a "sound" course of action? is it because the jennings deal was such a disaster? is it because you believe this team is appreciably worse than the '06 team?........

[austro]

i agree; i prefer not to rehash it as well (ignoring that i'm chest-deep in doing just that...) - what i really wanted to focus on was what, iyo, has changed between this winter and last winter? "Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline."

why is this NOW a "sound" course of action? is it because the jennings deal was such a disaster? is it because you believe this team is appreciably worse than the '06 team?........

I'm reluctant to jump in here, but it's worth noting that a difference for this year is that 1) Backe is coming off of elbow surgery and rehab, instead of heading into it, and 2) Patton is a year older and has another year of experience. So both of those options are more likely to pan out this year than they were last year.

Whether "more likely" elevates either to a level worth counting on is a different question.

[JimR]

i agree; i prefer not to rehash it as well

why is this NOW a "sound" course of action? is it because the jennings deal was such a disaster? is it because you believe this team is appreciably worse than the '06 team?........

then stop rehashing it. stop, please.

[JimR]

they overrated their team and then overrated (compounded by overpaying for) jason jennings. frankly.

bullshit. please take your pontifications to ad.com. please.

[JimR]

frankly, i respect and admire your opinion and this online persona of yours, which rests comfortably between "astute" and "engaging."

actually, Mr. Smarter Than Everyone, by my theory your using "frankly" means you think that sentence is true.

as do i, of course.

[Noe]

why is this NOW a "sound" course of action? is it because the jennings deal was such a disaster? is it because you believe this team is appreciably worse than the '06 team?........

Who said "NOW"?  If it was sound before, it is still sound today.

What exactly are we discussing again because I'm lost... do you want me to defend the Jennings deal without defending the Jennings deal?  I. Don't. Want. To.

[pravata]

but why, if you agree with noe's premise (and i do) that the 2008 astros might very well be OK going to florida without a jason jennings-type in their rotation, did the 2007 need a jason jennings-type in their rotation? doesn't the likelihood of losing him this winter essentially provide the same context as losing pettitte last winter?

and i'm sorry, but telling me other teams were throwing outlandish dollar totals at mediocre pitchers or that such historically astute organizations as the cubs and rangers were after jason jennings does not properly defend the deal.

they overrated their team and then overrated (compounded by overpaying for) jason jennings. frankly.

Mediocre?  Was what they gave up above mediocre?  The 200 innings was the thing, and he cost only 5.5.   There were of course, other teams than the Cubs and Rangers.  Really, I'd love to chew this over with you but, unfortunately, I'm due back on the planet Earth, so I gotta go.

[HPFRic]

bullshit. please take your pontifications to ad.com. please.

being an officious fuckstick accomplishes absolutely nothing and adds not an ounce of value to this exercise. engage, counter, debate, discuss - those would seem to serve this forum better given that it's, you know, a discussion board and all.

[JimR]

being an officious fuckstick accomplishes absolutely nothing and adds not an ounce of value to this exercise. engage, counter, debate, discuss - those would seem to serve this forum better given that it's, you know, a discussion board and all.

the R in your name must stand for Redundant. i know the P is for Pompous. you stated your position. then you restated it 100 times. i got it, now STFU, as Noe asked you to do much more politely.

[HPFRic]

the R in your name must stand for Redundant. i know the P is for Pompous.

oh yeah? well what does the J in your name stand for? “jim”? i mean, wait. uhm…. god! this is hard!!! “james”? no, dammit!

fuck it – i can’t match that kind of comedy firepower. go ahead and do the H and F and get my total and very public evisceration over with. i ask only that you take some mercy on me because as is, i'll be climbing out from under the “redundant” and “pompous” cracks for days… those were vicious little comedic hammers, you cold-hearted bastard.

Really, I'd love to chew this over with you but, unfortunately, I'm due back on the planet Earth, so I gotta go.

zing! it's like a comedy workshop in here!!! “due back on planet earth”...? ah, man - that is ripe! btw, i bet the P in your name stands for... “pompous”! i mean: “pompous” - no, no "redundant"! shit! damn you, jim – you make it look so easy…

btw, never termed jason jennings "mediocre"; the flotsam that teams were signing (meche, lilly, et al) were mediocre. he was merely overrated by the astros... and anyone else who thought he was anything beyond a league average pitcher.

What exactly are we discussing again because I'm lost

noe, if you care at all, i wanted to discuss this statement: Sometimes, if you get lightning in a bottle with some guys (candidates: Backe? Patton? FA?), you can afford to start a season that way and realize if you definitely need to add a solid starter at the deadline.

i agree with the sentiment completely. what i was hoping to discuss, specifically, was what, if anything, has changed? why do you consider this a viable course of action this year but term the jennings deal last year "sound”? because, imo, absolutely nothing's changed.

if you're not interested in discussing it, OK. no big deal. i just thought it was interesting.

[PCOL2000]

The P in my name stands for pleeease fuckin stop.  I guess i need to change it to PFSCOL2000.

[JimR]

The P in my name stands for pleeease fuckin stop.  I guess i need to change it to PFSCOL2000.

excellent, but he ain't listening. he's making a POINT(!), doncha know.

[PCOL2000]

It's the comedy workshop

[pravata]

zing! it's like a comedy workshop in here!!! “due back on planet earth”...? ah, man - that is ripe! btw, i bet the P in your name stands for... “pompous”! i mean: “pompous” - no, no "redundant"! shit! damn you, jim – you make it look so easy…

btw, never termed jason jennings "mediocre"; the flotsam that teams were signing (meche, lilly, et al) were mediocre. he was merely overrated by the astros... and anyone else who thought he was anything beyond a league average pitcher.

Practical.  I can see why you think this is supposed to be funny.  Because the alternative is that it's reality and you don't know what you think you know.  You can whine and pitch a baby fit all you want but grownups who understand what was going on at the time, realize that the Astros had few choices.  Many teams were bidding for Jennings and the Astros did what was necessary.  Children typically don't understand reality so you go right ahead and think it's a joke. 

[JimR]

Practical.  I can see why you think this is supposed to be funny.  Because the alternative is that it's reality and you don't know what you think you know.  You can whine and pitch a baby fit all you want but grownups who understand what was going on at the time, realize that the Astros had few choices.  Many teams were bidding for Jennings and the Astros did what was necessary.  Children typically don't understand reality so you go right ahead and think it's a joke. 

he thinks it is some sort of intellectual death match at the end of which he will be declared the winner because of his brilliance.

for the life of me, i do not understand why folks like this keep posting and trying to debate to a victory. the mood/sense/approach of this forum is perfectly clear.

[HPFRic]

I can see why you think this is supposed to be funny.

i sincerely doubt it.

You can whine and pitch a baby fit all you want but grownups who understand what was going on at the time, realize that the Astros had few choices.  Many teams were bidding for Jennings and the Astros did what was necessary.  Children typically don't understand reality so you go right ahead and think it's a joke.  

the grownups and children route... wow, you continue to display a deft touch with the clever rejoinders. jesus christ. isn't there a nearby off you can fuck, you weasel?

[HPFRic]

for the life of me, i do not understand why folks like this keep posting and trying to debate to a victory. the mood/sense/approach of this forum is perfectly clear.

jim, for the record, i've been posting here (off and on) as long as you have, or very nearly as long (9 years). so no need to pull rank or whatever it is you think you're doing here. i'm very much aware of the forum's dynamics; cognizant of the however many decent posters your tired, boring act has run out of here.


i'm asking a question in response to someone else's (coughcough) post; if noe doesn't want to discuss it, fine. but i'm not sure why you and your little lap dog have to jump in here and start launching petty little shit bombs.

[MRaup]

jim, for the record, i've been posting here (off and on) as long as you have, or very nearly as long (9 years). so no need to pull rank or whatever it is you think you're doing here. i'm very much aware of the forum's dynamics; cognizant of the however many decent posters your tired, boring act has run out of here.


i'm asking a question in response to someone else's (coughcough) post; if noe doesn't want to discuss it, fine. but i'm not sure why you and your little lap dog have to jump in here and start launching petty little shit bombs.

Hot damn! This again.

If JimR wasn't able to completely control everyone else on the board, we'd get some real debates going.

What a prick.

[JimR]

Hot damn! This again.

If JimR wasn't able to completely control everyone else on the board, we'd get some real debates going.

What a prick.

powah!

[JimR]

jim, for the record, i've been posting here (off and on) as long as you have, or very nearly as long (9 years). so no need to pull rank or whatever it is you think you're doing here. i'm very much aware of the forum's dynamics; cognizant of the however many decent posters your tired, boring act has run out of here.


i'm asking a question in response to someone else's (coughcough) post; if noe doesn't want to discuss it, fine. but i'm not sure why you and your little lap dog have to jump in here and start launching petty little shit bombs.

WFW.

feel free to let me run you off too, oh decent pompous ass poster. Noe asked you nicely to let it die, but you won't. STFU. your opinion of Jennings and the Astros' incompetence is clear.

[PCOL2000]

jim, for the record, i've been posting here (off and on) as long as you have, or very nearly as long (9 years). so no need to pull rank or whatever it is you think you're doing here. i'm very much aware of the forum's dynamics; cognizant of the however many decent posters your tired, boring act has run out of here.


i'm asking a question in response to someone else's (coughcough) post; if noe doesn't want to discuss it, fine. but i'm not sure why you and your little lap dog have to jump in here and start launching petty little shit bombs.

I'm a freekin clark senior to nobody and i just want you to stop.  it's your act i'm tired of right now

[SaltyParker]

fuck off, clarkie. come back in a few months.

how cute, Asshole!

[Outlawscotty]

Pettitte had just tried to hoist heist another $20 million from the Astros,

FIFMe

[JimR]

how cute, Asshole!

TZ axiom for newbies: "read more, post less."

[JimR]

FIFMe

excellent

[pravata]

i sincerely doubt it.

the grownups and children route... wow, you continue to display a deft touch with the clever rejoinders. jesus christ. isn't there a nearby off you can fuck, you weasel?

That was it?  You're done.  I was being very serious.  If you are still whining about Jennings, you're a child.  And we're done.

[Lefty]

i'm asking a question in response to someone else's (coughcough) post; if noe doesn't want to discuss it, fine. but i'm not sure why you and your little lap dog have to jump in here and start launching petty little shit bombs.

Did the 5 or so readable posters over at cf.net get tired of ´discussing´ this with you for the 5981st time or something?  Why here?  Why again?

[Reuben]

Did the 5 or so readable posters over at cf.net get tired of ´discussing´ this with you for the 5981st time or something?  Why here?  Why again?

Seriously. What is there left to really discuss about that deal? Nobody can know exactly what the options or discussions were between the Astros/Rockies/whoever. I'm sure many people were not huge fans of the deal at the time or now. Yeah, I'd say it's absolutely correct to say that the Astros "gave up" more than any other team was willing to give up for Jennings. Guess what: that's why they got him. The reasons why they felt they needed to make such a deal were pretty obvious at the time and have been clearly re-presented here by Noe among others.

Players don't always perform the way you expect/ reasonably hope them to (remember, Jennings was coming from Coors Field to MMPUS, where he'd have Adam Everett behind him- an improvement on last year's numbers was not out of the question). That's baseball; shit happens. All you can really say with certainty is Purpura didn't completely bamboozle the Rockies on that one. Reliable starting pitching is very hard to find and generally even harder to trade for. Time to move on and see what's out there for next year.

Also, I think Austro or someone made a good point that, at present, there are more reasons to expect guys like Backe, Albers or Patton to make significant contributions in the upcoming season. A legit #2 would still help out immensely, of course. Just my two cents.

[ybbodeus]

TZ axiom for newbies: "read more, post less."

I gather from this thread that said axiom doesn't exclusively apply to Clarks...

[ybbodeus]

All you can really say with certainty is Purpura didn't completely bamboozle the Rockies on that one.

There you have it!  That is the sin for which Purp is forced to pay.  Purp is being crucified by the Chromical and lil' Charlie on the radio for his failure to fill the shoes of the veteran GM he replaced. 

[94CougarGrad]

how cute, Asshole!

Are you bitter? You sound bitter. Try colonics.

[homer]

Are you bitter? You sound bitter. Try colonics.

Clark on clark violence is cute.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

I'm reluctant to jump in here, but it's worth noting that a difference for this year is that 1) Backe is coming off of elbow surgery and rehab, instead of heading into it, and 2) Patton is a year older and has another year of experience. So both of those options are more likely to pan out this year than they were last year.

Whether "more likely" elevates either to a level worth counting on is a different question.

I asked earlier today but I'll throw out Nieve's availability next year as well.  To compile the full list of possible starters, excluding Jennings:

Locks:
Oswalt
Williams - Unless he retires unexpectedly

Likely:
Rodriguez
Sampson
Backe

Outside shots at starter or bullpen:
Albers
Patton
Nieve
Gutierrez

I can think of several teams that would love to have the quality and number of options that Houston has.

[juliogotay]

Quantity, yes. A bunch of back of the rotation types, however.

They can't go into next season with just this bunch and expect to contend. Look for another packaging of young 'uns for a veteran.

[JimR]

Quantity, yes. A bunch of back of the rotation types, however.

They can't go into next season with just this bunch and expect to contend. Look for another packaging of young 'uns for a veteran.

how many "top of the rotation" types do you require?

[Froback]

how many "top of the rotation" types do you require?

6 of course.

People got spoiled with the Astros having one definate Ace and 2-3 guys who could be reasonably called #2 types in recent years.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quantity, yes. A bunch of back of the rotation types, however.

They can't go into next season with just this bunch and expect to contend. Look for another packaging of young 'uns for a veteran.

I disagree.  I look at the rest of the division and none have better rotations at this point.  The cardinals are looking at all of next season without Carpenter, although they get Mulder back.  The Brewers have fallen off since Sheets went down.  The Cubs could be interesting but other than Zambrano have nothing more than Houston.   

And don't sell short the Astros pitchers.  Nieve, can be nasty.  As can Albers.  Both are young and really haven't established their ceiling yet.   Backe and Sampson give you solid options for 3 and 4.  Wandy and Woody can do a nice job holding down the last rotation.  It's not great but if you put a good defense behind them with an offense that will score runs regularly, they may just surprise next year. 

[juliogotay]

That's an awful lot of "Ifs". Two of which are coming off of Tommy John. Look, there are plenty of candidates to fill spots and get innings but I don't see one from this list that I think you can project to have an ERA under 4.50 over 150 innings.

[juliogotay]

how many "top of the rotation" types do you require?

At least two. I like to see my team win and go to the playoffs.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

That's an awful lot of "Ifs". Two of which are coming off of Tommy John. Look, there are plenty of candidates to fill spots and get innings but I don't see one from this list that I think you can project to have an ERA under 4.50 over 150 innings.

Those IFs are more than anything you are likely to see in FA or in a trade.  I'm not saying it's ideal.  I'm saying it's probably what they'll head into ST with. 

[juliogotay]

We'll see. It will be an interesting off-season.

[chuck]

...realize that the Astros had few choices.

One of the choices was to keep what they had and make a deal for an established SP if the team found itself in contention mid-summer. I'd like to know why, with their three (now four) key players locked up for the foreseeable future, the team thought they needed to gamble in 2007 (and why they were making moves as if this were assumed to be a contending team) rather than be more conservative and keep two core, younger players for 2008 and beyond.

[Duman]

One of the choices was to keep what they had and make a deal for an established SP if the team found itself in contention mid-summer. I'd like to know why, with their three (now four) key players locked up for the foreseeable future, the team thought they needed to gamble in 2007 (and why they were making moves as if this were assumed to be a contending team) rather than be more conservative and keep two core, younger players for 2008 and beyond.

Because the teams fortune teller had a cloudy crystal ball that day. 

It is easy to second guess after the fact.  Remember, Hirsh is not pitching for the Rockies right now because of a broken leg.  Willie T is out through early September with a quad injury.  If the Rockies had known that, they might not have made the trade.

[pravata]

One of the choices was to keep what they had and make a deal for an established SP if the team found itself in contention mid-summer. I'd like to know why, with their three (now four) key players locked up for the foreseeable future, the team thought they needed to gamble in 2007 (and why they were making moves as if this were assumed to be a contending team) rather than be more conservative and keep two core, younger players for 2008 and beyond.

Could have, didn't.  What do you think they didn't?

[pravata]

That's an awful lot of "Ifs". Two of which are coming off of Tommy John. Look, there are plenty of candidates to fill spots and get innings but I don't see one from this list that I think you can project to have an ERA under 4.50 over 150 innings.

"Ifs" ? So what.  Every team has ifs.  Anybody tells you different is selling you something.

[MusicMan]

"Ifs" ? So what.  Every team has ifs.  Anybody tells you different is selling you something.

No, no.  It's "Life is pain, your highness.  Anybody who tells you different is selling you something."

[juliogotay]

"Ifs" ? So what.  Every team has ifs.  Anybody tells you different is selling you something.

Which goes back to my point that I think we'll see Purpura package some young pitchers, again, for a veteran type. That's so what.

[pravata]

Which goes back to my point that I think we'll see Purpura package some young pitchers, again, for a veteran type. That's so what.

That's the only thing he has to work with.  That's how they planned their minor league system.  The only other player he could get something for is Pence.

[Froback]

Which goes back to my point that I think we'll see Purpura package some young pitchers, again, for a veteran type. That's so what.

Depends on the Veteran I suppose.  Would you object to Santanna?  He is a FA after next season and has been making rumblings about not being happy in Minn (or at least at their lack of commitment to adding pieces to win it all).

[ybbodeus]

It is easy to second guess after the fact. 

If you can master the art of making people believe you've said so all along, you get your own radio show.