Author Topic: and/or?  (Read 7047 times)

pravata

  • Guest
and/or?
« on: December 13, 2005, 11:30:44 am »
"The team is discussing a trade with Cincinnati involving either outfielders Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn, but the Reds are asking for either Brad Lidge and/or Taveras in any scenario."

The Link

Andyzipp

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2005, 11:50:36 am »
Neither one of those guys need to be traded for Griffey, who is just as likely to get hurt getting on the airplane once the trade is consumated.

If you get rid of Taveras for Dunn, who plays center?  Burke?  Lane?

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2005, 11:54:04 am »
Quote:

Neither one of those guys need to be traded for Griffey, who is just as likely to get hurt getting on the airplane once the trade is consumated.

If you get rid of Taveras for Dunn, who plays center?  Burke?  Lane?




Exactly.  And while 'tis the season for giving, I'm not interested in Lidge for Dunn.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

geezerdonk

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3342
  • a long tradition of existence
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2005, 12:08:04 pm »
Quote:

"The team is discussing a trade with Cincinnati involving either outfielders Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn, but the Reds are asking for either Brad Lidge and/or Taveras in any scenario."




I believe that the Joe Morgan trade remains in the forefront of the Astros' organizational memory and should prevent any such nonsense as this.
E come vivo? Vivo.

Froback

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2005, 12:27:44 pm »
Quote:

Neither one of those guys need to be traded for Griffey, who is just as likely to get hurt getting on the airplane once the trade is consumated.

If you get rid of Taveras for Dunn, who plays center?  Burke?  Lane?





Not that I like the notion but I see Lane playing CF if Taveras is dealt in a deal like this.

For those who don't want to deal Lidge be aware that if the Astros are likely to upgrade the offense significantly they will probably have to trade Lidge.  They might be able to get Mench for less... (Heck the Rangers just went for Padillia) but don't expect an Abreu or Dunn type addition without Lidge being included.

jaklewein

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3612
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2005, 12:30:26 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Neither one of those guys need to be traded for Griffey, who is just as likely to get hurt getting on the airplane once the trade is consumated.

If you get rid of Taveras for Dunn, who plays center?  Burke?  Lane?




Exactly.  And while 'tis the season for giving, I'm not interested in Lidge for Dunn.





Me neither...I don't think we should give up much at all for Dunn.  He will be a FAgent in '07 anyways...and he will give us a fair shot in signing him.  Fuck the reds...they're chance to real us on a bountiful deal ('05 trade deadline) has passed.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2005, 12:32:36 pm »
That article was almost a persuasive essay on why Houston should NOT trade for another corner OF.  Maybe I'm wrong but the only needs I see, where Houston doesn't have at least 1 or 2 internal options with some level of proven success, is pitching.  And that assumes that Houston doesn't think Zeke and Wandy can hold down the tail end of the rotation.  

In that regard, the most valuable commodity they have to gain pitching is.... PITCHING.  How does it make sense to trade pitching to get pitching?  

Yeah yeah, everyone is pointing out the anemic offense.  It was the biggest team weakness last season, and most likely will be the same this coming season.  However, I don't see where they can upgrade any offensive production at any position without completely blowing away the current roster and making drastic changes.  Do they obtain a starting 1B?  Nope, not until Bagwell's situation is resolved as him definitely unable to play.  Outfield?  If Bagwell comes back, Berkman is in LF.  Do you dump Lane?  Cost-benefit wise, it doesn't make sense.  Willy?  Only if you believe the second half is more indicative of his future production.  

2B, SS, 3B, and Catcher are all locked down.  I like this team.  They play solid defense, run out solid to good to great pitching almost every game.  Could they use more run production?  Absolutely.  What position does he play and who do they lose to get it done?  And is anyone certain that Burke, Scott, and the other players in the system won't be able to handle the task?
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Froback

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2005, 12:35:51 pm »
Biggio's 2nd half last year scares me more than Willy's 2nd half.

But that is me.

ASTROCREEP

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 773
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2005, 01:40:05 pm »
You don't have to TRADE for Nomar or Bengie (is he still available?) and still improve your offense.

Nomar can play 3rd, 1st, LF, RF well. He can also play 2nd, SS, or CF in emergency situations.

Kinda like Spiers but with a bigger nose.

Lane could sit or be traded, if Bagwell can play.

2 years 14 million? Or could you get him for less?
Chuck Norris once ate three 72 oz. steaks in one hour. He spent the first 45 minutes having sex with his waitress.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2005, 01:46:00 pm »
Quote:

You don't have to TRADE for Nomar or Bengie (is he still available?) and still improve your offense.

Nomar can play 3rd, 1st, LF, RF well. He can also play 2nd, SS, or CF in emergency situations.

Kinda like Spiers but with a bigger nose.

Lane could sit or be traded, if Bagwell can play.

2 years 14 million? Or could you get him for less?




Please do not insult the legend of the Great Bill Spiers by including him in any comparison with Nomar.  Even if it is just nose size.

Moreover, Nomar will want a shit-load of money, but it would be odd to have a major salary on the roster for a player with no set position.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

ASTROCREEP

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 773
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2005, 01:50:32 pm »
Do you think 2years 14 million is too much? Can he get more?

Multi-position players turned out to very valuable last year.
Chuck Norris once ate three 72 oz. steaks in one hour. He spent the first 45 minutes having sex with his waitress.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2005, 02:00:17 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

You don't have to TRADE for Nomar or Bengie (is he still available?) and still improve your offense.

Nomar can play 3rd, 1st, LF, RF well. He can also play 2nd, SS, or CF in emergency situations.

Kinda like Spiers but with a bigger nose.

Lane could sit or be traded, if Bagwell can play.

2 years 14 million? Or could you get him for less?




Please do not insult the legend of the Great Bill Spiers by including him in any comparison with Nomar.  Even if it is just nose size.

Moreover, Nomar will want a shit-load of money, but it would be odd to have a major salary on the roster for a player with no set position.





In more ways than one.

Matt

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3578
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2005, 02:15:30 pm »
Yeah fuck the Reds. I like the idea of telling them to take what the Astros offer or get nothing and watch the Astros try and lock Dunn up in the offseason.  Hometown discount and Fat Elvis as a buddy.  Good chance of that

jaklewein

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3612
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2005, 02:23:17 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

You don't have to TRADE for Nomar or Bengie (is he still available?) and still improve your offense.

Nomar can play 3rd, 1st, LF, RF well. He can also play 2nd, SS, or CF in emergency situations.

Kinda like Spiers but with a bigger nose.

Lane could sit or be traded, if Bagwell can play.

2 years 14 million? Or could you get him for less?




Please do not insult the legend of the Great Bill Spiers by including him in any comparison with Nomar.  Even if it is just nose size.

Moreover, Nomar will want a shit-load of money, but it would be odd to have a major salary on the roster for a player with no set position.





How much is a "shit-load"?  The last offer I heard as rumored to Nomar was of the 1 year, $4M range via the Pirates.  Now obviously he didn't sign that offer, but I can't expect he'd be looking for too much more.  He was only getting paid around $8M with the Cubs (I think), and that was before he got injured.  If the deal is a one-year deal, then I could definitely see the club being interested.  Hopefully the are....I'd love to pick up a bat without having to trade any of our pitching.

Cheo

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #14 on: December 13, 2005, 02:26:03 pm »
I seriously DOUBT that Pup would trade Lidge to a National League team, much less one in their own division.

IMHO..they are shopping Taveras, Qualls and/or Wheeler, and the often printed "player to be named later". I would be surprised if Lidge is in any package....uh...unless Tejada is coming to town. ;-D

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2005, 02:47:49 pm »
Quote:

Yeah fuck the Reds. I like the idea of telling them to take what the Astros offer or get nothing and watch the Astros try and lock Dunn up in the offseason.  Hometown discount and Fat Elvis as a buddy.  Good chance of that




Which offseason would that be?  The one 2 years from now, when he'll finally be a FA?  Or is there already a decision in Cincy to not offer him arbitration when his contract expires?   They still own him for 2 more seasons, as far as I can tell.
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

Froback

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2005, 03:06:14 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Yeah fuck the Reds. I like the idea of telling them to take what the Astros offer or get nothing and watch the Astros try and lock Dunn up in the offseason.  Hometown discount and Fat Elvis as a buddy.  Good chance of that




Which offseason would that be?  The one 2 years from now, when he'll finally be a FA?  Or is there already a decision in Cincy to not offer him arbitration when his contract expires?   They still own him for 2 more seasons, as far as I can tell.





Can't say I am an expert, but I think he is a FA after the 06 season.  But I will check around to be sure.

jaklewein

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3612
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2005, 03:43:20 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Yeah fuck the Reds. I like the idea of telling them to take what the Astros offer or get nothing and watch the Astros try and lock Dunn up in the offseason.  Hometown discount and Fat Elvis as a buddy.  Good chance of that




Which offseason would that be?  The one 2 years from now, when he'll finally be a FA?  Or is there already a decision in Cincy to not offer him arbitration when his contract expires?   They still own him for 2 more seasons, as far as I can tell.





Can't confirm with link, but I've heard on more than one occasion (including sportstalk in CIN, ugh) that he's a FAgent after '06.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2005, 04:12:44 pm »
Quote:


Can't confirm with link, but I've heard on more than one occasion (including sportstalk in CIN, ugh) that he's a FAgent after '06.





Dunn currently has 4.074 years of service time.  After 2006, he'll have 5.074.  You need 6 to become a free agent.  Dunn will not be eligible for free agency until after the 2007 season.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

stubbyc

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 497
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2005, 04:59:48 pm »
Quote:

"The team is discussing a trade with Cincinnati involving either outfielders Ken Griffey Jr. or Adam Dunn, but the Reds are asking for either Brad Lidge and/or Taveras in any scenario."

The Link





Griffey's terrible in CF. He should be playing LF or 1b, but even then he's not worth Brad Lidge.

stubbyc

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 497
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2005, 05:01:12 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

You don't have to TRADE for Nomar or Bengie (is he still available?) and still improve your offense.

Nomar can play 3rd, 1st, LF, RF well. He can also play 2nd, SS, or CF in emergency situations.

Kinda like Spiers but with a bigger nose.

Lane could sit or be traded, if Bagwell can play.

2 years 14 million? Or could you get him for less?




Please do not insult the legend of the Great Bill Spiers by including him in any comparison with Nomar.  Even if it is just nose size.

Moreover, Nomar will want a shit-load of money, but it would be odd to have a major salary on the roster for a player with no set position.





From what I've heard, I'd expect Nomar to land somewhere with no more than a 1 year deal worth 5 mil plus incentives.

jasonact

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1469
    • View Profile
    • www.jasonmartinmft.com
Re: and/or?
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2005, 05:19:12 pm »
Quote:

From what I've heard, I'd expect Nomar to land somewhere with no more than a 1 year deal worth 5 mil plus incentives.




If that's true and he returns to form, that would be a great deal, but who knows if he'll be able to return to what he once was? I haven't read anything confirming that he'll ever be the same player.
phew. for a minute there, I lost myself
- Radiohead

astro pete

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2620
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2005, 05:26:44 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

From what I've heard, I'd expect Nomar to land somewhere with no more than a 1 year deal worth 5 mil plus incentives.




If that's true and he returns to form, that would be a great deal, but who knows if he'll be able to return to what he once was? I haven't read anything confirming that he'll ever be the same player.





If he doesn't return to form, he's only cost $5 million.  Sounds like a good deal to me.

stubbyc

  • Veteran Role Player
  • Posts: 497
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2005, 06:11:13 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

From what I've heard, I'd expect Nomar to land somewhere with no more than a 1 year deal worth 5 mil plus incentives.




If that's true and he returns to form, that would be a great deal, but who knows if he'll be able to return to what he once was? I haven't read anything confirming that he'll ever be the same player.





He got 1 year/8 million with incentives last year and I don't see how his value could have increased since then. He supposedly have a 1 year/4 million deal with incentives on the table from the Orioles.

DVauthrin

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2929
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2005, 06:41:03 pm »
What I want to know is why do the Reds want Lidge anyways.  So he can save all of their victories?   They would be better off going for high level prospect pitching in my opinion.  

At this point, Nomar is looking like a better option by the day with the type of offers he is getting on the table.   Plus, Ken Rosenthal wrote last night that the team is showing interest in Nomar(and in Rondell White).  The Link

Of course the odd thing was Alyson Footer was asked about Nomar in the team mailbag and she didn't seem to think the team was interested, no matter what position he would play.  Take that for what it's worth.

Finally, I wonder if Texas still likes Burke considering they dealt Soriano.   One would think if their new GM comes down to earth on asking prices that a Burke for Mench or Wilkerson deal makes some sense for both parties.
Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2005, 06:59:39 pm »
Quote:

What I want to know is why do the Reds want Lidge anyways.  So he can save all of their victories?   They would be better off going for high level prospect pitching in my opinion.  

At this point, Nomar is looking like a better option by the day with the type of offers he is getting on the table.   Plus, Ken Rosenthal wrote last night that the team is showing interest in Nomar(and in Rondell White).  The Link

Of course the odd thing was Alyson Footer was asked about Nomar in the team mailbag and she didn't seem to think the team was interested, no matter what position he would play.  Take that for what it's worth.

Finally, I wonder if Texas still likes Burke considering they dealt Soriano.   One would think if their new GM comes down to earth on asking prices that a Burke for Mench or Wilkerson deal makes some sense for both parties.





Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2005, 07:01:43 pm »
Quote:

Finally, I wonder if Texas still likes Burke considering they dealt Soriano.   One would think if their new GM comes down to earth on asking prices that a Burke for Mench or Wilkerson deal makes some sense for both parties.




Unlikely.  Their GM is getting killed for not getting a quality P for Soriano, despite the bon mots about how he's asking for each GM's firstborn plus two pitching prospects.

Anyway, with Soriano gone, they shift Young back to 2b and put Kinsley at SS.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Taras Bulba

  • Contributor
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3988
    • View Profile
    • Wing Attack Plan R
Re: and/or?
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2005, 07:02:04 pm »
Footer is a rare commodity: fairly knowledgable and damn good looking.  Hard working, too.
Purity of Essence

DVauthrin

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2929
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2005, 07:21:05 pm »
Quote:



Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.





Well, Ken did suggest in the article last night that the Astros were interested in Rondell White, and now according to 790, the team is in negotiations with him(based on what I just read here)

His article on Nomar was published at 1 am or so last night, and Footer had addressed the question earlier in the day yesterday just for reference.
Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #29 on: December 13, 2005, 07:24:53 pm »
Quote:

Quote:



Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.





Well, Ken did suggest in the article last night that the Astros were interested in Rondell White, and now according to 790, the team is in negotiations with him(based on what I just read here)

His article on Nomar was published at 1 am or so last night, and Footer had addressed the question earlier in the day yesterday just for reference.




Published, but obviously not written recently.  He writes "...the Astros are reluctant to trade Backe, knowing they might lose Roger Clemens..." which makes this about a week old.  Rondell White is not a new name. The Link The news is that they are in "serious" negotiations.  He's exactly the type of player Purpura is after.

DVauthrin

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2929
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #30 on: December 13, 2005, 07:48:54 pm »
That is what I get for glossing over the article early this morning.   I can see why Rondell White makes sense though, easily.  His injuries will drive down his price, and at the very least he provides the right handed power off the bench that we clamored for all of last year.
Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #31 on: December 13, 2005, 07:57:26 pm »
and given his history, he's not going to demand regular playing time, although his bat will probably earn him some....
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

astro pete

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2620
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #32 on: December 13, 2005, 08:04:41 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:



Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.





Well, Ken did suggest in the article last night that the Astros were interested in Rondell White, and now according to 790, the team is in negotiations with him(based on what I just read here)

His article on Nomar was published at 1 am or so last night, and Footer had addressed the question earlier in the day yesterday just for reference.




Published, but obviously not written recently.  He writes "...the Astros are reluctant to trade Backe, knowing they might lose Roger Clemens..." which makes this about a week old.  Rondell White is not a new name. The Link The news is that they are in "serious" negotiations.  He's exactly the type of player Purpura is after.




He means that Clemens is "lost" until May, but there is a chance he could still come back after that time.

Reuben

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8852
    • View Profile
    • art
Re: and/or?
« Reply #33 on: December 14, 2005, 03:45:15 am »
Quote:

What I want to know is why do the Reds want Lidge anyways.  So he can save all of their victories?   They would be better off going for high level prospect pitching in my opinion.  

At this point, Nomar is looking like a better option by the day with the type of offers he is getting on the table.   Plus, Ken Rosenthal wrote last night that the team is showing interest in Nomar(and in Rondell White).  The Link

Of course the odd thing was Alyson Footer was asked about Nomar in the team mailbag and she didn't seem to think the team was interested, no matter what position he would play.  Take that for what it's worth.

Finally, I wonder if Texas still likes Burke considering they dealt Soriano.   One would think if their new GM comes down to earth on asking prices that a Burke for Mench or Wilkerson deal makes some sense for both parties.





Nomar is suddenly very fashionable, it seems, for every team's paper to discuss as their cheap, awesome, new_____. What team couldn't use a ____ who once hit .370? He or White for cheap would be very nice Bagwell insurance, though. Burke is looking more and more out of here.
"Come check us out in the Game Zone. We don’t bite. Unless you say something idiotic." -Mr. Happy

Reuben

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8852
    • View Profile
    • art
Re: and/or?
« Reply #34 on: December 14, 2005, 03:51:28 am »
Quote:

That article was almost a persuasive essay on why Houston should NOT trade for another corner OF.  Maybe I'm wrong but the only needs I see, where Houston doesn't have at least 1 or 2 internal options with some level of proven success, is pitching.  And that assumes that Houston doesn't think Zeke and Wandy can hold down the tail end of the rotation.  




I wonder if the Astros are looking at Lowe, Clement, or Vazquez? All owed about what Morris got (Yanks are paying Arizona $3 mil/ year for Vazquez).
"Come check us out in the Game Zone. We don’t bite. Unless you say something idiotic." -Mr. Happy

jasonact

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1469
    • View Profile
    • www.jasonmartinmft.com
Re: and/or?
« Reply #35 on: December 14, 2005, 10:24:15 am »
Quote:

I wonder if the Astros are looking at Lowe, Clement, or Vazquez? All owed about what Morris got (Yanks are paying Arizona $3 mil/ year for Vazquez).




No for Vasquez. He's about to be traded to the WS Champs.

I don't know about Lowe, but Boston has been shopping Clement throughout the offseason. The Astros might be able to pick him up without losing much.
phew. for a minute there, I lost myself
- Radiohead

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #36 on: December 14, 2005, 10:54:32 am »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:



Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.





Well, Ken did suggest in the article last night that the Astros were interested in Rondell White, and now according to 790, the team is in negotiations with him(based on what I just read here)

His article on Nomar was published at 1 am or so last night, and Footer had addressed the question earlier in the day yesterday just for reference.




Published, but obviously not written recently.  He writes "...the Astros are reluctant to trade Backe, knowing they might lose Roger Clemens..." which makes this about a week old.  Rondell White is not a new name. The Link The news is that they are in "serious" negotiations.  He's exactly the type of player Purpura is after.




He means that Clemens is "lost" until May, but there is a chance he could still come back after that time.




"might lose" = lost?

S.P. Rodriguez

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2932
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #37 on: December 14, 2005, 11:12:22 am »
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:



Rosenthal's information is stale and may no longer be valid.  Given the choice between Footer and Rosenthal for accurate Astros information, go with Footer.





Well, Ken did suggest in the article last night that the Astros were interested in Rondell White, and now according to 790, the team is in negotiations with him(based on what I just read here)

His article on Nomar was published at 1 am or so last night, and Footer had addressed the question earlier in the day yesterday just for reference.




Published, but obviously not written recently.  He writes "...the Astros are reluctant to trade Backe, knowing they might lose Roger Clemens..." which makes this about a week old.  Rondell White is not a new name. The Link The news is that they are in "serious" negotiations.  He's exactly the type of player Purpura is after.




He means that Clemens is "lost" until May, but there is a chance he could still come back after that time.




"might lose" = lost?




Could you simply try to be less literal?  Sheesh....
"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man. "

-Mark Twain

astro pete

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2620
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #38 on: December 14, 2005, 11:12:29 am »
quote]

"might lose" = lost?




"might lose" = might not come back after May 1.

That, at least, is how I read it.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #39 on: December 14, 2005, 11:17:26 am »
Quote:

quote]

"might lose" = lost?





"might lose" = might not come back after May 1.

That, at least, is how I read it.




I can't do anything about that.

cc

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 949
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2005, 03:08:50 pm »
I guess I would also interpret that as referring to Roger's possibly either retiring or signing with another club *prior* to May 1.

I heard a snippet from a Rosenthal interview played back on 610 a couple of nights ago.  He sounded like he expected Clemens to come back to the Astros, and contended that the fact that he never gave Drayton a figure to work with made him think he just wanted to stay in the headlines a little longer.
"I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions."

astro pete

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2620
    • View Profile
Re: and/or?
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2005, 03:23:41 pm »
Quote:

I guess I would also interpret that as referring to Roger's possibly either retiring or signing with another club *prior* to May 1.

I heard a snippet from a Rosenthal interview played back on 610 a couple of nights ago.  He sounded like he expected Clemens to come back to the Astros, and contended that the fact that he never gave Drayton a figure to work with made him think he just wanted to stay in the headlines a little longer.





This is clearly what he's saying.  Clemens isn't "lost" until he either retires or signs with another team.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: and/or?
« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2005, 04:22:07 pm »
Quote:

Quote:

I guess I would also interpret that as referring to Roger's possibly either retiring or signing with another club *prior* to May 1.

I heard a snippet from a Rosenthal interview played back on 610 a couple of nights ago.  He sounded like he expected Clemens to come back to the Astros, and contended that the fact that he never gave Drayton a figure to work with made him think he just wanted to stay in the headlines a little longer.





This is clearly what he's saying.  Clemens isn't "lost" until he either retires or signs with another team.




No it's not.  And the reason I know it's not is the part where the Astros are "reluctant to trade Backe".  They were reluctant before they didn't offer arbitration.  Now they're much more than reluctant to trade Backe.  Rosenthal wrote this article over a week ago, before the arb deadline. In another article, written 7 days ago, he wrote "...the Astros would be gambling that he would not abandon his hometown team. The Yankees and Rangers, however, almost certainly would be interested if Clemens hit the open market."  The Link

Astros "gambling", Yankees, Rangers, "almost certaintly".