Bagwell to start season on dl

[Fredia]

The Link
they have him on the dl list but he seems to be (in my opinion only)saying he knows its over

[Nate in IA]

So, this means the starting outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane from left to right?  I think that'll be one heck of an outfield.

I really do think this is the best thing that could have happened for both Jeff and the Astros.  He's been one of my favorite players for his entire tenure with the Astros and I wish him the best.  Hopefully he can be a great asset for the Astros in retirement.

[astro pete]

Quote:
So, this means the starting outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane from left to right?  I think that'll be one heck of an outfield.

I really do think this is the best thing that could have happened for both Jeff and the Astros.  He's been one of my favorite players for his entire tenure with the Astros and I wish him the best.  Hopefully he can be a great asset for the Astros in retirement.

Best thing that could have happened? WTF??

[Nate in IA]

Quote:

Quote:
So, this means the starting outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane from left to right?  I think that'll be one heck of an outfield.

I really do think this is the best thing that could have happened for both Jeff and the Astros.  He's been one of my favorite players for his entire tenure with the Astros and I wish him the best.  Hopefully he can be a great asset for the Astros in retirement.

Best thing that could have happened? WTF??

Given the circumstances.  Of course, in a fantasy world, Jeff would not have a degenerate shoulder and could play on.  Given the description of what's left of his shoulder however, this is better for everyone involved.  Do I really need to add the "in my opinion"?

[CrawfordBoxes]

I think that were better off this way. I appreciate everything Jeff has done for us but at this point in his career. Moving Lance to first and getting more ABs for Burke and Taveras will be better for the team.

[OldBlevins]

Whether that's true or not, it's a sad day for Astros fans.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
So, this means the starting outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane from left to right?  I think that'll be one heck of an outfield.

Maybe not.  They could leave Berkman in the outfield and start Eric Munson at first.  That would be one heck of a lineup as well.  As is, the fight for the #25 man just got a whole lot more innuresting.

[Tralfaz]

That sounds like a Sunday line-up Noe.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
That sounds like a Sunday line-up Noe.

'Tis what I meant by my very last comment about the 25th man.  I expect Berkman to get the lion share of 1st base duty, but you're going to see more of Munson at first to finish this spring than you probably will anyone else (other than Berkman that is).

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:
That sounds like a Sunday line-up Noe.

'Tis what I meant by my very last comment about the 25th man.  I expect Berkman to get the lion share of 1st base duty, but you're going to see more of Munson at first to finish this spring than you probably will anyone else (other than Berkman that is).

Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

[Nate in IA]

Quote:

Quote:
That sounds like a Sunday line-up Noe.

'Tis what I meant by my very last comment about the 25th man.  I expect Berkman to get the lion share of 1st base duty, but you're going to see more of Munson at first to finish this spring than you probably will anyone else (other than Berkman that is).

I think what I hear you saying is that Garner just got a whole lot more flexibility in his ability to put what he feels is the best team on the field on any given day.  I do think the mainstay outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane.  However, as you point out, the 25th man now becomes very interesting indeed as it's the key to that flexibility.  

I think Jeff Bagwell has been the heart and soul of the Houston Astros for a long time.  I'm very sad to see him go and wish him the best.  On the flip side, I'm pretty excited about this season and looking forward to how it all plays out.

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

[astro pete]

Quote:

Quote:
So, this means the starting outfield will be Wilson, Taveraz, and Lane from left to right?  I think that'll be one heck of an outfield.

Maybe not.  They could leave Berkman in the outfield and start Eric Munson at first.  That would be one heck of a lineup as well.  As is, the fight for the #25 man just got a whole lot more innuresting.

That would put Taveras in Round Rock.  But from what Garner has been saying, I'd think Munson is most likely to claim the back-up catcher's job.  In that scenario, Quintero goes to AAA, Chavez and his son go through the waiver wire unclaimed, and Munson becomes the back-up catcher/back-up corner infielder.  That gives Garner the flexibility to load the lineup with left-handed sluggers if he likes (ie-Munson to first, Berkman to left, Wilson to center), while also assuring Taveras lots of playing time in center.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

Forget it, Pena's agent is Scott Boras.

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

Forget it, Pena's agent is Scott Boras.

Is there a post-Beltran Boras boycott?

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

Forget it, Pena's agent is Scott Boras.

Is there a post-Beltran Boras boycott?

Don't know, but I'd be surprised if Mclane wants to negotiate with him again. Anyway, Boras is likely to ask for something ridiculous.

[Matt]

Did Taveras add a Z to his name to come off as more hip and extreme?  I must have missed that Comical article.

[Reuben]

Quote:
Did Taveras add a Z to his name to come off as more hip and extreme?  I must have missed that Comical article.

Maybe to also tie in with the "buzzz" theme. Auzmuzzz. Enzzzberg. Quallz. Ozzzwalt. Jazon Lane. Think of the marketing potential! It'd be eXtreme-ly profitable!

[VirtualBob]

Quote:

Quote:
Did Taveras add a Z to his name to come off as more hip and extreme?  I must have missed that Comical article.

Maybe to also tie in with the "buzzz" theme. Auzmuzzz. Enzzzberg. Quallz. Ozzzwalt. Jazon Lane. Think of the marketing potential! It'd be eXtreme-ly profitable!

Ahem .... that would be 'egzzztremely profitable', wouldn't it?

[Nate in IA]

Quote:
Did Taveras add a Z to his name to come off as more hip and extreme?  I must have missed that Comical article.

No, I just screwed up when I typed it.  Mea culpa.  It won't happen again.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

I didn't know the Astros were persuing Pena.  'Tis why I'm confused where this semi-random "How About Carlos Pena" thought bubble came from.

[Matt]

Quote:


No, I just screwed up when I typed it.  Mea culpa.  It won't happen again.

haha I know I was just poking fun at all the media types that mispronounce Taveras all the time.

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point.

 

I don't see what's so confusing. Look at  Lamb's stats and look at  Pena's. Pena strikes out a whole lot more, but is 27 years old (Lamb's 31), a much better fielder, and had a terrific last couple months of 2005. If you place a high value on ST stats, then, well, probably neither should make the team.

I didn't know the Astros were persuing Pena.  'Tis why I'm confused where this semi-random "How About Carlos Pena" thought bubble came from.

No, sorry, I didn't mean to imply they were- I mentioned it now because he was just released, and has good LH power and good defense, while Bagwell just went on the DL. As Pravata mentioned, he's a Boras guy, but if they could nab him for $1 mil or so, might be worth a shot.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I mentioned it now because he was just released...

Why was he released?  And why is Mike Lamb expendable now because of it?

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:
I mentioned it now because he was just released...

Why was he released?  And why is Mike Lamb expendable now because of it?

It appears he was released because a) he's hit .160 this ST, and b) the Tigers didn't want to pay his $2.8 mil salary. They're putting Shelton and Young at 1B/DH. I stated above why he might be better than Lamb; I couldn't see them carrying both, though.

[Reuben]

 The Link
"If he would've hit like he hit the last six weeks of the season, we would've found a spot for him," Tigers president and general manager Dave Dombrowski said

[No? in Austin]

 ESPN Scouting Report on Carlos Pena

Quote:
Pena does not have a quick bat. There were times last season when he could not handle even an average major league fastball thrown over the heart of the plate.

Mike Lamb has a very quick bat and can hit an above average major league fastball.  I don't see where Pena's profile makes him a good fit to be a bench guy, especially enough to get rid of a top-notch bench player like Lamb.

[Reuben]

Quote:
ESPN Scouting Report on Carlos Pena

Quote:
Pena does not have a quick bat. There were times last season when he could not handle even an average major league fastball thrown over the heart of the plate.

Mike Lamb has a very quick bat and can hit an above average major league fastball.  I don't see where Pena's profile makes him a good fit to be a bench guy, especially enough to get rid of a top-notch bench player like Lamb.

I agree that if you base a comparison entirely on ESPN's year-old scouting report, and ignore their career stats, Lamb is a much better option.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I agree that if you base a comparison entirely on ESPN's year-old scouting report, and ignore their career stats, Lamb is a much better option.

Meaning what?  That you would dispatch a very good contributor to your bench for the bird in the bush *based* on career stats?  Why?  Because you're bored?  Do you even *watch* the Astros play?

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:

Quote:
ESPN Scouting Report on Carlos Pena

Quote:
Pena does not have a quick bat. There were times last season when he could not handle even an average major league fastball thrown over the heart of the plate.

Mike Lamb has a very quick bat and can hit an above average major league fastball.  I don't see where Pena's profile makes him a good fit to be a bench guy, especially enough to get rid of a top-notch bench player like Lamb.

I agree that if you base a comparison entirely on ESPN's year-old scouting report, and ignore their career stats, Lamb is a much better option.

Since Lamb is signed for $1.3 million, discussing releasing him is probably a waste of time.

[astro pete]

Quote:

Since Lamb is signed for $1.3 million, discussing releasing him is probably a waste of time.

Agree, except I would have added the words, "the bargain price of" before "$1.3 million."

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:
I agree that if you base a comparison entirely on ESPN's year-old scouting report, and ignore their career stats, Lamb is a much better option.

Meaning what?  That you would dispatch a very good contributor to your bench for the bird in the bush *based* on career stats?  Why?  Because you're bored?  Do you even *watch* the Astros play?

Dude, why are you getting so angry about this? It's not a big deal. I simply posed the question: "Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point." Then I answered your subsequent questions. I'm not saying Mike Lamb sucks, I simply wondered aloud about this minor issue, then I presented facts showing why it might be worth considering. Is it really that infuriating to suggest that a guy, only 27, who could turn out to be a very useful full-time player, might at least be worth a thought? Is it worth getting so worked up over that you throw the "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" at me?

[CJM]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I agree that if you base a comparison entirely on ESPN's year-old scouting report, and ignore their career stats, Lamb is a much better option.

Meaning what?  That you would dispatch a very good contributor to your bench for the bird in the bush *based* on career stats?  Why?  Because you're bored?  Do you even *watch* the Astros play?

Dude, why are you getting so angry about this? It's not a big deal. I simply posed the question: "Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point." Then I answered your subsequent questions. I'm not saying Mike Lamb sucks, I simply wondered aloud about this minor issue, then I presented facts showing why it might be worth considering. Is it really that infuriating to suggest that a guy, only 27, who could turn out to be a very useful full-time player, might at least be worth a thought? Is it worth getting so worked up over that you throw the "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" at me?

Your "facts" made no baseball sense.

[Andyzipp]

Without the vitrol, Pena has not been good in either of his major league stops.  Personally, not sure how playing part time is going to make him better.

[astro pete]

Quote:

Your "facts" made no baseball sense.

Sure they did.  What they didn't do was paint the whole picture.  That's where the disagreement began.

[Limey]

Quote:
Without the vitrol, Pena has not been good in either of his major league stops.  Personally, not sure how playing part time is going to make him better.

Easy.  You leave him on the bench for those ABs where he'd make outs, and only send him up when he's going to get a hit.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Dude, why are you getting so angry about this?

I'm not angry, just confused why Carlos Pena for Mike Lamb came up.

Quote:
It's not a big deal.

I agree, so why do you think I'm angry about it?

Quote:
I simply posed the question: "Any chance they'll pick up Carlos Pena? He might be more valuable than Lamb at this point."

And why I asked why he was released if he had value.  I wondered if maybe Pena had a flaw in his game that made him expendable.  Hitting .190 in spring training is not necessarily a reason a major league talent gets released from a team.  Especially if we're talking Jim Leyland as the manager of said team.

Quote:
Then I answered your subsequent questions. I'm not saying Mike Lamb sucks,

Then why get rid of him? See my confusion?

Quote:
I simply wondered aloud about this minor issue, then I presented facts showing why it might be worth considering.

Using stats in a vacuum is not using facts as much as using observation coupled with stats.  Someone will take a chance on Pena for sure, but to get *rid* of a player to make room for him, especially a very good contributor to your team is puzzling.  

Quote:
Is it really that infuriating to suggest that a guy, only 27, who could turn out to be a very useful full-time player, might at least be worth a thought?

No, hence why I asked for the clarification.  What do you want me to do, fawn all over your suggestion and declare you the smartest poster in the TZ?  I can you know, if that is what you want.  I merely put forth the scouting report that Pena, who *again* was *released by the Detroit Tigers* has some precievable flaws (a bat that is not quick enough to catch up with a mediocre major league fastball is damning).  To go with your facts.  I answered as kindly as I could, you came back with your own remarks to totally discount what I said, so I asked what you may mean by those remarks.

Quote:
Is it worth getting so worked up over that you throw the "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" at me?

It is an honest question, not an indictment.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Without the vitrol, Pena has not been good in either of his major league stops.  Personally, not sure how playing part time is going to make him better.

And to give him that part time job, you get rid of Mike Lamb?  Like I said, very confusing train of thought, to me any way.  

[CJM]

Quote:

Quote:

Your "facts" made no baseball sense.

Sure they did.  What they didn't do was paint the whole picture.  That's where the disagreement began.

The disagreement began because it made no sense (still doesn't).  

Where does somebody come up with that kind of shit (Pena in place of Lamb)?

[astro pete]

Quote:

The disagreement began because it made no sense (still doesn't).  

Where does somebody come up with that kind of shit (Pena in place of Lamb)?

You said his facts were not baseball related, but they were.  He came up with "that kind of shit" by looking entirely at statistics.  You and I may disagree with his proposal, but it wasn't as though he reached into his ass and threw out some entirely unrelated material to support his assertion.

[Ty in Tampa]

Arguing about an argument. Well done.

[astro pete]

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

Jumping on a guy?  OMG! Why don't we all just wear skirts and prance around like Kansas City fa... oh nevermind. *sheesh*  You and Reuben friends?

[astro pete]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

Jumping on a guy?  OMG! Why don't we all just wear skirts and prance around like Kansas City fa... oh nevermind. *sheesh*  You and Reuben friends?

I wasn't talking about you.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I wasn't talking about you.

Still, are you and Reuben friends?

[astro pete]

Quote:

Quote:
I wasn't talking about you.

Still, are you and Reuben friends?

Not that I'm aware of.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I wasn't talking about you.

Still, are you and Reuben friends?

Not that I'm aware of.

Cool.  Thanks.

[homer]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

Jumping on a guy?  OMG! Why don't we all just wear skirts and prance around like Kansas City fa... oh nevermind. *sheesh*  You and Reuben friends?

I wasn't talking about you.

Who were you talking about?

[astro pete]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

Jumping on a guy?  OMG! Why don't we all just wear skirts and prance around like Kansas City fa... oh nevermind. *sheesh*  You and Reuben friends?

I wasn't talking about you.

Who were you talking about?

The person with whom I was directly corresponding.

[CJM]

Quote:

Quote:

The disagreement began because it made no sense (still doesn't).  

Where does somebody come up with that kind of shit (Pena in place of Lamb)?

You said his facts were not baseball related, but they were.  He came up with "that kind of shit" by looking entirely at statistics.  You and I may disagree with his proposal, but it wasn't as though he reached into his ass and threw out some entirely unrelated material to support his assertion.

I said his facts made no baseball sense.  Didn't say anything about them not being baseball related.

[CJM]

Quote:

Quote:
Arguing about an argument. Well done.

About as impressive as jumping on a guy for throwing out an idea the week before Opening Day, I suppose.

You don't see the difference between jumping on a guy and calling out a stupid idea?

[astro pete]

Quote:


I said his facts made no baseball sense.  Didn't say anything about them not being baseball related.

You mean his "facts"??

[Reuben]

Quote:

Quote:
Is it worth getting so worked up over that you throw the "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" at me?

It is an honest question, not an indictment.

It's sometimes tough to tell from text what someone's tone is. It seemed like you were upset and "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" in that context seemed a tad disrespectful or accusatory.

I certainly don't expect anybody to "fawn over" my comments or questions, just disagree respectfully or sarcastically. I apologize if any of my responses to you seemed disrespectful.

Anyway, others have pointed out why it wasn't the greatest suggestion, aside from the "who's better" argument: Pena has Boras for an agent, and Lamb is owed $1.3 mil- in January perhaps a trade would've been a realistic option, but probably not now. Any upgrade Pena might present over Lamb would probably not be worth the trouble at this point.

By the way, I watch the Astros play whenever I can. Around here, their televised playoff games far outnumber their televised regular-season games, though. I freely admit that most others on here are far more familiar with the guys on the team than I am for this reason (and others).

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
It's sometimes tough to tell from text what someone's tone is. It seemed like you were upset and "Do you even *watch* the Astros play?" in that context seemed a tad disrespectful or accusatory.

If you and I were at a ballgame and I asked that of you, we both would be probably laughing at the time.

Quote:
I certainly don't expect anybody to "fawn over" my comments or questions, just disagree respectfully or sarcastically. I apologize if any of my responses to you seemed disrespectful.

Not necessarily disrespectful, but I did feel you brushed aside the scouting report just a tad too quickly.

Quote:
Anyway, others have pointed out why it wasn't the greatest suggestion, aside from the "who's better" argument: Pena has Boras for an agent, and Lamb is owed $1.3 mil- in January perhaps a trade would've been a realistic option, but probably not now. Any upgrade Pena might present over Lamb would probably not be worth the trouble at this point.

I don't understand fully what you're saying here, but Pena has some problems that are baseball related if the word out on him is a lack of a quick bat.  Losing bat speed is not a good thing.  His options diminish exponentially because of it.  So it seems that Pena could land a major league gig with a team that has nothing to lose in giving him a chance.  As far as the Astros are concerned, they would probably be best to offer Pena (if they're inclined to do so) a minor league, make good gig like the one Kevin Orie and Eric Munson (and JR House) signed.  I most certainly would not agree with giving Pena a major league gig right now and getting rid of Mike Lamb (which is ultimately what you asked my opinion about)

Quote:
By the way, I watch the Astros play whenever I can. Around here, their televised playoff games far outnumber their televised regular-season games, though. I freely admit that most others on here are far more familiar with the guys on the team than I am for this reason (and others).

Cool.  

[JimR]

WFW

thin skins have no place here.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:
WFW

thin skins have no place here.

It sounds like you could use a hug!

[homer]

Quote:

Quote:
WFW

thin skins have no place here.

It sounds like you could use a hug!

Peter Gibbons: When you come in on Monday and you're not feeling real well, does anyone ever say to you, "Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays?"
Lawrence: Shit, no man. I believe you'd get your ass kicked saying something like that, man.