Author Topic: heard a rumor tonight at the ballpark (Read 20607 times)

JimR · « **on:** July 29, 2006, 01:57:01 am »

Lane, Ensberg, Lidge for Tejada

i have no idea of the quality of the ultimate source.

Andyzipp · « **Reply #1 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:06:21 am »

Interesting...because I heard the same thing...with the idea that Tejada plays 3rd.

I'm happy to hold onto Everett if this is true.

astro pete · « **Reply #2 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:08:49 am »

Quote:

Interesting...because I heard the same thing...with the idea that Tejada plays 3rd.

That is the Astros' proposal, or that is the deal that is likely to happen?

Andyzipp · « **Reply #6 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:15:02 am »

My "source" works for the Astros in a undisclosed function...he's right about what he tells me I'd estimate 7 out of every 10 times to be correct.

He hasn't said Tejada is a done deal, or anything like that, but the Astros preference would be to ship off Ensberg, and replace him with Tejada, leaving Everett at short, Berkman at 1st and Huff in Right.

If they find a taker for Wilson, they're willing to let Scott finish out the season in left, knowing that they might be forced to turn to Pence later in the year...or stick Berkman back in left and put Lambchop at 1st...with no bench to speak of.

Supposedly (and big grain of salt time here) Garner is done with Ensberg, Lane and Lidge, although he'd never say that publically.

Edited because I just got back from the game and my brain and fingers aren't speaking to one another due to mistress beer.

Andyzipp · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:16:02 am »

The Orioles can be content to play for next year.

JimR · « **Reply #15 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:44:55 am »

the CBA gives him that right. see Alou, Mo

CDastros · « **Reply #17 on:** July 29, 2006, 10:31:58 am »

Thanks for the info Jim. This deal is to good to be true. I cant believe Baltimore would want 3 struggling players from the Astros.

Alkie · « **Reply #18 on:** July 29, 2006, 10:41:55 am »

They don't.

That's why Tejada is still in orange and black and the three struggling players are still Astros.

juliogotay · « **Reply #19 on:** July 29, 2006, 10:46:01 am »

Baltimore had scouts at the park last nite Chronicle reports.

Alkie · « **Reply #20 on:** July 29, 2006, 10:53:46 am »

That's not surprising. What would surprise me, would be the O's taking Ensberg, Lidge, and Lane for Tejada.

Usually in a deal proposal like that, there's one above-average-player with the two can't-seem-to-figure-it-outs.

In this case, I'm trying to see the downside for the Astros in this trade. If Purpura swings this deal, he's got a little Hun in 'em.

juliogotay · « **Reply #24 on:** July 29, 2006, 01:30:23 pm »

IF this deal goes down there is every possibilty that this is not a bad deal for Baltmore. Would you have made this deal during the off-season when Lidge and Ensberg both had great seasons and Lane looked like he was starting to figure it out?

Suppose Ensberg gets healthy, regains his stroke and Mazzone straightens out Lidge and Tejada demands a trade at years' end.

I'm not saying Houston shouldn't pull the trigger but you never know how things will work out. The above scenario is not far-fetched.

JimR · « **Reply #25 on:** July 29, 2006, 01:38:35 pm »

the Astros offered AE, Lidge and Lane during the off season, and the deal was close to happening when Tejada withdrew his trade demand.

juliogotay · « **Reply #26 on:** July 29, 2006, 01:56:32 pm »

But now the weak-hitting Everett has been substituted in the deal for Ensberg whose production could is much closer to that of Tejada.

JimR · « **Reply #28 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:42:34 pm »

and suppose Craig the Bastard wins the Pulitizer Prize for his previews?

mr. owlook · « **Reply #29 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:51:38 pm »

I've been in Baltimore 4 years now and have been amazed at how badly managed to O's are. I think Angelos is dead set on getting major leaguers in deals like this, so that accounts for Hunter Pence dropping out. That suits me just fine. I say pull the trigger now Purp.

Caveat - I think that the local media here downplays how difficult Tejada has been the last couple years as the team has struggled.

juliogotay · « **Reply #31 on:** July 29, 2006, 02:55:16 pm »

Explain please.

JimR · « **Reply #34 on:** July 29, 2006, 03:45:05 pm »

a win is a win

JimR · « **Reply #38 on:** July 29, 2006, 05:35:19 pm »

every team that is serious about him at the moment will move him to third. he'd better develop some interest soon.

Fredia · « **Reply #40 on:** July 29, 2006, 05:54:16 pm »

not directed to me but does taylor b. last few starts put a damper on his tradiblility

seib22 · « **Reply #43 on:** July 29, 2006, 06:14:15 pm »

none of the current rotation of corner outfielders are former league MVPs either.

das · « **Reply #47 on:** July 29, 2006, 10:39:26 pm »

So, this is what it feels like to be the yankees. McLane has some mighty deep pockets and/or a *serious* desire to win. Rumours in Balmer say potential Angels deal will not fire off and that the O's are leaning Astros. And that they *will* deal. MLB-proven players are the clincher. Angelos has a long history of such.......

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #51 on:** July 29, 2006, 11:27:47 pm »

Jayson Stark reporting that Astros and Rangers are only teams left in the hunt for Tejada. Said Angelos' involvement is the big factor right now.

Navin R Johnson · « **Reply #55 on:** July 29, 2006, 11:37:26 pm »

Assuming Tejada for Lidge, MoBerg and Lane or another minor leaguer.

WT/Burke CF
Biggio 2b
Berkman 1b
Tejada 3b
Huff RF
Wilson LF
Ausmus C
Everett SS

And some days you could play Lamb at 1st, berkman in RF and Huff at 3rd to bolster the offense further. If Berkman gets healthy.

I think that would be a very solid NL offense, one, that if we would have had all season we wouldnt be 6 games below .500. I am not so sure though, that that lineup is good enough to play .650 or .700 ball the rest of the way and make the playoffs. Assuming it take 88-90 wins to get a WC spot.

Especially when you consider the Astros wont have anybody that has ever closed on a regular basis, and only have 2 consistent starters.

If they feel they can keep Tejada for a couple years, and he want demand a trade, then I dont mind parting with the 3 players above, if not, then I dont think it is worth the risk.

Having Tejada and Berkman to build around for the next 5 years though, would be outstanding, regardless of whether we make the playoffs this year or not.

Curly · « **Reply #65 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:10:42 am »

Who the hell said he would bat 8th? Getting AEs bat out of the lineup instead of whomever would be sitting because Tejada would be at 3b is what we are talking about.

Holly · « **Reply #72 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:22:10 am »

Trickle-down offensive improvement... that about sum it up for ya?

Holly · « **Reply #91 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:43:47 am »

Hey, I'm not THAT bad. Seems to me like y'all are arguing based on different assumptions of which position Tejada would be playing... and that has different effects on where Everett (ie: "The 8th hitter") is, in the scheme of things.

Holly · « **Reply #96 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:50:57 am »

Nope, am not.

So, am I wrong in interpreting some of your exasperation about wanting Everett as a starter because he's a better defensive option AND because his name isn't one frequenting the trade rumors around Tejada?

CJM · « **Reply #97 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:52:04 am »

As long as Everett is on the active roster he will be the everyday SS. I guess the "Burke should be SS" posts will start again if there is no trade with Baltimore.

Alkie · « **Reply #98 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:52:12 am »

Ok, look. Pravata is saying that the 7 and 8 place hitters in the lineup are not the reason the team sucks.

You are saying it IS because it allows, for example, the other team to walk our #6 hitter to get to our #7 hitter (an almost automatic out).

The gap we're not bridging here is this:

If we're all in agreement that Brad Ausmus is a way above average catcher, who helps the team win in ways other than hitting, and that AE is a WAY above average SS, who helps the team win in ways other than hitting, the problem isn't other-teams-walking-our-#6-to-get-to-the-free-outs, the problem is that our CURRENT 3,4, and 5 hitters aren't scoring any runs (which IS their job).

Bottom line point here is:

If the 3, 4, and 5 spots are driving in the runs that are being set up for them, the fact that the #6 is being intentionally walked to get to two players that clearly have value on the field to the Astros, is irrelevant.

Because once we take the field again in the next half of the inning, it sure will be nice to have some way above average defense to back up our way above average pitching.

Holly · « **Reply #99 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:53:27 am »

Yuck-o. No thanks. Burke and Biggio as everyday middle infielders is about as Swiss cheese and two-hopper as it gets for this team in a long time.

DVauthrin · « **Reply #101 on:** July 30, 2006, 12:58:42 am »

The problem with the offense is the 4th/5th hitters. Chris Burke batting 3rd on occasion is a much bigger problem than Adam Everett batting 8th. If you want to look at why the offense is what it is, look no further than the struggles of Ensberg/Lane and the mediocrity of Wilson. They were expected to produce a lot, and outside of a hot april for ensberg, have done not enough.

Alkie · « **Reply #105 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:01:47 am »

Fine, fine. We're arguing the same point here, which is:

If the Astros made a huge improvement in the heart of the lineup, regardless of which corner player was replaced, the fact that our #6 guy would be intentionally walked at a Bondsian pace to get to the automatic offensive outs at the bottom of our lineup would be completely irrelevant, because we'd really really enjoy having those fellahs in the field once the outs in our half of the inning are made and we'd have scored the runs exactly where the runs should have been scored in the first place.

That's it.

Alkie · « **Reply #109 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:10:26 am »

Why not?

Because as I can see, the only argument you guys are making is:

The small ding we'd take defensively (overall) would be strongly offset by the small increase in offense by having a better #7 hitter and minutely better #8 hitter. Correct?

Holly · « **Reply #122 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:22:14 am »

Too bad you weren't born a lefty

Gotten started on the next generation yet?

Holly · « **Reply #137 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:49:29 am »

Sweet! Sounds like good news all around

JimR · « **Reply #139 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:51:11 am »

why is this raging debate going on? every team that is trying to get him wants him to play third. what does it matter what folks on the internet think? if he refuses to do that, then i guess how he play SS matters.

Alkie · « **Reply #140 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:52:29 am »

I think it's simply this:

we're ALL just trying to occupy our brains until the news comes in as to which of Abreu, Soriano, and/or Tejada we just traded for.

Curly · « **Reply #142 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:56:50 am »

You left off Willis.

Alkie · « **Reply #143 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:57:46 am »

Is he going to play 3B while Willy pitches?

Duder · « **Reply #147 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:23:08 pm »

The question is:
Is Tejada even an offensive upgrade over a HEALTHY Ensberg?
I don't think so.

JimR · « **Reply #148 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:24:28 pm »

healthy is not the same thing as hitting/productive

JimR · « **Reply #149 on:** July 30, 2006, 01:26:18 pm »

not necessarily true for me.

otterj · « **Reply #152 on:** July 30, 2006, 02:14:59 pm »

AE's offense v. Tejada's offense = much more difference than AE's defense v. Tejada's defense, imo.

Why have the Astros given up on Ensberg so quickly? If the Tejada trade does happen, and he would play SS, the lineup could be pretty potent as:

2B Biggio
LF Huff
1B Berkman
SS Tejada
3B Ensberg
CF P.Wilson
RF L.Scott
C Ausmus

with Lamb/Burke/Taveras spot starting and on the bench.

Even if Tejada would only play 3rd, it'd be a good trade, imo, given the Ensberg concern.

juliogotay · « **Reply #155 on:** July 30, 2006, 03:23:44 pm »

You and I have a different definition for "wishy washy". He seems adamant about not playing 3B and I suspect he can be be distraction if he isn't happy. Reports out of Baltimore indicate he isn't a popular teammate and is often late. That is not an "Astros type player" that Purpura talks about. Huff said he was happy to play wherever needed. He's a great hitter and would add alot to the lineup but I know if he'd be worth the price.

Bottom of the 1st and McLane's on the phone. I never see him on the phone during a game.

juliogotay · « **Reply #158 on:** July 30, 2006, 04:59:18 pm »

Wishy-washy: lacking in strength of character or purpose. Ineffective.

Tejada seems rather strong-willed to me.

Maybe the roids changed him. Or the money. Or playing on bad teams.

Andyzipp · « **Reply #160 on:** July 30, 2006, 06:02:14 pm »

I think he is polarizing, but I think the blustering gets out of hand whenever someone starts the "Everett is not a good shortstop because he can't hit" line of thought.

That's really not the problem.

Savage · « **Reply #162 on:** July 30, 2006, 06:15:07 pm »

No, sadly, surprisingly, the problem this weekend has been the pitching rather than the hitting. Maybe they need to stock up a few more situational guys and another starting pitcher. When they score 7 and 6 runs on Friday and Sunday, respectively, and lose, well, who cares about the hitting? Perhaps Roger needs a 160-pitch limit just to make sure he can finish the ones where his teammates manager to score for him. [i/]

I think what's been most perlpexing about the team this year is that at times the hitting has been ok, at times the bullpen has been good and at times the starting pitching has been great. But all three never seem to be working at the same time - hence the perpetual heartache (or heartburn).

Author Topic: heard a rumor tonight at the ballpark (Read 20607 times)

Andyzipp

pravata

pravata

Andyzipp

Andyzipp

pravata

strosrays

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata

pravata