Author Topic: Astros trade for Jennings (Read 27315 times)

schlumburger04 · « **on:** December 12, 2006, 05:48:11 pm »

The Link

hirsh straight up for jennings should of been enough

Froback · « **Reply #1 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:50:47 pm »

ok, so that would lead to the who is Miguel Asencio question.

ETA: Seems he was a KC pitcher then had Tommy John type surgery. Nothing special to see here... maybe a long reliver role in his future???

Andyzipp · « **Reply #2 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:51:49 pm »

Quote:

ok, so that would lead to the who is Miguel Asencio question.

I think he used to go by the name Eny Cabrera...

Froback · « **Reply #6 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:57:16 pm »

OK, Rotation is now something like this:

Oswalt
Jennings
Williams
Wandy
Nieve

Does that sound right?

Bench · « **Reply #7 on:** December 12, 2006, 05:57:59 pm »

It definately opens up a lot of questions.

Burke and Lane in center?

Two of Albers/Sampson/Wandy to round out the rotation?

Froback · « **Reply #10 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:01:56 pm »

Asencio was a starter before... and really didn't pitch much last year. I guess he is still comming back from Tommy John, so he is a wild card, but even before the surgery he didn't seem to be anything special.

I figure he will get a look-see at the #5 spot.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #13 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:16:47 pm »

This is more than we gave up for Randy Johnson. Wow.

No? in Austin · « **Reply #16 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:23:59 pm »

Nothing on the official site and even in the Chron. What gives?

littlevisigoth · « **Reply #19 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:26:47 pm »

790 says press conference with "big announcement" at 4:30 and reporting the details of the trade as they are outlined in the Fox Sports article. not that that explains why the Chron hasn't picked up on it. the official site won't put anything up until the press conference, of course.

Russ99 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:27:52 pm »

After the Chron got burned on the premature Garland announcment, I can understand them now waiting on official word.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #26 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:31:11 pm »

Doesn't look like conf. is on tv - are they usually and where would it be?

Bench · « **Reply #27 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:31:15 pm »

It's on live, now on Astros.com.

No? in Austin · « **Reply #28 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:31:26 pm »

The press conference may be to announce the signing of Jeff Bagwell to a personal services contract as well. Because there is nothing on the main site nor the Chron.

Strange.

BudGirl · « **Reply #29 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:31:28 pm »

on the astros site now.

MusicMan · « **Reply #30 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:32:11 pm »

This does not sit well with me at all.

BudGirl · « **Reply #33 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:36:02 pm »

no chance to talk extension yet.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #37 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:40:13 pm »

It's def. the deal as reported by Rosenthal.

Froback · « **Reply #38 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:40:45 pm »

Listening to press conference

Comments From Tim:
Asencio - bullpen bound
Burke to play everyday (so I guess that answers CF)
Lane to play more
Pence was mentioned as part of the future OF spots

Comments from Drayton:
From Baylor (Jennings)
Jennings is a good hitter

Response to questions:
Still things out there they are looking at, but nothing is making them feel motivated to do anything yet.
Thinks the team is better offensively with Burke playing CF over Wily.

Hard to hear some of the questions, so not sure if the first question was about extension or not. If it was, then they have not talked about it... but then like I said, I couldn't hear the first question, just the response.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #45 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:49:03 pm »

Maybe I'm out of it, but who are you projecting as the number 4?

Bench · « **Reply #48 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:51:38 pm »

Pup was noticeably quiet about Hirsh, only discussing him in the questioning portion of the conference saying only , "yeah, he is a good prospect." Maybe the organization was a lot more down on Hirsh that we imagined.

Alkie · « **Reply #49 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:52:14 pm »

Man, I'm just SURE I'm wrong about this, but I'm not seeing where Jennings was THAT big of an upgrade over Hirsh.

After all the bullshit posturing the last 2 years about Hirsh being UNTRADABLE....for Jennings? Really? Jason Jennings??

the KEG · « **Reply #50 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:54:22 pm »

I wonder how much the pitchers that still remain will be missing Willy's defense in center. He was still improving. There sure is a hell of a lot of potential upside for the Rockies in this deal.

toddthebod · « **Reply #51 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:55:12 pm »

Well, this deal certainly gives the Astros some additional payroll flexibility. Combined, Asencio and Jennings are getting $6 million for next season.

I expect a very good season from Jennings as he heads towards free agency. And I am really hoping the Astros can sign Jennings to a long-term contract.

I think that this was a very expensive deal for the Astros, although I have to say that neither Buchholtz nor Hirsch impressed me in their outings last season.

I am also going to miss Willy T. I would like to see the Astros go after Rocco but it doesn't appear that the Astros would have the pitching that the Rays are looking for. I am curious to see Pence in centerfield. The reports out of Arizona about his defense were encouraging.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #53 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:55:36 pm »

Jennings has to be as good as Pettitte at his best to make this deal worthwile, imo. Scary, scary, scary.

Alkie · « **Reply #54 on:** December 12, 2006, 06:56:26 pm »

I'm trying to step back as an Astros fan here and look at the trade from both sides.

I really hate to say it, and it may just be that I'm more familiar with the Astros who we lost than the Rockies we got, but it sure seems like we got reemed big time in this one.

Alkie · « **Reply #63 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:03:55 pm »

Last year, Jason Jennings was in the Top 10 in the NL in two categories:

Losses
Most walks

The losses are a function of the run support and his team. The walks? From our new #2? For a guy that only strikes out about 6 guys per 9 IP? We've been had, boys.

DVauthrin · « **Reply #66 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:06:31 pm »

Jennings worries me somewhat, but scouts in the astros org must have seen enough to suggest he has number 2 type ability out of coors field.

Like I discussed with you in a past thread, I want Huff back and to trade Ensberg. If Ensberg is on the team in april, i'll be stunned. However, one thought did occur to me. If huff costs 8-9 mil, do the Astros go that route, or do they use that money on a FA SP like suppan, because of a few questions at 4/5 starter.

I still think the jennings deal means huff returns.

Also, could a big reason why the club may not have been so upset about Hirsh was his attitude when called up? If I remember right, some vets had to put him in his place about not doing an interview after a shellacking and that may not have been the only instance.

Bob Sakamano · « **Reply #69 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:11:33 pm »

I don't think you'll find anyone in the world who considers Buchholz anywhere close to an A level pitching prospect.

For what it's worth, Jennings was the 11th ranked VORP pitcher in all of baseball last season. Yes, it's just one season. But, the fact that his peripherals were good is encouraging because it appears this was more than being lucky (i.e. a lot of balls hit right at a fielder). Instead, his stuff became more effective.

Doesn't mean it's going to last, but it's a good sign.

The Link

DVauthrin · « **Reply #73 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:17:50 pm »

I don't think the extension will be a hard sell. Jennings played at baylor and I don't see him trying to break the bank.

What this tells me is the astros soured on hirsh big time, for whatever reason, or they really thought jennings would step up outside coors field. Taylor was nice in stretches, but inconsistent. Buchholz doesn't bother me in the deal. The key is the extension, and what hirsh does, as far this trade goes.

Btw VORP=Value over replacement player. Meaning jennings by this "stat" was the 11th most valuable pitcher in MLB in 2006.

JimR · « **Reply #78 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:46:38 pm »

bullshit

JaneDoe · « **Reply #79 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:49:30 pm »

Jim, what is your opinion/evaluation of the trade? Who does Jennings compare to?

JimR · « **Reply #80 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:50:46 pm »

you're dramatic without even trying, and it usually is the end of the world approaching. not this time either. chill.

maybe you were in love with Hirsh like Schumstupid is. i was not. Taveras is who i did not want to trade.

JimR · « **Reply #82 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:55:39 pm »

that's just crazy. Randy Johnson was the premier pitcher in MLB.

JaneDoe · « **Reply #83 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:58:39 pm »

Maybe I am crazy, but I felt like it was too much to give up for a 1/2 season rental.

JimR · « **Reply #84 on:** December 12, 2006, 07:59:37 pm »

Hirsh is NOT all that! Jennings is a big upgrade. Hirsh still is a prospect who does not throw all that hard. again, i hate to lose Willy more than Hirsh.

jaklewein · « **Reply #86 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:01:51 pm »

Wow...took a long time to read threw all the posts. My take: I'm fine with the trade. The Astros had two ways to approach this season after Andy left...1) sell the farm to make the team as competitive as possible now...or 2) fill in the holes with what they had and maybe a marginal FAgent and then play wait and see. At that point maybe guys like Hirsh and Buch step it up and you'd try to improve the team at the deadline...or maybe you just wait till '08 to add a couple vets and make a run.

I was hoping for the latter...but I have to hand it to Drayton and Pupura. Some have already called this a move of desperation...I'm going to look at it as a move built on confidence...a move that took balls. I don't think this is the end...there's more to the Pup's grand plan than just this. I feel confident he'll add a least one more impact player. Hopefully a bat (i.e. Huff) or another SP (i.e. Suppan)...heck, maybe both. Again this move was balls-y. I don't think the Pup can stop here.

Last note...only thing that really does rub me the wrong way about this deal...I want to know what kind of bat we could've got with this haul last July for the stretch run? If the Stros would've added a bat like Lee last year around that time...you'd of had to of liked their chances. Not at the playoffs...but at the whole fuck'n thing.

Nate in IA · « **Reply #91 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:07:41 pm »

I like this trade. Like JimR, I hate to see Willy go but if we've got some speed ready to come up, I'm okay with it. I really like Jason Jennings as a pitcher. I think he knows what he's doing and executes really well. It was almost freaky last year how well Jeff Francis was supported and Jason Jennings was not. Just one of those weird things you notice during a year. Still, I think Jason Jennings will be a great addition to the rotation. It may take him a little bit to re-adjust to sea level conditions but I think we'll all be satisfied with his performance next year.

Now to get a serviceable 3/4. I'll enjoy watching the Astros next year.

schlumburger04 · « **Reply #92 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:10:31 pm »

hirsh is our top prospect, buchholz used to be our top prospect and willy is really really fast. all things teams might conider valuable that i really dont

5-6 years of hirsh should of been enough to get 1 year of jennings. thats a very fair deal

edit: replacing willy with burke will improve the team also, just another bonus

cougar · « **Reply #93 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:14:51 pm »

Well, I'm not as avid a MLB fan as a lot of people on the board, so I don't know a whole lot about Jennings. I do know that he was a sinker ball pitcher throwing at a park that is not kind to sinker ball pitchers. Throwing at sea level should help his primary pitch quite a bit, leading to a more effective pitcher.

I wasn't too high of Taylor and marginally higher on Hirsch, but I'm not jumping up and down at the thought of trading Willy. I can see why the Rockies wanted him (someone has to patrol the cavernesque center field out there) and I suppose the Astros wanted a spot open for whichever of Burke and Lane has the better spring. Then, when Bidge has gone off to Bermuda with Bagwell, Burke can go over to 2nd and Lane or Pence can take over CF on a full time basis (barring a trade for a Baldelli or Wells type player). Assuming Jennings signs an extension, I suppose I'll fall on the "cautiously optimistic" side of the fence.

Duder · « **Reply #94 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:16:40 pm »

In my opinion it hurts most to lose Taveras, especially since Lee and Scott will probably be manning the outfeild corners next year.

Sleepy · « **Reply #97 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:27:29 pm »

If he gets an extension, I have some optimism. I followed Jennings fairly closely last year (fantasy team and all that crap), and I really liked watching him. He had games where he was dominant. Despite walking too many, he kept the ball in the park (only four HRs in the second half). He usually pitched at least 6 innings, and he's headed into his prime.

I'd be much happier with Clemens as the #2, though....

DVauthrin · « **Reply #101 on:** December 12, 2006, 08:59:21 pm »

Another plus is you have two pitchers that can more than handle the bat in williams/jennings. Not saying it's a big deal, but it's a nice luxury to have.

If they can resign huff and trade ensberg for a 4th starter, I'd be happy with this offseason. I think both of those should be doable.

schlumburger04 · « **Reply #102 on:** December 12, 2006, 09:12:45 pm »

The Link

"Jennings becomes Houston's No. 2 starter behind Roy Oswalt, joined in the rotation by Wandy Rodriguez."

what an odd thing to say

schlumburger04 · « **Reply #104 on:** December 12, 2006, 09:24:00 pm »

wandy had the same number of wins that jennings had this past year

SeanBergmanRules · « **Reply #112 on:** December 12, 2006, 09:48:44 pm »

The problem is Jennings was a better pitcher, ERA-wise, at Coors last year than he was on the road. In the past, Coors has inflated his ERA, but not by much.
I don't know how valid of a concern this is, but theres also the possibility that attempting to adjust to Coors has screwed with his mechanics a bit.

Alkie · « **Reply #115 on:** December 12, 2006, 10:47:05 pm »

Hirsh Named Top Astros Prospect on 11/30/2006

Hirsh top Astro prospect for '06.

Buchholz top Astro prospect for '04.

All we read all year was how Hirsh was an untouchable super-stud starter of the future. He wasn't available for anyone at the deadline. I'll grant you Buchholz wasn't on anyone's A-list at this point in his career, but you can't tell me that Jason Hirsh, as recently as a week ago, wasn't considered the Astros best pitching prospect.

In any case, what we think is irrelevant as usual; but it sure seems like we gave up too much for too little. Obviously, if we could have done better, TP would have done that; so I suppose I shouldn't be too disappointed. I just wish they'd have gotten something more than a year of Jennings. Just doesn't seem like we got perceived-value for perceived-value.

jaklewein · « **Reply #116 on:** December 12, 2006, 11:00:17 pm »

Obviously, if we could have done better, TP would have done that; so I suppose I shouldn't be too disappointed.

Good point...now move away from the dead horse.

strobum · « **Reply #123 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:47:52 am »

So, for a guy who really doesn't give up a ton of homeruns, does anyone find it troubling that he's given up six in just three career starts at MMPUS?

Also, the whole, "he'll be a much better pitcher outside of Coors" argument doesn't really hold up. For his career, Jennings is 27-34 with a 4.37 ERA on the road.

I'm with Alkie on this one. Let's hope the Astros hold off on that contract extension. They may be happy to part ways after 2007.

ValpoCory · « **Reply #124 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:52:50 am »

I'm excited to go to a good ballclub and a team with playoff aspirations every year," Jennings said during a conference call. "I am looking forward to a new opportunity with a new team. It's almost like a breath of fresh air...."

Sorry, I know it's a cheap shot, but you don't often hear someone going from Denver, Colorado to Houston call it "a breath of fresh air".

VirtualBob · « **Reply #129 on:** December 13, 2006, 01:15:03 am »

Brandon Duckworthless is available ... How would he be as a #3?

Link to MLB.com transactions

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #130 on:** December 13, 2006, 01:17:23 am »

Allow me to play devil in a blue dress for a second-

I really don't like this trade because :

1. The Astros now have a weak defensive outfield. Lane doesn't have the range, Burke doesn't know how to play outfield well enough. Lee, Scott, and Burke might be the worst collection of outfield arms in the National League. I haven't seen Pence, but everything I've read says that he's a left fielder. Great defense up the middle was a huge part of the Astros' runs in '04 and '05.

2. Hirsch looked pretty good. He could develop into a middle-of-the-rotation innings-eater just like Jennings. Although it might be a bit tough pitching at Coors as a fly-ball type.

3. Only one year of Jennings. He's going to be a free agent for the first time, and with salaries the way they are, he's going to want to test the market. Yet the Astros lose a starting CF, a top flight pitching prospect and another possible prospect, for one year?

Of course, it's impossible to fully judge this deal, and even this off season, for some time to come. Hopefully there's a deal out there for a good defensive CF, this team badly needs one.

Rammer33 · « **Reply #136 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:02:47 am »

I think Jennings is going to be a solid number 2; actually I think as highly of Jennings as I do Garland ? obviously his numbers are skewed by coors but I tend to think you can?t just look at home/road splits because I think pitchers tend to adjust for coors and the adverse affect bleeds in to their road performances as well (although to a lesser degree obviously) ? any way my two cents - I think Jennings will outshine many pitchers next season with better reputations now that he is out from the handicapping effect of coors field and the team that played in it ?

As for what the stros lost I have never been high on Willy and thought to a degree he was more show than results (ie exciting player whose style made it easy to overlook his offensive productivity or lack of) ? I didn?t really think Taylor B would ever get there ? but admittedly I can?t say I have watched Hirsh enough to have an educated opinion (so I?ll defer to others)? although what I did see oddly enough he reminded me of Elarton ?

I think the stros gave up some potential, sure, but nothing IMO they couldn't part with and I am not really sure I see it coming back to bite them ...

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #137 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:42:16 am »

Jennings, 2004-2006:

Split   ERA   H/9  BB/9  HR/9  SO/9
-----------------------------------
Home   4.93  10.6   4.8  1.03   5.5
Road   4.50   8.9   3.5  0.83   6.3

Jennings, 2006:

Split   ERA   H/9  BB/9  HR/9  SO/9
-----------------------------------
Home   3.56   8.8   4.0  0.80   5.8
Road   3.97   8.7   3.2  0.65   6.2

In 2004, the Rockies and their opponents scored 41 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere, and in 2005 they scored 29 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere. That changed drastically in 2006, when they scored just 15 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere. Coors Field used to play something like the Moon. Last season, it played more like Cincinnati, Kansas City or Phoenix.

Jose Cruz III · « **Reply #139 on:** December 13, 2006, 10:09:05 am »

And twice the ERA. Oh the horror.

Tralfaz · « **Reply #141 on:** December 13, 2006, 10:39:17 am »

Hate to see Willy go, but don't forget, his agent is satan so maybe that played into this a little.

Buchholz and Hirsh got the worst of this deal, imo.

I like Albers as much as either though. In what I've seen of him, he looks very tough mentally and physically. He throws hard but hits the wall a little to quick. Hopefully his stamina will be addressed and improved this year.

Now, what about the line up. Specifically, the #2 and #6 spots. Assuming Biggio is your lead off hitter and Ensberg is the OD 3B, does Garner bat Burke #2 and Ensberg #6 (using Burke for speed and hope for '05 Ensberg)or the other way around (giving Ensberg the chance to get paid for walks and Burke for pop)?

JimR · « **Reply #142 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:05:49 am »

Burke at the top of the order

sign Huff today

trade Ensberg

...since you asked....

Froback · « **Reply #143 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:27:41 am »

Seen alot of people talking about trading Ensberg in this thread, but the question keeps jumping in my mind, "For what?"

Not that the team doesn't have needs, but the Astros just traded away 3 of thier big bargaining chips in Taveras, Hirsh and Buchholz... I don't see Ensberg landing a good pitching all by himself (maybe I am wrong)... The hopes I had was that Ensberg being packaged with someone else to land the piece the team needs, now I am not sure they have that 2nd piece anymore to package with him.

I am not in the camp to trade Ensberg just to trade him, even though I think Huff on the team makes it better.

BTW, I agree Jennings has alot to prove to make this deal seem balanced. Like Hirsh or not, he was "supposedly" the Astros top pitching prospect and Taveras was the 2 year starting CFer. Jennings improves the team, but I am not sure he improves it enough for this trade. But as someone pointed out, Nobody cares what I think.

JimR · « **Reply #144 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:30:30 am »

apparently the Astros do not agree with your assessment of Hirsh. that is the only opinion that matters.

Nate in IA · « **Reply #145 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:31:08 am »

Jennings, 2004-2006:

Split ERA H/9 BB/9 HR/9 SO/9
-----------------------------------
Home 4.93 10.6 4.8 1.03 5.5
Road 4.50 8.9 3.5 0.83 6.3

Jennings, 2006:
Split ERA H/9 BB/9 HR/9 SO/9
-----------------------------------
Home 3.56 8.8 4.0 0.80 5.8
Road 3.97 8.7 3.2 0.65 6.2

In 2004, the Rockies and their opponents scored 41 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere, and in 2005 they scored 29 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere. That changed drastically in 2006, when they scored just 15 percent more runs at Coors Field than elsewhere. Coors Field used to play something like the Moon. Last season, it played more like Cincinnati, Kansas City or Phoenix.

Those 2006 numbers look awfully weird. H/9, BB/9, and HR/9 all went down and the S0/9 went up. Yet his ERA is .41 higher? Something doesn't compute for me (though I'm nowhere close to a stat freak).

Foghorn · « **Reply #147 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:35:00 am »

Hirsch--looks like one of those guys who doesn't do any one thing great, but does everything good. Not sure how that translates to the major league level. I see his potential as that of an innings eater.

Buchholz--major league curve, had 2 or 3 great starts. I guess the injury issue is out there if it is true the White Sox backed away from the Garland trade beacuse of it. More upside than Hirsch, but health is a question mark.

Willie T--hits for a pretty good average, thanks to his incredible speed. Doesn't walk much. Seems overmatched at the plate on a consistant basis. Above average on the bases, but I never really think of him as a heady base runner. "Feets don't fail me now" seems to apply to him as well. Great defense though.

All in all, I'll miss Willie's defense and the upside of Buchholz. But thats it.

Tralfaz · « **Reply #148 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:39:05 am »

I know little of the Rockies rotation, was Jennings considered the Rockies ace or #2?

JimR · « **Reply #155 on:** December 13, 2006, 11:57:05 am »

publications do not know shit. they do not see games. BA and BP are especially laughable.

JimR · « **Reply #157 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:16:52 pm »

Jimerson will cut down on his Ks about the time hell freezes over. he is not an option, imo, despite his raw skills.

Bruntlett is an infielder and a utility guy. he is not an every day OFer. of course, i do not think Burke is either, but as DKR once said: "Old Ugly is better than old Nothing."

(i realize that by quoting Royal, i am inviting 50 posts from HH describing how DKR was not worth a shit as a coach.)

S.P. Rodriguez · « **Reply #159 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:22:36 pm »

What about Mike Rodriguez from RR? Someone gave a pretty solid breakdown on his performance. He could provide something similar to Taveras, no?

So far I like the upgrades to the offense but this team has a serious lack of speed. Outside of Burke and Everett, maybe Biggio, there is no one who really threatens to go 1st to 3rd or 2nd to home on anything other that a well hit ball.

JimR · « **Reply #160 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:22:42 pm »

i do not think that. why do you?

Tralfaz · « **Reply #161 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:25:42 pm »

Bruntlett keeps the bench strong and gives Garner flexibility in late inning situations and spot starts. He's perfect in that role.

Froback · « **Reply #164 on:** December 13, 2006, 12:36:16 pm »

I think this rotation has the potential to be sneaky good. Kind of like the Co-ards a few years back when you kept looking at them going "They are not this good!" yet they kept winning.

One word of warning on Jennings though, from what I can tell he looks like a slow starter, ie April stats are poor compared to later months.

JimR · « **Reply #173 on:** December 13, 2006, 02:57:55 pm »

Chen Feng Chin

i rest my case.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #176 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:14:04 pm »

Is that what it means? You are a brilliant statistical analyst.

JimR · « **Reply #179 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:49:27 pm »

Mr. CFC was BA's #1 prospect for LA for the 2000 season. i sat and watch AA pitchers dominate him with fastballs. he was nearly helpless. that's when i learned about BA.

BizidyDizidy · « **Reply #182 on:** December 13, 2006, 05:40:12 pm »

Jennings pitched 212 innings last year - lets say 106 home and 106 away. A change of .5 in ERA over 106 innings is a difference of ~6 runs. That's what you're wringing your hands over?

Nate in IA · « **Reply #183 on:** December 13, 2006, 05:41:46 pm »

The Rockies were/are a very young team and last year they played like it sometimes. I only got to see them at home (mostly watched the Astros on TV) but I distinctly remember a game earlier in the season where Garrett Atkins made 2 or 3 errors at the hot corner. I don't remember who was pitching that day but that was sort of the Rockies last year. Great one day, fairly horrible the next.

I'm thinking if Noe is correct and that split can be attributed to erratic defense, Jason is going to enjoy having Adam Everett behind him. It remains to be seen if he's going to enjoy having the center fielder behind him but if he remains the ground ball pitcher he has been, that won't matter that much.

DVauthrin · « **Reply #186 on:** December 13, 2006, 06:54:50 pm »

Jason Jennings meet Adam Everett. Adam Everett meet Jason Jennings. This should be the start of a beautiful friendship. And jennings might want to lavish everett with gifts to keep his gold glove caliber(should have won last year at minimum) shortstop happy.

Heck I bet Everett gets a lot of stuff from Astro pitchers for making ridiculous and routine plays behind them on a nightly basis. He is the best defensive shortstop in baseball as far as i'm concerned, and pitchers love pitching with him on their team.

JimR · « **Reply #192 on:** December 14, 2006, 10:55:05 am »

Foghorn · « **Reply #197 on:** December 14, 2006, 12:50:42 pm »

I always liked what Rawnsley had to say. He was a very good guest on the sports talk shows.

Jacksonian · « **Reply #219 on:** December 14, 2006, 05:52:38 pm »

I will not be denied.

das · « **Reply #220 on:** December 14, 2006, 06:02:28 pm »

I still use "15% off my sammich, that's no deal." in my casual conversation. I don't know what's funnier, me giggling at myself or the quizical looks from the other person.

Author Topic: Astros trade for Jennings (Read 27315 times)

Andyzipp

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin

No? in Austin