Right. Meaning it's not a hypothetical he conjured himself. Otherwise he wouldn't be asking for Charlie if "he heard about this trade." That would be like me hypothetically proposing we trade Luther Head for Vince Carter and then asking Clutch if he had heard about it and what the chances were.
wait...did you actually hear it? i think steve is saying he actually heard it and it isn't how you imply it was. but i could be wrong...because that happens sometimes.
lol, im so confused. i didn't hear it myself. what i'm saying is, if the guy that called in used the word 'heard', as said in Steve's post, that would imply it's actually a rumor as opposed to the guy's own speculation. I just want us to get Peavy. God Damn.
Link to CP's podcast: http://www.sports790.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=pallilo.xml Check out the third one down (Tuesday, November 25, 2008 Hour 3), "More BCS talk this hour as well as an interesting trade possibility on the Astros' table. It would involve moving Hunter Pence, however."
Are you going to tell us what it was or do we have to listen to the whole thing? EDIT: Nevermind. It was just some guy saying he heard that we're trading Valverde and Wigginton to the Indians for 3 pitching prospects and their big 3rd base prospect...then turning the pitching prospects and Pence to the Padres for Peavey.
If we can get Peavy for essentially Wigginton, Valverde and Pence, I think the Astros have to pull the trigger, especially because of the favorability of Peavy's contract. The downside is obvious though: We lose our starting 3rd baseman, starting RFer and our closer. Other organizations the Padres were interested in dealing with would have been dealing mostly farm players and been able to keep whatever they have in the majors intact so that the addition of Peavy would be a total gain for their major league team. Since the Astros don't have that luxury, they would have to create multiple new holes on their major league team in order to land him. The positive gain in Peavy would be offset to some extent by all those new holes. One way or the other, having the worst farm system in baseball makes this deal either impossible (Padres won't deal with us straight up) or costly (losing 3 key players in order to get what the Padres want). It's just simply hard to make these kinds of trades when your organization has no depth. There is a reasonable argument for not making this hypothetical deal even if it does get put on the table. Again, I would do it but I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't really pay off until 2 or 3 years from now, once Tejada's contract expires and we can find ways to fill the voids in RF and at 3B, SS, C as well as find a new closer. I think we'd be able to live with Oswalt, Peavy, Wandy and whoever else in the starting rotation.
I wonder how close Brian Bogusevic is to making the majors?!? Failing that, I'm sure we can pick up a fourth OF somewhere who can fill-in in RF to platoon with Erstad until reinforcements can arrive.... Bourne - CF Matsui/Sutton - 2B Berkman - 1B Lee - LF Tejada - SS Marte - 3B Bogusevic - RF FA/Quintero/Towles - C Oswalt Peavy Wolf Rodriguez Moehler I think that's a good enough starting/everyday lineup and a quality starting rotation to get us to the end of Tejada's contract.
i think both wigginton and pence are just "guys" - easily replacable average baseball players. you'll never regret trading them to get a 27-year old cy young award winner. valverde would be the biggest loss, far and away. i'm hoping they have a plan b in mind.
95% of Houston is under the delusion that Hunter Pence is an irreplaceable, blue-chip super-stud on the cusp of breaking out, when in reality he's pretty average for a corner-outfielder. That's why you see any reaction at all against a deal which I'm shocked the Padres would even consider to begin with.
people think that because the astros havent produced major league talent in awhile. Berkman is the last position player produced by the astros that is still on the team. thats what 7 or so years between producing solid position players.
Astros back off on Wolf deal - Economic woes in nation drive team's decision http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/6136976.html
One must wonder if the Astros have something bigger on the front burner that would make signing Wolf infeasible from a payroll perspective.
The team goes from Wolf being their #1 priority with a strong offer to backing off on that. Something is up. It is the only thing that makes sense. The payroll and economic concerns have not materially changed over the course of the last week or two.
what you're saying makes complete sense..and is entirely possible...but i refuse to get my hopes up for it!!! and there could be other explanations...like they've become aware that wolf really isn't interested in sticking around in houston, so they don't wanna waste any more time. all i want for christmas is jake peavy.
i'm with you. it seems like every time we try too hard to connect the dots and make inferences, it ends up that it was actually what the club claimed it to be.
