Master Index of Archived Threads


Today's Roster Gymnastics

Johnny Dickshot Aug 23 2005 10:34 AM

How the hell will the Mets fit in Steve Trachsel? According to the Snooze, Hamulack made the trip to AZ and had a uni ready, but was sent home -- perhaps because Willie had a change of heart regarding Jacobs. They need to make room on the 40 for Traxxx: Can they move Cameron to the 60-day DL for this (that officially kills his season, which was a longshot to begin with)... or do they trade Trax? Or trade somebody else? (In mofoese: Tom Glavine trade value: ++++++++++) DFA Graves? It's all pretty mysterious.

ScarletKnight41 Aug 23 2005 10:37 AM

According to [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/transactions]ESPN's MLB Transactions Page[/url], the Mets brought up thick legged Heath Bell.

metirish Aug 23 2005 10:39 AM

bell replaced Koo I think, but in order to activate Traschel a player has to go, I really can't see the Mets trading hm, what team would take a guy coming off back surgery?

Elster88 Aug 23 2005 11:11 AM

Not the Mets, that's for sure. See, Guerrero, V. (No, I will not get over it until every Met fan who told me his back made him a question mark admits they were wrong.)

willpie Aug 23 2005 11:49 AM

Elster88 wrote: Not the Mets, that's for sure. See, Guerrero, V. (No, I will not get over it until every Met fan who told me his back made him a question mark admits they were wrong.) I don't know if I said it to you, but I thought it made him a question mark. I was wrong.

seawolf17 Aug 23 2005 11:53 AM

Yeah, I'll admit I thought it made him a question mark, although I wasn't a CPFer at the time. I saw visions of late-career Larry Bird lying on the floor near the bench.

Yancy Street Gang Aug 23 2005 11:54 AM

Of course it was a question mark. He's proven that he's healthy, but that doesn't mean it wasn't valid to wonder whether or not he was healthy. Just because the answer was yes, it doesn't mean that there wasn't a question.

SwitchHitter Aug 23 2005 12:00 PM

Well, I thought the answer to the question was "no". But I'm not a Mets fan so it probably doesn't count.

metsmarathon Aug 23 2005 12:33 PM

of course, y'all know that when the next big free agent with a question mark hanging around his neck comes along, and we sign him, the answer to that question will prolly turn out to be an emphatic no.

sharpie Aug 23 2005 12:49 PM

Of course at the time we were still suffering from our Mo Vaughn hangover.

Nymr83 Aug 23 2005 05:17 PM

Guerrero WAS a big risk due to his back. The risk has payed off for Anaheim. Not every wise decision turns out well and not every unwise one turns out poorly.

Elster88 Aug 24 2005 09:30 AM

Nymr83 wrote: Guerrero WAS a big risk due to his back. The risk has payed off for Anaheim. Not every wise decision turns out well and not every unwise one turns out poorly. Sigh. Maybe there was a risk. But a BIG risk? Not at all, especially when compared to the potential rewards. When you have the chance to get a guy who is one of the best in the league on the cheap, you do so, and offer to throw in complimentary surgery. Just look at how much we paid for our current center fielder, a lifetime .280 hitter.