Master Index of Archived Threads


Leaky Astros

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 03 2014 08:56 AM

I just came across for the first time this from a reference in Heyman's latest piece on Alderson's nonanswers on the Mets' trade posture. Apparently the Astros' internal GM communications have been (continue to be?) anonymously hacked and published. Here's one:[url]http://anonbin.com/2412624498 in which "Depo" discusses a Muffy-for-Jonathan Villar deal last winter and John Ricco says that increased flexibility is allowing Mets to make incremental improvements. Fascinating and awful.

batmagadanleadoff Jul 03 2014 09:05 AM Re: Leaky Astros

I thought this thread was gonna be about when the Astros got rained out in the Astrodome. That Murphy piece is from last week. Here it is in more readable style. http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/p ... ith-astros I wasn't surprised to read that piece. I figger that Murph's gonna be history soon enough (/congratulating myself) being that he's getting closer to commanding free agent money and the Mets are broke. If the Mets ain't gonna, or can't re-sign him, they should get a body in return while they can, right?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 03 2014 09:09 AM Re: Leaky Astros

Oh for sure I think they'll deal Muffy, they'd be fools not to explore it. But who the hell is stealing their plans and for what purpose?

Edgy MD Jul 03 2014 09:59 AM Re: Leaky Astros

How about a leak like this coming out, embarrassing the whole league, and somehow, someway, it doesn't appear to be the fault of anybody in the Mets' organization? I mean, at least, not yet.

Frayed Knot Jul 03 2014 10:03 AM Re: Leaky Astros

Yeah, this leak leaked a couple days ago so folks have had a chance to go through a bunch of it. And the early word is that it's pretty embarrassing to the Astros, not just for the fact that it leaked in the first place but that they apparently kept notes on everything which included their wishes for every trade they considered some of which were pretty ridiculous: like do you think we could get Trout for ______, or Buster Posey for _______, etc.

Ashie62 Jul 03 2014 08:08 PM Re: Leaky Astros

At least the Astros know how to rebuild...

Edgy MD Jul 03 2014 08:25 PM Re: Leaky Astros

Implication being that the Mets' management does not? I think the proof of that will be in the pudding.

Ashie62 Jul 03 2014 09:32 PM Re: Leaky Astros

Yes and it already is....

Benjamin Grimm Jul 04 2014 05:04 AM Re: Leaky Astros

It's been proven that the Astros (36-51, .414) are better at rebuilding than the Mets (37-48, .435)? Seems pretty inconclusive to me at this point.

Frayed Knot Jul 04 2014 06:04 AM Re: Leaky Astros

I guess after averaging 108 losses over the last three years, a season that's on pace for only 95 qualifies as progress ... of a sort. That said, Houston is getting praise in some circles for breaking down their entire team and starting over (although that was a strategy that had more to with the previous owner looking to sell the team than about any baseball-inspired ingenuity) AND they've brought up a couple of good young players recently and look to be a much better team by the time we see them in the final series of the year than they were when the Yanx met them in the season opening series (although a 15-14 May remains their only winning month so far), AND their farm system is considered stacked to produce more talent in the future (three consecutive 1/1 draft picks helps immensely in that regard). Of course there's also a big gap between talking about what could happen and knowing what will happen, so declaring this whole process to be a success already is a bit of a case of premature jocularity.

Edgy MD Jul 04 2014 11:40 AM Re: Leaky Astros

Ashie62 wrote: Yes and it already is.... Nonsense and nonsense. Come on. Get back into the rowboat. Neither of those statements is supportable.

Ceetar Jul 04 2014 05:59 PM Re: Leaky Astros

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It's been proven that the Astros (36-51, .414) are better at rebuilding than the Mets (37-48, .435)? Seems pretty inconclusive to me at this point. nope, confirmed.