01-01-2009, 03:37 PM
<!--quoteo(post=8127:date=Jan 1 2009, 01:33 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Jan 1 2009, 01:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8120:date=Jan 1 2009, 01:24 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 1 2009, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8117:date=Jan 1 2009, 01:19 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Jan 1 2009, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8113:date=Jan 1 2009, 01:12 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 1 2009, 01:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8106:date=Jan 1 2009, 12:51 PM:name=Runnys)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runnys @ Jan 1 2009, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->That is assuming we go after Peavy.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we land Peavy, I'm fine with the DeRosa trade. But unless Hendry already has the pieces in place and the trade already outlined and agreed on, then this was an idiotic move and moving DeRosa made us a weaker team.
If this wasn't laying the groundwork for a Peavy deal, then it was a rebuilding move. And I haven't seen any evidence that we're rebuilding in 2009.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We're not rebuilding anytime soon.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then why did Hendry trade DeRosa for prospects? It has to be for pieces for another trade if we aren't rebuilding.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We're not "rebuilding". The core's still here for at least a couple more years, and Soto and Marmol for example a lot longer. You're lying to yourself if you think Hendry's really not trying to make the team better. There's still 2 months to go in the offseason, and he claims we'll have a better team on the field this year than last year. After the moves he's made the last couple years I'm forced to believe him and think this means he has a couple big moves in the plans.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope you're right. I hope the DeRosa deal is just a sliver of the bigger picture.
If we land Peavy, I'm fine with the DeRosa trade. But unless Hendry already has the pieces in place and the trade already outlined and agreed on, then this was an idiotic move and moving DeRosa made us a weaker team.
If this wasn't laying the groundwork for a Peavy deal, then it was a rebuilding move. And I haven't seen any evidence that we're rebuilding in 2009.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We're not rebuilding anytime soon.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then why did Hendry trade DeRosa for prospects? It has to be for pieces for another trade if we aren't rebuilding.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We're not "rebuilding". The core's still here for at least a couple more years, and Soto and Marmol for example a lot longer. You're lying to yourself if you think Hendry's really not trying to make the team better. There's still 2 months to go in the offseason, and he claims we'll have a better team on the field this year than last year. After the moves he's made the last couple years I'm forced to believe him and think this means he has a couple big moves in the plans.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope you're right. I hope the DeRosa deal is just a sliver of the bigger picture.