Jump to content

GM meetings a success per AM


Belkast

Recommended Posts

SG I believe has this one right. Ponson was still thought to be a developing pitcher and many thought AG would not develop much power. I do think it was a big missed opportunity.
This was after we traded and resigned Ponson and he was languishing with a 5+ ERA. He was not a developing pitcher.

I remember the parameters of the deal being discussed, I just refuse to believe, despite any reports (which are not always accurate, although i do admit existed for this story), that we could've gotten a former #1 pick who was still a very good prospect simply by buying him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
This was after we traded and resigned Ponson and he was languishing with a 5+ ERA. He was not a developing pitcher.

I remember the parameters of the deal being discussed, I just refuse to believe, despite any reports (which are not always accurate, although i do admit existed for this story), that we could've gotten a former #1 pick who was still a very good prospect simply by buying him.

If you were a Padres fan, would you have thought the Rangers would trade you Young and AGon for Eaton and Otsuka?

You can refuse to believe it but this is the way it was.....I mean, look at what they ended up trading him for....How can you think it wasn't possible when you consider the trade they made anyway???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, see, this is more like what I thought the off-season would be around here... instead of arguing about what kind of trades the team might make now to make things better, arguing instead about what trades teams coulda/shoulda made several years ago and whether they would've made much difference.

It manages to combine the fantasy aspect of trade talk, but without any of the future-oriented hopefullness ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, see, this is more like what I thought the off-season would be around here... instead of arguing about what kind of trades the team might make now to make things better, arguing instead about what trades teams coulda/shoulda made several years ago and whether they would've made much difference.

It manages to combine the fantasy aspect of trade talk, but without any of the future-oriented hopefullness ;-)

It's easier and less risky to try to make your self look smart talking about woulda, coulda, shoulda, trades in hindsight than it is to play armchair qurterback to McP, who looks to be a pretty smart cookie.:002_sbiggrin:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...