The last two days especially?

Both mentions of his comments on the trade deadline boil his position down too simply.

I don’t think he’s saying that one game truly should make or break the bank in terms of deciding on being a buyer or seller. The Rockies however have sort of spent the last month bouncing around, not really making up that much ground, or playing in such a way as to make a roll of the dice towards being a buyer a sure thing. On June 15th they were 8.5 back. Today they are 7 back. Had they either started playing the way they did after the All Star break (what, 13 games now) earlier or tanked it, the decisions would be a lot easier to make. We wouldn’t even be having the conversation if the Dodgers or Diamondbacks could hit better than my son’s T-Ball team.

But the teams performance has made the decision a gray area for sure. Renck’s point all along this week was if they Rockies completely falter in Pittsburgh, they ought to be more likely to be sellers, at say 8-9 games out. If the win or keep pace in Pittsburgh, and are say 5-7 games out, they ought to be buyers or stay pat.

The reason one or two games makes a difference is because of the lack of real movement prior and the fact that today is pop or get of the pot time. Now, maybe he’s placing too much emphasis on the games this week at Pitt, when the emphases really should have been this road trip, but still. The point is the Rockies are still in that No Mans Land, and the direction of the club for the next month is not an easy read.

Makes sense to me.

this may be a very quiet trade deadline. It looks like teams want to make sure they get value and get the better end of any deal, that they are reluctant to make fair trades. Are the Rockies buyers or sellers? Looks like we are right where we were months ago…..too far out to be serious buyers. Too close to be serious sellers….so we are neither really.

One rumor The Cowboy mentioned was Washington wanted Hawpe for Tim Redding. Which at first glance didn’t seem to crazy, corner OF, for a legit starting pitcher, but if you look at 30 year old Reddings career numbers (.489 ERA), he’s not that much better than 31 year old Josh Fogg’s (.503 ERA)

And Washburn? He’s got good stuff. But he’s be 34 in a couple weeks, and his career ERA is (.410), and it’s been going up. Besides 2002 he’s never won more than 11 games in a season, he’s a career .500 pitcher. (98-95). And he pitches to contact, and is not a K machine. Again…better than Josh Fogg? Hell better then DLR? With his contract, the M’s would be hard pressed to give him away. But they want not one, but TWO top can’t miss prospects? They are on crack. They would be lucky to get Koshansky and Hirsch for Washburn. Which by the way would actually help the M’s. They suck.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8398348

Why I don’t know, as they seem pretty set in their outfield (I have a friend who’s a die-hard ChiSox fan, so I’m kept pretty up to date on their various tribulations…)

How about giving away a bullpen arm? One I actually thought was Ok?

Astros claim A. Arias off waivers.

that the LADs sign Manny next year. That’s the whole point of trading him to the NL. Boston would have done just about anything to keep him out of the AL, (expecially NY), and this works out better for Boston as the LADs are more likely to sign him up than the Marlins would have been.