http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/artic...p&c_id=mlb

I have a feeling the Nats aren't going to be able to squeeze out a .500 record again.

I dont see it happening either, Guillen is a stud. Why did we trade this guy and not Kearns?? That still puzzles me.

you traded him because he sure seemed like a one year wonder type of guy. i wouldn't blame the reds.

flyingswoosh Wrote:you traded him because he sure seemed like a one year wonder type of guy. i wouldn't blame the reds.

He was our best player and its not like Guillen performing that well was a total surprise, he was susposed to be a stud coming up through the minors.

JFlight21 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:you traded him because he sure seemed like a one year wonder type of guy. i wouldn't blame the reds.

He was our best player and its not like Guillen performing that well was a total surprise, he was susposed to be a stud coming up through the minors.

yeah, but no offense, saying he was the reds best player, isn't exactly a big thing. and yes, he was supposed to be a stud, but he had a lot of years where he was a terrible hitter and a great fielder. it was a huge surprise when he became great.

Update: Guillen only out 7-10 days (wrist inflamation)

JFlight21 Wrote:Update: Guillen only out 7-10 days (wrist inflamation)

well, at least the nats can catch one break.