Although the Astros made no earth-shattering moves this past week, they made several that are in keeping with the multitude of quiet moves that all teams must make during the off-season, including a couple of transactions that were flat-out surprising to many of us.

I'm still startled that San Diego was allowed to claim Henri Stanley off waivers. I know full well that Colin Porter had an outstanding 2003 at New Orleans, but I also know that Stanley was up there with him, hitting .300 or better all season long before tailing off to .292 by season's end. Porter has certain physical advantages over Stanley. He's faster, has a better arm, can play all three OF positions, and bats left-handed. All that said, however, I still expected Stanley to compete vigorously with Porter for a reserve outfield spot in 2004. Although Porter perhaps has a greater "upside" than Stanley, his .294 BA in Arizona Fall League play is overshadowed somewhat by a low OBA and a low SLG percentage. In other words, Porter still has some growing to do. It appears to me that the Astros have made a choice between the two players that eventually should allow Porter to show fully what he can do. I hope the club has chosen wisely.

A little later in the week, Houston made still more minor moves, saying goodbye to P Brandon Puffer, assigning P Jared Fernandez to New Orleans, and protecting seven new faces on the 40-man roster in preparation for the Rule V draft at the Winter Meetings in December. Those moves left several minor players unprotected, but the only name on the unprotected list that really makes me hold my breath is 2B Brooks Conrad. He's a little behind Chris Burke in development, so it wouldn't be the end of the world if Houston lost him, but I hope the organization can hang on to him for next year and beyond. Since the rules governing the draft almost require that a player drafted be major-league ready, and since Conrad is not at that stage, it's possible that Conrad will slip through the draft without being claimed, and I shall cross my fingers and hope for that outcome.

All the various moves have left the Astros' roster standing at 38 men, which leaves room for two players more. I thought last Saturday and still think that the Stanley waiver claim may have been allowed to happen in anticipation of a trade or a signing yet to come. In all the talk about Andy Pettitte--and there's nothing new on that front, except to say that the two sides have now had an initial meeting--we might lose sight of the fact that there are other needs the Astros could be interested in filling besides starting pitching. With or without Richard Hidalgo in the starting lineup, Houston still needs more speed in the OF in a starting or reserve role, if it can get it, and Gerry Hunsicker continues to hunt for bullpen help. I was pleased to see the newspaper report earlier this week that the club has indeed expressed an interest in reliever Chad Fox, who can work either as a set-up man or a closer if Octavio Dotel falters.

Hunsicker was quoted last night on FSSW as saying the ballclub was interested in making a "special effort" to sign Pettitte if it could, language I remember hearing a few years ago in reference to Roger Clemens. I hope the ballclub can truly make that effort, but I'm not livin' and dyin' waiting for it to happen. To have landed Clemens over the winter of '99 was a dream both beautiful and terrible, and I'd just as soon not have that one disturb my sleep again. When Clemens was traded from Toronto to the Yankees, I was astonished--not because Clemens and his agents spurned Houston, and not because the Blue Jays got David Wells in return (the fat old guy pitches darn well), but because Toronto had committed the unpardonable sin of helping the best team in its division by giving them one of the greatest pitchers of all time. When the details of all that Clemens and his agents were demanding out of the Astros as the price for coming to Houston became known, I was glad that Hunsicker and McLane didn't give in to them. Some fans and observers of the ballclub think the current Astro talks with Pettitte are public relations attempt to salve the wounds created by the trade of Billy Wagner. Maybe that is so, but if so, the PR is unnecessary. Most fans who have at least a thumbnail knowledge of the Astros' payroll and the team's revenue figured out long ago that Wagner would have to be traded. It was just a question of when, where, and for whom. Others think the talks are are a smokescreen to hide what the club really wants to do. That could be true, also, but again, it's not necessary to feign doing something before doing something else. One has only to pursue quietly what one wants. I myself take the Pettitte talks seriously. I am convinced that if Pettite really does want to pitch near home that if his agents are reasonable in their demands, taking into account what the Astros can legitimately offer, based on their revenues and contract committments for the next several seasons, the two sides can work out a deal. If, on the other hand, all Pettitte and his agents want to do is foster a bidding war, then the Astros should and will lose interest in New York's left-hander quickly. In that event, Hunsicker almost surely has a backup plan--a move or set of moves he can try in New Orleans. I ran through most of those a couple of weeks ago for you, so I won't repeat them now, but I will remind you and encourage you to believe that good deals are still possible for Houston, Pettitte or no Pettitte. We spend an awful lot of our idle time at our desks or in bed picking apart what our team does well or does badly every season, but as hard-headed and as clear-eyed as that analysis may be at times, it's also good to remember that this club won 87 games in 2003 and finished out of first place by one game. It would not take a whole lot--another SP, a major bat at SS or in the OF, a full season of good health for Roy Oswalt and Jeff Kent, take your pick--for the Astros to do very well in 2004. This is not to say that Hunsicker shouldn't try to address the payroll issues or the need the club has for additional speed or for better production at the top of the order or whatever happens to be your personal concern about the team. It is only to suggest that, blockbuster move to come or not, the Astros are not that far away from being the best in the NL Central. The Cubs have fine starting pitching, but they will also have issues next season in CF, at 1B and in the bullpen. The Cardinals have about as much flexibility to make moves right now as Houston does, which is to say, not as much flexibility as they or their fans would like. They could be strapped next season with the same club that limped home four games outs in 2003.

On the other hand, if Chicago's Corey Patterson fully recovers from his knee injury and if Hee-Seop Choi catches fire at 1B, the Cubs could be much tougher to deal with next season than they were this year. If Walt Jocketty is as creative this winter as he's been the last few seasons, the Cards could patch all the holes in their pitching staff and be pains in our backsides again. Therefore, if Hunsicker truly does have moves to make, he'd better make them. Leaving aside whatever the Cubs and Cards may do, the Astros cannot afford to stand still. The club may be, even as it exists right now, capable of winning the Central next season, but it is not good enough to get to the World Series and win it. Hunsicker knows this, and although nothing has happened yet to change the face of the club, I would suggest patience. Wait and see what the Winter Meetings might bring.

In the meantime, we know that Jose Vizcaino has re-signed for another year, a development that gladdened my heart. For years before he became an Astro, I had thought of Vizcaino as just one of many good-field / no-hit utility men scattered across rosters all over the big leagues, but in the time he's spent with Houston, he's changed my mind. He fills one of the toughest jobs in baseball--the role of a pinch-hitter--admirably, approaching each at-bat, no matter how difficult, with professional poise, fully capable of slapping the ball sharply from either side of the plate with occasional power. If Vizcaino were an everyday player, I might be concerned about the effects of age upon him, but he's a part-time player who won't log a lot of innings unless a starter in the infield gets hurt. If Geoff Blum gets traded, we might look toward Vizcaino as a possible backup to Morgan Ensberg at 3B, and that possibility will be a concern until the Astros either resolve the situation over there or give Vizcaino enough playing time at the position in ST to allow him to work out his awkwardness at that spot. Otherwise, Vizcaino should continue to do admirable work at SS and 2B, either competing for or sharing a bench spot with Eric Bruntlett once March rolls around.

Brad Ausmus also re-signed. The terms--two years for $4 million--are both good and bad. Two years is a significant risk to take with a 34-year-old catcher coming off a bad year offensively and a decline defensively, but at least the money is split in a way the budget can tolerate, $1 million now and $3 million in 2005. I do not look for a comeback season for Ausmus in 2004 on the order of the comeback season Craig Biggio had from 2000 to 2001. Ausmus is not that kind of athlete. It would be pleasant, however, if he could approach .245-.250 at the plate and raise his percentage of runners caught stealing closer to forty percent. The Astros could live with those numbers, assuming the veterans produce as they usually do and the young guys--Everett, Ensberg, Lane--develop in the lineup as they are expected to. Neither signing this week should cause fans to leap out of their chairs in excitement, but they are the kinds of quiet, necessary signings that must take place and are are just as important as any big transaction a team makes as it prepares for the coming Spring.