This is written from a "win now at any cost" perspective - he gives good grades to teams that improved their 2008 performance without considering what they paid in either dollars or prospects for it.

6. Angels. Their surprise signing of Torii Hunter wipes away the $50-million mistake of Gary Matthews Jr. and adds to their clubhouse presence.

It wipes it out only in the sense that they'll have a good centerfielder now. They'll still have to pay the $50 million.

Tony La Russa and outgoing third baseman Scott Rolen just couldn’t get along

Who does Rolen get along with?

4. Mariners. GM Bill Bavasi's back was to the wall, and he pulled out a gem, acquiring talented left-hander Erik Bedard. The price was steep, and included top outfield prospect Adam Jones. But it was worth it. On the other hand, the price for Carlos Silva -- $48 million -- might have been a tad high, but he could thrive in a big ballpark and with a superior defense. A

Swing and a miss.

Who does Rolen get along with?

Who does LARUSSA get along with? 8th-place hitters and Dave Duncan?

22. Braves. They won't miss Andruw Jones' strikeouts. But while Mark Kotsay is OK on defense, he's no Jones. And how do they make up for the lost home runs? Bringing back Tom Glavine, a Braves hero, is a nice touch, though. C

How about a full season of Teixeira???

Reading that article, I get the sense that Heyman reads Primer as part of his rounds to see what fans are thinking about the trade. I remember specifically reading the "more quantity than quality" line in either the transaction oracle or the primer thread on the trade.

Still, not too much of it seems to have sunk in. He uses bits and pieces of the opinion and analysis, but he doesn't seem very receptive to the overall philosophy of the group here or to changing his mind.

EDIT: Heyman also seems to be ranking the teams based on story lines that he likes and that he thinks will be good to write about during the season. Which makes the list even more useless.

18. Rangers. I loved the Josh Hamilton gamble. Plus, it was prudent not to throw big dollars at a mediocre pitcher in that market, like Tom Hicks likes to do. Still you have to wonder who's going to pitch? B-

So it is good that they did not spend on a free agent pitcher, but bad because they did not bring anybody new to pitch? And don't say that they could have traded for Bedard or Santana. Who were the centerpieces of these two trades? MLB-ready CF prospects with potential. How many did the Rangers have before the Hamilton trade? Zero.

On the other hand, the price for Carlos Silva -- $48 million -- might have been a tad high, but he could thrive in a big ballpark and with a superior defense.

Going from the Twins to the Mariners is gaining "superior defense?" I don't see it.

I don't see it.

Especially with Wilkerson and Ibanez as the starting COF'ers. Remember, it is Ichiro with one exclamation point, not two. There are some things that even he can't do.

Minnesota was 15th in MLB with a DER of .694 in 2007, Seattle was 27th with a DER of .678 (Only ahead of both Florida teams and the Pirates). And the only change Seattle has made, besides getting a year older, is changing from Jose Guillen in RF to Wilkerson, likely a sidegrade.

But while some quibble and say they got “more quantity than quality’’ with their two-for-six trade that sent Haren to Arizona, a lot of scouts love the Swisher trade with the White Sox that imported Gio Gonzalez and especially Faustino De Los Santos.

My thinking's quite the opposite. Both DLS and Gio have to become good pitchers to make the Swisher trade worthwhile (or one becoming a star). That doesn't seem too likely. I'm at least as confident in Gonzalez and Anderson becoming good players as I am of those two, and the other four players push it far ahead in terms of return.

I think Swisher and Haren were about equally valuable commodities (Swisher's signed for 5/$35M and Haren for 3/$16M).

I think #1 summed it up pretty good. He doesnt seem to care what prospects were traded away or care how much money the new players are going to cost. For example, I cant believe he has the Mariners at #4 and the Nationals at #23.

Well, sure, but 2008 performance is a perfectly good focus for an article like this. It suffers mostly from the limit of a few words on each team.