Heyman just released his MLB offseason grades. The formula for getting an A is pretty simple: Trade for an established big-name player. What you gave up to get him, or whether your team is in a position to contend (*cough*Seattle*cough*) is completely irrelevant.
Actually, he does violate this rule once, for Houston. Not because the Astros are still well below .500 even with Miguel Tejada, but rather: "How does anyone get Tejada just hours before Mitchell takes the podium? Good grief." Yep, that's right: Tejada's alleged PED use is what will kill the Astros' chances this year, not their total lack of pitching. Apparently this syndrome is unique to Tejada, however, because Heyman suggests the Padres should sign Barry Lamar Bonds, who has been known to carry a few accusations with him.
Never one to avoid contradictions, Heyman also gives the Dodgers a good grade for adding Joe Torre, then praises the Yankees for letting him go--although apparently New York enters 2008 with only "a shot at the wild card". The Erik Bedard trade is lauded as both a "gem" for the Mariners and a "superior deal" for the Orioles. I've heard of a win-win trade, but not a pwn3d-pwn3d trade.
The Rockies earn a B+ by "locking up" Matt Holliday for the two years he was contractually obligated to play in Colorado anyway. The Phillies are given a good grade even though Heyman criticizes Philly's only mentioned acquisition, Brad Lidge. The Red Sox receive a good grade solely due to the Yankees' lack of activity, even though New York (re-)signed four of the ten best free agents.
To top it off, the article is poorly edited, unless "Troy Lauds" is some kind of pun that I don't understand.
I give the article an F+, because maybe it will convince someone to bet lots of money on the Mariners this year.