This is, as far as I know, what we've got. �He looks pretty much the same,�� one source told The Post on Monday. Now, that could mean, "He looks pretty much the same. I mean, same height and face and all. I'm sure he's worked hard. The proof's in the pudding, so don't go by what I've seen." Or it could mean, "He looks pretty much the same. But then again, I haven't showered with the guy. Hey, how about that gay guy who wants to play football? Are you covering that story?" Or it could mean, "He looks pretty much the same. We haven't seen him on the field yet, and it's silly to ask me about notable changes in a guy's physique. You can judge that for yourself." And that's pretty much where the rubber hits the road. If a beat guy wants to write about how fit Tejada is, he has all the access in the world to take a peek and judge for himself. Watch the guy in the field and describe his speed, strength, and agility relative to what you've seen before. Ask the guy what's changed in his physical abilities and watch him perform to give a first-hand impression of whether that's bullshit. Report. My problem isn't so much the un-named source. That's par for the course and that's Sandy's problem, but reporters have long used them. My problem is the magic-quotiness of it all. He looks pretty much the same? Well that's good, because he's six months older.