Abreu to the Astros? [Foxsports.com]

[bigboymumu]

Demand for Burnett could help Zito, A's (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5094856)


Most in the industry expect new Phillies GM Pat Gillick to do something big; right fielder Bobby Abreu would be a perfect trade addition for any team that fails to sign free agent Brian Giles. The Cubs could use the left-handed Abreu to hit between righties Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez. The Mariners also want to add left-handed power. The Astros — Abreu's original team — would be another possible partner if they could somehow find a way to absorb the $30 million he is owed over the next two seasons. The Dodgers also would make sense. ...

Not a bad idea! Speed, arm, defense, power, lefty....

[JaWindex]

we cant afford another huge contract like that

[thacabbage]

Not gonna happen. Even setting aside the fact that we can't absorb another huge contract, you have nowhere to play him. Bagwell is going to be back (I sure would if I was owed $17mill) moving Berkman to left. I can't see Drayton trading Jason Lane who is playing for peanuts to make room for Abreu's $15mill. Their only available positions for upgrade are SS and catcher. If you want Roger back, Ausmus has to be back. The only hope Astros fans can realistically have of improving is hoping Taveres and Lane continue their improvement, a full year of Berkman, and the snowball's chance in hell that they try Burke at shortstop.

If Roger doesn't come back, you have to spend that money on a starter. It's a very cloudy situation. We won't like it but they can hang their hat on being the defending NL champs and staying with the status quo.

[bobrek]

Bagwell can get his 17 million without the Astros having to pay a dime if it is determined that his injury prevents him from playing. If that is the case, insurance will pay his salary providing he does not play a single inning of a single regular season game. The second he steps on the field during the regular season, the Astros are liable for his entire salary.

Unfortunately, I suspect it will be a while before that determination is made.

[thacabbage]

Bagwell can get his 17 million without the Astros having to pay a dime if it is determined that his injury prevents him from playing. If that is the case, insurance will pay his salary providing he does not play a single inning of a single regular season game. The second he steps on the field during the regular season, the Astros are liable for his entire salary.

Unfortunately, I suspect it will be a while before that determination is made.
I wasn't aware that he would receive the entire $17 million if it went to insurance. Are you sure? I was always under the impression that it would be an arbitrary figure which would likely result in him attempting to play to receive the full value.

[bobrek]

I wasn't aware that he would receive the entire $17 million if it went to insurance. Are you sure? I was always under the impression that it would be an arbitrary figure which would likely result in him attempting to play to receive the full value.

I read about it last season around the time he decided to have surgery. From what I remember, the entire amount due in 2006 would be paid by insurance as long as he did not participate in any regluar season games. I would assume that the insurance company would do some sort of verification to make sure he is truly physically unable to perform in the field.

[russian88]

No way uncle drayton coughs up that much.

[Joshfast]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2227833

Chipper Jones is going to restructure his contract to help the Braves sign Furcal or some other free-agents. Why can't Bagwell do something like this? Also, I didn't think the player union allowed this sort of thing?

[Xenon]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2227833

Chipper Jones is going to restructure his contract to help the Braves sign Furcal or some other free-agents. Why can't Bagwell do something like this? Also, I didn't think the player union allowed this sort of thing?

I'd rather see the Astros pay him now and get it over with than seeing Bagwell become another Matt Maloney. Having him on the books til 2020 would suck.

[bobrek]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2227833

Chipper Jones is going to restructure his contract to help the Braves sign Furcal or some other free-agents. Why can't Bagwell do something like this? Also, I didn't think the player union allowed this sort of thing?

As mentioned in another thread, Bagwell has restructured his contract on more than one occasion. The player's union doesn't mind about restructuring, they don't like downward renegotiations.

[Joshfast]

As mentioned in another thread, Bagwell has restructured his contract on more than one occasion. The player's union doesn't mind about restructuring, they don't like downward renegotiations.

How could I have missed that other thread? :eek:

[NJRocket]

we cant afford another huge contract like that

we can certainly afford it....but history says we wouldn't even think twice

[msn]

we can certainly afford it....but history says we wouldn't even think twice
I'm not so certain that the Astros can afford it--mostly because of lack of information. What information has been published would suggest that maybe they actually can't. Two beefs with your take, respectfully submitted:

a) Have you seen the books?
b) Which history? The part where the Astros signed Kent, Clemens, or Pettitte? Or traded for Alou? Or, do you mean the part where they were outbid by $1M per for Beltran, Kile, and RJ?

[sydmill]

McClain is either the richest or second richest owner in the game. He can afford to pay a Yankee like salary but alas he is looking to turn a profit. I never understood why a rich person would buy a team to make money. If you are concerned with the bottom line why even go through the process? Count me in the Cuban camp who does it because they love the whole process of building and maintaining a winner.

[bobrek]

McClain is either the richest or second richest owner in the game. He can afford to pay a Yankee like salary but alas he is looking to turn a profit. I never understood why a rich person would buy a team to make money. If you are concerned with the bottom line why even go through the process? Count me in the Cuban camp who does it because they love the whole process of building and maintaining a winner.

Are you actually arguing that McLane HASN'T built and maintained a winner?

[Major]

McClain is either the richest or second richest owner in the game. He can afford to pay a Yankee like salary but alas he is looking to turn a profit. I never understood why a rich person would buy a team to make money. If you are concerned with the bottom line why even go through the process? Count me in the Cuban camp who does it because they love the whole process of building and maintaining a winner.

Cuban has stated, multiple times, that he runs the Mavs as a business and to turn a profit. That's why they let Finley go this year - they didn't want to pay the luxury tax. The Yankees are also run to make a profit. There aren't many, if any, owners that do otherwise.

These owners didn't get to be millionaires or billionaires by ignoring sound business principles.

[geeimsobored]

McClain is either the richest or second richest owner in the game. He can afford to pay a Yankee like salary but alas he is looking to turn a profit. I never understood why a rich person would buy a team to make money. If you are concerned with the bottom line why even go through the process? Count me in the Cuban camp who does it because they love the whole process of building and maintaining a winner.

Steinbrenner also makes millions more through his franchise. More people buy yankees gear, he has his own tv network, and they'll sell out almost every game. Thus steinbrenner can naturally spend more. Realize that baseball is unique in that almost every franchise is actually turning a profit. If you get into baseball, you expect a profit. Cuban's spendthrift policies aren't much better than Steinbrenner's. It takes a farm system and careful management to develop a team with talent AND chemistry. McLane has developed a team that does well consistently and yes he probably does need to expand the payroll slightly in order to accomodate one big free agent or trade but overall he's gotten a lot more heat than he probably deserves.

[NJRocket]

I'm not so certain that the Astros can afford it--mostly because of lack of information. What information has been published would suggest that maybe they actually can't. Two beefs with your take, respectfully submitted:

a) Have you seen the books?
b) Which history? The part where the Astros signed Kent, Clemens, or Pettitte? Or traded for Alou? Or, do you mean the part where they were outbid by $1M per for Beltran, Kile, and RJ?

My guess is that we made a LOT of money...of course, i dont know that for sure. I guess reading the local columns is where I probably got that we suppsedly made a lot of money. I have a hard time believe they didn;t make SOME money the last 2 yrs....who knows how much for sure though.

I think there have been more times than not that we didn't enter a fray for a player on the block or a high priced free agent. Regardless, this offseason is going to tell us a lot about Purpura as a GM. I think the fans and the local media (which probably has a much better clue than Joe fan about the finances) think that we made enough money that we should perhaps splurge a bit...that's all.

[msn]

My guess is that we made a LOT of money...of course, i dont know that for sure. I guess reading the local columns is where I probably got that we suppsedly made a lot of money. I have a hard time believe they didn;t make SOME money the last 2 yrs....who knows how much for sure though.

I think there have been more times than not that we didn't enter a fray for a player on the block or a high priced free agent. Regardless, this offseason is going to tell us a lot about Purpura as a GM. I think the fans and the local media (which probably has a much better clue than Joe fan about the finances) think that we made enough money that we should perhaps splurge a bit...that's all.
I haven't seen from the local media that the Astros made enough to significantly up the salary ante--but I may have missed it. I hope the Astros *do* splurge a bit, but I won't take to using the "McScrooge" moniker if they don't.

And this...
McClain[sic] is either the richest or second richest owner in the game.
...is so overblown and so inaccurate. I'm so tired of hearing it--it's not the redundancy itself that's getting to me but the redundant stupidity. Like hearing a song with bad grammar over and over again on the radio. Others have already addressed it well, but I will just add (for the gazillionth time) that *no* owner, president, founder, or CEO supplements his business from either personal funds or funds from another business. Why can't people grip that fact?

[bigboymumu]

OK, enough about the owner. Here is the question. If we add one more bat, like an Abreu, can we win it all next year. All things equal, I think we would have a great chance. Clemens comes back, Pettitte has one more year on his contract, Kent's contract is off of the books, Bagwell's gone, Biggio might have one more year, Ausmuss will probably sign a two-year deal, ... seems like a good risk. It is always easier to trade a player in the last year of his contract. The way I look at it... we rent Abreu for one year. If it does not work, we trade him.

[Major]

OK, enough about the owner. Here is the question. If we add one more bat, like an Abreu, can we win it all next year. All things equal, I think we would have a great chance. Clemens comes back, Pettitte has one more year on his contract, Kent's contract is off of the books, Bagwell's gone, Biggio might have one more year, Ausmuss will probably sign a two-year deal, ... seems like a good risk. It is always easier to trade a player in the last year of his contract. The way I look at it... we rent Abreu for one year. If it does not work, we trade him.

Depending on what we have to give up, I think you have to seriously look at this deal. $15MM/per for just 2 seasons for his production is easily worth it. And if Bagwell does retire or Clemens is gone, the money is right there. A middle of the lineup with Abreu, Berkman, and Ensberg would be as good as any in the NL.

The big question is what does Philly want from us.

[msn]

Bagwell's gone
I follow your reasoning above, but this part of it is quite the big assumption. It would be just as big for me to assume he comes back and jacks 35.

[bigboymumu]

I follow your reasoning above, but this part of it is quite the big assumption. It would be just as big for me to assume he comes back and jacks 35.


I was in a rush when I wrote that. I meant Bagwell's contract is off of our books at the end of this upcoming year. If all things are equal...

The point is, we gamble for one year. If we dont win it all or come close, we can always trade Abreu the year after or even during the season. It is a $15 million gamble.

[Major]

I was in a rush when I wrote that. I meant Bagwell's contract is off of our books at the end of this upcoming year. If all things are equal...

The point is, we gamble for one year. If we dont win it all or come close, we can always trade Abreu the year after or even during the season. It is a $15 million gamble.

It's also not a huge gamble in the grand scheme of things. The big gambles are the 4-7 year deals where they really affect your flexibility in the long-term. I suspect McLane is much more comfortable with 1 or 2 year contracts like this, and rightfully slow. A bad long-term contract for a team with our size market can be a big drag (Richard Hidalgo), but a 2 year deal has no long-term drawback in terms of our competitiveness.

[msn]

I was in a rush when I wrote that. I meant Bagwell's contract is off of our books at the end of this upcoming year. If all things are equal...

The point is, we gamble for one year. If we dont win it all or come close, we can always trade Abreu the year after or even during the season. It is a $15 million gamble.
gotcha

[msn]

My guess is that we made a LOT of money...of course, i dont know that for sure.
Hey, since we were talking about it yesterday I found this: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10136689/.

Although the article can only be based in educated conjecture (since the books aren't open), it's conjecture I trust more than my own due to the sources it consults.

It says that this season of success will most likely put the Astros "further into the black". That means, I guess, that they made money. I wonder how much? I wonder when the franchise got into the black?

Of note is the concept of the franchise's value versus the concept of whether it's actually making money. Years ago, the value was up but McLane could have made money only by selling the team because it wasn't making money (only accruing additional value). Now it appears both fronts are looking very attractive.

I want me some Abreu. :D

[NJRocket]

I think that even if Bags' contract is on the books this year....and we have to pay Roger....that we splurge. They are about to lose Wags....what about sending them Qualls and Lane?

[TMac640]

he'll play SS if he has to

sign him.

[bigboymumu]

I think that even if Bags' contract is on the books this year....and we have to pay Roger....that we splurge. They are about to lose Wags....what about sending them Qualls and Lane?

How about Buchholz and Astacio? :)

[sydmill]

obviously I am not a businessman, but dont companies frequently withhold dividends to reinvest into the business? that is all that I am advocating the stros do. we have played more games in the last two seasons than any other team which leads me to believe that we have accrued quite a bit of cash from being on national tv as well as the extra 20 or home games we have played yet the only increase in salary in the past two seasons was Rog's raise. oh yea and go foch yourself msn, there is no need to act all high and mighty in regards to me addressing the simple fact that yes, drayton could afford to spend more $.

[madmax11]

And this...

...is so overblown and so inaccurate. I'm so tired of hearing it--it's not the redundancy itself that's getting to me but the redundant stupidity. Like hearing a song with bad grammar over and over again on the radio. Others have already addressed it well, but I will just add (for the gazillionth time) that *no* owner, president, founder, or CEO supplements his business from either personal funds or funds from another business. Why can't people grip that fact?

Ummm.....yes they do. Have you heard of Roman Abramovich?

[NJRocket]

I will just add (for the gazillionth time) that *no* owner, president, founder, or CEO supplements his business from either personal funds or funds from another business. Why can't people grip that fact?

How do you know that for sure? I have a hard time believing that there are NO owners that do that...espsecially the wealthier ones.

[msn]

Ummm.....yes they do. Have you heard of Roman Abramovich?
No, please expound. But can you provide more than one example? And no, it doesn't make good business sense.

[msn]

How do you know that for sure? I have a hard time believing that there are NO owners that do that...espsecially the wealthier ones.
It's an educated guess, and I believe it would prove out accurate.

In the same way that you wouldn't expect your CEO to dip into his salary in order to get you a raise or a better Christmas bonus, no one should expect Drayton McLane to dip into his own finances for any salary. Where would the line be drawn?

[msn]

obviously I am not a businessman, but dont companies frequently withhold dividends to reinvest into the business? that is all that I am advocating the stros do. we have played more games in the last two seasons than any other team which leads me to believe that we have accrued quite a bit of cash from being on national tv as well as the extra 20 or home games we have played yet the only increase in salary in the past two seasons was Rog's raise.
That seems very plausible. If that's what you meant when you said, "McClain[sic] is either the richest or second richest owner in the game," then forgive me for misunderstanding.

oh yea and go foch yourself msn, there is no need to act all high and mighty
I'm sorry my retort came across as a personal attack. It's an argument (Drayton is rich so he should spend) that I get tired of because it's so wrong. I didn't mean for it to come across as flaming on you personally. If you meant that the man should dip into his personal wealth, then respectfully I believe you are dead wrong. If you meant something more akin to what you said above, that seems quite plausible.

There is a difference between Drayton McLane and the Astros. If Drayton is rich, then good for him. If the Astros aren't making money, then they aren't. If they are, then I hope they trade for Mr. Abreu.

Go Astros!

[NJRocket]

It's an educated guess, and I believe it would prove out accurate.

In the same way that you wouldn't expect your CEO to dip into his salary in order to get you a raise or a better Christmas bonus, no one should expect Drayton McLane to dip into his own finances for any salary. Where would the line be drawn?

I dont think thats a good analogy ....Bonuses and salary are USUALLY based on production....at least after the 1st year.

Also...when I had my own business, I used to give away MY personal Jets, Knicks, Nets tickets to employees who went above and beyond...or perhaps buy someone dinner if i saw them at a restaurant (out of my own pocket)....i know its a different extent but i would imagine what I did wasnt that uncommon...but it may not be the norm either.

[msn]

I dont think thats a good analogy ....Bonuses and salary are USUALLY based on production....at least after the 1st year.
But that's precisely it--based on production; not based on the depth of the owner's pockets.

Also...when I had my own business, I used to give away MY personal Jets, Knicks, Nets tickets to employees who went above and beyond...or perhaps buy someone dinner if i saw them at a restaurant (out of my own pocket)....i know its a different extent but i would imagine what I did wasnt that uncommon...but it may not be the norm either.
It's not uncommon to give gifts--Drayton bought Roy O a tractor (or so it was reported), but gifts and dinners do *not* equate to personnally funding salaries and bonuses.

[msn]

Ummm.....yes they do. Have you heard of Roman Abramovich?
Looked it up myself (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Abramovich).

Abramovich and European Football
In 2003 he became the owner of the companies that control Chelsea Football Club in the United Kingdom. This immediately raised his profile in Britain where the tabloids noted the Russian connection by humorously dubbing the club Chelski. As soon as Abramovich took control, he poured massive investment into the Club, bringing to it the finest footballing and managerial talent that could be obtained, with money no object. The Club also embarked on an ambitious programme of commercial development, with the aim of making it a worldwide brand and not simply a local football club. The result was near-instant success: Chelsea finished its first season after the Abramovich takeover in second place in the Premiership. The following season they moved into first place and reached, also, the semi-finals of the Champions League. They are now the dominant force in English football. See main article Chelsea Football Club.

This man's wealth utterly dwarfs McLane's. But notice the aim of his investments in the club: to turn it into a worldwide money-maker. He still isn't personally funding salaries just to do it; he's leveraging (hopeful) championships against a potential windfall of worldwide profit.

[sydmill]

msn - Sorry for flying off the handle there, I guess I can be a bit touchy...