ClutchFans - Phil Rogers is wondering if the Astros would trade Clemens to the Cubs????

BSW

05-03-2005, 08:16 AM

Phil Rogers from the good old Tribune up in Chicago is smoking some really good stuff.....

:eek:
• Wonder if there's any way the Astros would trade Roger Clemens to the Cubs? He's almost certainly going to be somewhere else by the end of July as the Astros don't have enough solid hitters to become a serious contender.

Houston has lost the Rocket's last four starts by scores of 1-0, 1-0, 1-0 and 3-2. This is the same pattern that ended Randy Johnson's stay in Arizona.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-050502rogers,1,1417.column?coll=cs-whitesox-utility&ctrack=2&cset=true

BSW

05-03-2005, 08:18 AM

Did he happen to watch the Astros take 2 of 3 against his Cubs this past weekend without Berkman and without much of a bench or our closer due to the flu???

What an idiot!

Joe Joe

05-03-2005, 08:23 AM

Wonder if there's any way the Cubs would trade Mark Prior to the Astros? He's almost certainly going to be somewhere else by the end of July as the Cubs don't have enough solid hitters to become a serious contender.

BSW

05-03-2005, 08:29 AM

Oh no....we are a game behind from the Cubs. We should just thrown in the towel, because they never fall apart! :rolleyes:

msn

05-03-2005, 08:45 AM

Originally posted by Joe Joe
Wonder if there's any way the Cubs would trade Mark Prior to the Astros? He's almost certainly going to be somewhere else by the end of July as the Cubs don't have enough solid hitters to become a serious contender.
Outstanding!

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 08:56 AM

Prior or Wood will be a Yankee before Clemens would ever become a Cub.

deepellumrocket

05-03-2005, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by BSW
Oh no....we are a game behind from the Cubs. We should just thrown in the towel, because they never fall apart! :rolleyes:

And for all the talking heads saying Clemens will end up with the Yankees this season, the Astros currently have a better record and are fewer games out of first place than the Yankees. Why do these people just assume its a foregone conclusion? (Please note that this is a rhetorical question. I know all about East Coast Media bias...)

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by deepellumrocket
And for all the talking heads saying Clemens will end up with the Yankees this season, the Astros currently have a better record and are fewer games out of first place than the Yankees. Why do these people just assume its a foregone conclusion? (Please note that this is a rhetorical question. I know all about East Coast Media bias...)

You aren't wrong...BUT, if you had to bet on one of the 2 teams (Astros or Yanks) turning things around and making the playoffs, you would probably bet on them....which is why people speculate that he would go there.

Also, there is that alleged story that Clemens has a handshake deal with Drayton that he would trade him to either the Yanks or Red Sox if the Astros fall out of the race.

Nick

05-03-2005, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by NJRocket
Also, there is that alleged story that Clemens has a handshake deal with Drayton that he would trade him to either the Yanks or Red Sox if the Astros fall out of the race.

Any sentence that has both the words "alleged" and "handshake deal" in it automatically registers as blank nothings in my brain, so I had to re-read that about 20 times.

Are you going to name your source, or does this have to be a Stern vs. JVG thing??? :D

Honestly... Phil Rogers can go on writing this garbage... I'm still waiting for his annual "The Cubs are in a much better position (long term) than the Cardinals" column that always seems to coincide with a Cubs flop to end the season.

Seriously... why do the Cubs get THIS much attention. Sure, they won the division 2 years ago, but they didn't even win 90 games. Thus, it took two teams playing awful baseball down the stretch (astros and Cardinals) for them to sneak in. Then, they beat the Braves in 5 (which everybody seems to do, nowadays), and choke it up big-time to the Marlins.

Last year, they were awful as well.... and I don't want to hear the line that they had injuries, because when they got Prior and Wood back at full strength, they were very much in the driver's seat in the wild card race.

In the end... no matter who's managing them... esp. that ingrate Dusty.. the Cubs will always be one useless franchise.

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Nick
.

Are you going to name your source, or does this have to be a Stern vs. JVG thing??? :D

its been discussed on 610 numerous times....especially right after he signed

MadMax

05-03-2005, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by NJRocket
its been discussed on 610 numerous times....especially right after he signed

but it's never discussed with any credibility..it's just lobbed out there..and then denied by all the parties. it is a rumor...nothing more, nothing less.

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by MadMax
but it's never discussed with any credibility..it's just lobbed out there..and then denied by all the parties. it is a rumor...nothing more, nothing less.

never been denied by clemens or drayton that i can remember....only richard justice has said its a joke...

overall, i cant see it being the first thing clemens discussed after he signed...but its not such a far fetched idea when you look at the situation closely

MadMax

05-03-2005, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by NJRocket
never been denied by clemens or drayton that i can remember....only richard justice has said its a joke...

i thought i heard clemens deny it.

Blatz

05-03-2005, 11:31 AM

I thought I heard Clemens and Drayton deny it.

Nick

05-03-2005, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by NJRocket
overall, i cant see it being the first thing clemens discussed after he signed...but its not such a far fetched idea when you look at the situation closely

Actually, it does seem pretty far-fetched.

Roger didn't have to come out of retirement, and he decided to to do so last year because we had Andy, and he wanted to see what it was like to pitch in his hometown.

After last year, he could have written his own ticket anywhere.... sure, he wanted to give it an actual go with Andy, but in all likelihood, if he wanted to sign elsewhere, he would have.

To just decide at mid-season that he's going to want to pitch up in NY or Boston again seems pretty ludicrous... and if winning more rings for those teams is really on his agenda (or wish list), why did he retire from the Yankees in the first place?

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Nick
Actually, it does seem pretty far-fetched.

Roger didn't have to come out of retirement, and he decided to to do so last year because we had Andy, and he wanted to see what it was like to pitch in his hometown.

After last year, he could have written his own ticket anywhere.... sure, he wanted to give it an actual go with Andy, but in all likelihood, if he wanted to sign elsewhere, he would have.

To just decide at mid-season that he's going to want to pitch up in NY or Boston again seems pretty ludicrous... and if winning more rings for those teams is really on his agenda (or wish list), why did he retire from the Yankees in the first place?

It doesn't seem far fetched at all. Clemens is the single most competitive guy on the planet. If had a chance to go pitch up north for 8 weeks and win another ring, he would do it in a heartbeat.

It wouldnt shock me if he has a limited no trade clause and Boston and NY are the only teams on the list.

Again, I dont think it will come to that...but its not far fetched at all.

msn

05-03-2005, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by Nick
Actually, it does seem pretty far-fetched.

Roger didn't have to come out of retirement, and he decided to to do so last year because we had Andy, and he wanted to see what it was like to pitch in his hometown.

After last year, he could have written his own ticket anywhere.... sure, he wanted to give it an actual go with Andy, but in all likelihood, if he wanted to sign elsewhere, he would have.

To just decide at mid-season that he's going to want to pitch up in NY or Boston again seems pretty ludicrous... and if winning more rings for those teams is really on his agenda (or wish list), why did he retire from the Yankees in the first place?
I bet you Clemens will only pitch for teams that have a demonstrable and well-reasoned Plan B. :D

MadMax

05-03-2005, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by msn
I bet you Clemens will only pitch for teams that have a demonstrable and well-reasoned Plan B. :D

what's Cashman's Plan B?? :)

particularly with Randy hitting the DL soon, reportedly.

bobrek

05-03-2005, 11:51 AM

Here is the thread where the trade clause was discussed:

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?threadid=90909

Nick

05-03-2005, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by MadMax
what's Cashman's Plan B?? :)

Does anybody else think "suicide" when they see that guy? He's under such immense pressure... I bet you he resigns before this year is over, if the Yankees continue to flounder like this (even though its not his fault that guys are not producing like they have in the past).

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by MadMax
what's Cashman's Plan B?? :)

particularly with Randy hitting the DL soon, reportedly.

If RJ goes on the DL for any length of time....you can bet that Cashman's FIRST call will be to Drayton. Granted, we would never move him at this point in the season....but you know they will try.

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:55 AM

McLane, who met with Berkman's agent Thursday in hopes of working out a multiyear deal, did not deny the validity of Newsday's report.

"Anything is possible," McLane said. "But as far as any part of a written agreement, there isn't one."

McLane, who gave Clemens a no-trade clause with his record $18 million, one-year deal last month, says he would consider trading anyone if that player requested it. Clemens' agents were unavailable for comment.

"He's got a no-trade, so we couldn't go out and trade him unless he agreed to it," McLane said of Clemens. "We'll listen to anything that is brought up, but as far as an automatic deal, that's not in the contract

MadMax

05-03-2005, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by NJRocket
McLane, who met with Berkman's agent Thursday in hopes of working out a multiyear deal, did not deny the validity of Newsday's report.

"Anything is possible," McLane said. "But as far as any part of a written agreement, there isn't one."

McLane, who gave Clemens a no-trade clause with his record $18 million, one-year deal last month, says he would consider trading anyone if that player requested it. Clemens' agents were unavailable for comment.

"He's got a no-trade, so we couldn't go out and trade him unless he agreed to it," McLane said of Clemens. "We'll listen to anything that is brought up, but as far as an automatic deal, that's not in the contract

what's extraordinary about that?? seriously, what's the big deal with any of that???

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Nick
Does anybody else think "suicide" when they see that guy? He's under such immense pressure... I bet you he resigns before this year is over, if the Yankees continue to flounder like this (even though its not his fault that guys are not producing like they have in the past).

I could see Big George canning him AND Torre if this continues

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by MadMax
what's extraordinary about that?? seriously, what's the big deal with any of that???

its Drayton refusing to deny that there was a conversation about this between he and Roger

Nick

05-03-2005, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by NJRocket
I could see Big George canning him AND Torre if this continues

But, what would really come of that?

Is it really the "managing" at this point? No.

I think its putting a bunch of "superstars" together on one team, and allofasudden, nobody knows who the leader is anymore. Either everybody wants to be the leader, or everybody expects somebody else to take the role.... and in the end, nobody leads.

George has to change his "mindset" of just trying to sign every great player out there that he can. They did, however, pass up on Beltran... which was a breath of fresh air. (but maybe they knew that he wouldn't be worth the money... ;) ).

NJRocket

05-03-2005, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by Nick
But, what would really come of that?

Is it really the "managing" at this point? No.

George doesn't care whose fault it is. Its just the way he works. He obviously isn;t going to fire Pavano, Mussina or Wright for pitching poorly...so this is his only outlet.

Nothing he does surprises me.

Trader_Jorge

05-03-2005, 02:33 PM

Look, let's be honest. The only reason Drayton paid Clemens that outrageous salary for this season was because he knew all along that he likely wouldn't have to pay all of it. He knew that the product he was putting out on the field was far weaker than last season. With that in mind, he figured the Astros would not be in contention by mid-summer and he could dump the salary through a trade.

This line of thinking is also why Drayton insisted on not including a no-trade clause in the Beltran deal. People brushed off the no-trade clause as a convenient excuse for Beltran to chase the money. They said it wasn't the real issue behind the Mets getting Beltran. They were wrong. Drayton does not want to be locked in to big dollars to players. Period. Drayton is cheap, plain and simple, and this is just one more manifestation of it.

JPM0016

05-03-2005, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
They were wrong. Drayton does not want to be locked in to big dollars to players

Yeah, that's why Berkman got a 6 year deal with a full no trade clause. :rolleyes:

Groogrux

05-03-2005, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by JPM0016
Yeah, that's why Berkman got a 6 year deal with a full no trade clause. :rolleyes:

Or Bagwell. Or Biggio. Or Pettitte.

He never gives big contracts. Never. Ever.

If last year was any manifestation of him being cheap, I'll take it!

Nick

05-03-2005, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Look, let's be honest. The only reason Drayton paid Clemens that outrageous salary for this season was because he knew all along that he likely wouldn't have to pay all of it. He knew that the product he was putting out on the field was far weaker than last season. With that in mind, he figured the Astros would not be in contention by mid-summer and he could dump the salary through a trade.

This line of thinking is also why Drayton insisted on not including a no-trade clause in the Beltran deal. People brushed off the no-trade clause as a convenient excuse for Beltran to chase the money. They said it wasn't the real issue behind the Mets getting Beltran. They were wrong. Drayton does not want to be locked in to big dollars to players. Period. Drayton is cheap, plain and simple, and this is just one more manifestation of it.

Why are you still here then???

You've already told us not to waste time posting about the team, or watching the team play this year... but I still don't understand why you continue to post if you feel so strongly against this team and its owner.

Do you simply get off by stating these claims every single chance you have?... because honestly, your anti-drayton posts are starting to lose just a tad bit of novelty, after the 100th time we've all heard it.

Its kinda like having a parrot around here. :rolleyes:

Castor27

05-03-2005, 02:55 PM

According to Jayson Stark, Clemens moving is highly unlikely:

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2052208&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fmlb%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dstark_jayson%26id%3d2052208

Roger Clemens hasn't phoned his moving company yet. But it sure is funny how the open speculation is already beginning on where Clemens will wind up in July:

Yankees? Red Sox? Braves?

Uh, not so fast, folks.

There happens to be a little clause in Clemens' contract that adds $3 million to his $18-million salary if he gets traded. So just that clause alone, says Houston GM Tim Purpura, makes it "highly unlikely that's going to happen."

One thing that clause means is that Clemens is totally unaffordable for Atlanta. And even the Red Sox would be unlikely to want to add a guy at the deadline who had another $9 to $12 million coming.

So that would leave – guess who? – the Yankees. But even they would have to think long and hard about whether the Rocket is worth the price.

Obviously, they're the one team out there that has the cash in Boss Steinbrenner's checking account to afford him. But how much would it really be worth to them to add one pitcher – even one as dominating as this man?

Say the Yankees traded for Clemens in early July – about halfway through the season. He would have $9 million left in salary, plus that $3-million incentive clause – plus another $5 million or so in luxury tax. That's $17 million for a three-month rental.

True, the Astros could pay some of that money. But why would they?

Considering the potential public-relations nightmare they would be risking in trading Houston's No. 1 icon, they would need to be blown away to consider moving Clemens and paying him to pitch somewhere else. But the Yankees don't have enough attractive young players to blow anyone away.

Oh, it's true the Rocket could engineer this whole scenario if he pushed hard enough. But you should also remember that Clemens hasn't forgotten that he had to cajole the Yankees just a little too hard to bring him back for the 2003 season.

So if the Yankees suddenly find themselves desperate for one final reunion, he would no doubt enjoy watching the Yankees squirm and drop that $3-million relocation fee in his wallet.

We'll no doubt start hearing the rumors in June if the Astros are still scoring 1.29 runs per game for Clemens. But if the Rocket is going to finish the year as a hired gun, just bear one thing in mind:

He'll be the most expensive hired gun in history.

lalala902102001

05-03-2005, 04:11 PM

Although I don't question the fact that the Astros are and will remain a bad team this year, I just can't imagine the Cubs be any better. They've lost as much offense as we did, and their pitching is simply awful right now.

Maybe Houston will trade Roger Clemens in mid-season (and we probably should), but I'm rather certain that we'll not trade him to a team that will finish behind us in the division.

msn

05-03-2005, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Drayton does not want to be locked in to big dollars to players. Period. Drayton is cheap, plain and simple, and this is just one more manifestation of it.
You're either unobservant or stupid, plain and simple. Have you not noticed the "big dollars" to the following players?

Bagwell
Berkman
Hidalgo
Clemens
Pettitte (even at a "discount", that's big money)
Kent, for two years

Not to mention highly competitive offers to Beltran (yes, Beltran) and Randy Johnson back in the day.

Heck, they even spent at one time $5M on Brad Ausmus. Cheap???

"Cheap" is the standard uninformed parroting from your typical Astros-fan whiner.

bottlerocket

05-03-2005, 07:11 PM

Cubs couldn't afford him. They Yanks maybe but not the baby bears.

Trader_Jorge

05-04-2005, 07:21 AM

Yeah, you guys don't think Drayton learned his lesson from those big deals to Bagwell, Hidalgo and Pettitte? Come on, apologists, surely you can acknowledge he did. Berkman is a hometown legend whose public relations value makes him an exception in this discussion.

I can't believe someone cited Jeff Kent as an example of Drayton willing to spend money over the long term. That's funny. He signed Kent for what was arguably a below market rate 2 years ago and then dumped him (his top RBI man from last year) for salary reasons in a year when the Astros lost their best player because of money (Beltran). Hilarious.

msn

05-04-2005, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by Trader_Jorge
Berkman is a hometown legend whose public relations value makes him an exception in this discussion.
No, Berkman is an $85 million contract. You cannot arbitrarily dismiss that, especially not with the excuse you employ here. $85M is $85M.

I can't believe someone cited Jeff Kent as an example of Drayton willing to spend money over the long term. That's funny. He signed Kent for what was arguably a below market rate 2 years ago and then dumped him (his top RBI man from last year) for salary reasons
Way to skew the facts in favor of your weak argument. First of all, I acknowledged that it was only for two years. You can argue it was below market--but you may want to check what FA's, especially infielders, were signing for that year. Second, the decision to let Kent go was not a slash in salary for the sake of slashing salary but an attempt to *keep* Beltran, which makes your next phrase even more stupid.

in a year when the Astros lost their best player because of money (Beltran). Hilarious.
Really? The Astros cut Kent *after* they lost Beltran? Or are you arguing they should have been clairevoyant?

Additionally, the Astros did *not* lose Beltran due to money. I know you've tried to prove that point, but you've failed miserably. It's really very simple--$112M (or even $107M) in Texas is better than $119 in NYC. The whole "long-term commitment" BS is a stretch--that money was guaranteed to Beltran one way or the other, and in case you haven't noticed, teams that trade away big contracts often end up having to pick up a large percentage of that contract anyway. See: Hampton, Mike for one of the more recent and crazy examples.

In other words, I'm not an "apologist", I just don't buy the whole "Drayton is cheap!!! conspiracy crap. It's just more examples of Astros fans whining for the sake of whining, and with ridiculous and illogical assumptions at that.

HayesStreet

05-04-2005, 10:29 AM

I could see Clemens agreeing to a trade to the Yanks or Red Sox. He gets to finish the year on a contending team and also helps the Astros by getting something in return (players). Hell, then he could just come back to the 'stros next year!

MadMax

05-04-2005, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by HayesStreet
I could see Clemens agreeing to a trade to the Yanks or Red Sox. He gets to finish the year on a contending team and also helps the Astros by getting something in return (players). Hell, then he could just come back to the 'stros next year!

what in the world would they get back?? there's nothing there. the yanks have zero in the cupboards. i'm not familiar with the Red Sox, but I don't think the Sox NEED Clemens to win that division this year. i don't see them picking up his obligation.

the only team i can really see is the Yanks...and as I said, they have nothing to give back. The 'stros would have to be overwhelmed with an offer in order to give up Roger. The Yanks don't have anything overwhelming they can part with in terms of young talent.

gr8-1

05-05-2005, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by deepellumrocket
And for all the talking heads saying Clemens will end up with the Yankees this season, the Astros currently have a better record and are fewer games out of first place than the Yankees.

Because one team is about winning and the other is a perennial also ran. I'm embarassed for the Stros right now. Clemens is trying to help the ball club as well as cement his legacy and these guys can't get him one win.

MadMax

05-05-2005, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by gr8-1
Because one team is about winning and the other is a perennial also ran. I'm embarassed for the Stros right now. Clemens is trying to help the ball club as well as cement his legacy and these guys can't get him one win.

are they "about winning" this year? they're not exactly doing a bang-up job in that effort.

were they about winning last season? they got no farther than we did.

Groogrux

05-05-2005, 10:39 AM

nevermind...way off.

gr8-1

05-05-2005, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by MadMax
are they "about winning" this year? they're not exactly doing a bang-up job in that effort.

They'll be in the playoffs in October. Whatever it takes, their owner will do.

Groogrux

05-06-2005, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by gr8-1
They'll be in the playoffs in October. Whatever it takes, their owner will do.

When you're in the biggest market in the league by far, then it's a lot easier to do whatever it takes. Have Steinbrenner and McLane switch teams for a season and I bet all the whiners will be spelling Steinbrenner wrong.

Also, McLane's never made a move at the deadline to help his team. Ever.

BSW

05-06-2005, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by Rocketman95

Also, McLane's never made a move at the deadline to help his team. Ever.

Please tell me you are smoking something that made you forget the past.

gr8-1

05-06-2005, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by Rocketman95
When you're in the biggest market in the league by far, then it's a lot easier to do whatever it takes. Have Steinbrenner and McLane switch teams for a season and I bet all the whiners will be spelling Steinbrenner wrong.

Also, McLane's never made a move at the deadline to help his team. Ever.

I don't think McClane is a bad owner at all. Facts are facts though. I would bet on the Yanks being there at the end. I think we'll finish third.

The Cardinals or Cubs may be willing to spend more than us.