You may need an Hakeem facemask or goggle setup, if you jerk that knee any higher you just might fracture some orbital bones.
Agree with this - that's a fantastically cheap and short-term deal for an excellent player. I'm not going to judge the Astros without knowing what his preferences were and what they offered - but I'd be really disappointed if we thought that was too expensive a deal. If that's the case, I don't see us ever really signing a top-tier free agent because that's about as good a value deal they would ever get for a player of that caliber.
It wasn't about not being willing to spend 80 mill on one player. They simply liked Beltran more. There wasn't really a need for a player to push Gattis to the bench. Luhnow also really likes his 1st round picks. As Astros' fans, we want to see our dream team come true. Sometimes a dream team isn't what we need to win.
I can't believe people are making excuses for the Astros 3 years 60 sounds like a great deal. They should have been all over that.
If you honestly believe that Luhnow would put a first round pick above the needs of the current MLB team... and you're actually ok with that... you're probably going to be ok with literally any decision (or lack of decision) this team makes.
3/60 is neither cheap nor an overpay considering pick value is about $15 million. If Astros still have money in budget, I would assume they were in ballpark of this deal.
Luhnow will evaluate every deal on its merits and draft pick will be part of that evaluation. If you think Luhnow will place zero value on a pick, you haven't been paying attention. Luhnow wants to win now, win later. That said, I think he'll either talk CWS down to a reasonable deal or make a trade at the deadline for someone like Cueto. Not sure he wants to tie his last bit of budget (guessing Astros are close) to another DH/1B.
I'm disappointed as well, given the contract. I wouldn't say it was a great deal, but it certainly wasn't an overpay which has dominated baseball free agency for years (but not so much this year). To get a star player at a need position for a reasonable contract would have been perfect. It means one of or a combination of 3 factors: 1) They simply love the guys we have in house (Gurriel & Reed) 2) Crane wasn't willing to give Luhnow the money 3) The expect a steep decline from EE
What's to say we weren't all over it and EE simply chose Cleveland? That's why they are called free agents, because they have the freedom to choose.
I don't think it's out of the question that Gurriel and/or Reed produce more WAR this year than Encarnacion. Given that his salary is much lower than I anticipated, I still would have loved to have him. But he's at an age where decline is always a factor. You can never sure how steep it will be or when it will happen, if it happens at all. If the Indians are stuck with the really bad contract of a declining player, and one of our guys turns out to be really good, this deal we obviously should have made will look like a brilliant choice. As with most choices, this move will retroactively be good or bad.
I never said he'd place zero value... but if you're ok with draft pick compensation being a "deal breaker", then you're also going to be of the permanent mindset of never wanting to sign a free agent, being risk averse to trading valuable prospects, and always defending every front office move. Yes, the goal is always to win now, win later... and with their current under 25 core, that will be the expectation by default. The promise of "winning later" also rings hollow if there's not maximization done to "win now". Later on, they'll just be swapping one weakness out for possibly another weakness. Payroll isn't close to being in jeopardy. They cut salary and added it back.
Can't really scrutinize the age/decline factor much... not when the Astros are fresh off of signing a 40 year old for close to the same amount/year. If you feel strongly that Beltran will maintain consistency this year, you have to also give EE a semblance of the benefit of the doubt for at least the next 2 years till age 35. One thing I thought he brought to the table was big-time playoff hitting experience. I know most will scoff at that as being a "thing"... but when every pitch is magnified, and every single member of the pitching staff is fair game to be thrown at you, and you have a franchise that historically has some stars who just never could get it going int he playoffs... you tend to pay attention to guys who hit well in the post-season (Lance Berkman was a playoff god).
I wonder how much geography had to do with it? I would imagine he chose them on the basis that they are a legit shot at the title next season as well. After all that, it seems he didn't get the huge deal everyone was expecting he would get.
I don't feel particularly confident Beltran will maintain what he did this year, that's why he has a one year deal. Beltran is at an age where decline is a neon red flag.
Agreed. I'd take the potential risk of EE declining (but still likely having at least 1-2 good years left) and costing a first round pick, but still being only $20 million/year... vs. a 1 year $16 million dollar Beltran. Then again, this team survived a 1 year $16 million dollar Rasmus, so anything's going to be better than that.
I like it. The sox and tribe will be the AL favorites and we can slide under the radar with our youth. I think EEs numbers will start to decline in CLE
