What if we never sign carlos lee.....2009 Astros and what Should Have Been Today

We were coming off a World Series appearance, Carlos was one of the best available bats. We needed an immediate impact to our offense.

Nobody was complaining when we spent then because we were in Win-now mode and we did what most organizations would of done.

Just look, the Rangers tried to resign Cliff Lee to a huge contract. Had they signed him to something around 20M/Yr for the next 6 years and him become a dud after 3 years they'd be singing the same thing we are.

 

The Lee signing was absolutely crippling... but it was a perfect example of management doing "what the fans wanted", and how that isn't always the smartest move.

Fans at the time were still upset about not getting Beltran, even though they had made the World Series, and were clamoring that they do something to improve the offense.

The Carlos Lee contract is one of the ALL TIME WORST for a mid-market team, and their struggles now are very much related to being hampered by his albatross contract. Its also no suprise that his ****** is still out there (ie - untradeable), and he's predictably not lived up to the $$$.

 

Well, the Astros went to the World Series in 2005. In 2006 they didn't make the playoffs and both Clemens and Pettite filed for free agency.

I believe the argument is they shouldn't have been in "win- now" mode.

 

That is entirely untrue. A lot of people knew that Lee wasn't worth anything close to that number and predicted this situation. Soriano and Lee got badly overpaid in that market to the ultimate detriment of both teams. Lee was a good hitter and consistent producer but he was never a truly elite player. He's only posted an OPS above .900 once in his career. He has a career OPS of .831. The Astros should've passed on that bad market no matter what are needs were and what fans wanted. In a nutshell, there was too much poor and shortsighted thinking during that period (well beyond that albatross contract given to Lee) that we are very much paying for today. You have to make sacrifices at times when you are in contention but there is a difference between sacrifice and total neglect for the future.

 

Everyone kills Lee, including myself, but the fact of the matter was he did his job for 3 seasons. Trading for Jennings, signing Woody Williams and NOT resigning Andy were the real issues that started the downfall.

Zobrist is a nice player but isn't a great player by any means and in fact look at what Matt Downs has done, curious to see what numbers he projects to have had with Ben's ABs.

Luke Scott has been BAD this season...Carlos is having a better season, like I mentioned in the other thread.

 

If Pettite stayed for $12 million a year, they likely continue to not sign any decent draft picks. Even when Lee did his job, he still wasn't worth what he was getting paid. He only produced for half of his contract... that is NOT worth it.

Meanwhile, Lance Berkman continues to play well... and actually wanted to stay here, but no spot for him thanks to Lee.

 

Woody was signed for 6 million per and Jennings made 5.5 million when traded for...use that money to sign Andy and its a wash while getting a much better pitcher. Lee was overpaid no doubt and a mistake but until last season he did his job...everyone knew this would happen.

It just comes down to a broken philosophy, not matter who they would have signed or didn't. The picks they didn't sign were 3rd and 4th rd picks, that's being cheap not out of money.

 

that offseason was an unqualified disaster. It wasn't just one bad thing, it was not offering arbitration to Pettitte, Clemens, and Huff (and missing out on 6 potential first round picks). It was signing Lee and Woody Williams and losing a 1st and 2nd round draft picks. It was not signing 3 of the first 5 picks they did have. That was the perfect time to rebuild, but instead it probably set the team back 5 years.

One silver lining: Do you remember the rumors that Purpura was offering Pence and Hirsch for Jon Garland? Instead they went with the Jenning's trade, but can you imagine if the Pence/Garland trade happened?

 

They're being "cheaper" because they were overpaying players on the big club.

They only now started to realize how important player development really is... but now they're 5 years too late.

 

Good post.

I don't remember Pence for Garland.. I remember he was offering the exact same package they traded for Jennings, and Ken Williams said no to the trade because it wasn't enough (and with the lack of production of Taveras/Hirsh... he was probably right).

 

There were a few of us.

 

Call me crazy, but wasn't Ben Zobrist traded for A. Huff? I remember Buster O. at the time saying that the Astros didn't give nothing of value for Huff, but he added that we gave up a grade B and C prospects. I remember thinking to myself, if you give up a grade B prospect, thats something of value. Shoot, come to think about it, they gave up more for Huff then they did Beltran now that we got to see how all the prospects we traded panned out. Sros can't do wrong right.

 

I think the way the Astros were handling Zobrist's development had a lot to do with how he was perceived as a prospect. He was in his mid-20s and he was toiling at Double-A. If you didn't know any better, that would make you think that he wasn't much of a prospect.

He wasn't putting up prolific numbers in the minors, but it's the job of the player development staff to recognize potential. In hindsight, Zobrist should have already been on the big club by the time of the trade.

 

There is some serious man-love going on for Zobrist. He's had one great year and another good half season. He was pretty mediocre last season and has been okay this season.

Huff was an excellent aquisition that year, he provided everything the Stros needed from thrid base. Remember, Ensberg went into his coma and then got hurt so the Stros needed a 3B badly and got it. If the Stros had resigned him, trading a good player like Zobrist wouldn't have hurt nearly as much.

 

But they *didn't* re-sign him. They traded multiple years of players for one-year of another player. It's the underlying philosophy that was messed up. There's no way to predict Zobrist would have turned out as good as he did - but you trade for one-year rentals when you're positioned to have a great season (Randy Johnson, Carlos Beltran). You don't trade young players for one-year rentals in seasons where you know your team doesn't have potential for greatness. Between the 10-15 players traded for Tejada, Valverde, Huff, and Jennings, you can't predict which ones would have turned out well. But you can certainly project that 1 or 2 of them might have - you hold on them to figure out with 1 or 2 are the gems.

 

Agree with you EXCEPT Stros were coming off a WS and still very much in contention in a WIDE open NL. Stros still had Roger, Roy and Andy so greatness was still VERY much possible. I really don't have an issue with this particular deal, Pupura was a horrible GM but this move was good.

If we didn't have to pitch Chris Sampson on the last game of the season, we might have made the same run the Cards made that season.

 

Good point - I had forgotten that trade happened in 2006.

 

The big mistake wasn't necessarily in signing him, but for signing him for so long.

Trading away all our prospects for above average players whose difference in production would have been fairly negligible was a killer as well.

And I'm still of the belief that Pettite was never gonna re-sign here. Yeah the Astros didn't exactly entice him, but the guy has always been a Yankee. I never really bought that he was gung ho about being here, not like Clemens.