Nolan Ryan was still in his prime when he signed with the Astros. I thought that was what you were after.
You just happened to pick the player that had a prime of over 20+ years. Most players "primes" overlap when they sign their first BIG contract (whether its with their existing team, or they go to their first new team as a free agent). The candidates for that sort of player that the Astros have signed is Carlos Lee.
Kent was old, but he wasn't past his prime when he signed with us. He had been an all-star the previous 4 years and was coming off a season where he finished 6th in the MVP voting. He was an all-star with the Astros, and then went on to play another 4 years with the Dodgers, where he also was an all-star once. He would have had plenty of suitors when he was a free agent, and we paid him more than he had been paid at any point in career, so I'm not sure he actually took a discount of any sort to play for Houston. He went to his "hometown" Dodgers after the Astros and got paid a bit less there (though he was that much older).
still not really sure why the team is obsessed with spending a ton of money on a closer... but im so starved for FAs that i wont question it
I'm not saying they have to do it SOLELY with draft picks, just that they're not going to get marquee FAs until they can show that the FA wouldn't be wasting the prime years of his career there.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>The Astros don't think David Robertson wants to pitch for them, says New York man <a href="http://t.co/X4qClt0OmU">http://t.co/X4qClt0OmU</a></p>— Astros County (@AstrosCounty) <a href="https://twitter.com/AstrosCounty/status/541940917444153344">December 8, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Take it for what it's worth, but this is what one agent said Sunday of Astros: "(It's) difficult to gauge intent and interest they have"</p>— Evan Drellich (@EvanDrellich) <a href="https://twitter.com/EvanDrellich/status/541740749604134912">December 7, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> No real news... lots of dis-information, designed media leaks, and wishy-washiness overall... bleh.
I have a gut feeling that this is going to be a fun and eventful offseason for the Astros. All the moves might now happen this week at the Winter Meetings, but I think a few signings and trades will happen. I just hope they are moves that I like, and that will work out well for the big league club.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Multiple sources say the Astros have been pursuing SS Jed Lowrie.</p>— Brian McTaggart (@brianmctaggart) <a href="https://twitter.com/brianmctaggart/status/541993535872843777">December 8, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
there were also reports last night that the royals are listening to offers on holland and wade davis. wonder if we get our relievers via trade, even if its not them.
He has played 1B, 2B, SS, & 3B, so he could offer some versatility, but I'd rather stick with Marwin at SS. Lowrie could compete for the 3B job though.
Your percpetion of the team does not jibe with, at the very least, Miller's perception. Did you even read what he said before beating the same ol' drum? The Astros have never, and will never compete with the Yankees. But Miller paints a very positive view of the organization and it's FO.
Just like I'm not going to believe every bad-mouth piece of press they get (or when agents publicly chastise Luhnow's negotiation tactics)... I'm probably also not going to believe the cushy lip-service they get when they get rejected. In the end, he took less money (a lot less if you factor in state income tax) to pitch elsewhere. I don't really care about what sort of "impressive pitch" they're able to do... but the fact remains that simply throwing more money at a player may not be enough to overcome the "other" factors. Robertson also seems to be using them for leverage (at least according to the leaks likely being put out there by the Astros themselves). As it is, I'm not disappointed that they're losing out on big money closers (since I don't think they need to spend lot of money to find one)... but I am disappointed they're getting rejected despite offering the most money and potentially being everybody's favorite leverage team. I'm also not comparing the Astros to the Yankees but to similar markets they once dominated in terms of "more desirable franchise", but now I'm not so sure. Their "image" problem, which goes beyond simple wins-losses, always had the potential to affect them in free agency, and it looks to continue to be true despite more $$$ being thrown out there.
His perspective and insight is significantly greater than yours, though, which is why it carries considerable weight. Perhaps it was lip-service, though I don't recall a player being that effusive with a rejected suitor. Regardless, you keep beating the same drum, and when presented with dissenting opinions - legitimate opinions, in this case, coming from someone who would know - you're quick to dismiss so you can go on about how damaged the Astros' brand is. If I'm a potential free agent, I think Miller's comments might actually resonate, lip service, or not.
But you do. That's how you always end up in these conversations - everytime anything negative is said about the Astros, you use it as evidence that they have a bad image, etc. You are worried that the Astros made enemies of agents and that free agents are avoiding them or using them as leverage, etc. You accept those kinds of claims and use them to worry about things, but then you ignore the claims on the opposite side. That's not to say you're wrong - but you're choosing what claims out there you want to believe. Other factors like "get to pitch for the Yankees" has worked on free agents over the last 50 years or however long free agency has existed in baseball. It's not specific to the Astros. "Everybody's favorite leverage team" meaning 1 guy? Who have they lost out to besides the Yankees when offering the most money? I agree they have an image problem. But that was part of the process - problem fixes itself once they aren't one of the worst teams in baseball. People have always been willing to give up a little money to not play for bottomfeeders.
What part of "just like I don't believe the astros are some toxic organization", and "don't believe the lip service" was made unclear to you? I am VERY concerned the Astros have an image problem that goes beyond simple wins/losses... and as far as the 10 bad press articles for every one piece of "good" press, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle, but slightly towards the negative. And, its doesn't matter what I think... I'm still supporting the team. It matters more what the casual fans, the sports agents, the free agents, and their own homegrown players that need extensions think. My opinion is that they have image problems that go beyond wins-losses or being bottom feeders. The "smartest guys in the room that haven't accomplished anything" schtick has clearly rubbed more people the wrong way than the right way. They aren't one of the worst teams in baseball currently... and will continue to improve on the field... but they still likely have further to go from an "image" and "PR" standpoint.
Again, as I said above... I'm still a fan... so it really doesn't matter what I say/think as I'm still supporting them. As far as "beating the same drum", I'm not really sure what that is referring to... but I presume its that any "concerned" opinion about this team, and where they are in the rebuild, should be met with "Go away... everything is fine... front office can do no wrong" rhetoric. It is possible to evaluate this team both positively and negatively all at once. They have positively rebuilt the farm and it is now starting to translate to improvement on the field (no longer god-awful, but still some improving to do). They have not endeared themselves towards agents thanks to past dealings, and have currently failed to acquire their top two reported targets... again, those are negatives even if they put forth an "impressive effort".
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Besides Jed Lowrie, the Astrros have also kicked the tires on Chase Headley.</p>— Nick Cafardo (@nickcafardo) <a href="https://twitter.com/nickcafardo/status/542022225612660737">December 8, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
It's you repeating the same refrain over and over and over again - there might be some truth to it; but when confronted with an informed contraian POV, you easily brush it away and get back to beating the drum (which you literally provide a pristine example of later in your post...). We have a lot of snippy baseball writers taking shots and then quoting OTR sources; Miller, so far as I know, is the only one on the record and he paints a very positive picture of the organization. That should be encouraging; instead, it's "lip service" (even though it was clearly more than just lip service; he could have said nothing or offered standard replies - and probably would have had the Astros not genuinely made his decision difficult. Seemed fairly sincere). (beat, beat, beat...) BTW, would that be the opinion of Miller's agent? Which other agent, besides Aiken's (who, justifiably, has an axe to grind), would fall into this camp?
