Surveying the wreckage. Lineup possibilites for 2005.

Buck, you're just a homer. Pfft.

 

Yeah, Whiteman's a below average SS, they have tried him at 3rd in the past when they still had illusions (delusions?) of Burke as a MLB SS. Not sure how much of a prospect he is anymore.

SS is one position (catcher is another) where I gladly sacrifice offense for great defense.

 

I don't know about that...

Maybe keeping Billy's $8M on the payroll this year could have won Game 6 for us?

At the very least, the lefty-righty combo of Wagner and Lidge would have been the best in the game, period.

I know a lot of people feel Wagner had worn out his welcome with the Stros b/c of the harping about spending, and that may have been in the owner's box, but not in the clubhouse.

Bagwell, Biggio and everyone else who counts on the field new how valuable he was in the late innings, regardless of what boneheaded things he said to the media off the field.

So, if you're going to claim that money has never inhibited the ability of the Astros to win, I submit the Wagner deal as exhibit A.

I know a lot of people are going to respond with "Well, if we kept Wagner, we wouldn't have signed Pettitte, and consequently Clemens..."

To which I respond: Doesn't this further that illustrate that (at least) sometimes Drayton's financial decisions cost us on the field? The fact he was only willing to acquire the starters we so desparately needed AFTER trading away the best LH closer in the game is an excellent example of how his fiscal retentiveness has been an obstacle in the past.

 

Why are we still talking about Billy Wagner?

First of all, he didn't exactly tear it up in philly... he went there with an injury that he most likely would have had here (considering that it showed up in Spring Training)... and thus, we'd have an $8 million dollar dud of a pitcher.

Second of all, Brad Lidge has already proved himself to be just as good as Wagner... and that's only in his first 1/2 year as a closer.

Wags was amazing... but what he was doing in 1998 was basically un-human (spotting a 99 mph on the corners... amazing). But, you knew that he'd eventually slow down because he was simply throwing out there... and throwers eventually lose a little something in their arm that makes them a little more human.

Lidge is a PITCHER... and he's even lights out after so many arm surgeries (I shudder to think what he would have been like if he hadn't had all those).

(btw... I understand you're advocating in using both of them... but there's no way Lidge develops into this beast that we saw in the playoffs if he's still playing second-fiddle to Wags. He's become a monster... the one that Dotel wished he could have become).

Finally, the Astros have made the same financial decisions that all mid-market teams have had to make over the years. Also, the Braves and Dodgers have done it now recently as well, seeing that the big spending ways don't neccesarily mean more success than mid-market spending.

Bottom line... you can't tie up huge amounts of money in closers or older veterans, when it could cost you in resigning your younger up-and-coming stars. The Astros anticipated that with Wagner, and were able to (hopefully) get something out of it. They also have maxmized the FA opportunity when available (with Kent, Pettite, and Clemens).

I'm totally fine w/ Drayton & Gerry. They've made good decisions in terms of player development... fiscally sound decisions, in terms of spending when they have to, and cutting their losses in Hidalgo and Wagner when the cost didn't justify the means... and they've been successful throughout all of it.

 

I agree with much of what you said. I am fine with Drayton and Gerry as well, for the most part.

My point was that Max and others jumped all over someone for bringing up the money issue again, as if it was totally irrelevant. I disagree with that completely. Money is always a relevant issue when it comes to the Astros, and it probably always will be. There's nothing wrong with that, but to say financial decisions have had no impact on the product put on the field is foolish.

Can you honestly say you wouldn't take Wagner in the 12th inning of Game 6 over anyone else on the roster not named Lidge? Do you think his absence had absolutely no impact on the outcome of the season? Many would say he was to the pitching staff what Bagwell and Biggio were to the everyday lineup - the heart and soul. His value to this team went beyond his performance on the field. But enough about Billy...

There are plenty of other historical instances when finances have restricted the growth of this team. Do you remember when Clemens was leaving Toronto and a deal was nearly reached to bring him to Houston for Hampton and Hidalgo? The deal would have been done, but when Gerrry and Drayton threw their public hissy-fit over Roger wanting an extension done BEFORE the deal was made, the whole thing blew up in their faces and Roger went on to enjoy 4 terrific years in NY before finally making it home to Houston, and then only as a grossly underpaid hometown discount. So, in essence, we missed out on nearly a half-decade of enjoying the finest pitcher of his generation for purely economic reasons. Not convinced yet?

Besides Wagner and Clemens, do I really need to go into the list of talented players in their prime who we have let walk away for almost nothing for purely economic reasons?

Apparently, I do:

Caminiti
Finley
Kile
Hampton
Everett
Alou
Castilla

So, forget Wagner...

I have just listed off another 7 All-Star quality players whom the Astros have let walk because of payroll concerns in the Drayton McClane era. For three consecutive years we had to replace the ace of our pitching staff b/c they became too expensive to keep (Kile, Hampton, Randy).

None were moved because of poor performance...all were about $$$. So to contend that the quality of the team never suffers as a result of McClane's self-imposed budget is obviously flat-out wrong.

That is my point.

 

the argument didn't look dumb though when we had no bullpen.. clearly they should have gotten us a bullpen

 

I'll have to look, but I thought he said he lost money even in minute maid park as well

 

if we believe this article then he is claiming to lose money..

www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/2210802

"McLane understands he hardly gets any sympathy when he claims losses. Nonetheless, he has told people close to him that the Astros lost $15 million in 2003. He won't say, however, if that is actual cash output, AAV rate or "book."

Some agents find it difficult to believe McLane and the Astros can lose money annually while playing at Minute Maid Park, which opened in 2000 after the people of Houston had it built amid promises that the Astros would have a better chance to compete in a new stadium. "

 

Anyone who brings up the fact that we didn't have Wagner as a negative has absolutely no credibility. Without trading Wagner, we don't sign Pettitte. Without signing Pettitte, we don't sign Clemens.

If you're saying you'd rather have Wagner, who spent a good part of the year injured, over Pettitte and Clemens, then you don't know what you're talking about. By the way, who signed Wagner to that big contract he's enjoying now? What about the nice big contract Hidalgo signed? Bagwell? Biggio? Berkman and Oswalt will no doubt stay Astros.

The Clemens in 1998 Milos is referring to also wanted an absurd contract that no mid-market team would be sane to sign. We lost Kile by $1 million dollars. McLane made a competitive offer to him and he chose Colorado. Everybody knew that Johnson a)wasn't going to resign with the Astros and b)was most likely going to sign with Arizona. He did flirt with the Rangers for a bit, IIRC, but ultimately, he chose family in Arizona. We traded Everett and Hampton and got good players in exchange. Adam Everett nearly made the all-star team this season and without Dotel, we wouldn't have Beltran who had one of the best post-seasons ever. I don't recall the circumstances when we traded Caminiti or Finley, but I do recall us trading them, not just letting them go in free agency. All I remember before that is a team that hadn't really done anything, and two seasons after the trade, we made the playoffs for the first time in 11 years. Alou and Castilla? Good riddance. Alou, despite playing well this year, is getting paid too much and wouldn't have allowed us to get Pettitte, Clemens, or probably Beltran this year. Castilla's only got good stats because of Coors.

Like Nick has pointed out, the Astros have had to make moves similar to many other mid-market teams. Like it or not, we're not the Yankees or Red Sox. We can't keep every player that wears an Astros' uniform. They've done remarkably well competing within the economic restraints that baseball provides. Only someone that doesn't understand that would complain about the overall record of McLane as an owner.

 

No one is disputing that the Astros let go players because of money. What we are disputing is whether it is "self-imposed."

 

Details of the Caminiti trade as per this site :
December 28, 1994:
Houston Astros send to the San Diego Padres:
Ken Caminiti
Andujar Cedeno
Steve Finley
Roberto Petagine
Brian Williams
Player to be named later

San Diego Padres send to the Houston Astros
Derek Bell
Doug Brocail
Ricky Gutierrez
Pedro Martinez ouch!
Phil Plantier
Craig Shipley

 

Milos... I agree that the Astros, like all teams except the Yankees, have always used fiances as a determining factor in their decisions.

I also agree with the fact that they've let several players go over the years due to the fact that they were due to make huge salaries in the upcoming years.

Finally, I will also say that many of these players went on to have years that were far superior to the ones they had in Houston, meaning we didn't get the "most" out of them, like most mid-market teams do with their "prospects" before they become high priced stars.

All that being said... you CANNOT fault McLane & co. for the fact that even though they've let all these players go, they've continued to put a SUCCESSFUL franchise on that field year-in and year-out. THAT is why Max and everybody else are probably jumping all over this argument... because, in the end, this team still wins.

That can't be said for most teams that take this approach... the A's have perfected the art of winning cheap, but other teams that have tried to play moneyball recently (Pirates, Royals, Blue Jays, Mariners) have all FAILED miserably. A lot of that has to do with these team's farm systems... and for that, the Astros are very very lucky to have guys like Oswalt, Berkman, Miller, Lidge, Everett, and Ensberg not only come up from the minors, but succeed heavily.

So, if you're an owner... and you know that your team can be just as competitive (if not more so) at a upper-middle class payroll, provided you let certain players go, promote within your farm system, and only sign expensive FA's to either fill a need, or when the opportunity is too good to pass up... what do you think you'd do?

No team keeps all their home-grown talent... a similiar list to the one you just put out there could be created for virtually every team, except the Yankees.

We could always play "what-if's" if we had those players... We could have already won a world series by now, if we had kept only just a handful of those guys... or, we could take into account that maybe we might have been just the same or worse, albeit with a higher payroll and less flexibility.

I honestly think the Astros way of doing business is just about what most teams should be considering... provided they have a stocked farm system (which teams like the Brewers and Devil Rays are about to reveal), and that they don't pass up the opportunity to sign decent FA's here and there.

Its still "moneyball", but Houston's taken it to a whole new level... and the results on the field have spoken for itself.

 

but the team doesn't spend the amount to make sure they will make it all the way.. if they spent money to make sure we have a good bullpen.. we'd be in the world series right now..

as for the wagner trade.... it was a cutting salary move unless they knew for a fact they were getting andy and roger...

I know we have been successful... but I think the fact that we have a lower payroll does make a difference in us ending up in the world series or not...

yes he has spent money.. i guess I just had the idea that a new stadium would put us higher up in spending... and I can't buy that he has lost money in minute maid park

 

I wouldn't consider Wagner the anchor of the pitching staff at all. Oswalt was the anchor. And whatever "heart" Wagner would've added pales in comparison to what Clemens brought.

Your list is practically entirely flawed.

Caminiti and Finley were traded together to the Padres, mainly because we thought Phil Nevin, our #1 overall pick was going to be a good player (turned out he would be, later). We got back Phil Plantier, who was supposed to be a big time slugger. Caminiti himself hadn't hit more than 20 HR in a season. We also got Derek Bell, Doug Brocail, and Ricky Guttierrez, all of whom gave us a few good seasons. This deal had very little to do with money, and we certainly got a return.

Finley was traded coming off his career high in home runs of 11, and coming off back to back seasons with OBPs of .305 and .329 (for comparison, Adam Everett's OBPs the last 2 years were .320 and .317). He was 29 at the time he was traded. Were you guessing he'd hit 30+ HR 4 times in the next decade? Right.

We lost Kile and Hampton due to money, I'll grant you...but Colorado was willing to overpay for pitching and we weren't. We landed Dotel in the Hampton trade who landed Beltran. Almost nothing?

The Everett move was about money, but it's not like we dumped him. We received a guy who we thought would become our starting shortstop- and he did. Never mind that Everett (Carl) is a lunatic. Almost nothing?

Alou...he left us when he was 35 (prime?), with a history of injury troubles. He's put up outstanding numbers the past few years, but we've had a crowd in the outfield, especially at the corners. Remember, when Alou left, Hidalgo was coming into his own. With Berkman in the other corner, we simply didn't need him.

Castilla was a pick up off the scrap heap. The guy was RELEASED by the Devil Rays mid season. Would've been nice to keep him, but practically the entire league thought he didn't have much in him. Apparently, everyone was wrong.

 

results on the field? I know we've done well... but one playoff series win in all of gerrys and draytons time here isnt that successful in my book...

 

Different Pedro Martinez. This one was a lefty, and his career lasted about 5 years.

 

Well, in that time... they've lost to teams with both better payrolls, and lesser payrolls.

They've also now beaten a team with a higher payroll.

What does it all mean? Probably that a high/low payroll can only take you so far... ie, the playoffs. After that, its up to the players on the field to step it up.

We lost from 97-01, not because of your payroll, but because Biggio/Bagwell/etc. didn't hit. They hit this year... and they won. What a concept!

They ultimately didn't go all the way because they didn't have a 4th starter... and ironically enough, they invested big $$$ in one who's unfortunately injured. You can't blame Drayton for his elbow... (or can you?).

Sure, you could blame the lack of $$$ in the bullpen, but besides Wagner... was there really an obvious choice of who they should have targeted? I guarantee you they'll improve that facet in the off-season... but the bullpen is always 3rd on the priority list (after starting pitching and hitting, and if you're missing one of the first two, the bullpen can't save you... see the 2003 Astros).

Finally... for the Drayton losing money at MMP argument... you can believe what you want. But, this team ultimately "loses" money in the fact that they have a horrible TV deal that is luckily going to expire soon. Stadiums don't mean that much more in terms of "profits"(especially since the Astros do spend better than avg. on payroll)... but, the TV deal is what ultimately determines your fate.

Its what separates the Yankees, Red Sox, Braves and Cubs... from the Cardinals, Astros, and Mariners.

 

Nick... I definitely agree that payroll doesnt gurantee you victories.....

It is just easier to win when you have bigger payrolls..

It would be a lot easier for me to believe he was losing money though if I had some proof.

Strangely enough though, I have no problem with him making profit. If he owns a team.. actually he SHOULD make a profit every year.

The fact that we don't spend as much as the big time teams does annoy me.. but its not really a criticism of Drayton.. but more of a criticsm of the fact that MLB allows this to be the case in the first place.

Strangely enough now Yankee fans tell me.. the marlins winning etc proves there doesn't need to be any salary cap and claim their big payroll doesn't make them win anymore...

I don't think big payrolls gurantee anything in one single year.. but over long periods of time I think you are more likely to win if you have a big payroll..

The fact is the way we have handled this team... there is no doubt in my mind we'd have a champ by now if there was a salary cap.. and that's what annoys me.