So he adds a little bit to the payroll last yr (Kazmir for just 1/2 the yr) as well as Gomez for one more yr, and by doing that, you're CONVINCED he's going to spend the hundreds of millions of $$ it's going to take to sign Altuve, Keuchel, Springer & eventually Correa (and others) to stay competitive over the next 5-7 yrs? Their payroll a few yrs ago (under Crane), was down below 30 million. The highest paid player was Wandy, and he wasn't even on the team (with the Pirates). The next two yrs the payroll was extremely low as well, and thus by it being low there's nothing that you can take away from his actions regarding spending $$ on contracts that would give anyone the confidence to say (or in your case to say "yeah...we do know") that he will spend the necessary $$ in the future. They made the playoffs last yr, and what did he do in the offseason to convince you for sure that he's going to spend hundreds of millions of $$? He signed Rasmus to a one yr deal, and got Fister on a real cheap one yr deal as well. That's it. Payroll right now from what I can see is around 85-87 million. That said, because he spent a little bit of money at the deadline last yr, you can say "yeah...we do know" in the coming yrs he'll be willing to bump it up significantly? I'm not saying he won't, but like I said, there's nothing he's done thus far that could make anyone say he will like you're claiming. I guess only time will tell. For the future of the 'Stros I damn well hope he and his partners will.
You've changed the context, which was originally, "Crane will spend if we're good." Last year, they were good. And last year, he spent. He also re-signed Tony Sipp. And just because he wasn't acquired during your conveniently limited - and ultimately meaningless - time frame, Carlos Gomez still counts. He was, before Rasmus signed his QO, set to be the highest paid Astro in 2016. Altogether, including Giles, he added $38MM to the 2016 payroll- and that doesn't include the ~$11MM he added via arbitration, including a ~$7MM raise for Keuchel. Again, the premise was, "Crane will spend if we're good." So far, so good. I'm on much firmer ground here than you are - care to provide an instance in which they've been good and he *hasn't* increased payroll?....
Meh. Crane hasn't shown a willingness to spend big money. They jettisoned Lowrie for financial reasons. They were not taking on a lot of money in the expiring contract of Kazmir. Carlos Gomez is making 9 million this year and then will be a free agent. Even the Hamels contract wasn't going to be that rich, as the Phillies ate a lot of that money/Harrison in that deal. What happened to all the money that the Astros were going to spend during the summer? I am not saying the Astros will not spend any money (obviously as they have signed players); but there is no indication that the Crane is willing to spend big on players in free agency or in trade. I am sure a lot of that is the mess after the team was told, and the level of investment by the owners.
The Jed Lowrie who has a lower OPS than Kemp, Castro and Gattis? The same Jed Lowrie who fetched a 24 year old pitcher currently in AAA with a 1.89 ERA and 0.84 WHIP and .180 or so BAA?
Did I say it was a bad deal? That wasn't really the context of the discussion. They still shed nearly $10,00,000 moving him, and what was that money spent on? Luhnow and his staff are exceptional at evaluating young players.
When they let Lowrie go, the expectation that the team was a year or 2 away from contending. The mindset changed soon after. I wouldn't hold that one over his head in terms of "spending when winning" because no one thought they were in winning mode *yet*. Kazmir, they acquired and then spent something on Fister to replace him. 1 year deal, sure...but they spent it this year. And will probably spend to replace him this offseason unless someone internal is better. I don't think that's an argument against him spending. Gomez made money last year as well. And yeah, he's making a decent chunk this year. I don't see how you can bring this up and say he's *not* spending. He clearly acquired and willingly increased the payroll to try and improve. That's what spending is. But the Hamels contract would again have been a significant increase in money, and he was willing to do it! Finding reasons these aren't all $240M contracts doesn't change the fact that he was willing to (or did) acquire and spend on guys. Colby 15, Fister 8, Keuchel 7, I'm sure they evaluated others and made offers. I'm fine knowing that the team is prudent about its spending and doesn't throw insane money at Uptons/Heywards. I'll disagree. He's had opportunities (since ~2 months into last season when we realized the team was ready to contend soon), and he has spent. No, he didn't immediately give someone a $250M deal in the 1 offseason he's had since then, but the signs are positive.
Go read OP. He and some of his buddies were talking about the next five yrs. So adding 38 million to the payroll this yr (which still makes it below 90 million) you know for sure he's going to amp it up SIGNIFICANTLY paying 100 hundreds of millions in contracts to Altuve, Springer, Keuchel, and eventually Correa? You, as well as the rest of us Astros fans, would love for Crane to do this, but none of us know for sure.
FIFY Until its either extension time, or they're passing up Hamels-like deals due to financial restraints, there's really no reason spouting off against the owners, despite what your inside sources are leaking to you.
The Astros were just in the playoffs and were projected as the likeliest to win the AL West by most sources not ESPN when they traded him the second time.
I didn't disagree with the trade, and still don't. I was pointing out that the Astros made that move motivated by finances. They saved about $10,000,000 trading him. Doug Fister? A one year contract at $7,000,000? That isn't really "spending" in the way that I think the OP meant. Did they make a run at Cueto or Samardzija? Did they make any serious runs at any of the major free agents? Carlos Gomez makes $9,000,000 this season, and the Astros paid around $3,000,000 for him last year. So that is a total of $12,000,000. That isn't a major financial commitment. Cole Hamels would have probably cost the Astros about $39,000,000 over three years. That is an unbelievably good deal; and no where near the commitment that other elite players cost. I don't want the Astros to unnecessarily spend money. I also realize the Astros do not have the network money other clubs have, and that has to be considered. I don't think he has really opened up the purse strings like everyone assumed. There was no large free agent signing and all of the players the Astros have gotten in trade have been for limited contractual costs. I am not saying Crane will never spend money, but he has not shown a willingness to spend like the big boys. I don't think that it is a matter of him being cheap. I think he is leveraged out of his ass, has a lot of investors to answer to and over paid for the franchise in hind sight.
Nick I know this wasn't addressed to me, however I want to be clear on what I originally stated. I never said that Crane and his group wouldn't pony up big $$ for contract extensions or through possible trades. All I'm saying is based upon his time as owner there's nothing he's done that anyone can say for sure he's going to be willing to pay hundreds of millions. HUGE freakin difference between taking the payroll up 38 million in one yr (where it's still below 90 million) to paying Altuve 200 mil, Keuchel 150-200 mil, Springer 100-150 mil, and Correa 250-300 mil (700 to 850 mil).
And this wasn't addressed to me But since I'm somewhat on the other side of this, I'll respond. I agree there's a huge difference. I guess, why bring it up unless there's a concern? Clearly you must have some concern (Nook has certainly gone in that direction) that he won't pony up based on his activity in the past ~12 months. And in my mind, there shouldn't be a concern yet. No, there are no guarantees. But I don't think he's done anything to suggest he *won't* spend on at least 3 of those guys. (I do think any owner/GM is going to constantly evaluate young talent vs. veterans, and how to create a great team while not breaking the bank unnecessarily. Meaning, if K Tucker, D Cameron, and someone else make Springer expendable, they might trade him for prospects. I'd call that being prudent about your future rather than straight cost-cutting.)
You're right. I was addressing the other guy. However, I'm confused what your stance is when you say you never said he wouldn't pay big money for extensions, yet you then express doubt that he would in the very next paragraph.
