If you can spend that kind of money on Stanton, then go fix the bullpen and add Otani. Money spent in better places
Crane finally gets it. In 5 years this kind of money looks like a bargain. It’s almost irrelevant. You can’t burn down a franchise in payroll. Never seen iit happen. Payroll will continue to rise. You need to translate that expense into franchise value in order be financially successful. He gets it. In the end I don’t care about the bullpen productivity in comparison to 9 innings of Stanton productivity. That too is more valuable. But I’d probably bat him 5th to keep the Altuve-Correa connection going as that is working. If I’m Stanton I prefer to make my own name, with my own franchise, but it matters less in baseball. If we do get Stanton, or otherwise, just remember that with the establishment of a dynasty, we will become hated by the remainder of America. It comes with the territory. And the fairytale of rising from nothing to King dissolves into the story of an evil empire. But I’ll take it.
If this Stanton thing happens we will officially be the Warriors of Baseball. Win a championship and add an MVP level talent to a championship team.
Difference being we could add him and not be guaranteed to even get out of the first round, much less repeat. If this were the NBA and having clearly the best squad assured us of more titles I would be all for it.
Performance is everything. Plenty of people here were reticent to trade for Verlander because of the amount of money he was owed. Now, looks like a relative bargain... even if he's going to be on the decline (or fall off a cliff) in one of his remaining years here. The Astros got the best possible performance he could give them, and couldn't have gone all the way without him. If a player plays up to his potential... its almost always worth it.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/spo...tis-set-to-DH-more-catch-less-in-12368862.php Adds substance to the Lucroy rumor. I like Stassi, but would also be cool with bringing in a more proven player. 14 months ago Lucroy was in line for an $80M+ contract, so I think if he can be had for <$10M/yr it is a low risk high reward situation. I also would be ok with bringing in Avila, Iannetta, or Castillo for the right price. Not sure any good answers will be available on the trade front, but if Wilson Ramos or JT Realmuto came available they should look into it.
Plenty of people were also willing to trade Bregman, LMJ, Martes, Tucker, Franklin Perez, and other young guys such that Astros wouldn't have the budget left, propsects left to trade for Verlander. In addition, some those guys were needed for the win as well. Astros don't win if they don't have a lot of home grown talent that allowed them to manage budget so they could add free agents and trade acquisitions. Performance is everything. I'd rather spend money on Altuve, Correa, and/or Springer....guys that have proven capable of winning a WS in Houston and give Houston its best chance going forward within the constraint of what Astros budget is going forward. If the Astros have enough money to do whatever they want, sure they should go for Stanton. He's one of the best players on the planet. I highly doubt Astros can find a trade that fits Astros budget, Marlins would like, Astros would like, and is better than what other teams will offer. Opt out basically mean Astros would be risking $295 million (How much is left on his contract if he gets major injury) for about $100 million worth of performance (assuming he plays next three like his last three and then opts out). Luhnow has shown he can use budget wisely and get players that can win a World Series. If he can get Stanton here, I would love it. Just don't get your hopes as Marlins aren't going to give him to the Astros.
Not sure what you mean by "Crane finally gets it." They started with a plan and they've stuck to it...and it's working. No one from that office has ever said they weren't wiling to spend if the time and the situation were right. They've done that. He's gotten it all along. Also, there are many examples of franchises getting buried under the weight of their payroll. Spending for the sake of spending is and always will be stupid (remember Carlos Lee?).
Like I said, they get it now, they tried not to spend on Verlander, and it nearly sank us, but after seeing the result of a demoralized roster, and the substandard performance that correlated to it, they pulled the trigger, with a little push from Keuchel and the team, and they did it after the deadline to illustrate the point, and we won the title. It’s clear. You spend on the big fish. Then you get the dividends financially and on the field. The plan was never to buy Verlander or any other ace, they broke away from the plan when things were looking bleak. so kudos for having the sense to see it. That’s awareness. And they they are about to do it again which proves it sank in.
By many accounts, they were working on a trade with the Tigers for Verlander before the non-waiver trade deadline. They planned to spend, whether it was on Verlander or someone else.
When drafting, often the strategy is to get the best athlete/player available rather than draft for need. When trading or signing FA's, its usually need over the best player available. If, for a moment, we were to consider "best player available" into our winter strategy, guys like Stanton certainly come to mind. But in terms of need, more pitching would seem the better bet. Maybe we need to consider what pitching is available before we write off the best player strategy. If the best pitcher available is a #3 rotation guy or a middle reliever, then maybe a super slugger helps us more.
Sounds similar to the arguments against acquiring Verlander. I’m sure if they get payroll blessing, they can find a way to get it done and both optimize the current core’s chances along with the always constant goal of being a long term contender.
That just underlined the point for me they weren’t willing to spend to make it happen. Otherwise they would have pulled the trigger with ease. Something had to change their minds and plan after the deadline.
It is those same arguments against a number bad trades that would have prevented Astros acquiring Verlander. I thought it was an overpay for Verlander but considering the situation needed to be made at the time of the trade. Granted, I was wrong about the overpay as whatever was wrong in first half was fixed. I was heavily against Verlander when he was still pitching like crap. Unless Astros cut a serious amount of salary, Marlins pay a significant amount of salary, or Crane drastically increases the payroll, Stanton is not coming to the Astros.
Or, Stanton regresses in a couple of years, opts-in, and prevents the Astros from maintaining their core, thus ruining their chances of being a long-term contender. The problem here is that the Astros have no ability at all to forecast what Stanton will be in 3 years, and thus it's a true gamble. There is zero reason for the Astros to risk the entire philosophy and roster construction that got them in this position on a gamble on Stanton that essentially puts their future after 3 years completely out of their control.
Except it wasn't up to them. Verlander had to agree, and he was holding out hope until the very end that he could get to LA or Chicago. Verlander had zero reason to agree to a trade to the Astros in July.
