Lance can't stay healthy more than 5 minutes. What makes you think he's having an All-Star season for anyone?
It's not about what you get back for LMJ, it's about dumping his salary. Healthy? He's never pitched 150 innings in a season. So yes, you probably wont be able to pull the wool over another orgs eyes, but if Dana gets the chance to get out from under that contract he shouldn't think twice about moving LMJ.
Again, I just disagree. He isn't getting out from under the contract. Either he gives up talent or pays to unload it (maybe both) And whatever that cost is, it is very likely the result ends up being the Astros were better off keeping him.
If LMJ performs well in the bullpen and this off-season Dana is able to get out from under that contract, knowing LMJ has never pitched 150 innings in his career you wouldn't trade LMJ? Do you realize having that money would allow Dana to keep Bregs or re-sign Tucker? Man you're definitely a LMJ fan.
I am a fan. But I also think that if LMJ pitches well out of the bullpen then he can help the team next year. Pitchers get hurt ALOT in 2024 and if he proves he's healthy enough to have trade value, then having his talent on the roster is even better. Because they could need pitching. If he's healthy, his salary is not bad.
Sure... but that team isn't going to pay his whole salary AND give up prospects for him. Thus if he really has that potential trajectory, might as well keep him. If you want to get rid of him to make room on the 40 man roster, that's probably the best the Astros are going to get in terms of "relief". It won't provide more financial flexibility, however.
No team is going to take on LMJ's salary... not sure why thats such a difficult concept. Its a sunk cost. It also shouldn't prevent Crane from trying to retain other players as its still relatively benign compared to some other albatross pitchers contracts that teams never got their money's worth (Strasburg), but if your point is solely salary relief... it ain't happening. The two JV trades to the Astros should serve as perfect examples (especially since he was "healthy" both times)... Detroit and NYM paid more of his salary to get certain prospects. For a team to give up any sort of potential quality prospect for LMJ, the Astros would likely have to pay all of his salary.
He is done. His contract was a terrible business decision from day 1. His contract is just one example of the bad decision making that has this team up to it's eyebrows in bad contracts the likes of which where unheard of in Houston not so long ago.
I miss the days when the Pedro Baez was the only bad contract we had to deal with. Now we have to pay LMJ, Abreu, and Montero
I think that Bregman would stay if the Astros offered him a deal comparable to what he will get on the open market. I just do not see that as a realistic expectation. If it was, I think it would already have occurred. And I definitely do not think that freeing up money from the McCullers contract changes that in the slightest.
What you are advocating here is most likely another "bad" contract. By bad I mean the player is likely not going to be all-star level but still making all-star money at some point before the contract ends. I understand that is different than a contract that is bad from the start, like the ones mentioned her, but it hasn't stopped fans from complaining about these kinds of deals in the past. Tucker is likely looking for Albert Pujols type money (10yr $254M) while Bregman is likely looking at Marcus Semien's deal as a comp (7yrs $175M). It has been researched and widely accepted that, on average, players lose about 0.5 WAR per season after age 30. Tucker is on pace for 6.2 WAR. He was on pace for 9.7 before getting hurt, but has been between 5.4 and 5.7 the last 3 seasons. Let's say 6.5 is his "level". Years 1-2 = 6.5 WAR 3 = 6 4=5.5 5= 5 6 = 4.5 7= 4 8= 3.5 9= 3 10= 2.5 (that's about Jake Meyers' 2024 if he was a RF instead of CF) That's not terrible for Tucker, especially considering the production in the first 5-6 years of that deal. Bregman is a different case. Since 2021 he has averaged 4.2 WAR per 162g and the contract will start at his age 31 season. To be VERY fair to Alex, let's say his "level" is 4.5 WAR. Year 1 = 4 WAR 2= 3.5 3= 3 4= 2.5 5= 2 6= 1.5 7= 1 By year 4 he is essentially Mauricio Dubon which isn't bad in a vacuum but not good at $25M per season. By the last couple of seasons, he probably isn't even the best option on the team. I would do the Tucker deal in a heartbeat. The fans would just need to understand how the final season or 2 are and not talk about the "terrible contract" it would simply be the cost to keep Kyle. A year ago I was still a believer in Alex and thought he was closer to a 5 WAR player than a 4 WAR player and was advocating for this deal. But no longer. I love Alex but at his salary, I would not do more than 5 years and he won't take that.
Being able to save LMJ, Montero's money would be a game changer. It would allow Crane, Brown to add a talent comparable to Bregs if Bregs walks.
