<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Jim Crane says he won't comment on Tanaka other than to say the Astros are interested in the Japanese pitcher.</p>— Jose de Jesus Ortiz (@OrtizKicks) <a href="https://twitter.com/OrtizKicks/statuses/425729089819774976">January 21, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Why is Crane even saying he's interested in him? He knows the Astros have no shot at landing him, right??
not really I mean hell if we manage to get him I would tip my cap to him... I'm just not sure we have any real shot.
"It says we're interested in picking up a very quality pitcher to bolster our rotation," Crane said. "We think we've got some guys coming up, and in a few years you could look with [Mark] Appel and a few of the other guys on the team, one of the best starting rotations in baseball if we were able to add him in there. We do have some talent besides that. We'll draft first again this year and that very well could be a pitcher. You'll see a strong starting rotation here very soon."
If the Astros were on equal footing with other teams. I wouldn't mind making a hard run at him. I don't know Tanaka's priorities, but it would seem that we would have to noticeably overpay to get him here, which would be my main problem. 6/100 I would do, but if we're talking 6/130 or so, or 5/115 that is too steep.
but we CAN overpay and still have an extremely low payroll and not have any prospects blocked sometimes I think some of you guys have an objective to save Crane some cash, which I don't understand since our payroll is so pitifully low
Exactly. It ain't our money, and there's no salary cap. What's the problem? It's pure conjecture that Crane spending money on Tanaka (or anybody) will result in him being less likely to spend on others in the future. That's in people's minds. I see it completely oppositely - if he's willing to shell out a ton of money on Tanaka, the more logical assumption is that the man is simply willing to spend. This franchise has been in one world series in 50 years. There is no risk too high, in my opinion, as long as it's a move designed to help us win. We've been unwatchable for the past 5+ years, and now people are freaking out about possibly overpaying a potential staff ace.
This doesn't make any sense. Regardless of what the budget is, there IS a budget. Every signing has an opportunity cost. Just because Crane might be willing to pay Player X $25MM/yr doesn't mean he should or that there isn't a more efficient way to spend that money. Drayton signing Carlos Lee wasn't a sign that he was willing to spend endless money. It was a sign that he was willing to spend $17MM/yr. Once he did that, he didn't have money for anyone else. The budget is not relevant today, but it will mean something in 3 or 4 or 5 years. Every player has a value - overpaying just because you can is a terrible way to run a franchise and the lack of long-term planning is how teams get in financial messes.
Agreed that there is a budget. But what's happening is that everybody opposed to this is GUESSING Crane's budget, and your guess is that Tanaka would be taking out a huge, huge percentage of it. Nobody knows what the hell Crane's budget is, and predicting that it's low after seeing him shell out $140MM on Tanaka is simply illogical. If he's willing to spend that kind of cash, the safer assumption is that his budget is pretty expansive. I expected somebody to bring this up. I don't think it needs to be explained that Jim Crane is, in fact, a new owner, and is of no relation whatsoever to Drayton McLane. Quit comparing him to McLane and his budget, or any of his management decisions. It makes no sense to do so. I may as well use Mark Walter as my point of reference...it's just as relevant.
Just because we have a low payroll doesnt mean we can go out and spend 20+ million on ONE player. Now I would love it if we signed Tanaka, but I disagree with the idea that we can spend all we want on him just because of our low payroll.
To me Tanaka makes the most sense, moreso that Choo for example, to blow a wad of cash on now. He's still young 25 I think and committing big money now when you're hopefully soon to be star players are still dirt cheap is the way to go to balance the budget. By the time Springer, Correa, Appel, Rodon, etc. are set to make big bucks Tanaka's contract will be close to the end. I wish the Stros would add one top dollar guy each year for the next 3 years let's say. For a Rockets analogy it'd be like having 3 Dwights and 6 Parson type salaries (Springer, Correa, Appel, Rodon, Folty, Ruiz, LMJ).
I agree we have no idea what the budget is. But regardless of what it is - unless it's effectively unlimited - overpaying for a player is a terrible idea. Let's say it's a ridiculous $200MM. You still want to build the best possible team for that $200MM. Paying $30MM for a player you believe is worth $20MM means you can't go sign $30MM worth of players. It's still bad financial management and leads to a less than optimal team. The only exception is if you believe there is no budget. But even the Yankees, which are the closest thing to that, were smart enough not to just overpay for any player (take Cano, for example). Overpaying just because you can is a way to ruin a franchise's long-term health. The Astros should determine their value of him and offer him that. If they are close and need to go up slightly, fine. But to overpay significantly just for the sake of it is silly. The team will most likely regret it in 3-4 years when they could better allocate that money.
Crane said they could potentially go up to $50-60M for 2014, regardless of how the tv deal plays out. So there's your budget's upper limit. And we're nowhere near it. Do your homework next time, Major. http://houston.astros.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20131009&content_id=62740232&c_id=hou
