I'm not sure that's true - Mike Trout and his agent, certainly, have been vocal about their irritation. The players that really get hurt are the ones that never get a chance to cash in - those that either have short career arcs or those that get injured early (especially with pitchers) and have careers derailed. The old Astros guys - Wade Miller, Carlos Hernandez - come to mind. They can spend 3-5 years in the minors and 2-5 years in the majors and then get hurt and never get a big paycheck. In that regard, MLB rewards performance over potential, unlike the NBA and NFL, and puts more of the risk on the players than the teams. You only really get paid if you are good for an extended period (or time your career year well in your contract year).
I thought Springer was hitting .161 this spring with a strikeout every third at bat. If he's MLB ready, he's hardly showing it right now.
My projection was based on the 40 HR rookie season you projected, with above average ("not falling off a cliff") production thereafter. None of those guys you mentioned had that sort of year (whereas Ryan Howard did). Silly to project any of this before he's even on the roster, but the bottom line was that the Astros offer wasn't some grand gesture of "good faith" to Springer... it was a tactic in order to cash in on savings (and a valid one, at that) that most mid to small market teams attempt to utilize. Nobody "complains" when Tampa and Oakland do it because their financial picture (and actions based on it) has been consistent for some time... the Astros are pretending to be a small market team (in a mid-to-large market), and they're being called out on it on the very first instance they've showed (just like they were called out on having the pathetic payroll, which I understand was by design). And again, Springer was probably smart to reject it as above average (or superstar) play will net him more.
Things could get even worse once he actually faces regular big league starters/relievers going all out and throwing big league stuff (as opposed to ST fodder). If the situation was reversed, and Springer was mashing in ST, I'd just as easily say that it doesn't matter till he can show it regularly against pitchers throwing their season stuff. The idea that the second he steps on the field as a member of the big league team (whenever that may be) that he would be close to or at his expected production level is far-fetched... all players need big league adjustment time, and the majority fail at the start.
From what I've heard/read, Trout and his agent have gone out of their way to NOT be vocal about it... its more a media story to point out how underpaid he is, while Trout and the team simply wants to let things play out (as they will). In the end, they'll work out a multi-year avoid-arbitration/early FA deal. As far as the other players you mentioned, yes there is always a "risk" of injuries preventing a player from getting a big pay day... and that is true in all of the sports. Carlos Hernandez and Wade Miller, had they been in the NBA and presuming they were first round picks, would have gotten their rookie wage contracts only. If they were in the NFL and were mid-round picks, would have gotten non-guaranteed salaries with marginal signing bonuses similar to what they made in the big leagues. Neither played long enough to warrant a "good" long term deal at any point. There is no perfect system. Yes, MLB rewards players based on performance. They also reward "potential" in the form of the multi-million dollar signing bonuses given to high round draft picks that may NEVER make it. The NFL makes all first round players "rich" before they ever step foot on a field. The NBA mitigates the damage the best with rookie-wage contracts (however, they have the smallest pool of draftees of any sport). In the end, I still don't see any current members of the players union, or future members of the union, wanting to institute an "increased guaranteed money/rookie pay scale" especially if it would cause decreased salaries for the guys that have proven to produce. If anything, they've limited the MLB draft pick signing bonuses because of the over-rewarding of "potential" that you claim they don't do.
So Springer got sent to the minors again. Damn! I know he is a strike out machine, but he should still be in the Majors. Let him learn in the majors, it's not like he is a youngster or we are a contending team and want a seasoned veteran out there.
Once he wasn't promoted last fall, the only way that he was gonna be on OD roster is if he had forced the issue with a monster spring. I don't know what the threshold for "monster" is, but I can tell you it's not .167 with 10 K in 30 AB.
Even then, that would be a clear reason to not overreact and stick with the plan of keeping him down. Just as people shouldn't get too concerned with bad spring numbers, they also shouldn't get too excited about "good" ones. Obviously if they had come to terms with a deal to bypass arbitration, he'd be on the roster... now since they're likely going to be going year-by-year for the foreseeable future, it makes little sense to give up the extra year of free agency when all you need to do is wait a month. My guess (fear) is that they're really going to put the screws to him and make him wait till June/July to avoid super-2. Leave it to the Astros to have a contract "dispute" over a player who hasn't even had an MLB at bat yet... the PR that has followed this team since Crane took over has been nothing short of toxic.
The team is *VERY* concerned about the strikeouts; sure, the contract is obviously a factor - but my read (in talking directly with people in their FO) is that the Ks scare them to death. At his current level of production, his best-case scenario MLB comp in Ryan Howard (who's MLB success in spite of his minor league K rate is largely considered a giant anomly). More likely comp? Preston Wilson. Again, this is straight from the (almost) top. he has to cut down on the swings-and-misses.
Sure... then again, that's a lot of money to offer somebody that they are VERY concerned about. Its also a lot of money to offer somebody that has never seen an MLB AB. Lastly, Springer (and his reps) obviously aren't as concerned about his long-term career prospects. Additionally, I wonder if the Astros are as concerned about the rest of the record-setting strikeout machine lineup? You know, the guys the fans are actually paying MLB- level prices (and dynamic prices!) to see at the big league level? If his K's "scare them to death", then they've already likely died from watching the current Astros lineup. :grin:
I thought I was negative on Springer due to strikeouts. I'm expecting Springer to get on base a lot better than Wilson, similar power numbers, and better defense.
I thought money ball didn't care about K's. High OB + HR is what we want and springer has done both in the minors.
Its the only thing they have left to "spin". I'm sure Luhnow/etc. are peeved about the leaked contract info. Additionally, his K rate went down (with his walks improving) as he progressed through the system last year... while the MLB team was setting the all-time K record.
I guess they can say that, but I think it is 99% about the contract. He is 24 and a 30/30 guy in the minors last year. His strikeouts were bad, but didn't he have a solid OB%?
This is the one thing that has always puzzled me about your posts. You are very pro-Springer and very anti-Carter. Springer has defense and speed to help him, but Springer (along with Singleton) will probably be about as bad as Carter at striking out...your biggest gripe about Carter. Springer will probably be a better player than Carter due to defense and speed, but probably won't be great unless he cuts down the strikeouts.
His K rate increased at every step in minors except the last half a season in AAA which he still struck out a quarter of the time, the same rate as Carter struck out at AAA. OB% and HRs are affected by strikeouts. Most guys strikeout more in the majors than the minors. He should still be a good player, better than any position player on Astros MLB roster with the exception of Castro (please stay healthy). Just don't expect future perennial all-star (unless he is forced on team because he is just better than the other Astros) This isn't to say he can't be a perennial all-star, but I see the odds of that about the same as his odds of being a worse strikeout guy than Carter.
I'd probably be banging the drum for Carter as well, if he was still in the minors. I've never said Springer is a future HOFer waiting to happen... I'm against stashing players for contract/cash/arbitration reasons, especially on what should be a top 10 media market team, but being managed more like a bottom-feeder. Especially on a team where nobody is blocking him. Especially on a team that lies through their teeth at the reasons for keeping him down, and could potentially do that for each and every future prospect. As far as projecting Springer's future... lets let him have at least half a season worth of AB's in the majors before declaring him as nothing but a "good defensive player/strikeout machine" only.
When have the Astros lied through their teeth about the reasons for keeping Springer down? Maybe they have and I just missed it, but I haven't really seen any statements from the team about why he isn't up. I've seen a LOT of media comments about it, and obviously a LOT of differing opinions on this site . .but I haven't seen official statements from the Astros, in fact teams rarely ever make statements about those things
Agree completely, while big spring stats don't mean a whole lot as far as what a guy is ready to do, it is a lot harder to move a guy down who tears it up than it is to move one down sitting at .161 Hopefully he gets off to a great start at AAA and is not only here by summer, but here being productive
