People love to point to the rare exceptions. Heck, people forget, in 1997, the Marlins actually had the 7th largest payroll, then they sold off most of their veteran stars they had recently paid (Sheffield, Alou, Brown, Leiter, Bonilla).
I don't think Springer is going to place a lot of emphasis on what happened 4-6 years ago when it comes to contract time. Just as Mike Trout's not going to remember his annoyance with the Angels when they offer him a gigantic deal. Can you name some players in recent years that took a hometown discount? People talk about it all the time, but in general, players that get to free agency sign for the highest contract unless there are some unique circumstances (last contract, chance to win a title, etc).
Just looking at the "local" players... while they all got paid a good amount by Houston, Biggio, Bagwell, Lance and Roy all could have gotten at least the same amount (if not more) if they shopped around. But they all wanted to stay here... and that made a difference. I don't think its as much a "hometown discount" as it is making it harder for the players to leave a certain situation that they're comfortable with. It impact salary, even if its only by a few million dollars. On the flip side, when somebody is intent on testing the market, I agree that there is very little chance of a player wanting to stay for less (or stay at all)...see Cano. If the Astros end up being as "toxic" towards their homegrown players/potential free agents, as they are perceived in the media, then yes there will be ill-effects of their shenanigans, and nobody will want to resign here. I agree that 6 years from now, he's unlikely to hold this against them.
This is the closest the "team" has basically come to saying he's basically going to be down there for salary reasons (article from astros.com). Given the "explanation" McTaggert gives, it may be that he isn't up here till late June/early July for the super-2 deadline to pass (instead of the 3 weeks that most are projecting to get the extra year of free agency). http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20140402&content_id=70720756¬ebook_id=70720958&vkey=notebook_hou&c_id=hou
The cardinals are one of the best franchises in the MLB and he was a big part in building their minor league system.
Waiting on Super II would bother me (for Springer, not necessarily other guys). Would need to see quality from Guzman, Krauss, Hoes, Pressley, & Grossman for me to be on board with not calling Springer up by the end of April.
My guess is that if the current RF tandem is doing "ok", and is injury free... they're going to drag this out as long as possible (which would be past the super II deadline for this year). Just annoying that Pressley was a last-second pickup in part because they knew they needed another OF besides just Hoes out there, with it being a given that Springer wasn't going to be here till "whenever". They may also feel that just one month is not enough to fully eval the current team, regardless of how everybody is doing.
I've been resisting joining the calls for bringing up George. I was thinking the guys we had in the OF would do a decent enough job to let the Astros take their time. While Hoes .308 /.438 /.976 and Fowler .320/.370/.970 seem up to the task, Grossman .081/.227/.443 and Presley .161/.355/.516 obviously are not. Our collective .188 team BA and .258 OBP are dead last in the league. The time has come.
agreed--I've been in the same boat as you (not pushing hard for it). But esp with Presley where there's more of a track record to be pretty certain, I'm ready to move on and get Springer up. If we're not waiting on Super 2 (2 more months), now is definitely the time. The worst would be to try to wait, and then succumb to media/fan pressure and be forced to bring him up in May or June. Then you'd lose this time, piss people off, and gain nothing
If they didn't give into pressure all of last year, when Springer was doing historic things and there was even less talent in the outfield...what makes you think they will defer from the "plan" now?
Last year was 1 year further away from "winning". Maybe last year was always a "hold back" year because we knew it was a 100 loss year (or really really wanted Rodon). Now, with Springer/Correa/Appel/Rodon, the future really will be set up. I also think they would change course a bit based on a number of factors. The temperature gauge on the fans...they know people are only willing to put up with so much. If even the people that understand the scenario are starting to get restless, you may see some deviation. They also may feel like certain guys progressed faster than expected (Correa crushing it right now), or maybe they are excited by what Feldman is doing now and see some possibilities for excitement at MMP, etc. Maybe last year they didn't expect to shore up the bullpen so well in the offseason Just so many variables at play. If I would hope Luhnow would be so rigid on Springer given that he's already 24.. they'll need to stagger the big 4 prospects anyway. Maybe it's all hopeful thinking on my part and nothing more..
If this team waits all the way until the super 2 deadline, it would be a very bad omen for the future. Suddenly tolerable player control (not that I agree with it) becomes penny pinching. The more this team seems worried about future payroll 4 years from now, the more I'm concerned they will never spend the money they should. If come 2017 this team is still worried about a million here or there it will be a very bad thing. The longer this team chooses to put a bad product on the field, the longer it will take fans to come back if they start winning again. Fans will come back, but it won't be overnight.
A 10 week wait isnt an omen of any serious proportion. How much they spend in the future has more to do with how lucrative a TV deal is in place than anything else. While I am an advocate of getting Springer to the majors now, by 2017, no one will care whether it was April or July of 2014 when he came up.
