If you're in charge, do you let Gerrit Cole walk or pay him?

Who's locker is next to him? Look like he was kinda laughing.

 

Of course he isn't coming back. That has been clear to anyone paying attention for a long time, and the Astros would not have gotten Grienke otherwise, just as they wouldn't have gotten Cole if they believed Keuchel was coming back - they are operating one year ahead. And Cole's teammates (and recently the man himself) repeatedly talk about his time here in the past tense.

That said, I would imagine that coming so close to a ring could work in our favor. He could taste it, but didn't get it - and he won't get it with the Angels. Maybe some part of him will want another chance soon.

But, I'm falling into the same trap as many wishful-thinking fans -- creating a narrative in my head instead of just looking at the actions of the principles involved. As with Tilman and the luxury tax ... watch the actions, not the words, and the answer becomes obvious.

 

He doesn't want to be here.

 

Yup he is a goner !

 

That's a man right there who is gone. I don't think the message could have been any clearer. Think we should match any offer, however, there isn't one thing about that exit that said I might stay. You have a goodbye to the fans, a statement of unemployment, refusing to wear our cap, and refusing to take part in team commitments. That's all she wrote.

For me, the trade to get Grienke was independent of Cole. It was to win a title. We will be severely handcuffed next year if Whitley doesn't shine. We'll be more than solid all year, but come the playoffs, we'll be outclassed on the mound. The bats will really need to get it going to overcome not having an elite staff.

 

No. Going into free agency he's not going to eliminate 25+ teams some of whom will pay him a lot. Even if he really wants to be in California, he's not going to remove bidders and loose leverage on a larger contract.

Also doesn't read that Reddick said Cole said that, just that was the impression Reddick got.

 

Definitely understand his frustration but at the same time had that been harden we would all be collectively saying good riddance and hating on him for this. He deserved to play but this Is beyond bad for the guys in that clubhouse who love this stros team

 

McCullers should be 100 percent. We still have the talent to compete and are still considered a super team without Cole.

 

That seems to be the analysts consensus. Astros have figured out how to get the most out of players...and will find another one to do that.

Conversely...I wouldn't be surprised if Cole struggled, at least some. How many pitchers have left the Astros for bigger dollars (sometimes, after taxes, actually LOWER $$$)...and then struggled after they left.

You'd think more athletes would recognize a good thing when they had it, and stay with the good thing. That's where the Borass' of the world come in and mess everything up. It might be in the ATHLETE's best interest, but its not in the AGENT's best interest. So, they convince them otherwise...and even to wear the stupid hat.

I'm not saying Cole should stay and not get paid. But, not matter where he goes he's going to get a LOT of money. He would have been offerred a LOT of money to stay here. Would you rather get a LOT of money on a good team in a great situation where you are already doing great...or a LOT of money without those things?

 

I think that was clearly Boras' influence. I honestly wouldn't even see it entering a player's head to do that. All the GM's know he's a free agent...what does he have to gain by doing so? Nothing...and might even have turned some of them off. But might be those who didn't know Boras was his agent...so Boras gets something out of it.

 

But if what you say is really true... why would the Astros pay big money when they can just find another bargain to flip into a high-priced elite pitcher?

This brings up the question whether or not the Astros just flat-out told Cole "thanks, see ya!" prior to the end of game 7.... it does go both ways. Players can choose to go elsewhere, or teams can choose to not re-sign guys.

 

From what we read here beginning of the year, both Cole and Correa has a contract extension on the table for them. Both has said no so far. And I expected both to be gone when FA hit for them. I hope we can reach an extension agreement with Springer this offseason. That’s my #1 wish. Otherwise, he’ll be gone next year too.

 

I don’t remember reading that. Do you have a link?

Cole did say this in March


“The 28-year-old categorically denied he had been involved in any discussions about an extension though he did say Houston asked him if the team could contact his representatives about a possible new contract.

“I told them they are free to call Scott (Boras) whenever they want,” Cole said. "That was the extent of the conversation and since then, Scott has not been contacted by anyone from the club. This seems more like a phone call negotiation involving the media than anyone else.””

 

I believed Nook posted that a few times on here. If I remember it right, Astros FO were trying to negotiate Cole’s contract same time that they did with JV. I could be wrong. But Nook has said there’s a contract extension on the table for Correa last few months.

 

Because he is a very good pitcher. The finding a bargain to flip into another elite pitcher is a big 'if', certainly. But it factors into what they will offer. They would offer big money, just not as big as other teams in bigger need.

It's a generic question, though...not Cole specific. If you're a player, in a great position, doing great on a great team...why leave for the highest bidder, when any team will pay you what is objectively a helluva lot of money?

Would you rather earn $20M and be happy, or $25M where you might struggle, might be on a losing team, and might ultimately not be happy? Well, it's $5M MORE money, you say!? Once you have 'enough' money, additional money has relatively less value. What does a player do with $25M that they couldn't do with $20M??

Lots of us have probably faced similar choices, and I think most of us choose the other way. If you are making, say, $80k, and you could switch jobs and make, say, $90k...and you are happy where you are..I think most of us turn that down, unless we're in a situation where we really need that additional money. We'd rather stick with the situation we're happy with...because work sucks if you're not happy. Now, if we think that other situation is better AND pays more money, then that's different, and we take it.

Athletes seem to almost always make the other choice, and I wonder how many of them end up regretting it.

Mike Modano (hockey reference) had that choice at the end of his career...with a really good team (Boston), and after mulling it over a few days, he called the Boston GM back and told him he just couldn't see himself playing in a different uniform. The Boston GM told him he understood, and that it was refreshing seeing a player actually value his team and be reluctant to leave. Because that's abnormal. FWIW...he didn't regret his decision, and while he'd still be revered in Dallas...he wouldn't be the 'played his whole career with one team' guy. There's value in that...moreso now precisely because it's so rare.

Possible...but why do that when they might need him in Game 7? I certainly don't see that being an in game discussion..and I see no reason they would have had it prior. IF they did, though, that puts Cole's actions in a different light.

 

Sure. But you presume winning is the only factor these guys look at.

In the end, he’s going to go where he and his family are happiest... for all reasons (money, contention, love of the city).

I doubt they would have discussed negotiations per say right before a pivotal game. But the way this front office runs things, I wouldn’t be surprised if they had a general overview with him on what their role would be in free agency. If they really don’t have interest in spending the expected $30-40 million a year that Cole is guaranteed to get, I don’t see why it’s a bad thing to let him know ahead of time so he can start focusing on all other teams.

 

so what's bidding start at, 30 mil a year, or even 35 mil a year for Cole? Unless he signs with a contending or playoff team, otherwise, his priority is clearly $ instead of W.

 

No, I don't.

That's just it...they don't typically do that. They go where they get the most money. Which is their prerogative (or, more likely, their agent's), but, as I said, I wonder how many regret it later. Seeing it go more the other way in basketball, where players really are going where they want...but not really in baseball.

Wherever Cole goes, it will probably work out for him, if what he really wants is just the money. If more than that, we'll see. I predict he won't do as well, and the statistics are vastly on my side.

Oh, I'm sure either they had that conversation, or, by things not said, the agent was pretty clear they weren't. But then the next time a Boras client signs with their current team will be the first time. Lots of teams won't even talk with their players if Boras is their agent...no point. This was likely driven more by Boras than by the Rockets. GM's like to find win win situations...good deal for them, good deal for the player. Boras only believes in win - FU. His only interest in the current team is as leverage to drive up the price.

 

Works both ways.

Altuve was a Boras client when he accepted that very team friendly initial extension that had him being paid pennies for prime years. Granted, the team was taking a risk as well since Altuve hadn’t turned into the force he is now, but we are talking about Jake Marisnick-type money for what was an everyday player.

Altuve fires Boras not long after it was abundantly clear he had bet against himself. But was still willing to negotiate a long term deal with the team that developed him despite that contract issue.