My memory may be off, but I remember something like this: He cut an unprecedented amount of payroll. He cut again. Then he raised payroll, but not by more than he's cut. He raised it again, but still below pre-Crane levels. He raised it finally to above pre-Crane levels, but still well below MLB inflation rates from pre-Crane levels. That's like saying something is 50% off for clearance sale price the day after raising normal prices 250%.
I don't really see any evidence of this. I have been told the Astros have a pretty strict budget. It looks to me like Jeff has tried to maximize that budget by getting creative targeting guys under long term financial control (Giles/Fiers); trying to sign young players to long term deals (Altuve, Springer, Grossman) and now targeting players in the international market.
The Astros payroll this season is approximately $113,000,000 which is 21st in baseball (the bottom 1/3). For comparison purposes, the Texas Rangers have a payroll of $170,000,000. A $53,000,000 difference is huge. Essentially the Astros could have added Cueto and Price for that much difference. The teams competing against the Astros for the division and playoffs have the following difference in payroll. Yankees: +112 million Red Sox: +110 million Tigers: +95 million Rangers: +57 million Blue Jays: +45 million Orioles: +42 million Mariners: +32 million Royals: +30 million Indians: - 1 million So, the Astros are competing against teams in the AL for the division and WC that on average spend nearly 60 million dollars MORE on players than the Astros. I don't care how good your farm system is, and how good your GM is; that is a lot to overcome; especially with injuries. It isn't impossible, as the Indians have been very good with essentially the same payroll of the Astros. However, that is an outlier. (What is the difference between the Astros and Cubs? The Cubs were in a position to go out and sign Lester, Heyward, Lackey, Zobrist and Fowler.) The Astros will never have the revenue stream that the Cubs, Red Sox or Yankees have. However, the reality is that it is hard to consistently compete when your other AL rivals are spending 50-100 million more than you. There is a reason the Astros payroll isn't higher (the owner is leveraged out his ass... he has to answer for a large number of minority owners... he over paid for the team... the bankruptcy... not in a lucrative television/radio deal like the Dodgers/Cubs/Angels etc.)
Couple notes: Houstons market and TV deal are not on par with the top tier teams, including the Rangers. So it's not realistic to ever really expect Houston to match the payrolls in New York, LA, or even Dallas. I do think it's reasonable to expect, over the long term, a payroll in the middle of the pack (from your list, somewhere between the Blue Jays and Mariners). The payroll #s only include major league salaries. They don't take into account what an org spends on draft and int'l signings, scouting, etc. I have no proof but I suspect over the last few seasons the Astros have spent more on amatuer talent (including scouting) than most other teams. I certainly think there's room in Houstons budget to take on 1-2 large contracts and still have a decent chance at keeping their core together over the medium term. There's evidence of this in that they pursued Hamels, Abreu, etc. Also, signing Yuli was significant. I don't think we will see a premier free agent sign in Houston anytime soon (other than potentially international guys like Gurriel, Otani, etc.), for several reasons. But in shopping for star level talent via trade, I don't think money will be an obstacle and I am hopeful this will be the offseason where they swing for the fences.
The Astros have about the same revenues as the rangers. http://www.overthemonster.com/2016/3/25/11305654/red-sox-franchise-value-forbes-here-comes-the-money I think the problem is crane. He is poor in terms of owners. We would be better off with a rich owner. McClane did open the wallet when he needed to even though he was kind of meddling. The fact we have such a low payroll sucks.
Pretty sure those Forbes numbers are bunk. Certainly #s reported on the tv deal aren't close between Rangers and Astros.
That is certainly how it seems to me too I wasn't trying to say that I think Luhnow has done a poor job even though he has been given the ability to spend if he wants....was just saying that IF Crane was allowing him to spend and he just couldn't figure out how to do so properly, it would signal a big problem I just hope that 1) A couple of the pitching prospects turn into front of the rotation types and 2) When it does come time to re-sign the young studs, I hope that Crane will spend the big 6 figure deals that will be necessary
I'd like to think that is the reason why they have been and will continue to be so financially prudent.
Hope so...but the other thing I worry a little about is when it comes time to sign a guy like Altuve long term....if we haven't gone out and acquired other major league talent to supplement the developed guys, and we stay "relevant" but never take the next step to where we are division champs and legitimate world series contenders year in and year out...will he turn down what will very likely be more money from yankees/red sox/dodgers to sign a big, long term deal here? And that goes for all of them, Altuve, Correa, Springer, Bregman...not something we necessarily have to worry about right now, but Altuve didn't seem very happy for the first week or two after the deadline this year, and Luhnow even made some comments about the guys "having to learn to deal with it" or something along those lines...
The problem is that Correa, Altuve, and possibly even Bregman are going to be looking for $250M+ when they reach free agency. Even if Houston is saving now, I don't see how they afford more than 1 of those contracts and still have enough left to fill in the holes and field a contender. Better to maximize the window now.
still no evidence that Crane will not do the same as McLane. He has this offseason to show it, though unfortunately the FA market is dry. He may have to show it through trade (which both increases payroll and requires you to spend in the future to replenish you minors), though Gurriel was a good first sign. Lourdes would be another good sign, because it'll take big $$ there too. Recall Hamels. Crane tried to open the wallet when he needed to and when it made sense.
Right. I wonder if Luhnow just has a really hard time justifying giving up the opportunity to pay $5M for a $30M asset so that he can spend $150M for a $110M asset.
Do you have any updates on the leverage/back-debt situation since Crane took over? You were saying the same things 4-5 years ago. Certainly, owning a MLB team since that time (featuring several years of a bargain basement payroll, combined with 1 playoff year and another winning year) would help pay a lot (if not all of it) off. Payroll has appropriately increased as the team has gotten better... but there's also the factor the the TV deal has stabilized and provided constant revenue (unlike the first 2 years) and every MLB team profits off the league online media deals, the revenue sharing program, and the re-distribution of the luxury tax. Some believe payroll will never increase past a certain point... but that certainly could change if they reveal that the attendance spike Houston provides to a "good" team brings in revenues that make it more than worth it. Houston has to have a winner to provide consistent support (and consistent ticket revenue)... unlike Chicago, NY, LA.... something Drayton did certainly realize towards the end (at the expense of the minor league system), where the glory days of Pettite/Clemens/Oswalt/Berkman certainly helped inflate the franchise value to which he then sold off to Crane.
I attended a session with Luhnow earlier this year. He did actually show the (disguised) numbers on this -- comparing our payroll to the Cubs (because Epstein is an analytics guy). It showed our total investment in draft+international+minors is on par with the Cubs and near the top of the league. That includes the minor league scouting efforts to allow us to find guys like Paulino/Martes as A-ball gems that we can acquire for cheap.
This is a bit of propoganda. I have no doubt the Astros are top half in MLB in minor league spending. There is now way we are spending that much more on scouting than almost any team. Every team maximizes spending on scouting, it is so important. Alot of our spending can be chalked up to having the biggest budgets in the draft and international pool over the last few years. Of course we spend alot there , we've had the number 1 overall pick 3 times in a row and with it a huge bonus pool. This year we went overboard with the international spending. Which is good since we have stayed within budget since the rules began I doubt the Astros have complete data on what other teams pay their scouts, the only reliable info is the draft spending. I wouldn't put it past our GM to count some of the cubs " minor league" spending as major league investment now that players like Bryant are technically in the majors. The crux of what I'm saying is that you cant believe the guy, especially since this was an event to hype up Astros fans ( I'm assuming) . I definitely believe we spend alot of money at the minor league level. But does that go down if we increase the MLB payroll ? Does spending there keep the MLB payroll down ? those last two questions are hugely important and they are up to Crane.... who i loathe. Our market is not huge , but the Astros the last decade have given fans absolutely no reason to invest in this team. From the transfer to the AL , the CSN debacle , raising ticket prices as a last place team, and being ****ing horrible all the while make it a tough uphill battle. The tone Crane has projected hasn't acknowledged this.
I think that's a reasonable question. I'm hopeful we get the chance to find out, but I'm not sure there's a $110M asset to be had this offseason.. at least that we need. I don't know if Luhnow (or Crane) will ever pay $150M for a $50M asset if it comes to some crazy overpayment like that.
Certainly each of the top FA this season could help Houston, given they have needs at OF, C, 1B, and SP, and that they could always stand to add elite relievers. Cespedes is probably the only $100M player this offseason, but he would certainly be a difference maker in the middle of Houstons lineup. The next tier (Ramos, Encarnacion, Reddick, Bautista, Chapman, Jansen, Desmond, Fowler, Trumbo) will all get $50-90M, and any of those players would improve Houstons roster. Houston currently projects to ~$75M payroll next season. I don't see any extension candidates, as Correa/Altuve/Springer/Bregman will almost certainly not be willing to delay free agency, Keuchel/McHugh are coming off down years, and McCullers is hurt. Everyone else is either signed long term or not a core player. So that means Houston should have quite a bit of payroll flexibility, I would guess between $30 and $60M to add. So technically they'll be able to go after whoever they want.
Sure , but probably not as much as I would have if they were winning . Also I haven't spent much money . I've gone to a few games over the last few years . Maybe 1-2 games a season , and some of those tickets were given to me. That was a weird attempt to find a flaw in my argument
