I understand where you are coming from but in light of Cubs working intensively to not become the scrubs anymore, the Cards still being the Cards, the Reds making moves, etc. What do you suggest? Lance had an MVP-esque like season last year and that was in spite of Ensberg and Lane constantly choking at the plate. Granted I am not thrilled with Lee's defense but everything in life has positive and negative consequences. If you let someone else get him either within the division or the NL, you are going to pay dearly because his track record shows him to be a big-time run producer. Call it a knee jerk reaction or whatever ... The Stros are in danger of becoming a second-tier team if they do not substantally upgrade around Lance and Roy and Uncle Drayton knows he cant catch lightning in a bottle with this group this time around. Someone is not going to be here come spring training. Willy T, Burke, Ensberg, Lane, Lidge ... they cannot stand pat with the "I believe they have potential" line. This means nothing if they never realize it. As a fan, I'm tired of hearing they will develop ... We need pieces that will better compliment each other on this team. Timmy P definitely has a thankless job this offseason. He has to be feeling the heat.
You can count on Berkman to hit .300+ with an OBP of around .420+ which means he gets on base 4.2 times every 10 plate appearances. Lee is probably projected to hit right around .300 with an OBP in the .350 range, meaning he gets on base 3.5 times every 10 plate appearances. You skewed your example way too low. You can also go in the other direction in that how many outs will happen back to back. Getting a quality hitter isn't just to have back to back hits, it also enables the team to generate more offense that hasn't been there as the newly acquired hitter can pick the other guy up if he makes an out.
K . . . I guess i have some fuzzy math I still don't think it will matter that much if we have a wham bam lineup of hitters when we are giving up 5 runs a game. Just looking at Lee, i don't see a top ten player. He wouldn't even be the best hitter on the team. It is great to spend money, but spend money wisely. With Lee on the team, our defense will only get worse in the coming years. If we can get him for 12-15 a year for 3-5 years great. 15 for 6-8 cannot be an option.
I've been listening to 790 and they just reported that Carlos Lee is asking over 100 MIL minimum 6 yrs Well guys I think thats it hahah Who's available next yr.. Still does anybody know of a website that shows when players become eligle for free agency? I've been looking everywhere.
So are you agreeing to the wager? If Lee gets $95+ million base salary (regardless of contract length) I'll donate $25 to the tip jar, anything less and you donate $25 to the tip jar. Agreed?
There are 800+ players in MLB... lots of those guys would be valuable additions to the Stros, even though they're not "top ten". Pitching and defense has been proven as a formula for success, but so has having a good cleanup hitter to protect your big bat. It makes a huge difference to a lineup. And adding Lee has nothing to do with whether we give up 5 runs a game. We'll resign Clemens and Pettite if they want to pitch, we'll pick up Woody Williams if his price tag is reasonable. There really aren't any available quality arms that would be any better than a 4th pitcher after Oswalt-Clemens-Pettite, and the guys who are out there like Zito are very overrated. And I could care less about defense in LF, where Lee would play. There's no way he could be worse than Biggio was a couple years ago in left, and we did ok then.
Just because he's looking for it doesn't mean he will get it. And it doesn't mean there aren't other options available in the market via trade or FA. I would prefer a right handed bat, but there are some good lefty sticks that would help the club: Dellucci, Floyd, Nixon, and even Drew, if they will talk to boras ever again, at the right price. You could use the lee money and put it in the Schmidt or Zito sweepstakes, or find a trade for Andruw Jones/Tejada/Wells/Baldelli. Furthermore, I wouldn't count the Astros out of the lee sweepstakes. It's not even december and you are in panic mode. That's nuts.
You can't assume Andy/Roger are playing. The club has to find two mid rotation starters(williams likely one) and plan as if those two aren't playing, then they are a huge bonus if they agree to play and the team isn't screwed in the process. That means looking at lilly, meche, schmidt, zito, mulder, garcia, jennings, peavy, suppan, etc for the second guy, and signing them/trading for them. At worst, they are really good 4th/5th starters if the duo plays, if not, you covered your butt if they say adios.
So, you're gonna put scott/huff in right? I don't even want to think about how bad that might be as a solution. I don't want a top ten player. I really don't want to pay Lee top ten money. I don't want to give anyone top ten money when they barely break top 25. It is a big reach to just pencil in clemens and pettite into the rotation. What happens in March when they both decide that they want to retire? All of the sudden you have a pitching staff made up of Roy Oswalt and not much else. We need to be thinking worst case senario, not best case senario.
Lopez wrote an article in today's chron that pretty much was dead on. I am too lazy to upload a link but it said that Lee is not a good fit and that we should pursue other options.
Lopez needs to consider how much talent you would have to trade for Wells or Crawford, who isn't a middle of the order hitter yet. He makes no mention of that in his article because it diffuses his point in one fell swoop. I also don't see Lee getting 100 mil over 6 years, regardless of what he is asking for. Lee is a very good fit at the right price: righthanded, hits both lefties/righties well, and can be hidden by the short porch at MMP defensively. And ultimately, it's Drayton's money anyway, so if he wants Lee he can spend to get Lee and handle the incoming payroll concerns. He can afford it if he so chooses.
Here you go. We're closing in on that special season of swooning hearts, special surprises and holiday romancing. So why shouldn't Drayton McLane hear those three little words every baseball owner should hear at least once in his life? Don't do it. Here at the Union Station satellite office, our specialty is spending McLane's hard-earned dollars. We do it with impunity, and we do it often. We do it like the Hilton sisters on a binge with daddy's platinum card. But in the case of Carlos Lee — one of the last sluggers standing after the Chicago Cubs' unabashed leap into the deep end of the free-agent pool for Alfonso Soriano — McLane should keep his hands in his pockets and act like he doesn't hear the critics. You know those faultfinders. In fact, I've been one. Echoes of "he's too cheap," "he's too slow on the trigger" and "he doesn't have the vision to make a big deal" always reverberate in McLane's heart. Short list grows shorter When the offseason began and the Astros' front office held meetings trying to determine which players would be worth the expense, the list was narrowed to four. Soriano was at the top, a clear No. 1 target. Next came Jermaine Dye, a restricted free agent, then Aramis Ramirez and Lee. But the White Sox exercised their option on Dye, and the Cubs re-signed Ramirez. And after Soriano signed with the Cubs for an ungodly $136 million over eight years, everything changed. McLane can blame the Cubs for the skyrocketing market. On top of paying sick money to Soriano and keeping Ramirez happy (for $73 million over five years), they juiced the wage rate with contracts for second baseman Mark DeRosa (three years, $13 million) and backup catcher Henry Blanco (two years, $5.2 million). That took the price of playing the free-agent game with Lee through the roof, with his asking price vaulting to the six-year, $100 million range, considerably more than the Astros offered last week. It also left that creature stirring in McLane's head. No one is more aware or sensitive to public perception than McLane. If he comes right out and says Lee is not worth the seller's-market price tag, he'll be called cheap again. Questionable shelf life But in this case, the mistake might be trying to counter the perception by signing a player who within two years would be better suited physically to be a first baseman. That job is taken, by the MVP-caliber Lance Berkman. McLane and his decision-makers suddenly find themselves facing a dilemma. Sign the 6-2, 240-pound Lee, 30, and they have a player who could bolster an offense in desperate need of a jolt. But Lee might not prove to be the best fit. Don't sign him, and not only do the Astros not get the offense, they get roasted on the public-perception front. Certainly, a bold move must be made. The last thing this club needs is the status quo. Something must be done to protect Berkman in the order and offer help in scoring runs. But there's a difference between bold and stupid. Bold is what the Astros are thinking. They have made a new list. If they can sign Lee in the $90 million range, that remains the first choice. But it is unlikely. Thus, here at the Union Station satellite office, we like the looks of the next two names on the Astros' list: Toronto outfielder Vernon Wells and Tampa Bay's Carl Crawford. Obtaining either is the way to go, the first option being Wells, a multitalented Gold Glove outfielder who, at 27, is younger than Lee. Wells hit .303 last season with Toronto with 106 RBIs, 40 doubles and 32 home runs. Wells and Crawford, 25, have ties to Texas and clearly are superior options to Lee. But they would arrive only via trade. A swap is a much more dicey proposition, considering the Blue Jays and Devil Rays are asking for two front-line players and a pitching prospect. The Rays and Jays also would have to decide they'll talk trade with the Astros. Neither Toronto nor Tampa Bay has said no. Wells or Crawford also would expect a contract extension that would push his salary into the $13 million to $15 million range. But that money would be much more well-spent than throwing as much or more at Lee. The Astros would get more seasons and better defense out of Wells or Crawford, and they would not have to worry about a potential logjam at first base. The Astros have made it clear the only two untouchable players on the roster are ace Roy Oswalt and Berkman. Why not start thinking like an owner who is in tune with smart baseball decisions instead of one who's a slave to public relations? McLane could trade second baseman Chris Burke, shortstop Adam Everett and, say, pitcher Jason Hirsh or minor league star pitcher Troy Patton. Wells is younger than Everett. Crawford is younger than Burke and Everett and just one year older than Hirsh. Like Astros manager Phil Garner has said, if it doesn't hurt, then it's probably not a good trade. If Lee wants to become an Astro at a discount, great. If not, the Astros should look hard, think hard and deal. The window of opportunity for this club is closing, particularly if Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens retire. Spend wisely, Drayton. Just don't spend for the sake of spending.
Where did I say that I assumed Roger/Andy were playing? Most of those guys you mentioned are going to require trades, which means giving away assets. Bottom line, I'd rather not trade good prospects for a mediocre arm. I'd love to get a guy like Peavy or Dontrelle (won't happen) and would trade away the farm to get them, but some of those guys you mention are pretty mediocre. Realistically, if we don't get Clemens and Pettite back, we're a sub-.500 team, absent some exceptional talent coming in. Jeff Suppan isn't my idea of such a talent.
I agree. Lee doesn't merit that much from any team, winning or losing. But 5 years, 70 mil seems reasonable. I guess I'd rather be optimistic and hope that Lee signing (along with Woody Williams) lures Roger/Andy back, because then we're talking a solid club next season. One of the top rotations in baseball and punch in the middle of the lineup. Because if we're resigned to being bad, then just forget this offseason entirely and play the kids next year.
five years, seventy mil . . . would be fantastic . . . and I'm right there with you. Everything is pointing to a seller's market, which is a shame. Though if Uncle D is willing any contract (70, 80, 90) for 5 years would work. I just don't want to see Lee sitting around in the clubhouse when he is 37 and still making bagwell money.
