I agree, and coupled with the fact that the Astros still have to pay him his one million dollar contract I would think they would stick it out and at least use him in mop up situations or long relief.
Well Shane would have got killed this year, believe it or not but Redding will give us a better shot at winning than Shane would.
Shane Looks like Shane is still looking for a job... I'm glad he won't be going to the Mets...but the Reds, Cardinals and Braves will hurt...
Releasing Shane Reynolds wasn't an econimic move, because the Astros still have to pay him his 1 million dollar contract... it was pure business. The guy throws 82-85 mph on his fastball, and his only other decent pitch is his splitter... So he offers nothing to the Astros considering the pitching prospects we have in the organization. Why let him get rocked for 10 losses when we can throw Tim Redding out there to lose more and get much needed experiene out of it all. Meanwhile MLB blocked the NY Mets from signing Reynolds to a minor league contract because the way the contract was structured, but from what Shane's agent has said there are 4-5 teams very interested in him... there are plenty of non-contenders out there that need sub-par pitchers, but thankfully the Astros aren't any of those teams. The Astros have plenty of arm-strength and talent, and a lot of the bullpen can spot start decently at any time. Yet another good move by Gerry.
The incentive laden contract that Reynolds signed with Houston included the 1 million dollar base and a number of incentives. 2 million dollars in incentives were simply roster bonuses. He would have earned $300,00 for 30 days, another $500,000 for 60 days, $600,000 for 90 days and $600,000 for 120 days. He would also have received bonuses totaling up to 1.7 million for making certain numbers of starts. Economics DID play a factor in Reynolds release.
If it was about economics they would never have resigned him. They gave him another shot and he stunk it up... If they thought he would have been of some use they would have kept him around even for the extra 1-2 million, he's washed up and they payed 1 mill to find that out for sure.
not only was it A factor, it was the ONLY factor in my mind. sure, there was some uncertainty over how he was going to pitch, but no more than the rest of the back of the pitching staff. plus, factor the intangibles of being a leader in the locker room and what you have is a player that is more valuable than the other pitchers on the squad. a lot of people on this team are admittedly pissed off about this move, and they should be. there is no question in my mind that if robertson and shane had similar contracts, shane would still be here. therefore, this move is entirely economic in nature.
Clubhouse leadership is entirely over-rated these days... look at the Giants last season and the Yankees every season. The only leader that our young pitchers need is behind the plate, not on the mound. Of course I am talking about Ausmus.
Uhm, I think the reason he was released was because there was no uncertainty about how he was going to pitch. He was going to suck. I mean, there were questions about Redding, Munro, Robertson, etc, etc - but they didn't put 82mph grapefruits over the plate in Spring. Shane was a hell of a pitcher for a long time, and gave the Astros a lot of good starts, but he doesn't have it anymore and we essentially gave him a 1 million dollar thank you for all his hard work for this club.
I think the fact that with all of the question marks in MLB pitching, the fact that no one has signed him is very telling. He was a great pitcher, who contributed much to this club. He's still a great person. He's in a similar position to Hakeem a few years back. (Similar situation -- Reynolds isn't in the same league.) He could probably ride his experience, and be an OK player, but his body won't ever let him play at the same level. It's time for him to explore other opportunities.
I know its early, but the Astros aren't missing him right now. I doubt that they ever will this season.
