One correction: It should say the last two years for the Red Sox as far their fiscally responsible moves go because Ortiz, Millar, Mueller were all acquired two years ago in the offseason.
Is it? Well, lets look at the last 10 World Series Winners and where their payrolls rank respectively in each year. (95-99 payroll # at the start of the season) 1995 Atlanta - 3rd @ 45 million 1996 New York - 1st @ 52 millon 1997 Florida - 7th @ 48 million 1998 New York - 2nd @ 63.5 million 1999 New York - 1st @ 88 million (00-04 payroll # at the end of the season) 2000 New York - 1st @ 95 million 2001 Arizona - 8th @ 85 million 2002 Anahiem - 16th @ 62.5 million 2003 Florida - 20th @ 56 million 2004 Boston - 2nd @ 130 million Eight of the last ten World Series winners have had a payroll in the top 10.
I think Theo's a good GM, he's a Billy Beane disciple. But it takes more than 2 years for me to call a put a stamp on an organization as "fiscally responsible", especially one with a payroll like that. Let's see what the Sox look like in a few years when their old contracts are gone and it's a fully Epstein-created squad.
I'd be interested to see where the breakoff point really is--"the top 10" isn't really that impressive, as it only represents the top third. Somewhere in there, perhaps as low as #5 or as high as #10, there may be a spending gap that separates one tier of spenders from another. I just don't know where to find the info, or I'd analyze it here.
1 New York Yankees $184,193,950 2 Boston Red Sox $127,298,500 3 Anaheim Angels $100,534,667 4 New York Mets $96,660,970 5 Philadelphia Phillies $93,219,167 6 Los Angeles Dodgers $92,902,001 7 Chicago Cubs $90,560,000 8 Atlanta Braves $90,182,500 9 St. Louis Cardinals $83,228,333 10 San Francisco Giants $82,019,166 11 Seattle Mariners $81,515,834 12 Houston Astros $75,397,000 13 Arizona Diamondbacks $69,780,750 14 Colorado Rockies $65,445,167 15 Chicago White Sox $65,212,500 16 Oakland Athletics $59,425,667 17 San Diego Padres $55,384,833 18 Texas Rangers $55,050,417 19 Minnesota Twins $53,585,000 20 Baltimore Orioles $51,623,333 21 Toronto Blue Jays $50,017,000 22 Kansas City Royals $47,609,000 23 Detroit Tigers $46,832,000 24 Cincinnati Reds $46,615,250 25 Florida Marlins $42,143,042 26 Montreal Expos $41,197,500 27 Cleveland Indians $34,319,300 28 Pittsburgh Pirates $32,227,929 29 Tampa Bay Devil Rays $29,556,667 30 Milwaukee Brewers $27,528,500
7 of last years 8 playoff teams were in the top 10...us being the only exception at 12. Of the 3 in the top 10 not in the playoffs, the Giants were in it until the last week...and the Phillies until mid Sept...only the Mets, who are just a disaster (until this year anyway), weren;t anywhere close. Interestingly enough, as I didnt evern realize this myself, i that the O's are 20th....WAY below the upper echelon of spenders...so those who always bring their name up as examples of teams that spend and lose, are incorrect. Also, once you leave the top 10, there are only 2 or 3 teams that competed this year....us being one of them.
Correction...6 of the top 10...I forgot Minny...and that may be in part due to the fact that no one in the division is higher than 15
Sorry for talking to myself here but.....another thing is that every division winner is in the top 9 (and given that the Giants were in it until the last day for the division, you can say top 10) except Minny.....and using the example above, explains that division
Max- I didn't mean to suggest that 7 years of 100-loss seasons would be OK with me, as long as we had one ring. I meant that having the 5th best winning percentage in baseball over the past however-many years hasn't been as satisfying for me, as a fan, because it hasn't included even a single Series appearance, yet alone a title. Being consistently above-average during the regular season may make all those July's and August's better for some fans, but to me, the cumulative effect of all those years of coming close have left me jaded to as to the Astros success. I cannot force myself to look on the bright side any more b/c 15 years of doing just that with no tangible reward for my patience has left me incapable of getting excited about a playoff appearance. I do remember the lean years, when Nolan left and Bags and Bidge were just breaking in. Back then, such as 94, getting close was good enough for me. However, maintaining that level for the better part of a decade has only left me wanting more. For me, a July hovering a little over .500 with a decent shot of winning the wild-card is only marginally more fulfilling than one when the team is out of it. Other than the true bottom-feeders like Montreal and Milwaukee, almost every Major League team has a shot to become a playoff team in any given year, while the perennials like NY, Atl and Boston make it a routine. Over the past decade or so since Drayton bought the team, if I was to rank every team's overall success during that time, any team that had at least one WS ring would have to be ranked ahead of Houston, IMO. That means in addition to the top dogs like NY, Boston, and Atlanta, many other teams have been more successful: Toronto DBacks Marlins Angels ...and let's not forget the consistent winners who have at least made it to the Series: Cards Giants San Diego Indians Phillies ...and then there's the good teams who have come consistently close, just like the Stros: Seattle A's Dodgers Twins Rangers That's at least 10-12 teams right there who, IMO, have had as-good or better a 10-year run as the Stros and could make a decent argument for being a more-successful franchise over that time, regardless of what their cumulative winning % might be. Wherever you might put them, I find it hard to believe the Astros are the 5th best team over that span without a single Series appearance to show for it. Hell, we just won our first postseason SERIES, let alone NLCS or WS. The Marlins have won more CHAMPIONSHIPS than the Stros have postseason series! To me, the Astros are at or near the top of that middle-of-the-pack group. I just have a hard time getting excited about being consistently above-average any more. Maybe I'm just a Braves fan trapped in the body of a Stros fan and apathy to winning is my curse. I truly wish I could still find a way to be as excited as you still seem to be.
Just a quick addition to my previous post: 94, 98 and 2004 were exceptions to the mediocrity... Each year I was genuinely convinced we had a shot to win it all, and was crushed when we didn't. Every other year I never really felt excited about our chances, playoffs or not, and they kind of blur together for me.
I have to disagree here. Boras said the money the Astros offered was enough to keep Beltran in H-Town. He really liked it here. However, the problem reported was that the Astros wouldn't throw in a no-trade clause. If memory serves correct Bagwell, Biggio, and Alou all got no-trade clauses. So why not give Beltran one? He's more clutch then all of them combined. This leads me to believe Drayton really didn't want to fork up the money to sign Beltran. Sure, he wanted him back, just not at that price. Anyone remeber how Drayton balked at the early reports on ESPN that we offered Carlos a 7 year 95 million deal? My assumtion is that they waited untill the last minutes so Drayton could say he did all he could do to resign Beltran, but couldn't because Beltran wanted to be a Met. When all that was really neccessary was a no trade clause in the contract. Drayton tried to play a PR game where he ended up looking like the good guy that got hurt and Boras/Beltran were the greedy bad guys.
Milos -- I'm just a fan. I watch because I was raised on Astros baseball. I watch because it's fun. If it's causing you to be "jaded" or "pessimistic" or whatever else...please...by all means...turn it off. Life is way too short. Pick up rooting for a big market team where winning seems to be a birthright. It will be a lot easier on you.
And this is where you stop. I would hope you don't believe the garbage Boras puts out there; it's all about saving face.
i'm certainly not saying McLane would never tell a lie. but if you asked me to pick who is far more likely to lie in this situation...i'm going Boras. he lied all the way through. yeah...there were 7 teams offering 7 years/$100 million. right!! funny how the Yankees front office handled him. they "told" on him. they went public that he had called them over and over on Saturday after they kept telling him they weren't interested.
Bags didn't get a no trade clause, I don't think. Biggio neither. They have 10/5 rights though so they don't need them. Alou had a no-trade, but that was given to him by the Marlins, not the Stros, and it came back to bite us. Andy Petitte, on the other hand, was given a no trade clause when he signed his contract (but Petitte's deal is much shorter).
yeah..keep in mind this was a 7 year deal. which the mets will be paying out for close to 14 years. better hope nothing goes wrong.
So you believe Borass but not Drayton? How quaint. Beltran not signing had more to do with the marketability of being in NY than a no-trade clause. Drayton Offered a limited no-trade clause and Beltran would have had the standard 5-10 clause invoked after the 5th year anyway. He would have had total control of where he went if traded. Beltran wanted to be a Yankee not a Met but the Yanks did not enter into the bidding. I wonder why they did not, maybe they have dealt with Borass before....hmmm Borass called the Yanks everytime the Astros offered anything and the Yanks said don't call us, we'll call you. Borass was convinced( and had Beltran Convinced ) that the Yanks would enter at some point. It was reported that Borass even told the Yanks Beltran would sign for less than the Astros final offer ( which was considerably less than the Mets offer) but the Yanks said no thanks. After the Astros deadline passed Borass paniced and told Beltran to sign with the Mets so he would still be in the NY market eventhough it was not the Yanks. If a person is serious about signing a contract, you don't wait until the 11th hour to bring up a list of things that are deal-breakers.
that's exactly right. and it's arguably fair criticism of McLane for letting it get to that point. the problem is...that's boras' m. o. that's the way he does things. so if you get cold feet, you lose out on a player your fan base is rabid about. but if you stick, you do so with very little control of the process.
I would submit that the first five years listed do not count since the Astros' payroll last year was more than 4 of the payrolls listed. SO the Astros have spent more. If you look at the last 5 years, it looks like the trend seems to be that spending wisely is more important than just spending wildly.
