among other things you're full of, you're full of assumptions. i have no ties to mclane. i'm not a big baylor booster...frankly, i find myself rooting for UT more than my alma mater in most things. i think the criticism of mclane is silly when i consider the history of this once-laughingstock franchise, though. you're making assumptions about what happened in this deal, tj. that's fine...but there's nothing concrete about them. we don't know what the final holdup was. both sides make self-serving comments. the truth is somewhere in between. i would have been pissed if the astros had not pursued beltran. they make a $100 million + offer. that was more than fair, given value around the league. one team reached down and overpaid, bidding against themselves at $17 million/year. i wouldn't match that, either. i said that last week...and the week before...and the week before that. i've been pretty consistent about that, and it has nothing to do with my years at baylor.
boras knew from the get go that we didnt have that much money. everytime we had an offer he would call the yankees and ask them if they can offer more. sure, if this is the case and if it is all about the money, then let it be...i am booing him. i cheer for the astros not the player. beltran strung us all along and we offered him a contract that was basically the same. we gave him everything he wanted and i have NEVER EVER see the city of houston show SO MUCH LOVE to a player. end of convo, i am BOOING him.
1 - We didn't mortgage everything. Jeff Kent isn't worth 9 mil and Wade Miller is a toss up at best. Maybe you should watch a game before engaging in such discussions. 2 - There has been a plan B in place. Maybe you should read the news before engaging in such discussions. 3 - A no-trade clause is no small detail...Drayton wasn't expecting a hometown discount, you just dont want two 17 mil a year players on the roster...Drayton did raise his bid (once again know your stuff before speaking).
Wade Miller at 1.5 million for this year is a steal A no trade clause is a VERY small detail when its for a player of Beltran's caliber
The Astros weren't allowed to negotiate a friendly deal like that either. Otherwise he'd still probably be an Astro.
Had we gone to arbitration, there's a rule about how much his pay would've decreased from last year. I think the minimum we could've paid him was ~$2.75mil, and that's if the arbitrator sided with us.
How does that mesh with the idea that the Stros couldn't negotiate a deal similar to the Boston one? If Miller was willing to sign for $1.5 mil with Boston, don't you think he'd have been willing to accept a similar deal prior to arbitration with Houston? Unless there's something I'm missing.
Bor-****** is to blame...he controlled the situation from start to finish...Beltran was just a puppet, and his "no-trade" bs is just proof of that...
That's not true because Miller wasn't a free agent, he was just under his 6 years of club control but at the point where arbitration is used to determine a player's salary. However after the Astros let him go, he was free to sign a deal with any team. He chose the defending champions, not a big surprise since they were interested. Sam, Miller wasn't going to do work out a deal like that before arbitration because his agent(assuming he has a brain) would advise him that arbitration would give him quite a bit more than a deal like that would, therefore hold off until after arbitration and you can choose your team essentially even if it is the Astros.
Are you sure about that? I thought I remembered the Astros had a long streak awhile back of avoiding arbitration with their players, including working out deals at the 11th hour to avoid going to the arbitor. In fact, doing a little research, I know you're incorrect on the rules. Here's a quote from the MLB website: But even if you'd been right, they could have made a Boston-type offer to Miller before the arbitration deadline - maybe even up to $1.7 mil or so, more than Boston ended up giving him. Maybe they did, I don't know, but it doesn't seem likely that Miller and his agent would reject such a deal and then sign with Boston immediately afterward.
Look deeper. If Miller's agent rejects a deal because he knows arbitration will yield his client more, then he also knows that the Astros will refuse arbitration for the same reason. So the arbitration payday is never going to come. That said, why wouldn't Miller's agent negotiate with the Astros? The only scenario is if he miscalculated the market for Miller - but he signed quickly with Boston, he didn't really even test the market for long.
Thanks for all of the love guys, especially the ones that imply that it has made it easier to swallow. Frank gets mad props, too. HE's playing all the instruments. Fire off an email to frank@lemonenemy.com if you feel inclined, the dude rawks.
What i'm saying is the the odds were in Miller's favor all the way. If he doesn't get arbitration, yes he runs the risk no one signs him, but with his stuff and career numbers, no way that happens. If he does get arbitration, he makes 4-5 mil. And secondly, I forgot about the 20% rule that was brought up just now, which means instead of 1.5 mil like Boston, the Astros would have had to offer 2.72 up front, not counting any 2nd year. I think the Astros decided he just wasn't going to be healthy and to cut their losses than gamble that he would be.
