I really don’t care. But it’s obviously something that keeps you up at night with every 40 man roster move. I never ever thought about the impact of adding a guy to the 40 man for one day or transferring a guy to the 60 day IL… as it pertains to paying minimum salaries… till you brought it up. Good job by you. But hopefully Click/Cranes statement this year can help you rest easier. we could have the greatest assemblage of MLB guys on an MLB team of all time… and some here will still be hyper focused on draft picks and 60 day IL transfers. It’s what makes this place great!
That's hilarious... you don't care.... Yet here you are in a THIRD thread chasing me around about this same topic. Keep on not caring......
I don’t care about nitpicking the budget. I do find it entertaining that there are people who do so. Carry on…
Cool..... Would you like me to start DMing you my opinions on every insignificant roster move? It will be like your own personal newsletter. That way everyone won't see you follow me around the forum like a jaded girlfriend.... but you don't care..... oh sorry.... now I am your entertainment Maybe I will post in the Yankees@Astros thread next.... seeya there sport
Whatever you want to do. honestly, my only concern is when you start getting happy about possible arbitration impact when one of our young guys struggles. Not sure why you’d focus on that during games… helluva way to follow a team that’s currently the best at what they do.
We live without Springer because we still have Correa. Need vocal leaders like that on the team. Lose one and it’s workable, but lose both? I’m just doubtful. I was ok with losing Springer even though I liked him a lot. Altuve leads by example, as does Brantley. Bregman is vocal but in a totally different way than Springer and Correa. What Springer and Correa bring to the locker room is invaluable. Not to mention Correa is legit HOF talent when he’s on the field. We need him for that too. I hope we offer something long term and front loaded for Correa with player options and PA/incentive clauses midway and then team option on the last year or so.
Correa is the definition of SWAG. He's one of the few player that really relishes the bright lights and being up against the wall. The bigger the stage, the better he is. He's on a different level than Springer. Springer had to bat first because he didn't bat as well when there were people on base. Correa plays better under pressure.
And I'm totally fine with this mentality--leave it all out on the field this year and hope it ends up with another World Series win. We'll celebrate another trophy, appreciate Carlos one last time, and part ways. That's the best outcome we can hope for. That being said, I hope Click does everything he can during the trade deadline to strengthen this team for one last dance.
Yeeeeeaaaaaah. None of this is really true. I invite you to peruse Springer's and CC's postseason stats here, especially the WS numbers: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/correca01.shtml https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/springe01.shtml Also, Springer hits better with men on base than without, for his career (and better than CC with men on)
I was going to respond with the actual stats from 2017 - 2019, but it would be a colossal waste of time because @rockbox just threw crap out there that (as you said) isn't really true. There were his 27 plate appearances in 2017 where there was a runner on 2nd and his OPS was Robel Garcia like, but other than that, he has generally been very good to great with runners on base.
One last dance? This team is positioned with or without Correa to be World Series Contenders for at least the next 2 years. Luhow and now Click are interested in the Cardinal program that made St. Louis contenders most every year for decades. Astros still have Tucker, Bregman, Alvarez, and Valdez lined up as a formidable core for years to come.
One of the cardinal rules of negotiation is to not negotiate with yourself. A caveat to that rule is DON'T MAKE THE INITIAL OFFER. You are setting a floor or ceiling if you do. Since there are often two professional negotiators at the table familiar with these rules, they sometimes get around it by making simultaneous opening positions. Both shoot for the moon, but it gets the ball rolling and discussions of terms and structure and it's effect on AAV leave each side with an idea of whether coming to terms is a likely outcome. I'm pretty sure Correa won't get top dollar without meeting certain incentives because of his history of not playing full seasons. But he's going to ignore it as an opening position and expect full value as if there were no history and team will open with the assumption he will be out for portions of every season. It's just how negotiations work. Demand for his services is certain, but the supply of good alternatives is also certain. Right now the Tatis contract at 14 years with ~25M AAV and Lindors 10 yr at ~34M AAV set pretty good parameter's for a deal IF INCENTIVES ARE MET. But I don't see any teams other than the Yankees paying bigger bucks and that's only to poke the eyes of the Astros. But they have been a little less free spending than they were under George.
I disagree. In fact, if Bregman replaces him at SS and Toro keeps progressing, I think we make the playoffs with the current team minus Correa. Bullpen and bench help is on it's way from the IL. But don't get me wrong. I'd prefer to keep Correa if they can reach a reasonable deal.
