I'm not talking about instead of Beltran, I'm saying in addition to. I'd be happy to see a LF out there who's got any sort of arm at all. Biggio kills us at that spot. And if Beltran didn't sign, then you'd have other options besides Palmeiro starting the season. Or an upgrade at 3B, a SP, something. The team needs to make some sort of positive move this offseason, they can't all be negatives. Again, a Beltran signing will solve alot of problems.
Assuming the Mets are at 112 million, I still think that instead of saying "Our 105 is the same as their 112", we should have offered 112 and said "Our 112 is worth 120" or whatever the tax formula makes it.
who's gonna write the check ,though? you want drew and beltran??? great!!! can you wash dishes?? again..the astros ultimately have a limited budget...as do most teams in MLB. the decision was made to pursue beltran to the exclusion of other big name FA's. had they chosen the other way, there would be a larger group of people screaming that mclane really wasn't committed to winning. that's the point RM95 is making....more than any other owner/team i've ever seen, this team is damned if you do, damned if you don't in the eyes of its "fans."
I dont know $105 for 7 years is a little more than i wanted to go BUT it will just be exciting to know we have a center fielder with speed, powers, skills, & most importantly CLUTCH for the next generation of 'stros baseball. Bagwell/Biggio now Beltran/Berkman (Killer B's) I think $105 in TX goes aloooot further than $112 in NY...
Who the hell cares about fair, honestly? What makes something a "fair offer"? Does it matter if you make what you consider to be a "fair offer" to a player when you know that player will get more somewhere else? Kent was looking for 2 years, guaranteed. He was certain to get that from someone. Offering 1 year, guaranteed, even if it's what you consider a "fair offer", was a waste of time, because he'd already stated he wouldn't accept one year. It was a good PR move though, I'll grant you, because it looks like we "tried". But let's call a spade a spade. And your quote was to a post that was false, or misleading at best.
if it's at or near market value. it was. someone went an extra year. no one offered 3 years. the astros offered one with an option for another. not like it was a nothing offer, sam.
Is it not possible that the Dodgers overpaid? 538 plate appearances is very easy to obtain, barring major injury. Kent averages well over 600 PA per year. If he did get injured, at his age, do you really want to risk another year at a position where the Astros defense is seriously lacking? Even in 2003 with his injured wrist and hamstring, he managed more than 538 PA.
Forget Drew for a moment. What about Alou? Kent made $9.5 million last season, money that's not being spent. He was offered $7m to stay, so the Astros had that much at least to spend without me having to wash dishes! Alou's making $6m next season pursuant to his contract with the Giants, so it seems like we could have afforded him if we chose. And you're mistaken if you think the value of a pitcher (Williams) who went 45-22 with the Cards during his 3 1/3 seasons there is $1.5 million. He's not hurt, he's a Houston native, and he would have been a fine signing at $3.5 million.
I also think that the issue with Kent was that we weren't going to go "balls out" for him becuase as long as we got Beltran, we could keep a good lineup in tact and it would soften the blow of losing ou top RBI guy... I dont have a problem with offering Kent a "fair" deal because he doesn't mean nearly as much as Carlos does to the future of our team. "Fair" may not cut it with Carlos...and we should have known this going in (hopefully we did)...it will take a lot more than "fair" to land Carlos.
1. we'll agree to disagree on williams. he pitched less than 190 innings, won 11 games and had an ERA over 4. i can't imagine his numbers are going to track up from that. i wouldn't pay to reward him for a good 2003, when i don't think his numbers will even approach that in 2005...though his stats may look better in a pitcher's paradise like SD. 2. i wouldn't pay Alou $6 million, either. particularly if i need to open up as much cash as possible to get beltran. i wouldn't commit to Alou.
well, for starters he's not real bright. honestly...he loves driving controversy, even when it doesn't exist. he plays angles that aren't there...making inferences that are supported by facts.
Market value being what the market will bear, $17m over 2 seasons turned out to be his market value. Kent had made clear he wanted 2 years guaranteed. At the risk of repeating myself, our offer didn't meet that requirement, so it wasn't even in play. If you can't afford the ante at the poker table, you don't get dealt any cards. In this case the ante was a multiyear guaranteed deal.
Sam Cassell, the point was that you said that the Astros had all their eggs in one basket and missed out on players like Woody Williams because they were going after Beltran and Beltran only. The Astros offering Jeff Kent $7 million guaranteed for this season. That's proof enough to show that they didn't go after Woody Williams for reasons other than money. You'd think we could at least wait until all this plays out, including after we're finished with the roster even if we don't get Beltran, before we call our offseason plan a disaster.
one team offered it, sam. do you think A-Rod got market value??? or do you think the Rangers overpaid??
Was Woody Williams really that much worse last season than Pettite was (salary, $10m this season)? 4.1 versus 3.9 era, 11-8 versus 6-4. Andy's pretty much a career 4 era guy, too. Sadly, that is pretty decent in today's MLB. A few million for a decent pitcher is peanuts in this market. If Beltran had signed with the Yankees on day 1 of free agency, would you have spent the money on Alou? Do you think that's too much for a 40 homer guy? Do you think that the Astros couldn't have afforded both players? Does that mean that if Kent had taken the offer, they couldn't have afforded Beltran?
The Yankees were looking for a 2B, other teams were too. He would have gotten that kind of cash from someone. I didn't see anyone after saying that $17m was too much for Kent, like people did about the ARod deal. It wasn't precedent-setting or out of line with the contract other, similar players have gotten. There's really no comparison between the Kent and ARod deal.
