It could just be posturing by Beltran and his agent, trying to save face... or it could be the truth. In the end, the deal they got from the Mets is not that much more... so he either wanted to go to NYC, or this no-trade clause was really a big deal to him (remember, he had no say when he got traded from KC).
Yeah, but that trade shouldn't have made him feel bad. With out being traded to us this past season no way would he have made this kind of money. argh....man that is just a tough one to swallow, if that indeed was the main reason behind it.
Ugh, before I at least assumed they just wanted more money. if this is the case maybe Beltran is the reasonable one give him a no trade.. i believe the topic came up the other day on here and everyone just assumed yeah he will hae a no trade
just like how we went from the middle of the pack to being right on the edge of going all the way? y'all take this a little bit too extreme. we weren't even the division winners. we needed a historical season by beltran, amazing pitching by oswalt and clemens to have gone that far. y'all make it sound like we're always putting out the best team in the NL. signing pettite, signing clemens, trading for beltran was technically patchwork. why? because clemens was in retirement before we begged him out of it. we were going no where before the beltran trade and it took a great late season run to put us in the playoffs.
Agreed... but perhaps at the time, for a guy who's never been traded before, it might have left a bad taste in his mouth... even though he was going to get a chance to win. Once again... who knows if this was really the sticking point, especially since the Astros had this deal on the table for awhile (ie - they could have worked out that issue earlier if Beltran/Boras didn't like it). What I don't understand is... when any player has that type of contract, it almost assures that a trade can't be made (especially since you normally try to trade players because they "struggle" for you, not because they're earning their contract). Thus, who cares whether a no-trade clause is there or not... his contract basically makes him untradeable anyways.
seems to me beltran is worried that he'll suck right after he signs the deal. no trade clause is THAT important to him? look, if ARod can be traded, ANYONE can be traded.
I dont see how the no trade clause could be the reason this didnt go through. Like Nick said, this deal was on the table for a while. There is no reason they couldnt get that worked on earlier.
Didn't A-Rod waive his no-trade clause? There are many situations where a player can be convinced to do that, even though its in the contract (especially if you're like A-Rod... going from hell to the Yankees).
Historical post-season. As has been mentioned repeatedly, Beltran's regular season was good, but left a lot to be hoped for, especially in September.
Now, on second glance... when I read Pupura's comments on how stuff that "should have been dealt with earlier" came up at the last second, this could be what he was talking about. But, chances are that it was Beltran/Boras who "allofasudden" had a problem with the Astros' contract, and not Drayton springing this no-trade clause at the last second. They stalled... deadline passed.... they sign with another team the next day (with no deadline to do so). That should pretty much say it all.
i forgot about that. thanks for the RIGHT info. but still, why WOULD a no-trade clause be that vital to a player? he wants stability? i see no other way of getting that stability other than 1. getting paid 15-17 mil a year 2. being one of the top players in the game. unless the astros really suck next season (and it didn't look that way if he had returned with clemens) like the rangers did with ARod, Beltran would have gotten his stability. this is just another way that Boras and Beltran is doing damage control IMO
yea that's what i meant. sorry bout the mistype. all in all, everyone is just bumming a bit too much about the astros. every time goes through times of mediocrity. if you don't want to face that kind of reality, be a yankees fan.
I think the bottom line is that Beltran just didn't want to be in Houston....He and his agent used the astros to get more coin. This just sux after the season we just went through.....now it seems like a pipe dream. I hope i'm wrong though.................
A member for 2.5 years and that was your 3rd post? Quite impressive. This shows the impact that Carlos is having on us.
I really don't buy that... not when the Mets ended up giving them 119 over 7 years... which is about 7 million more than their first reported offer. If they were really ok with 108 than they would have been ok with 112.... it was a ploy to stall the negotiations.
I refuse to believe that the "No Trade" clause was the absolute problem here. ESPN is now reporting a 7-year, $119 million deal, which would mean the Mets increased their offer. Our offer is/was $11 million less, which is a good difference.
