Purpura has said that the trade talks have cooled off, and the free agent market is dwendling down to scrub players. So my question is when do you think Purpura will make his first significant out of clubhouse acquisition?
610 said this morning that Tejada is even more disgruntled about his situation in Baltimore than he was a month ago, so maybe there is a chance.
The FA part is painfully obvious....but to hear that trade talks have cooled down is a horrible sign.
Do you know why he is upset? He is upset because he basically said that the O's need to keep up with the rest of the AL East and improve the team or they might as well trade him. If he thinks Baltimore is slow to improve the team to his liking, I cant imagine him being satisfied with TPs offseason...or lack thereof.
Um, who have we fallen behind in the Central? Plus, he should know that if we were to add him to a World Series team, minus Roger Clemens, would make us a favorite again.
My point is that a bad offseason in the players and/or fans eyes isn't always what it seems (i.e. 2005 Astros)....I am just trying to think of Tejada being an Astro right now....being upset that were are standing pat this offseason after losing arguably the best pitcher in the NL from last yr. Hell, the O's spend a lot of money and he is frustrated.
I still firmly believe that if we add a player of Tejada's caliber, Clemens will return. I think his decision is pending on such a move.
If our offseason ends with us doing nothing except for losing our best pitcher, then Purpura is a complete failure. We desperately needed a bat for our impotent offense last year, and he sat on his hands. We still desperately need a bat, and he's still done nothing to date. Frustrating to say the least, especially coupled with the loss of our best pitcher.
I'd rather the team go out there and continue to kick ass despite his "ineptitude", instead of his new additions being utter flops (see 2005 Houston Rockets), or us giving up way too much young talent in a trade of desperation (see 1997-2000 Houston Rockets).
It isn't the GM's fault that Drayton has tight purse strings. Our payroll is at $85,000,000 this season WITHOUT Roger Clemens, they aren't going to sign any big names UNTIL they know they have a shot at the playoffs. Drayton never pays players on their potential, well minus Hidalgo.
Yet, the reason why the payroll is so high is because Drayton did sign those "big names" such as Pettite, Berkman, Bagwell, Biggio, and Oswalt. He also had given out decent pay to Wagner and Kent. And, btw, all teams besides the Yankees are operating like this now... its the reason why the Red Sox had to part with Damon, its the reason why the Cardinals wouldn't give another year to AJ Burnett, its the reason why teams like the A's are always in the playoff hunt, while teams like the Rangers and Orioles sit at home every October. Also, I know you're not a "drayton basher"... so please don't feel like I'm grouping you with the rest of the complainers.
Hunsicker never seemed to have problems making trades and finding pieces to sign in the offseason...and he had the same tight purse strings.
I suspect it will be inseason. The team is either going to suck it up huge, and therefore we'll see some of the productive players get traded away for young talent, or the team will be good but in a close race for the division crown, so we will acquire someone for the final push.
He didn't have to work around Bagwell's end-loaded contract, when he was here Bagwell was making peanuts and he got out before he had to deal with the wasted 18-22 million a year on him. Outside of Clemens who's large contracts pay for themselves in ticket sales the Astros have never paid "big" money for a free agent, they've only really paid big money to guys brought up in the system... Biggio, Bagwell, Berkman, Hidalgo. Drayton will not pay big bucks for a guy he doesn't know will work out, he simply doesn't pay for potential he wants proven players. Oh, and how many World Series did we get to under Hunsicker?
I'm not going to sit an argue about who is a better GM...Hun or TP....its a no contest. As for the World Series comment.....that's like saying Barry Switzer is a better coach than Parcells since he was able to win the Super Bowl with the Cowboys.
Hunsicker wasn't nearly as good of a GM as people made him out to be. If he was we wouldn't be stuck with paying Bagwell like 50+ million the final 3 years of his contract on the downside of his career... Hunsicker was smart, he made a name for himself while potentially hurting his team in the long run and he got out before he had to deal with the problems he created. He did a good job, I'm not going to say he didn't but he wasn't as amazing as most believe. People continually bash Drayton's system yet he continues to keep putting a winning team on the field year after year... yet people praise Les Alexander/Carol Dawson like they are gods and their teams haven't done jack crap for nearly a decade now. All of the people complaining about Purpura now were the same ones bashing the Astros last season, and look who came out golden in that deal. After we get Bagwell and/or Clemens off the books there will be PLENTY of room to better the team across the board, and Drayton isn't going to put his team in the hole by overpaying for free agents just because the market is thin. He learned with Bagwell that he isn't going to sacrifice the future for the now, because if he sticks with his formula of bringing players up in the system and signing free agents mid-season when there is a chance for a playoff run he is going to have a lot more long-term success then your run of the mill Florida Marlins feast of famine approach.
i agree..hun is better. having said that...i think it's entirely possible that hun would have made a trade last season that might have cost us the team that got to the world series. i'm not sure he would have held on as long as purpura did. even if purpura only did it by accident. i think hun may have given up on burke for some fill-in matt lawton type player, for example. i'm very glad that didn't happen.
