| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Bance Lerkman |
An idea I agree with |
Lead | |
|
I can't remember who it was that said it, but they said they couldn't stand teams like the Muts who go out and purchase a bunch of random talent and try to make it fit into a team. I do believe in chemistry and what it means, and I feel like it is crucial to a team's success. If you can balance that with great talent and a well rounded team you can easily find success. That being said, if we're not going to make any whole-sale changes to this team, why not lock up our young players before they reach free agency? Since we're not going to make the Tejada type blockbuster this offeason, why not win the fans over by locking up Roy Oswalt, Morgan Ensberg, Adam Everett, Jason Lane, Willy T, and Chad Qualls? I for one think that Jason has the chance next year to price himself right out of Houston's budget, and while I think Morgan is only a 25HR 80RBI guy, maybe he'll repeat from last year and demand 10 mil per season when he gets a chance to leave. And Roy, don't even get me started on that one. Roy O is the type of pitcher that makes the Astros the Astros, and it's the lack of a Roy O that makes a team like the Pirates the Pirates...Roy needs to be locked up...NOW! If you can lock those guys up, the only holes that have to be filled within the next couple years are catcher, left, and 2nd...hopefully Burke and Scott can turn into the players we hope they will, and it would be nice if we could get an A ball catcher to come out of nowhere and steal the scene. The pitching horizon looks great with guys like Hirsh, Pence, Nieve, and Bucholtz nearing the majors...I just hope that we don't let guys like Oswalt, Lane, and Ensberg get away because we didn't make them a reasonable offer BEFORE they turned into the best of the best (Roy definitely already is in my opinion).
|
|||
TheRedSon |
Re: An idea I agree with | ||
|
Taveras, at least, is still under club control for the next five years.
|
|||
Conners |
Re: An idea I agree with | ||
|
Qualls has 4 more years I think.
|
|||
HouLW |
Re: An idea I agree with | ||
|
Oswalt is the only player in that group who I think you want to lock up long-term and if I recall correctly, the Astros worked out a 2-year extension with him last season. At the time, that was probably the right move (as opposed to a 5-7 year deal) due to his lingering oblique and groin problems. I wouldn't mind seeing a 3-4 year extension on top of that for Oswalt, who I consider to be one of the game's best and most consistent starters.
I think it would be foolish to insist on locking up Ensberg long term after a career year (see Richard Hidalgo), because the Astros would end up paying a premium for his services. Let's see if Ensberg can replicate his 2005 numbers first. I would rather be forced to pay market prices for a proven, consistent producer than run the risk of payroll and position inflexibility that results from handing out long-term deals to players based on one excellent season. Everett, Lane, Taveras, and Qualls simply do have the major league track record to justify long-term deals. As others have pointed out, the Astros have little reason to offer long-term deals to player like Taveras and Qualls who are already "locked up" since they are under club control. Everett is an excellent defensive player, but because of his limited offense, he is unlikely to command a market premium that would require the Astros to lock him up early. Of those players, Lane has the most potential for a breakout season in my view, but I still wouldn't give him a long-term deal except at deeply discounted prices. |
|||
Clack |
Re: An idea I agree with | ||
|
HOULW, I think you make some good points. I generally agree. With respect to Ensberg, I think the Astros should consider a deal which isn't based upon the market value of last year's performance (top third baseman in NL) but rather a discounted value based upon the assumption that he is an above average, but not "best," 3bman. However, it would be up to Ensberg to decide if he wants to roll the dice and try for another season like last year. Your point about the Hidalgo contract is well taken. However, the Astros' decision not to take Berkman up on a contract extension also proved costly.
|
|||
Skalz |
Re: An idea I agree with | ||
|
Remember that Ensberg and Lane are old for relatively new big leaguers. Ensberg is 30 and Lane is 29. Put that in perspective with Berkman who is 29 but has been a productive big leaguer twice as long as Ensberg.
I'm not saying that Ensberg and Lane can't improve, it's just that those two aren't as young as some people seem to realize. |
|||
Bance Lerkman |
... | ||
|
I wasn't implying that we lock Ensberg up to a Hidalgo type year. I'd just offer something like 30 mil over 5 yrs and see what he had to say about it. I'd honestly make the same deal with Lane. I'd also offer Everett something like 15 over 5. I just think that you put the pressure on them to look at guaranteed money as opposed to the seasons that they THINK they might have. Call me crazy, but i think 5 mil a year for a medicore player is worth the risk when you consider you might have a top 20 player for well under 10 mil a season.
|
|||
masstro |
Re: ... | ||
|
Jason Lane is not, nor will he be, a top 20 player. Compare him to our new addition, Preston Wilson. Last year Lane had an OBP of .316!!
One other thing... What in the world gives you this amazing certainty that a mid-performance outfielder who had difficulty even breaking into the major leagues is going to magically become an All-Star? He had a miserable month followed by a great one (May and June), but all of the others were pretty consistent (solid, but not spectacular) AND his numbers actually declined when looked at on a month by month basis (i.e. September worse than August worse than July worse than June). Four months of steadily declining production does not make me think that this is a guy ready to have a huge breakout. |
|||
| Contact Administrator |