Author Topic: Astros "win" (Read 5341 times)

I think I have the latest list. Did I miss a couple?

19 Astros 2008 Salaries in place (these total $86.775M):
-------------------------------------------------------
Lance Berkman -- $14.5M
Miguel Tejada -- $13M
Roy Oswalt -- $13M
Carlos Lee -- $12M
Woody Williams -- $6.25M

Kaz Matsui -- $5M
Jose Valverde -- $4.7M
Ty Wigginton -- $4.35M
Mark Loretta -- $2.75M
Doug Brocail -- $2.5M

Brad Ausmus -- $2M
Geoff Geary -- $1.125M
Geoff Blum -- $1.1M
Oscar Villarreal -- $1M
Darin Erstad -- $1M

Brandon Backe -- $0.8M
[ETA-thanks xcrunner] Dave Borkowski -- $0.8M
Chad Paronto -- $0.5M
Jack Cassel -- $0.4M

xcrunner51 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 19, 2008, 11:35:56 am »

You mean Dave Borkowski right? Not some weird combination of Joe Borowski and Dave Borkowski

toddthebod · « **Reply #9 on:** February 19, 2008, 11:50:47 am »

From Justice's blog:

Quote

I can't imagine Mark Loretta or Geoff Blum really want to be here. Both surely wanted to go someplace where there'd be more playing time

http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2008/02/and_then_drayto.html

I think that Justice is full of shit, but if Loretta and Blum didn't want to play in Houston, they didn't have to come here. Loretta didn't have to agree to arbitration, Blum didn't have to sign a contract. As I recall, there weren't a a lot of other teams knocking down their doors

Bench · « **Reply #10 on:** February 19, 2008, 12:01:34 pm »

Quote from: toddthebod on February 19, 2008, 11:50:47 am

From Justice's blog:

http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2008/02/and_then_drayto.html

I think that Justice is full of shit, but if Loretta and Blum didn't want to play in Houston, they didn't have to come here. Loretta didn't have to agree to arbitration, Blum didn't have to sign a contract. As I recall, there weren't a a lot of other teams knocking down their doors

Good lord, and that was the least full of shit aspect of that article. What a simply awful waste of whatever the blog equivalent of ink is.

utastro · « **Reply #11 on:** February 19, 2008, 12:07:36 pm »

But could Tal beat Footer?

David in Jackson · « **Reply #12 on:** February 19, 2008, 12:42:56 pm »

Quote from: toddthebod on February 19, 2008, 11:50:47 am

From Justice's blog:

http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2008/02/and_then_drayto.html

I think that Justice is full of shit, but if Loretta and Blum didn't want to play in Houston, they didn't have to come here. Loretta didn't have to agree to arbitration, Blum didn't have to sign a contract. As I recall, there weren't a a lot of other teams knocking down their doors

I agree and am still puzzled why we have two similar older veterans taking home their salaries and not starting.

pravata · « **Reply #13 on:** February 19, 2008, 12:57:57 pm »

Quote from: David in Jackson on February 19, 2008, 12:42:56 pm

I agree and am still puzzled why we have two similar older veterans taking home their salaries and not starting.

You're worried about Blum's 1.1 and Loretta's 2.75? The starters the Astros have at 2nd and short are better than either. Blum said that his first choice was the Padres, but they did not want him. Do we think Blum received offers of a million from any other team? And Loretta was mentioned in every discussion about teams that were looking for a 2b, did he end up with the Astros by accident?

JimR · « **Reply #14 on:** February 19, 2008, 01:26:18 pm »

Quote from: David in Jackson on February 19, 2008, 12:42:56 pm

I agree and am still puzzled why we have two similar older veterans taking home their salaries and not starting.

because it is one of the many things you do not understand.

Bench · « **Reply #15 on:** February 21, 2008, 09:40:05 am »

Tal loses in Philly

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3256452

Howard "wins" $10 million.

JimR · « **Reply #16 on:** February 21, 2008, 09:41:48 am »

Quote from: Bench on February 21, 2008, 09:40:05 am

Tal loses in Philly

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3256452

Howard "wins" $10 million.

hard one for the club to win, eh?

pravata · « **Reply #17 on:** February 21, 2008, 10:03:23 am »

Quote from: JimR on February 21, 2008, 09:41:48 am

hard one for the club to win, eh?

Can't understand it, I'm sure Tal included Howard's zone rating in his presentation.

mihoba · « **Reply #18 on:** February 21, 2008, 10:16:53 am »

Quote from: pravata on February 21, 2008, 10:03:23 am

Can't understand it, I'm sure Tal included Howard's zone rating in his presentation.

Not to mention his ML record 199 whiffs.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #19 on:** February 21, 2008, 10:25:33 am »

And his trouble with lefties...

Quote from: mihoba on February 21, 2008, 10:16:53 am

Not to mention his ML record 199 whiffs.

MusicMan · « **Reply #20 on:** February 21, 2008, 10:49:56 am »

Quote from: JimR on February 21, 2008, 09:41:48 am

hard one for the club to win, eh?

I don't understand why the Phillies went to the mat on that one. This isn't a backup, or a closer you think will be gone in two years - this is a franchise cornerstone. Why risk pissing him off?

Froback · « **Reply #21 on:** February 21, 2008, 11:00:18 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on February 21, 2008, 10:49:56 am

I don't understand why the Phillies went to the mat on that one. This isn't a backup, or a closer you think will be gone in two years - this is a franchise cornerstone. Why risk pissing him off?

Or better yet, why are you not working on a long-term deal with him to avoid this whole process all together. The dude is about the best masher in baseball. Granted he Ks a ton, but mashers like him make the whole line-up better, IMO.

~~I am not a Philly fan, but I just don't want to see someone like that being the next Yankee or Red Sox... wait, if he is, then he won't be in the NL anymore.~~ Ignore the man behind the curtain.

mrpink · « **Reply #22 on:** February 21, 2008, 12:30:54 pm »

Quote from: Froback on February 21, 2008, 11:00:18 am

Or better yet, why are you not working on a long-term deal with him to avoid this whole process all together. The dude is about the best masher in baseball. Granted he Ks a ton, but mashers like him make the whole line-up better, IMO.

~~I am not a Philly fan, but I just don't want to see someone like that being the next Yankee or Red Sox... wait, if he is, then he won't be in the NL anymore.~~ Ignore the man behind the curtain.

Supposedly they were, but couldn't get one hammered out before the arbitration deadline. Read somewhere they were offering Pujols-like money, but he wanted more.

pravata · « **Reply #23 on:** February 21, 2008, 01:03:45 pm »

Tal Smith outlined the Phillies position,

Smith said the Phillies’ case hinged on Howard’s limited major-league service time and how he slots into baseball’s salary scale. Howard hasn’t been in the majors for three full seasons. He can’t become a free agent until after the 2011 season.

It’s likely the Phillies argued that their $7 million offer matches the highest one-year proposal for a first-time arbitration-eligible player. The St. Louis Cardinals offered $7 million to Albert Pujols in 2004 before agreeing on a seven-year, $100 million extension.

“That’s certainly a major portion of the criteria,” Smith said. “It’s the length and consistency of the career. That’s basically what the discussion was about. There’s no denying his performance. It’s a question of how that slots into the criteria.”
Link

Froback · « **Reply #24 on:** February 21, 2008, 01:37:47 pm »

Quote from: pravata on February 21, 2008, 01:03:45 pm

Tal Smith outlined the Phillies position,

Smith said the Phillies’ case hinged on Howard’s limited major-league service time and how he slots into baseball’s salary scale. Howard hasn’t been in the majors for three full seasons. He can’t become a free agent until after the 2011 season.

It’s likely the Phillies argued that their $7 million offer matches the highest one-year proposal for a first-time arbitration-eligible player. The St. Louis Cardinals offered $7 million to Albert Pujols in 2004 before agreeing on a seven-year, $100 million extension.

“That’s certainly a major portion of the criteria,” Smith said. “It’s the length and consistency of the career. That’s basically what the discussion was about. There’s no denying his performance. It’s a question of how that slots into the criteria.”
Link

That is exactly as Tal has been portrayed in these things. Never attack the player, but defend the number.

BUWebguy · « **Reply #25 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:31:32 pm »

How much is Tal Smith involved in these proceedings (as opposed to simply his company/people)?

I know he started it all while he wasn't affiliated with a team, but it seems like a potential conflict of interest now. (For instance, a man of lesser character could subtly prod a guy like Howard toward free agency, thus hoping to get him either on that man's team or out of the league.)

For the record, I don't think Tal Smith is that kind of guy; just seeing potential there for abuse.

JimR · « **Reply #26 on:** February 21, 2008, 04:18:57 pm »

Quote from: BUWebguy on February 21, 2008, 03:31:32 pm

How much is Tal Smith involved in these proceedings (as opposed to simply his company/people)?

I know he started it all while he wasn't affiliated with a team, but it seems like a potential conflict of interest now. (For instance, a man of lesser character could subtly prod a guy like Howard toward free agency, thus hoping to get him either on that man's team or out of the league.)

For the record, I don't think Tal Smith is that kind of guy; just seeing potential there for abuse.

oh, please. how does one do that in the context of an arbitration hearing? the club rep is sitting right there.

Trey · « **Reply #27 on:** February 21, 2008, 04:27:58 pm »

How the Ryan Howard hearing went down:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=gallo/080221&sportCat=mlb