Connolly: Elias does not have approval to take on salary to add prospects in a trade

[jerios55]

2 hours ago, interloper said:

I have no idea. Does Elias like the prospect? I don't think Elias wants to pay $12 million for a 2019 draft pick, mostly. Is there a chance that prospect creates $12 million worth of value at the ML level at any point? And I think that's probably a tough sell right now to ownership. "Hey I know we want to keep budget low while we rebuild, but can I have this draft pick for $12 million? He may or may not be any good." 

We just gave out our highest pitcher contract ever to Cobb and the guy makes $14 million/year sitting on the shelf. I think it's reasonable to pump the brakes on spending for a minute.

Not that I disagree with the point, but trading Bundy for Cozart (with other pieces like the 2019 first rounder) would be a net change of paying ~$6 million.  (edit: answering those mentioning it as part of the Bundy trade).

Whether they discussed Cozart as an option who knows.  And maybe Elias isn't super high on WW that the 6 mill is worth it. 

If Cozart is healthy this year, the idea of a flip is interesting.  However, if Villar at ~3 mill left last July wasn't a big draw, the risk with Cozart at ~6mill for half a season likely isn't worth the risk.  Interesting move by Angels, I'll be curious how it works out.

[Philip]

3 hours ago, Scalious said:

That is very idealistic. It's a worthy goal but that is something that is extremely hard to do, while trying to win a WS

 Of course it’s hard to do, that’s why baseball is hard. During the season, it’s hard to play, during the off-season there’s this massive chess match going on. Of course it’s hard, but that’s the goal and Tampa does it well, the Cardinals do it well, and a few other teams do it really well with periodic lapses, and that’s OK. Remember, a consistently successful franchise is not going to win the World Series every year but a consistently successful franchise will win every year. The Cowboys had, I think, 21 straight winning seasons under Tom Landry(God bless him) but they only won two of five Super Bowls, and yet every year they were a threat.

Some teams do it badly from year to year.

Sure it’s hard, but it’s not impossible. It is doable, and that’s why casting a very wide net when acquiring players is the second most important thing after good analysis. The nature of the game guarantees a high percentage of failure, so you want to have a large enough pool that you always have options when a prospect fails.

 

Edited December 11, 2019 by Philip
Clarification

[Frobby]

34 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

The Astros have had five straight winning seasons. They also now have a high payroll that the owner wants to cut.Carlos Correa might be traded.I keep hearing they are going to be a dynasty.Get back to me in a few years when Greinke and Verlander are 39.

What constitutes a “dynasty” in today’s environment?    Winning 100 games for three seasons in a row is very tough to do.    

[interloper]

 

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What constitutes a “dynasty” in today’s environment?    Winning 100 games for three seasons in a row is very tough to do.    

I will say, I'm pretty curious how the Astros maintain and handle the next few years. It's a real test for the "pipeline" Elias talks about and which I have decided to buy into completely.  It's certainly worked for the Astros so far, but it will be interesting to follow the next wave and how they restock. Especially without the benefit of high draft picks. 

[atomic]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What constitutes a “dynasty” in today’s environment?    Winning 100 games for three seasons in a row is very tough to do.    

Dodgers have 7 straight seasons with 91 or more wins. 

Giants won 3 World Series in 5 years.  There rebuild they never failed to win less than 71 games before going on to their championship run. 

All I hear is this excuse this is the way it has to be done.  I don't think it is the way to do it. And who knows how many games the Astros would have won without cheating. 

[Going Underground]

2 minutes ago, interloper said:

 

I will say, I'm pretty curious how the Astros maintain and handle the next few years. It's a real test for the "pipeline" Elias talks about and which I have decided to buy into completely.  It's certainly worked for the Astros so far, but it will be interesting to follow the next wave and how they restock. Especially without the benefit of high draft picks. 

I have seem their farm system ranked from twelve to 25th in Bleacher Report after this season. Not sure the 25th is realistic but I can see the Astros window closing in three or so years.

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

I have seem their farm system ranked from twelve to 25th in Bleacher Report after this season. Not sure the 25th is realistic but I can see the Astros window closing in three or so years.

Elias has mentioned "never wanting to do this again" in regards to the rebuild. And almost certainly that means to this drastic of a degree where you're having to start whole departments from scratch and such. 

So I think the Astros will face some struggles at some point, but maybe their path back to contention won't be as long or intense. 

[Going Underground]

15 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What constitutes a “dynasty” in today’s environment?    Winning 100 games for three seasons in a row is very tough to do.    

Also losing 100 games for three years in a row is also tough.Doing both  in a decade probably has never happened in a 162 game season  

[Three Run Homer]

48 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Name me any successful business that operates without a budget.  Anyone who is criticizing management because they gave their GM a budget just doesn't understand business.  

There's nothing wrong per se with ownership giving the GM a budget and then setting him loose--that's a much better model than ownership meddling in every decision.  The question is, what is the budget?  Does it allow the GM to use the team's full draft and international signing allotment, hire an adequate scouting, development and analytics infrastructure, and still make an effort to field a major league team?  Or is it so low that the GM is forced to make harsh decisions?  

[Enjoy Terror]

4 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Why is it notable that Elias has to check with ownership before taking on a poor contract with a prospect attached?

Connolly positing that "There are only two ways to read this" is such a short-sighted, blood-boilingly dumb thing to say; they aren't even the most logical two conclusions. This is Connolly scape goating ownership for everything based on all past transgressions. It's such a "blinders on" approach to holding a grudge. He can't write an unbiased article.

The title of this thread is misleading, even if it is Connolly's opinion, it's being presented as a fact.

[Scalious]

48 minutes ago, Philip said:

 Of course it’s hard to do, that’s why baseball is hard. During the season, it’s hard to play, during the off-season there’s this massive chess match going on. Of course it’s hard, but that’s the goal and Tampa does it well, the Cardinals do it well, and a few other teams do it really well with periodic lapses, and that’s OK. I remember a consistently successful franchise is not going to win the World Series every year I do however think that I consistently successful franchise will win every year. The Cowboys had I think 21 straight winning seasons under Tom Landry(God bless him) but they only won two of five Super Bowls, and yet every year they were a threat.

some teams do it badly from year to year.

Sure it’s hard, but it’s not impossible. It is doable, and that’s why casting a very wide net when acquiring players is the second most important thing after good analysis. The nature of the game guarantees a high percentage of failure, so you want to have a large enough pool that you always have options when a prospect fails.

 

I'm not dis-agreeing with any of this. Most of what provoked me to comment was the trading away players when their arbitration numbers get high. The Rays HAVE to do this out of survival. They don't have the payroll for otherwise. We should have more room to keep the right guys we want once we re-establish a competitive team.

It's harder to susation success when do things like the A's did and pawn off Josh Donaldson the minute he was not long super cheap.

[sportsfan8703]

I like the whole looking for bad contracts idea.  Maybe we're praying for a Davis swap?  How about this NBA style bad contract swap,

BAL gets - Longoria(3/58.5), Lowrie(1/10), Cozart(1/12.7) Total = 81.2 million (12.2 million gain)

NY gets - Davis(3/69), Cueto(2/48.6) Total = 117.6 million (11.7 million saved)

SF gets - Cano(4/96), Familia(2/23.3)  Total = 119.3 million (0.5 million saved)

I know it's December, but I feel like I'm making a late push here for worst post of 2019.  Gotta finish the year strong.   

[atomic]

40 minutes ago, interloper said:

Elias has mentioned "never wanting to do this again" in regards to the rebuild. And almost certainly that means to this drastic of a degree where you're having to start whole departments from scratch and such. 

So I think the Astros will face some struggles at some point, but maybe their path back to contention won't be as long or intense. 

I think their GM will be suspended and they will lose multiple #1 picks in the draft for their cheating.  They are probably going to end up right back where they started.  

[wildbillhiccup]

28 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

Connolly positing that "There are only two ways to read this" is such a short-sighted, blood-boilingly dumb thing to say; they aren't even the most logical two conclusions. This is Connolly scape goating ownership for everything based on all past transgressions. It's such a "blinders on" approach to holding a grudge. He can't write an unbiased article.

The title of this thread is misleading, even if it is Connolly's opinion, it's being presented as a fact.

I agree completely. The jump to conclusions by Connolly is a grand canyon sized leap and it borders on irresponsible reporting. I missed the days when reporters would present us with the facts and let us draw our own conclusions. 

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, atomic said:

I think their GM will be suspended and they will lose multiple #1 picks in the draft for their cheating.  They are probably going to end up right back where they started.  

Okay. Well that's their bad if so. Doesn't say anything about whether or not their system of rebuilding works (it appears to). The cheating thing is separate for me.