Brady Aiken DID NOT SIGN

[max power]

A person with knowledge of the situation told Evan Drellich of the Houston Chronicle that Brady Aiken has a "cut-and-dry" issue with his left ulnar collateral ligament.

 

It sounds like Aiken might have an abnormally small UCL, and even though it's not damaged, the Astros are contending that it makes him more at risk going forward. "He may have some (of the UCL), but not much," Drellich's source said. Aiken's advisor, Casey Close, is claiming that Aiken is perfectly healthy and worth every penny of the previously agreed to $6.5 million bonus. The Astros are willing to offer the lefty $3.16884 million. The two sides have until Friday afternoon to work things out.

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Houston Chronicle

Poor astros fans.

[LDF]

A person with knowledge of the situation told Evan Drellich of the Houston Chronicle that Brady Aiken has a "cut-and-dry" issue with his left ulnar collateral ligament.

 

It sounds like Aiken might have an abnormally small UCL, and even though it's not damaged, the Astros are contending

that it makes him more at risk going forward. "He may have some (of the UCL), but not much,

" Drellich's source said. Aiken's advisor, Casey Close, is claiming that Aiken is perfectly healthy

and worth every penny of the previously agreed to $6.5 million bonus.

The Astros are willing to offer the lefty $3.16884 million. The two sides have until Friday afternoon to work things out.

 

 

 

Source: Houston Chronicle

 

that is little more than the amount jeff Hoffman pit - tor sign for.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I believe he has to wait three years to be draft eligible again, as long as the original drafting team followed all of the rules for attempting to sign a pick.

 

 

If they can't reach and agreement he has two choices. Go to UCLA is one. The other choice would be to play for an Independent League Team and he will be draft eligible again next season.

[Quin]

Wow, this is something else.

[caulfield12]

The Astros have also had issues with Robbie Grossman, where they offered him the same type of deal as Springer/Singleton and he didn't accept it...and he was quickly sent down to the minors after he nixed the offer (although his stats weren't that great at the time, it still seemed like a direct cause and effect/correlation with the contract refusal.) Matt Dominguez was the other pre-arb player offered.

 

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/ast...e02ca9cd87bd7f9

Long, exhaustive look into the Astros' controversial front office approach by beat writer Evan Drellich

 

 

Evan Drellich takes a flame-thrower to the Astros

 

So Evan Drellich got some very interesting quotes regarding how the Astros do business, in which we find that there are apparently "pockets of internal discontent" and a "potential reputation problem" throughout baseball.

 

Former Astro Bud Norris:

"They are definitely the outcast of major league baseball right now, and it's kind of frustrating for everyone else to have to watch it."

 

Drellich interviewed 20 players, coaches, agents, and others connected to baseball for their opinion on the Astros, and here issues that were repeatedly brought up:

 

*The de-humanizing aspect of Astros' business negotiations, including contracts and call-ups in a manner defined as a "dehumanizing, analytics-based approach."

 

The most damning quote comes from an anonymous Astros player:

"I don't think anybody's happy. I'm not. They just take out the human element of baseball. It's hard to play for a GM that just sees you as a number instead of a person. Jeff is experimenting with all of us."

 

Luhnow's response? Drellich says "feelings aren't high" on Luhnow's list of concerns:

We're not running for election here, it's not a popularity contest.

 

So, explosive stuff from Drellich and the Chronicle, and it's impressive to see such reporting from the Chronicle - who I admittedly thought have been overly-critical in 140-character bursts. But this is a thorough take. It's gonna take some time for me to wade through my thoughts...but I'm happy to hear yours...

Posted by Ast

Edited July 16, 2014 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

The Astros and Brady Aiken

 

The San Diego Union-Tribune had an article a few days ago (I changed careers, and am studying for a test that I need to pass so as not to make the Changing of Careers a "mistake," so I'm woefully behind on Astros-related things) regarding the Astros and 1-1 overall pick Brady Aiken. The gist of the article? The Astros are screwing over Brady Aiken by trumping up a possible elbow ligament issue, offering him $5m (when the slot is around $7.9m).

 

Not to go all Oliver Stone here, but the $2.9 million Houston is trying to save on Aiken is almost the exact amount needed to sign two other high school pitchers - fifth-round pick Jacob Nix and 21st-round pick Mac Marshall.

 

The report is that the Astros had offered $5m to Aiken before selecting him, came up to $6.5m in the days following the draft, and then dropped it back to $5m while Aiken and his family were in town to take a physical and sign a deal.

 

5th Round pick Jacob Nix had a deal in place with the Astros for $1.13m over slot, and Mac Marshall's demand was $1.4m over slot (for a 21st-Round pick, anyway). Add that up, the Astros would need to save just a shade over $2.5m in order to sign all three players.

 

The U-T's Kirk Kenney succinctly sums it up (one-sentence paragraphs have been reduced to one three-sentence paragraph for sanity purposes): Has Houston so alienated Aiken that he now won't sign at any price? We'll find out. Even if the two sides do end up coming to terms, is this really the way to begin a relationship?

 

A few things about this piece...

 

1) This is coming from Aiken's hometown newspaper, so it's not as though it's Jon Heyman or Ken Rosenthal getting bored and deciding it's been a few weeks since they wrote about the Astros, so minus whale write about how disingenuous the Astros are. This can't be dismissed out of hand.

 

2) It obviously came from Aiken's side of the negotiations. The Law Offices of Jeff Luhnow aren't going to reach out to the San Diego Union-Tribune and plant a story (and if they did, then that's diabolical. Also a little genius, but mainly diabolical.)

 

3) I'm trying to get past the part of the story where someone would only want to give me $5m instead of $6.5m, but let's try to look at it from Aiken's side. The 3rd overall pick, Carlos Rodon, just signed a deal that was worth a little bit more than what the Astros offered Aiken two picks earlier for an "elbow ligament issue" that may or may not actually be there. If the article is correct, Aiken is still throwing - hardly the actions of a pitcher with an elbow ligament issue. Because if there was concern about his elbow, his camp would shut him down and not let his elbow burst like a jello water balloon before he signs any deal, even if they were upset about the Astros going after further savings.

 

4) On the Astros' side, should we fault the Astros for trying to figure out a way to sign three of the top high school pitchers in the country? No.

 

5) Do I feel a little turned off by even the possibility that the Astros are trying to game a 17-year old kid out of $1.5m? Yeah, I do. I said this on the Astros Boxes podcast last Wednesday, but if the Astros think Brady Aiken is good enough to be the 1-1 pick overall, and he has an elbow ligament issue, just give him the deal that was apparently in place for $1.4m under slot and be done with it. Don't screw up your draft and further harm the perception of yourself and your team over $1.5m.

 

6) Nix and Marshall will take $2.5m to sign, right? Let's say Aiken will still take $6.5m (although with Rodon signing for about that, if there are any hurt feelings, $6.5m might not get it done). That's $9m the Astros need to come up with to sign all three. The Astros had signed their other picks in the top ten rounds for $4,890,500 total. They signed 14th-Round pick Nick Tanielu for $200,000, meaning that they lose $100,000 from their bonus pool, so the Astros are essentially at $4,990,500 in bonuses, leaving $8,371,700 to work with to sign Aiken, Nix, and Marshall. That's $628,300 short of deals for all three. Well, wouldn't you know it, the Astros can exceed their $13,362,200 bonus pool by 0.1-5.0% and not lose future draft picks. What's 5% of their pool? $668,100. They'd have to pay a 75% tax on the overage amount, but they wouldn't hurt their future drafts. Essentially, if the Astros were willing to come across and pay an extra $471,225 in an overage tax, they could feasibly sign all three players.

 

7) But if the Astros were willing to do that, they wouldn't be in this position in the first place.

 

www.astroscounty.com

 

 

 

 

 

“These are analytical people,” said an industry source. “They see players as assets.

 

“They’d rather allocate $6.5 million in the draft to two assets than one.”

 

And if it’s three assets, so much the better.

 

If the Astros pay $5 million to Aiken, then they can give $1.5 million apiece to Nix and Marshall. They can’t otherwise go over slot on Nix and Marshall, or the Astros will be penalized with the loss of a future draft pick.

 

This was awkward from the outset.

 

When the Astros contacted Aiken in the minutes leading up to the draft on June 5, they reportedly lowballed him with an initial offer of $5 million. Houston came up from there, but Aiken still wasn’t sure the Astros were going to select him when commissioner Bud Selig stepped to the podium to announce the pick.

 

“I actually did find out on TV,” Aiken said when interviewed by the MLB Network minutes after being selected. “We were going back and forth and we just found out. It was a crazy moment.”

 

The Astros were apparently just following a script similar to 2012, when they selected high school shortstop Carlos Correa. He received a $4.8 million bonus, when the pick was slotted for $7.2 million. Houston applied the money it saved on Correa to go over slot with a $2.5 million bonus to high school right-hander Lance McCullers Jr.

 

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/Jul/12.../?#article-copy

 

In a recent Sports Illustrated article, writer Bill Reiter was given extensive behind-the-scenes access with the Astros. It included a glimpse into Houston’s draft room.

 

Wrote Reiter, “the decision to select Aiken over (Tyler) Kolek, (Carlos) Rodon and (Alex) Jackson—who would be picked second, third and sixth, respectively—had not been a last-minute one.”

 

“We decided the morning of the draft,” Mike Elias, Houston’s director of amateur scouting, said in the SI story.

 

Of course, Houston played it like Aiken was among three or four players still in the mix on draft day when they lowballed him that evening.

 

The logic is that the bonus slots drop substantially — $6.8 million for the second pick, $5.7 million for the third pick, $4.6 million for the fourth pick, $3.85 million for the fifth pick, according to Baseball America — so sign for the lower amount rather than risk falling in the draft and making less, anyway.

 

That’s just negotiating as far as many organizations are concerned. To those not familiar with the process, it seems disingenuous.

 

What the Astros are trying to do now remains to be seen.

 

Do they truly believe that what was discovered in the medical tests is significant enough to warrant a discount, or did they just see an opportunity to save more money? Money that could be used for another signing coup.

 

Maybe it’s something. Maybe it's not.

 

Houston already had a deal in place with Nix, a right-hander from Los Alamitos High, for $1.5 million, some $1.13 million over slot.

 

Marshall, a left-hander from Parkview (Ga.) High, was projected as a second-round pick coming into the draft. He made clear his intention to attend LSU, however, and slid down the draft until the Astros took a chance on him.

 

Marshall was asking for a reported $1.5 million signing bonus, which is some $1.4 million over slot.

 

The Astros reconnected with Marshall two weeks ago, right about the time they would have been getting Aiken’s test results.

 

On Sunday, they asked Marshall to fly to Houston for a physical, but Marshall was already on the LSU campus in Baton Rouge. It may be difficult to sign him now that he has begun to immerse himself in college life.

 

 

Aiken’s last appearance of the season came May 30 in a playoff game against Granite Hills. He threw six innings, allowed four hits, two runs, walked two and struck out 14.

 

“He topped out at 98 mph and showed no signs of discomfort,” said Granite Hills coach James Davis.

 

Said Cathedral Catholic coach Gary Remiker: “In terms of my experience with him this year, I would report him 100 percent healthy.”

Edited July 16, 2014 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

I can only imagine being George Springer, who is nearly single-handedly bringing excitement and interest back to the Astros franchise. I have said this during recent game recaps - this is a young, exciting team when they are playing well. George is a big part of that. Altuve is having a great offensive season. Fowler is as-advertised - on-base threat with some pop. Villar is intermittently fantastic, but also forehead-slappingly frustrating at times. Now, the hope is kind-of at the Major League level, with much more to come later in 2014.

 

But imagine being Springer sitting down with your agent and the Front Office prior to the season.

 

FO: Hey, George, welcome, sit down. Coffee?? No? Ok, our computer says that you are worth $7 million guaranteed, options can take it to $23. Interested?

George's Agent: Um, can we negotiate?

FO: No, the computer says that this is right.*

* - Mucho paraphrasing. But the leaked information seems to indicate that this approximates what happened. But who really knows. My point is, if this happened, it sucks. Read on.

 

Then, George leaves the room. He logs on to Astros County on his mobile phone, and sees articles from fawning nerds like Batguy, myself and the Constable. He logs on to Astros.com. He likely sees his image on promotional material - George is coming, donchaknow. He leaves MMP and sees himself on a billboard. Or something. Regardless, the Astros think enough of him to pump him up publicly, use him for marketing, create conversations about hit, sponsor a website (ok, they didn't do that), but they won't even talk turkey with regards to numbers.

 

And he is being asked to play in a losing team, having to work twice as hard and be twice a mature and when the opposition, the media, the baseball insiders and others make disparaging remarks and jokes about your team, and you don't get rewarded through winning, then it double-sucks.

 

As a kicker, after May 2014, the reported counter-offer of 7/42M seems waaaay too low.

 

That said, I would be surprised if the Front Office didn't have a business plan, too. Overpaying for Springer, or at least fairly purchasing his arbitration years, essentially buying the risk ('cause he isn't a sure thing) may not be what they want to do. That could lead to difficult conversations with Folty, Correa, Appel, Santana et al. Springer's negotiations aren't happening in a vacuum, and there are many other things to consider here.

 

But still, this is a team with no albatross contracts, no one they need to pay down (aside from Wandy), in one of the largest media markets in the States (if they are ever able to, like, broadcast to their home city). I would have done backflips if they had signed Springer to 7/42. If nothing else, it would have indicated a belief, a commitment. A belief in a guy. A human guy. Screw the digits, lets take a chance! Because the fan base, and the other players, and the poor nearby bloggers are all waiting for a sign that it is go-time.

 

My point is this. Gosh, I hope that these statements from Norris and Lowrie are wrong. I hope that the Grossman and Dominguez negotiations aren't as alluded to in the article. I hope that the Astros didn't immediately turn down 7/42 for Springer, but at least made a counter-offer, or moved on the guaranteed money thing, or did something to sweeten the deal. Because that is not a way to run any business that has human beings in it.

 

Because, as Robert Ford's voices says in the radio ad in the radio feed: "Have you ever heard of a bat hitting a grand slam??" At the core of this huge business are a bunch of people. And where there are people, relationships matter. And reputations. And narratives. And gossip.

 

God forbid if the Astros are treating the players like they have treated the fans.

 

Winning may not fix that damage until it is too late. Because, hopefully soon, the Astros will want to sign that one free agent who can push them over the top.

 

Posted by Masked Marvel

www.astroscounty.com

[caulfield12]

Over the course of this past holiday weekend, I spent a lot of time thinking about the Astros. I didn't spend a lot of time actually watching the Astros (barbecues, napping, family time, and whatnot), but my thoughts were certainly on the Astros in light of Evan Drellich's article about the Astros' "radical ways."

 

In the quick post we threw up on Friday morning, I told you I'd need some time to think about it. Now I have. /cracks knuckles

 

Anybody surprised by the "radical ways" of the Astros has not been paying attention. Yes, they shift their defense around to try to make more outs which, on occasion, pisses pitchers off. Yes, their minor-league pitchers are on a different schedule than the other 29 teams' minor-league pitchers. Sure, winning 51 games is - in the grand scheme of the standings - no worse than losing 61 games. And so the Astros ended the 2013 season on a 15-game losing streak that ranks among the most painful things I have ever endured for "leisure" in my entire life (other than, you know, "2011-2013" of watching Astros baseball). No, you cannot watch Astros games because there is a first-class screw job happening courtesy of the Astros/Rockets/CSN Houston/DirecTV/UVerse/Suddenlink. These are odd ideas to implement in baseball.

 

The reason you can't see Astros games is because the Bidness Side of the Astros is the mirror image of the Baseball Side: Short term pain for long term gain. This #process has all been undertaken on the premise that it will get better. The minor-league system, depending on who you read and value, ranks anywhere from 1st to 5th in all of baseball. For years the most fun part of writing for Astros County has been the minor-league recaps, because there's so much hope, which is of course different from "promise."

 

Former Astro/Noted Hater Bud Norris (who, give him credit, went on the record for the piece) said that the Astros are "definitely the outcast of baseball right now, and it's kind of frustrating for everyone else to have to watch it." The second part I'll agree with - the first three weeks of 2014 were equally as frustrating as the last two weeks of 2013. The first part? I'm not so sure. I mean, if you take the time to photoshop Dre 3000 and Big Boi on Luhnow and Reid Ryan, that'd be funny. But what does Norris mean by "outcast?" The Astros (presumably) made serious bids for both Tanaka and Abreu this off-season, and were turned down by both. Who knows how many free agents the Astros approached to better the team this off-season? The three pieces they added to the bullpen included Chad Qualls and Matt Albers - who began their careers with Houston - and Jesse Crain, who has not pitched a game for the Astros*.

 

*full disclosure: I said on an Astros Boxes podcast that, if the Astros didn't sign Jesse Crain, I would burn something down.

 

You have already seen Chapman, Clemens, Valdes, Oberholtzer all get shipped back to Triple-A. The Astros have made some fantastic acquisitions (so far) in Tony Sipp and Collin McHugh. Dexter Fowler has shown that he can hit and get on base outside of Coors Field. Tony Sipp and Collin McHugh have been fantastic. But how were they acquired? Trade, signed after being released, waiver claim. Point is the Astros aren't enticing free agents to come to Houston. In the interest of not looking like I'm cherry-picking quotes to fit my points, Luhnow told Drellich that their plan hasn't prevented players from coming to Houston.

 

Is (our plan) going to change what we're doing if we believe we're doing the right thing? No, it's not going to…We're sensitive to it. If it starts to affect us in a meaningful way that we can't sign players, or players quit, or players don't give us their best effort, then we'll have to address it. As of now, that hasn't happened.

 

One way of looking at this would be to say that the Astros aren't in a position to need free agents right now. The whole point of the rebuilding process has been to draft, develop, and trade their way into contenders - the Astros aren't going to throw $45m at Carlos Beltran to plug a hole, as the Yankees did. The Red Sox model of 2013 (hit big on a number of free agent signings) would not work in Houston because, if you're a player trying to rebuild some value, doing it in a Red Sox uniform than it is more appealing than in an Astros uniform (see: Sizemore, Grady).

 

Another way of looking at this would be to take the anonymous quote in Drellich's piece at face value, which, in its entirety, reads:

 

I don't think anybody's happy. I'm not. They just take out the human element of baseball. It's hard to play for a GM who just sees you as a number instead of a person. Jeff is experimenting with all of us.

 

That's dramatic, and we'll come back to that towards the end. But then things get strange in Drellich's article: Luhnow - appropriately - wouldn't answer that specific charge...for now, more on that in a minute. Jim Crane said they treat every player with respect and that he supports Luhnow's use of statistics. Okay, let's stop here.

 

I feel like we're veering back into the old paradigm where the two sides of baseball can't mix: scouting vs. analytics. You can totally have it both ways; Analytics and scouting can mix, and the Astros do both very well. The problem starts with the next quote from Luhnow...

 

"We're not running for election here; it's not a popularity contest," said Luhnow, who seeks feedback from across the organization but said feelings aren't high on his list of concerns unless they impact outcomes. "We're trying to win big league games, and we're trying to produce major league players in the minor leagues, so if those two results are occurring, that's predominantly what we care about. Now of course, any time you've got human beings involved … you want to understand how they're impacted."

 

And that's where the Astros problem starts because Luhnow is dead wrong about that. The Astros should absolutely be trying to win a popularity contest. What I'd like to see is Luhnow and the rest of the organization go out of their way to make the Astros the most attractive team in baseball to other players. Houston should be a marquee destination for any player who needs a team. Right now, that's not exactly the case.

 

The Astros have been very upfront about what the plan all along: short-term pain for (ideal) long-term gain, and the toll it has taken on the fanbase is pretty clear. The Astros are averaging a shade over 21,300 fans per game, which is somehow 11th in the American League. If you take out Opening Day against the Yankees, the Astros are averaging 20,466 fans per game. They've had three home games - two against the Rangers (!) - where fewer than 15,000 fans showed up. And you want to talk about CSN Houston? The only thing you hear about Astros' broadcasts is either (1) another 0.0 rating or (2) how nobody can watch the games.

 

If you're an Astros fan in Houston or the arcane blackout zone who doesn't have Comcast and you don't feel comfortable trying to scramble your IP address so you can pay $120 to see your local team on MLB.TV, you are reduced to watching the game through others on Twitter, or watching MLB Network during the game in the hopes that they'll cut away from showing the Braves long enough to show a highlight or two. Trying to follow a game that way sucks.

 

It's far more fun lately, what with winning more often, and all. Springer has sprung, and that's great, but the organization isn't exactly helping. Singleton and Foltynewicz still sit in Triple-A when they're clearly ready for the Majors, and there are a whole train of prospects waiting for the dominoes to start falling. While I understand the business decision behind service time and Super Two statuses, every time Marc Krauss gets a start at 1B another piece of my leprous heart falls off. Dallas Keuchel has become a pitcher you make evening plans around. George Springer is, well, George Springer. Bo Porter brings a fire and intensity to the bench and clubhouse that makes me want to run through a brick wall. It's more fun to watch Porter react to a player when he rounds the bases and heads back to the dugout than it is to watch the player. I might write an actual letter and see if he'll be my daughter's godfather. For the last few weeks the bullpen has made it so that I have pulled out exactly zero hairs in final third of Astros games.

 

I love that the Astros use as much information as they can about the game of baseball. Ultimately I'm in favor of anything that will make my leisure time more leisurely. But I'm different. You're different, too, if only for the fact that after 324 losses in three seasons you're still reading an Astros blog. We've said this before, the Astros aren't trying to appeal to hardcore fans - we're here regardless.

 

It is a fact that The Apparatus likes losing precisely as much as we fans do. But Drellich said in the above quote that feelings aren't high on Luhnow's list of concerns. That should probably change. Perhaps Luhnow and the Baseball Side of the Astros leave the "pleasing of fans" to the Business Side. Like "Scouting" vs. "Analytics" playing together well, baseball is a business and the business of baseball has to do with fans coming to the games or watching on television. There's not a whole lot of either going on.

 

The Astros, and Jeff Luhnow, need to be very careful about their plan for the future. It doesn't matter which anonymous Astro said he felt like he was in Luhnow's own science experiment, that quote is out there now. As Torii Hunter told Evan Drellich, "I don't think a lot of people know that we communicate with each other and all the free agents out there, they communicate with other players." Think about the past three years (yes, even before Luhnow arrived) and tell me that you - Astros fan - don't feel exactly the same way. The Astros need to treat their organization exactly like a popularity contest, to players and fans alike, because if the Astros clinch a playoff spot in front of 18,000 screaming fans, who actually wins?

 

 

http://www.astroscounty.com/2014/05/actual...ty-contest.html

Edited July 16, 2014 by caulfield12

[cabiness42]

Over the course of this past holiday weekend, I spent a lot of time thinking about the Astros.

 

You need help.

[Kyyle23]

Lol. More like you spent a lot of time copying and pasting. Jeez

[caulfield12]

The Astros are just misunderstood and there's a conspiracy to make them look bad rebuttal...

 

 

 

 

I had the good fortune of being invited to the Astros' blogger's night event a couple Fridays ago, during which a small group of us spent 45 minutes in discussion with Astros General Manager Jeff Luhnow and Assistant Director of Player Development Allen Rowin. I asked the very first question, and it was, "Does it frustrate you when we get something wrong because the information is wrong and it's something you can't share?"

 

Luhnow's answer:

 

"I'm used to it. The answer is yes...it's part of what we have to deal with, unfortunately. We can't be transparent on everything, not just because of rules and regulations out there, but because we don't want every other club out there to know what we're doing." He continued, "The thing that frustrates me more than anything is the lack of true journalistic ethics that used to exist and no longer does. I'm talking about this desire to be first in stuff -- that journalists who are 'credible', magazines and papers, end up saying that just are not true. And they say it as fact, and it's really frustrating. My brother's a journalist, but he would never do something like that. He was brought up in the old-school, you gotta have your sources, you gotta confirm your sources, you gotta be right."

 

 

Here is a list of the things about the baseball world that bother me most.

 

Irresponsible reporting

Condescending dismissiveness of anything that doesn't goose-step in line with "the way things have always been done"

The entitled attitude of spoiled kids

 

 

Irresponsible reporting...

 

Scenario: Astros 5th-starter Brad Peacock comes down with forearm tightness. Astros call up Rudy Owens from AAA to take the start.

 

Context: This is Rudy Owens' first major league start. Top-ish pitching prospect Mike Foltynewicz is also in AAA, with a 3.86 ERA.

 

Immediate Reaction: Outrage from the Chronicle's Jose de Jesus Ortiz, who continues to give the impression that he is the anti-Drellich, a writer primarily concerned with saying "I told you so", being first, and drumming up readers' reactions to drive web hit counts.

 

Note, the "better prospect" that Ortiz referred to, mentioned in others of his tweets, was right-hander Mike Foltynewicz.

 

 

But that's just the tip of the bad-journalism iceberg. Last season, Forbes writer Dan Alexander published an article, titled "2013 Houston Astros - Baseball's worst team is the most profitable in history." The story, presented as fact by the author, was so filled with dubious assumptions and claims that another Forbes writer, Maury Brown, published a scathing rebuttal not a week later titled "Erroneous story claiming Houston Astros most profitable ever a massive strikeout." But the damage had been done. According to Luhnow, he still has to defend himself against the poorly-researched and un-corroborated claims in Alexander's first story. The story has damaged the franchise's reputation. All because some ivy-league-educated blogger decided that he was above following the precepts of journalistic integrity that he was no doubt taught to use in college.

 

More recently, Fox Sports' Ken Rosenthal came out with a post titled, "System discourages teams from promoting top prospects" in which he uses the example of George Springer to complain about the way teams exploit their top prospects. He comes to the conclusion that:

 

"If Springer had signed long term, the Astros might not have hesitated to promote him. His countdown to arbitration and free agency no longer would have been a concern. While some might interpret the Astros' reluctance to accelerate Springer's arrival as punishment for him not accepting their offer, the team sees it differently, sources said."

 

Rosenthal named no sources as the root of the $23-million contract that the claims the Astros offered Springer. He passed off the information as fact without verifying it with anybody.

 

 

 

http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2014/5/25/574...-dismissiveness

Far and away the most interesting part of the editorial, where he defends the defensive shifting, tandem/piggybacking rotations, sense of entitlement (we've argued that here about guys like Davidson and Hawkins and K.Walker, to name a few), and the idea that players are basically just numbers/stats

 

 

Players ARE numbers

 

Sounds cold, doesn't it? Says one agent, per Drellich's article:

 

"Players are people, but the Astros view them purely as property that can be evaluated through a computer program or a rigid set of criteria," one player agent said, echoing others. "They plug players into it to see what makes sense from a development or contractual perspective and it does not engender a lot of goodwill in the player or agent community.

 

"They wield service time like a sword (in contract extension negotiations) and basically tell a player, 'this is what you are worth to us, take it or leave it.'" (Drellich)

 

While I cast doubt on the opinion that the Astros view their players as property (that's sure not the impression you get when you hear the enthusiasm with which the front office folks talk about the players who work for them), what this agent is griping about is essentially correct.

 

But what's wrong with that? Every company, corporation, and sports franchise in the world does the same thing with their employees. Sure, when you're that person, you don't like being passed over for a raise, or moved into a different department to work for that lady who wears too much perfume, or being let go because of downsizing. But from a organizational point of view, those are decisions that always must be made, lest the organization fail. Is there any doubt that Biggio's chase for 3,000, or the cost of Berkman and Oswalt's contracts, had a negative effect on the Astros' ability to field a playoff team from 2007 to 2010? Is there any doubt that the money spent unwisely on Carlos Lee did more to hurt the club's financial flexibility than it did to improve their win-loss percentage?

 

In 2010, I read an article in the Houston Chronicle that said there were over 120,000 engineering jobs in the city of Houston, but only 80,000 engineers to fill them. As a result, I get five to ten pings a week from engineering recruiters trying to pry me away from my current job (good luck with that, suckas). There is also a shortage of doctors in the country. We could always use more teachers, welders, and policemen.

 

There is not a shortage of baseball players. A zillion kids grow up playing baseball in this country, and there are currently around 6,900 professional baseball players playing in minor leagues affiliated with MLB who have hopes of reaching The Show. This does not count those in non-tracked play, such as extended spring training and foreign professional leagues. There are another 1,000 or so who have spent time in the majors. Every one of those 10,000-ish ball players have been, at one point or another, the best player in their neighborhood or school. Being the best makes one special enough to reach professional ball. But it does not make you more special than your peers once you get there, and the attitude of entitlement adopted by some of the players will work against them as they move forward in their careers.

[caulfield12]

You need help.

 

http://www.astroscounty.com/2014/05/actual...ty-contest.html

 

C'mon.

[LittleHurt05]

Is Thailand really that boring that all you can think about is the Astros?

[witesoxfan]

Come to see that Aiken has a small ligament and then you get blindsided by Caulfield.

[BlackSox13]

While that was a rather long read it does give some insight to some of the things the Astros have done before the Aiken situation came along. This is some s*** storm brewing here. Glad its not the Sox.

 

Thanks for posting the info Caulfield.

[caulfield12]

Is Thailand really that boring that all you can think about is the Astros?

 

 

Haha, it's rainy season here...four days/nights in a row.

[GreenSox]

I believe he has to wait three years to be draft eligible again, as long as the original drafting team followed all of the rules for attempting to sign a pick.

Is that the rule? It seems way out of wack and gives the player no leverage. if you don't sign for 2 bucks, you wait 3 years? There has to be a way to get back into the draft the next season, if the club offers, say, under 85% of slot.

Edited July 16, 2014 by GreenSox

[witesoxfan]

I believe if he goes the Independent League route or the JC/CC route, it's only a 1 year wait.

[witesoxfan]

So wait, it's a 40% offer if the player fails his physical, correct? A small ligament is an abnormality, it's not a failed physical. This isn't "he can't pitch right now because he's injured because his body isn't put together," this is "he can pitch right now but his ligament is small and may not hold up over the long haul."

 

I personally think the Astros should have to offer 90% to receive compensation for their draft pick.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I believe if he goes the Independent League route or the JC/CC route, it's only a 1 year wait.

 

 

This is true. If he feels healthy and doctors have told him he is, I'd choose this route. I'd play Indy ball and become a top 5 pick next year.

[Chisoxfn]

You need help.

Ummm...that is the author, not caufield.

[southsider2k5]

So wait, it's a 40% offer if the player fails his physical, correct? A small ligament is an abnormality, it's not a failed physical. This isn't "he can't pitch right now because he's injured because his body isn't put together," this is "he can pitch right now but his ligament is small and may not hold up over the long haul."

 

I personally think the Astros should have to offer 90% to receive compensation for their draft pick.

 

That would be the Aiken's camp side of it. I'd demand 90% and not a penny less, just on the principle of the matter.

[caulfield12]

This is true. If he feels healthy and doctors have told him he is, I'd choose this route. I'd play Indy ball and become a top 5 pick next year.

 

 

Where is PTAC on this one?

 

An abnormally small UCL ligament increases the future tear chances by what %?

 

And a TJ surgery (using a regular-size ligament to replace the smaller one) would have what effect?

 

 

If he was throwing 98 MPH at the end of May and is still throwing regularly (in the last couple of weeks and has 3 "clean" physicals or medical clearances), it's a difficult case to prove for the Astros. Plus, he's putting Casey Close, the family advisor, in an impossible position by offering another one of his clients (Nix) $1.4 million over slot. Of course, this is largely being able to do that by ripping off Brady Aiken, who is also Close's main client, in the process. Playing both sides against the other.

Edited July 16, 2014 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Where is PTAC on this one?

 

An abnormally small UCL ligament increases the future tear chances by what %?

 

And a TJ surgery (using a regular-size ligament to replace the smaller one) would have what effect?

 

 

If he was throwing 98 MPH at the end of May and is still throwing regularly, it's a difficult case to prove for the Astros.

In the article about it, the one independent doctor they asked seemed to think it wasn't that big of deal either for more potential for injury it or repairing it, which seemed to be an issue with the Astros. Obviously, not everyone will agree.

 

If Aiken is confident he is healthy, I don't see any reason he would want any part of the Astros organization at this point. Go to a JUCO or play independent ball next year. Even if you only get the money the Astros are offering, at least you don't have to deal with them through your cheap years.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Dick Allen

[TheTruth05]

The Astros can talk about the small ligament and future issues that might arise from it, but they're really beating themselves up here.

 

If they don't sign him, it leaves a bad vibe with the fanbase, leaves Aiken to prove them wrong, and future draft picks will be aware of the way the Astros handled this.

 

If they sign him for the 40%, Aiken will remember the cheapness of the Astros come resigning time.