Aggie2008 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/base...t.ap/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razzledazzle Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I hope the Astros finish in last place for ten years straight. The Packers have class they are letting Favre finish his career as a Packer while his team struggles. Clemens has one heck of a year and they just kick him to the curb. I bet they will keep Bagwell though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRocky99 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Originally posted by razzledazzleI hope the Astros finish in last place for ten years straight. The Packers have class they are letting Favre finish his career as a Packer while his team struggles. Clemens has one heck of a year and they just kick him to the curb. I bet they will keep Bagwell though. You are wrong on this. They did not kick him to the curb and they WANTED (and still do) him back. The Astros decison to not offer Clemens arbitration had NOTHING to do with them not wanting to keep him. Clemens was not and is not ready to decide whether or not he will even play next year. Clemens' agents repeatedly said that Roger wouldn't decide whether he would return for another season until January or February, and the Astros could not afford to repeat last year's Carlos Beltran debacle. Had the Astros offered arbitration, Clemens had until Dec. 19 to accept or reject it. If he had accepted, he would have been considered a signed player. Had he rejected it, the Astros would have have until Jan. 8 to negotiate a contract. If they didn't complete a deal, they lost the right to sign Clemens until May 1. So, since he wasn't ready to make a decision and stated that he won't be until January or February, they simply had to make a decision and they did. While I hate that there is a chance Clemens will not be in an Astro uniform next season, I do think the Astros' decision was the only one that they could make. As far as Bagwell, he is under contract, so there is no option on that anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsn03 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 You're exactly right BigRocky this was brought on by Roger's indecision, the Astros had to start trying to get some other players, and they couldn't wait on him until Feburary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRocky99 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 thanks Ramsn03. Yeah, I know the Astros got some heat and will get some heat for not offering arbitration to Clemens. However, it was the only thing that they could have done under the cirmcumstances. Clemens likely would have gotten $20 mil in arbitration and I do think the Astros were prepared to pay that although it would have really hurt the team's overall payroll. I also know that they have some big time money that they will be paying Oswalt, Pettitte, Berkman, Bagwell, and others so they can't even use the entire $18 - $20 mil for free agents, but it does give them some working money. To me, Bagwell is the key and I am not sure when/if the Astros will have a clue as to his health for next season or what he will decide to do. In the past, Bagwell has renegotiated his contract to allow the Astros to sign players such as Kent, Pettitte, and Clemens. Now, this season, he is to make the big bucks. So, it is also hard to blame him for being unsure of his future. Anyway, if he can't play on a daily basis, then Berkman will likely play 1B full time and another corner OF (hopefully with some power) will be needed. I would hate to be GM for the Astros right now with both Bagwell and Clemens' status for next year still up in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsn03 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I'm not sure if they can count on Bagwell, his shoulder is bad, and it would be great if the Astros were an AL team, he could DH for them, but since they are not, they do have to be careful with how big a contract they give him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sppunk Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Boston won't offer Clemens a contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldog7 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Theyre idiots if they dont, even though he wont sign there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sppunk Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Originally posted by Bulldog7Theyre idiots if they dont, even though he wont sign there. Boston has eight starting pitchers, we do not need another. They never have hinted at offering him a contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldog7 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Who are the eight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRocky99 Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Bagwell is already under contract for the upcoming season on a long term deal he signed several years ago. I think his salary for the upcoming season is in the $17.5 million category. The only thing I can see if he is not capable of playing health wise) is for he and the Astros to come to some sort of buyout option. As I said, he has re done his contract several times in the past at request by the Astros to allow them to resign others. The big Astro rumor now is that Brad Lidge could possibly be traded for more offense and/or another starting pitcher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sppunk Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Originally posted by Bulldog7Who are the eight? Arroyo, Clement, Schilling, Beckett, Miller, Wakefield, Wells and Paps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie2008 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 " 'We had an internal discussion and concluded we should make an initial call to let the Hendricks brothers know we were open to discuss Roger's return if he should have interest in the Red Sox in 2006,' " CEO Larry Lucchino told The Globe." Sounds like a hint to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sppunk Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 But today, Hoyer said Clemens isn't on their radar and every FA gets called by every GM to discuss any possible opportunities. I'd rather Fenway burn to the ground than have to see that scum pitch a game there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now