From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s Tom Timmermann.
In retrospect, maybe the Astros didn’t need to re-sign slugging center fielder Carlos Beltran.
The team lost Beltran, who had 38 homers and drove in 104 runs in 2004 and was an overwhelming offensive force in the postseason last year, to free agency. In the offseason he signed a seven-year, $119 million contract with the Mets.
“Well, first and foremost,” Astros manager Phil Garner said, “I didn’t necessarily think it was a big loss. One of my things that I feel is, if you put so much of your capital in any one player, it’s going to hurt you in my opinion. … So I applaud our owner for going the extra mile and trying to make that happen, but I think it probably was a blessing in disguise.”
The Astros instead banked on Willy Taveras being ready to play in the majors. Taveras had a good season, hitting .291.
Uh, yeah, the same Willy Taveras whose OBP percentage was .325? If Taveras was such a viable replacement for Beltran, why was Chris Burke starting in center last night? Might it have something to do with a a leadoff hitter that strikes out four times as often as he walks being a liability?
I’m in awe of what Houston have accomplished this season, especially after their miserable start and considering how much playing time they’ve given to guys who’d have spent the entire season in Round Rock otherwise. But unless you’re a Roger Clemens’ accountant, there’s no way you can ignore the fact that the Astros struggle to score runs and very often, provide their pitching staff with the smallest margin of error.
Houston are a win away from the World Series and the Mets are playing golf (or sudoku) right now, so it is hard for me to accuse the Astros of mismanagement. But if Garner’s Gang somehow blow their 3-1 NLCS lead, it might be fair to assume that Beltran would’ve made a difference.
To be fair, the Astros offered an obscene amount of money for Beltran. I’m not sure that they were really banking on Taveras being ready. Beltran and his agent strung along Houston until the last minute and killed any chance of them making a serious run at another star. A lot of people knew whatever team won the Beltran stakes would likely be overpaying for him, and yet the Astros were willing to take that chance. That being said, it would be ludicrous for the Astros to say they miss a player that bolted on them.
How would the obscene amount offered to Beltran compared to what they willingly paid the 43 year old Roger Clemens or Lance Berkman, whose flag football exploits rendered him disabled for the first two months of the season?
How is it that Beltran is the one that “strung along” the Astros, but Clemens gets a free pass after waiting much of the winter to decide whether or not to return, then finally singing the biggest one-year deal in baseball history?
How would it be ludicrious for the Astros to admit they miss Beltran? Can you really deny that they’d be a better team right now with him?
McLane’s payroll flexibility was gonna take a hit either way. He opted to overpay for a 43 year old that takes the ball every 5 days — and is a free agent come October 31. If and when the Astros win the World Series, you can tell me they made the right choice.
I should be clear that I am not a Beltran hater. I loved what he did in the playoffs last year. And I’m pretty sure he would have hit more than 16 homeruns playing in Minute Maid Park instead of Shea. And it’s hard to deny the lure of New York. Hell, I left Texas for New York and I didn’t even have the help of Scott Boras. But I also think it’s hard to assume that Beltran would be as good in these playoffs as he was last year.
Sure Berkman was hurt, but the first two months of the season are pretty much meaningless at this point. Without Berkman’s grandslam, the Astros don’t get past the Braves in the 18 inning game. If not for a hanging slider over the middle of the plate to the best hitter in baseball, he would have gotten us past the Cardinals with his hr last night.
And the reason Clemens gets a free pass is because he is still absurdly better than the majority of pitchers half his age. It’s really difficult to assume Beltran’s greatness when he bats .266 with 78 RBIs. If the Astros made one huge mistake this offseason it was letting Jeff Kent leave.
I don’t think Beltran would have to be as good this autumn as he was last year to be considered an upgrade on the platoon of Burke and Tavares, Paul.
I’m just saying that I still find it curious that Beltran’s salary demands are cited so often, yet the Astros found a way to break the bank for a 43 year old pitcher (on a one year deal) and a left-fielder whose absence for the season’s first two months certainly had something to do with Houston’s poor start.
How are the season’s first two months meaningless? Had the Astros merely played .500 ball for the first 50 games, they might’ve made a run at the NL Central, won the division and had home field advantage in this best-of-7 series. Sure, Berkman’s had some huge moments this postseason, but for a team that has had so many problems scoring runs all season (just check out the kind of run support Clemens has received), imagine how much better they’d be with Beltran _and_ Berkman?
re : the loss of Lt. Dangle. I find it less telling that the 37 year old Bad Lieutenant was allowed to walk compared to the loss of the 28 year old Carlos Beltran
For what it’s worth, Newsday’s David Lennon points out that Houston pretty much matched the Mets’ offer, save for the no trade clause.
http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-spnlnote164472382oct16,0,2124869.story?coll=ny-baseball-headlines
“it’s really difficult to assume Beltran’s greatness when he bats .266 with 78 RBI’s”
and it’s really easy (apparently) to ignore that he played while recovering from a hamstring injury for much of the first half, then continued playing in the 2nd half after he and Mike Cameron re-arranged their faces. If Beltran’s RBI total is an indicator of his true worth, consider that he had Jose Reyes and the tandem of Kaz Matsui/Miguel Cairo hitting in front of him all year (and Mike Piazza providing “protection” in the cleanup spot at the season’s begining).