Perspective and history are not worthless arguments in terms of arguments about perspecive and history, but in the case of your argument, they're worthless. McLane is not the "constant" when you are comparing organizations with different owners with different agendas in different markets within an ever changing enconomy, market values and market flexability. There are too many outside variables to compare them. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Not to mention two of the teams you listed have changed ownership within the last three years. Where would I rate McLane? In terms of what? On what scale? Success? Wealth? Revenues? Budgets? Budgets compared to wealth? Budgets compared to revenues? Hometown discounts? How long have I been a fan? An hour. A month. Since we aquired Beltran. Since Bagwell won the MVP. Since Mike Scott threw a no-hitter to clinch the division in '86. Since Mantle hit the first homerun in the Astrodome. Why don't you pick one that will make you feel better. It has no pertinence to the matter.
the historical perspective matters to me, big time, gunn. i watched this franchise suck for years and years. i watched them win 2 division crowns, one in 80 and one in 86. followed by and preceded by years of futility. and i've watched them win 4 division crowns in the mclane era..with a chance for a 5th playoff berth in 8 years. i'd say that record is highly relevant, particularly when compared to other astros owners.
Gunn, Are you gonna answer my question? Would you have more respect for Drayton if he had paid Kent, Pettite, etc. full market value instead of using a hometown discount?
You apparently think McLane is cheap and only signs "hometown" players or players to "hometown discounts". Taking all of his baseball ownership skills into account, how do you rank him (based on your status as a fan) compared to the other 29 owners in baseball? It's really a simple question. To further simplify this question, I'll offer the following. Pretend that you can have any current baseball owner as the Astros owner. Who would you pick to own the team? Now pretend that person doesn't want the job. Who would you pick second? Repeat this scenario until you decide to choose McLane. Approximately when did you pick McLane? 5th? 10th? 20th? 30th? Did you pick Selig before him? Did you pick Steinbrenner before him? Did you pick Pohlad before him?
$80 million is nothing special for a mid-market team, but it's not really cheap either. I'd say it's about average.
You must have gone to debate school. When you have no answer or are not willing to give one, you attempt - weakly - to redirect the discussion by asking questions. Actually, if there's nobody to call you out on it, it's quite effective in beginner debate class. I mean, really, what's easier than asking all the questions and refusing to answer any back?
I'll respond for gunn. These are just hypotheticals, which mean nothing. My ranking means nothing. Can't you just accept the fact that I won't answer any of your questions because I can unilaterally declare them irrelevant and declare myself right?
I think one thing we have going for us is that through this remarkable run, Carlos Beltran has become the face of the Houston Astros. He is indisputedly this team's leader and best player. If they can continue their success into a postseason berth, and subsequent national acclaim for the gifted Beltran, we may have a sliver of hope. On the Yankees, he's forgotten in the forest amongst the A-Rod's, Jeters, Sheffields, and Giambis. While Kent, Bagwell, Berkman, and Biggio are names, they certainly do not have the glitter of the Yankees stars.
Really, it's not a simple question. There are too many aspects of ownership to lump it into one response. It's a question that requires a multifaceted answer. You just want a simple response, which I can't give you. There are some things he may be good at and others that he may be below average at.
You haven't asked any questions. You've done nothing but ramble incoherent nonsense and suggest hypothetical situations.
Silly Question : Why is resigning free agents somehow mitigated by the "home town discount"? We still have to make a significant financial commitment to these players, don't we? Isn't this just a cheap way to try and pretend we didn't sink $20+ million a this year into Kent, Pettite and Clemens - but these guys got hometown discounts - so it was a cheap $20M. Re : Alou and Wagner. This one is right in my wheelhouse - Alou has had two average to below-average years at the plate with ****ty defense - and only this year has he played worth what he was paid. We made the right call not to pay him. Wagner was paid $8M a year - about average for an elite closer. Billy Wagner is not an elite closer. I don't see how you can say he was cheap with Wagner when he paid him higher than market value. Silly, silly argument. I don't think you can argue that McClane has been cheap when each year over the last five or so, he's made a significant financial contribution to a player, he could easily have passed on - that's not what cheap is made of.
Oh btw, Beltran is just fine according to sportsradio 610. He is slated to start tomorrow if there are no setbacks with the weather thingy up in the Buckos neck of the wood.
