Started By
Message

re: Astros Drama Continues......

Posted on 7/20/14 at 8:54 am to
Posted by Rouge
Floston Paradise
Member since Oct 2004
136798 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 8:54 am to
First reference i see is an article by Evan Drellich in The Chronicle.

If this become a legal situation, and i think it will, he Drellich will be receive subpoena and be asked to reveal his source.
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 9:21 am to
Kid has been cleared medically which is the funny thing, Astros medical staff just found a "potential" issue. One that may never be a problem.....

I know a few posters have stated their is a risk with all pitchers but Aiken is no exception since currently he is physically fine.
Posted by Prominentwon
LSU, McNeese St. Fan
Member since Jan 2005
93709 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 9:28 am to
nevermind
This post was edited on 7/20/14 at 9:34 am
Posted by Prominentwon
LSU, McNeese St. Fan
Member since Jan 2005
93709 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 9:29 am to
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/20/14 at 9:34 am
Posted by Prominentwon
LSU, McNeese St. Fan
Member since Jan 2005
93709 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 9:33 am to
quote:

I know a few posters have stated their is a risk with all pitchers but Aiken is no exception since currently he is physically fine.


I think Matt Krook was the kid that the Marlins took and didn't like his MRI and blew out his elbow at Oregon this year.


The Orioles did the same thing with Balfour over the summer.

My issue is that everyone acts as if the Astros are JUST trying to save money and just changed their minds and didn't want to pay the kid. Even AFTER verbally agreeing with him on 6.5.

Everyone takes the kid's side because his "agent" is spewing venom all over the place about the FO. Of course, they're going to be pissed, they lost out on tons of money. They're going to get to the media and lash out about anything and everything.

My issue is, why is Close pissed off that the info was "leaked." Seems to me that's something they didn't want everyone to know. For the simple fact that Aiken will never sniff another $ amount like that because other clubs will feel that his arm IS a liability, even if he does seem to be healthy....right now.
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 9:42 am to
I think all teams have an assumption a kid is a liability, I mean I stated earlier that Tommy John is becoming so common for every pitcher it seems. Toronto took a guy #7 who is currently rehabbing from Tommy John.

Teams will always have issues and I'm sure there has been players that had "concerns" with their arms and teams passed on them and they ended up having no issues.

I do think the Astros handled this wrong, they dropped their original offer from 6.5m to 3.2m and then 5 minutes before deadline to 5m? Had they dropped it from 6.5m to 5m the player/agent may not have saw it as such an insult.

From what I've read, both Aiken/Nix appear to have a case against the Astros. One if they do file a grievance they could be FA (or Nix getting the 1.5m from the Astros and Astros exceeding their spending limit)
This post was edited on 7/20/14 at 10:06 am
Posted by MOT
Member since Jul 2006
27802 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 10:05 am to
quote:

From what I've read, both Aiken/Marshall appear to have a case against the Astros.

This is just getting to be absurd. Marshall? Based on what?
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 10:05 am to
Meant Nix, my bad in that one
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 10:10 am to
THIS IS ALL SPECULATION



quote:

Of the two, Nix probably has the best shot at seeing a grievance. Since he actually agreed to a deal with the Astros and took a physical, he was all but signed by the team. That press conference never came, though.

Obviously, the Astros were waiting on the Aiken savings before formally signing Nix, but it's likely that they never told the player they needed Aiken to sign before Nix could get his $1.5 million. If this is the case, then the Astros could have breached a verbal agreement with Nix.

Because of his medical situation, Aiken could also see a grievance. The lefty apparently saw five different doctors, who gave both the team and Aiken's camp differing reports. If Aiken's doctors told him he's fine and the Astros doctors suspected an abnormality, Aiken could argue that he should be made an free agent, since the Astros trumped up medical issues to get a discount on his deal.

That's a possibility, but the more likely scenario is that, if Nix wins his grievance, Houston is forced to honor its pact with him. Thus, they'd exceed the bonus pool by more than 10 percent and forfeit a pair of draft picks at the top of next year's class.

Posted by MOT
Member since Jul 2006
27802 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 10:39 am to
quote:

but it's likely that they never told the player they needed Aiken to sign before Nix could get his $1.5 million.

I would love to know why that would be "likely".
Posted by Maximus
Member since Feb 2004
81261 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 1:41 pm to
quote:

I've been quite vocal about the Astros treatment of draftees Brady Aiken and Jason Nix, both of whom received offers that were later rescinded. In Aiken's case, the impetus was an "abnormality" in an MRI. There was no tear, no fraying -- it simply appears that Aiken's UCL is smaller than the average person's. It hasn't stopped him from being healthy or throwing 97 mph in his last start. And there is no data to suggest that the size of the UCL puts him at any greater risk of injury or that it increases the difficulty of repairing it should there be an injury down the line.

The Astros lowballed Aiken, offering instead the $3.1M required for them to get a compensation pick next year. Later, they reportedly "upped" the offer to over $5M, which they say the Aiken camp ignored. But here is the thing: If you are willing to get that close, why not just give him what you promised for a little bit more than $1M? That isn't exactly a huge amount of money in the world of elite player signing bonuses.

The reason is simply this: The Astros attempted to capitalize on a gray area (at best) concern to strong arm Aiken, save money, and use it to diversify their risk by signing the previously thought to be unsignable lefty Mac Marshall, a 21st round overslot. It wasn't about the money, it was about getting greedy. It was about using favorable rules to minimize risk at the expense of amateur players. It was about trying to have your cake and eat it too.

The guy who really gets burned here is Jason Nix, a 5th round pick who agreed for $1.6M but the Astros reneged on the offer when they lost the pool money that comes with the #1 slot in the draft. They would have lost their next 2 draft picks and rather than be accountable for their own miscalculation, they preferred to go back on their word and pass the cost down to a high school ballplayer.

What's more, they took some cheap shots on the way out, deliberately outing Brady Aiken and Jason Nix as having negotiated with agents, something the NCAA would be sure to investigate, thereby jeopardizing their college eligibility. Their strong arm tactics rebuffed, the Astros took it a step further by potentially further diminishing their remaining options. How petty.

We can blame the system here if we want and surely the MLBPA sold out amateurs in the new CBA so that they could protect free agency and established players. That may be true, but they aren't solely to blame here. The owners pushed vehemently for this CBA and were set to lock out the players over these very rules. How many of you would have sacrificed a season of baseball for amateur baseball? How many of you think that the average player had any chance of outlasting ownership in this kind of standoff? The MLBPA may have made a questionable choice, but in reality, they were backed into the corner on this. They had a choice, but it would have been an extremely costly one for them.

Business is business but that should work on both ends. If you make a commitment, you should be prepared to honor it and not weasel your way out of it at the expense of others, especially innocent bystanders like Jason Nix. The Astros could have just paid Aiken the extra million or so they promised, honored the Nix commitment, and dropped their pursuit of Marshall. It would have worked out fine. It would have cost them just a little extra money to avoid this debacle.

But the CBA as negotiated gave them little incentive to do that. They get the 2nd overall pick in next year's draft as reward for their questionable actions along with all the pool money that goes with what stands to be the 2nd and 3rd pick in the 2015 draft next year. Given that they freaked themselves out over the UCL and had buyer's remorse over Aiken, the Astros decided they were willing to make that trade. They have already talked about drafting a college arm to make up for lost development time. The careful calculation continues.

Their only chance to truly lose out on this is if players and their agents stick together and refuse to make pre-arranged deals with a team that is clearly prepared to abandon them at their convenience. But I won't hold my breath on that. The system favors ownership on this and they will probably come out of this just fine.

I hope we can someday say the same for Aiken and Nix.
Posted by Ninja Looter
Member since Sep 2008
1848 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 1:54 pm to
quote:

Maximus



Who the hell is Jason Nix?
Posted by Bumble Bee
Northwest, La
Member since Jan 2011
753 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 4:24 pm to
If the Astros get the #2 pick as compensation the selection will more than likely not be an under slot saving them money. If they do not sign the player, there is no compensation for a compensation pick.

I'm sure the "advisor" will use that as well as this year's debacle as leverage.
Posted by Ninja Looter
Member since Sep 2008
1848 posts
Posted on 7/20/14 at 4:30 pm to
quote:

If the Astros get the #2 pick as compensation the selection will more than likely not be an under slot saving them money. If they do not sign the player, there is no compensation for a compensation pick.


This is wrong. That rule was changed in the last CBA. Compensation picks now last for two years.
Posted by Prominentwon
LSU, McNeese St. Fan
Member since Jan 2005
93709 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 8:59 am to
Aiken undergoes TJ

You can find your typical Astros trolls in his thread.
Posted by msutiger
Shreveport
Member since Jul 2008
69604 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 9:01 am to
(no message)
This post was edited on 4/10/23 at 2:41 am
Posted by tigersaint74
Poopoo, Hawaii
Member since Feb 2007
664 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 9:04 am to
Posted by Galactic Inquisitor
An Incredibly Distant Star
Member since Dec 2013
15176 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 10:12 am to
So, the Astros did the right thing and their doctors' conflicting reports were more correct than Aiken's rosier outlook?

I'm not an Astros fan at all, but it seems like they made the right decision.

My only question is whether the Astros had any indication of the issue before the draft.
Posted by Jwho77
cyperspace
Member since Sep 2003
76656 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 10:20 am to
quote:

My only question is whether the Astros had any indication of the issue before the draft.


Considering all of MLB had exactly zero access to the kid for physical examination, your question is already answered.

But the big bad Astros will still be torched by already biased haters for making a smart business decision. Evil Houston only offered the kid $5 million in the end instead of $6.5 million after finding the injury. How dare they? Latrell Sprewell must be rolling over in his mansion just thinking about it.
This post was edited on 3/27/15 at 10:21 am
Posted by Lester Earl
Member since Nov 2003
278290 posts
Posted on 3/27/15 at 10:44 am to
quote:

When the news came out that 2014 unsigned number one overall draft pick Brady Aiken was going to require Tommy John surgery you probably had a similar reaction to mine, the Astros dodged a bullet. Then Aiken wrote a piece for The Players' Tribune and if you paid close attention you see where it made the Astros look even worse than they did a year ago when they first botched the Aiken negotiation.

Aiken's piece is eloquent and he comes across mature beyond his years. I was so impressed I made my 15 year-old freshman left-handed pitcher read it. Here's what caught my eye:

I can honestly say I don't regret not signing?...it was an informed decision based on circumstances only a few people know the truth about. The money wasn'??t the only factor to consider. I wanted to play somewhere I felt comfortable, with a support system I felt would lay the groundwork for a successful and long career...Even now, I know I made the decision that made the most sense for my future.

This is from an 18-year-old kid who turned down $5 million dollars less than a year ago and just had Tommy John surgery. Could the Astros have handled his situation so poorly that even now, with all that has happened, he doesn't regret taking the last minute offer? Apparently so.

And that "support system" part? That's the equivalent of dad saying he's not mad at you, just disappointed in you. Those sting.

The handling of Aiken, Jacob Nix, J.D. Martinez, Bo Porter and the mystery of whatever happened with Ryan Vogelsong and the Astros this past winter has not been a good look for Houston.

Matt Harvey and Jose Fernandez will be coming back from Tommy John surgery this year, it is hardly a career ender for elite level talent. Elite level people though are much harder to come by, and the Astros let one get away.




guess CJ Nitowski is a troll too
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram