TLDR - I'm very happy we didn't sign Cespedes at that ridiculous price. It would have been ridiculous and I'm very pleased with management's restraint.
------
It's almost insufferable to read the *****ing, 07. It's like when people complain about any one of the 20 NFL franchises that don't have a good QB not drafting a franchise QB when there aren't that many to begin with.
There wasn't anyone to spend smart money on and in 3,4,5 years our payroll is going to be huge to keep our core. This team has more than just one year with a chance to make a deep playoff run. Sure, Crane/Luhnow might be cheap, but at this point it's for the right reasons. If money prevents us resigning Keuchel or something, then ***** away. I will too. Mortgaging the future by signing or trading for over the hill players playing well below their contracts is EXACTLY what got us in the total rebuild mode to begin with under previous ownership. Remember Carlos Lee? Miguel Tejada? Just to name two. Yes, a key FA signing or two will be needed, especially if it's proven SP. Vut signing someone just to sign them at a position of depth for you? I don't see how the current situation looks even remotely like what ever happens under Drayton. I'm struggling to find a single similarity even.
Signing Cespedes for 25M might make us better, but not 25M better. Hell, might not even make us 10-15M better. That's overbuying to try to get ST results over LT longevity. First "major FA" STL has tried to sign in ages was Heyward, and that was a known commodity that had played on their team after they traded for him. Are they not in the hunt every year? They're a franchise to model, not the Dodgers or Yankees.
Our likely payroll had we dropped 25 on Cespedes - 108M, good for about 18th at start of last year (not to mention a Cy Young winner at 525k). Playoff teams last year started the year at:
NYY - 2nd
TOR - 10th
KC - 16th
TEX - 8th (including significant injuries on a lot of that payroll)
HOU - 29th
LAD - 1st
NYM - 21st
CHC - 11th
STL - 13th
PIT - 25th
Seems like we might be spending wisely. I refuse to criticize ownership and management for not spending money just to spend money or act like we are top 10 payroll because we're winning and that's what winners do. 4/10 teams were top 10 payroll and 3 of 4 lost in their first round. None reached the WS. 16th beat 21st.
***In 2014, 7th (SF) beat 19th (KC) in 7 games. Other playoff teams were 1,5,6,9,15,13,25,27 - so 5/10 top 10 teams with 4 out of 5 (all but SF) losing in their first round. Before that WS winners ranked 4th, 8th, and 11th in year starting payroll. Until 2013, 100M got you into the top 10. I'm not saying you don't have to spend money to win championships, but "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" doesn't work with me. Spending money blindly doesn't lead to championships, spending money on good players does. Go look at the stars of those teams and tell me what they have in common. I don't have time but I may do an analysis before the season of how many teams have $20M+ position players (and if they were FA or keeping homegrown prospects) to see success trends of those teams. I do know that not a single WS winner over the past 5 years had one. 4 highest paid players (by far) were: Pence (16M, 2014 Giants), Holliday (16M, 2011 Cards), Ortiz (14M, 2013 Red Sox), and Pujols (14M, 2011 Cards).
You continue to spend money wisely to keep your core and add one or two pieces when your farm system can't deliver at a position. None of the very weak FA class this year was that extra piece to put us over the top.
I challenge you to find a single move that you would have done at the price point they signed and we will revisit it at the end of the season to see production versus price. I'd really like to say we will look at it again in 3-5 years (against what we did), but thats too intense (even though that's what GMs have to do).
The only piece I would have wanted added was a front line SP, and that just wasn't available. Tough luck. It's been a long few days so I apologize if that's harsh, but your point of view is ridiculous and it set me off since I haven't slept in well over 48 hours. I'm sure you're a nice guy and I'm sure we'd get along IRL, but all the data we have here says you're wrong and that the correct long term moves were made this year (which happen to be good for business). I think you have a sour taste in your mouth from the past few years (and understandably so), but go look at last year's opening day roster to what's projected for this year and tell me management isn't trying to field a perennial playoff team.