PDA

View Full Version : Bagwell to have surgery - out for the season? out forever?



PTBNL
03-25-2006, 03:02 PM
ESPN link (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2383575)

"I may never play again," he said. "It's been 15 years with the Astros. I have to do what's best for me, what's best for the Astros and best for baseball."

The 37-year-old Bagwell, perhaps the most popular player in franchise history, spent the spring in a contentious battle with the team while he tried to prove he could still play despite a chronically injured right shoulder.

TC81190
03-25-2006, 03:04 PM
If you can't throw a baseball, you probably shouldn't play the game.

alex trevino
03-25-2006, 03:28 PM
Too bad I have always liked Bags.

George Foster
03-25-2006, 10:34 PM
The only reason he showed up for spring training was to draw his check. He knew he could not play.

jmcclain19
03-26-2006, 12:09 AM
The only reason he showed up for spring training was to draw his check. He knew he could not play.

I couldn't disagree more.

The guy is a warrior. He had to give it one last go to see if he could do it again. Not to mention that he seemed like he could hit a little bit when he came back last year. Maybe he thought the offseason would allow his surgery to heal and he could return to form?

I can't think of another non-Red in the last 15 years I have more respect for and have enjoyed watching more than Jeff Bagwell.

Baseball is worse off without him.

Izzardius
03-26-2006, 03:23 AM
Unfortunate end to an excellent career. Unless he winds up as a DH somehow.

HTownRedsGuy
03-26-2006, 09:18 AM
The only reason he showed up for spring training was to draw his check. He knew he could not play.

His $ is guaranteed-Why would he need to show up?

George Foster
03-26-2006, 10:10 PM
His $ is guaranteed-Why would he need to show up?

It's not guaranteed if he retires. The Astros wanted him to retire, because they knew he could not play. Someone is going to get screwed and it is not going to be Bagwell because he would not do the right thing and retire. Heck, in my opinion, he should not have been on the World Series roster. He could not contribute, 2 hits in 11 AB's. He deserved to be on the bench, but not on the roster. If he refuses to retire the Astros have to pay him 17 MILLION this year. The Astros are going to file an insurance claim saying he is to injured to play. Either way, the Astros or an insurance company is going to get screwed out of 17 million dollars.

He made 18 million last year with only 100 at bats, 39 games. How much money is enough? At what point are your hurting your team? Loyalty goes both ways...right?

tts1stros
03-26-2006, 10:23 PM
It's not guaranteed if he retires. The Astros wanted him to retire, because they knew he could not play. Someone is going to get screwed and it is not going to be Bagwell because he would not do the right thing and retire. Heck, in my opinion, he should not have been on the World Series roster. He could not contribute, 2 hits in 11 AB's. He deserved to be on the bench, but not on the roster. If he refuses to retire the Astros have to pay him 17 MILLION this year. The Astros are going to file an insurance claim saying he is to injured to play. Either way, the Astros or an insurance company is going to get screwed out of 17 million dollars.

He made 18 million last year with only 100 at bats, 39 games. How much money is enough? At what point are your hurting your team? Loyalty goes both ways...right?

No, no no....it's a contract. It's guaranteed.

He might play. He might retire. He might grow back his ZZTop beard. The Marlins might move to Las Vegas. California might drift off into the Pacific Ocean. But one thing's for certain: the Astros are paying Jeff Bagwell $17.5 million. Whether he can play, can't, retires, or is deemed medically unfit. It's guaranteed money.

The only question is: will the insurance company reimburse the Astros for that money? That's why they filed the claim.

George Foster
03-26-2006, 10:38 PM
No, no no....it's a contract. It's guaranteed.

He might play. He might retire. He might grow back his ZZTop beard. The Marlins might move to Las Vegas. California might drift off into the Pacific Ocean. But one thing's for certain: the Astros are paying Jeff Bagwell $17.5 million. Whether he can play, can't, retires, or is deemed medically unfit. It's guaranteed money.

The only question is: will the insurance company reimburse the Astros for that money? That's why they filed the claim.


Are you crazy? If you retire the contract is void. Under your logic I can sign a 5 year deal and then retire and be paid for five years right? What if I'm put in prision? Under your logic I'm still drawing a check...right?

Joseph
03-26-2006, 10:43 PM
Sorry George, while agree there are players who would show up to collect a check, Bagwell just isn't one of them. There are few players as respected in the game as he is, and I think the only reason he tried to play is because he wanted to play. He's borederline HoF, the most revered player in the history of the Astros, including Nolan Ryan and Jimmy Wynn and Jose Cruz etal, and he just simply would not disprespect the game or his team for the sake of a paycheck.

harangatang
03-26-2006, 10:49 PM
Sorry George, while agree there are players who would show up to collect a check, Bagwell just isn't one of them. There are few players as respected in the game as he is, and I think the only reason he tried to play is because he wanted to play. He's borederline HoF, the most revered player in the history of the Astros, including Nolan Ryan and Jimmy Wynn and Jose Cruz etal, and he just simply would not disprespect the game or his team for the sake of a paycheck.
Absolutely correct.

George Foster
03-26-2006, 10:57 PM
Sorry George, while agree there are players who would show up to collect a check, Bagwell just isn't one of them. There are few players as respected in the game as he is, and I think the only reason he tried to play is because he wanted to play. He's borederline HoF, the most revered player in the history of the Astros, including Nolan Ryan and Jimmy Wynn and Jose Cruz etal, and he just simply would not disprespect the game or his team for the sake of a paycheck.

I would love to agree with you but the evidence is otherwise. as I stated in the above post. He did not help the club at all last year and made 18 million. The Astros organization loyally gave him a roster spot on the post-season team. He only played in 39 regular season games and 100 AB's. He could not play last year, what makes him think he can play this year? The shoulder has showed little if any improvement. He had a great career, he was a class player. He should do the right thing and walk away...retire. Let the Astros spend that money elsewere. Over the last 10 years the Astros have gave him 122 million in salary (thebaseballcube.com)

Cyclone792
03-27-2006, 12:00 AM
Nobody knows how the Bagwell situation will play out this season, however, IMO he's the greatest first baseman in National League history (at least for another six or seven years when by that time some dude in St. Louis might have sometime to say about it). Not only that, but I'd say Bagwell's the greatest first baseman the game has ever seen since WWII when Jimmie Foxx retired, and I'd also say that Bagwell is third all-time overall at first base behind only Lou Gehrig and Foxx.

If he fails to make Cooperstown on the first ballot, or fails altogether, it'll be an absolute crime and travesty. To top it off, he's been one of the classiest players the game has seen this generation.

Jpup
03-27-2006, 04:54 AM
Nobody knows how the Bagwell situation will play out this season, however, IMO he's the greatest first baseman in National League history (at least for another six or seven years when by that time some dude in St. Louis might have sometime to say about it). Not only that, but I'd say Bagwell's the greatest first baseman the game has ever seen since WWII when Jimmie Foxx retired, and I'd also say that Bagwell is third all-time overall at first base behind only Lou Gehrig and Foxx.

If he fails to make Cooperstown on the first ballot, or fails altogether, it'll be an absolute crime and travesty. To top it off, he's been one of the classiest players the game has seen this generation.

I kind of agree with most of that, but I have always suspected he was on the juice. he lost a ton of weight a couple of years ago. either way, he's a Hall of Famer IMO.

RedsBaron
03-27-2006, 06:28 AM
I kind of agree with most of that, but I have always suspected he was on the juice. he lost a ton of weight a couple of years ago. either way, he's a Hall of Famer IMO.
I've always been a fan of Bagwell, but, yeah, I've always wondered about whether or not he was on the juice, too.
In his New Historical Baseball Abstract published in 2001, Bill James ranked Bagwell as the fourth best firstbaseman of all time, behind Lou Gehrig, Jimmie Foxx and Mark McGwire; Eddie Murray, Johnny Mize, Harmon Killebrew, Hank Greenberg, Willie McCovey and Frank Thomas, in that order, rounded out James's top ten. I personally would drop McGwire way down that list because of my belief that steroids greatly contributed to his run of great seasons from 1996 through 1999.

Cyclone792
03-27-2006, 07:30 AM
I kind of agree with most of that, but I have always suspected he was on the juice. he lost a ton of weight a couple of years ago. either way, he's a Hall of Famer IMO.

He's had a degenerative shoulder and shoulder arthritis for about five years now. I've read that Bagwell's father also had the same thing so there's a direct family link for him. Any type of shoulder problem can really derail a workout regime, and both muscle mass loss and weight loss can be pretty typical if you cut down your workout. Shoulder problems in general and working out are nothing new, and it's generally not uncommon for someone who strength conditions to injure their shoulder or develop some type of shoulder problem later in life due to working out.

Bagwell's decline starts and gradually goes downhill right around the time he began having shoulder issues. IMO, whatever muscle mass loss and weight loss Bagwell's had in the last five years is likely attributed to his shoulder condition and not physically being able to condition himself how he'd like. If it's difficult for him to even throw a baseball, imagine what it's like trying to throw the weights around.

Roy Tucker
03-27-2006, 07:52 AM
Good luck to Bags. Like many have said, great player, great competitor, great guy, just hated to see him play against the Reds. I frequently referred to him as "damn Bagwell" because that's what I said when he came to bat. Bad things were about to happen.

He just wore out Reds pitching throughout the 90's. Just killed them. I would think much of Bagwell's success came at the hands of Reds pitching. It would be interesting to see his career stats against the Reds.

I remember seeing a game at Riverfront where he had 2 HRs and 2 doubles off the CF fence. I was actually happy with the doubles because at least they kept him in the park.

Cyclone792
03-27-2006, 07:56 AM
Good luck to Bags. Like many have said, great player, great competitor, great guy, just hated to see him play against the Reds. I frequently referred to him as "God damn Bagwell" because that's what I said when he came to bat. Bad things were about to happen.

He just wore out Reds pitching throughout the 90's. Just killed them. I would think much of Bagwell's success came at the hands of Reds pitching. It would be interesting to see his career stats against the Reds.

I remember seeing a game at Riverfront where he had 2 HRs and 2 doubles off the CF fence. I was actually happy with the doubles because at least they kept him in the park.

Ask and shall receive ;) Bagwell vs. Cincy thru 2004:



Oppon G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB IBB SO HBP SH SF XI ROE GDP SB CS AVG OBP SLG

CIN N 191 683 146 209 40 2 47 149 132 23 122 12 0 8 0 9 17 26 5 .306 .423 .577


His career AVG/OBP/SLG overall is .297./.408/.540 so there's a noticeable difference upward vs. Reds pitchers.

tts1stros
03-27-2006, 04:06 PM
He might play. He might retire. He might grow back his ZZTop beard. The Marlins might move to Las Vegas. California might drift off into the Pacific Ocean. But one thing's for certain: the Astros are paying Jeff Bagwell $17.5 million. Whether he can play, can't, retires, or is deemed medically unfit. It's guaranteed money.

The only question is: will the insurance company reimburse the Astros for that money? That's why they filed the claim.Are you crazy? Under your logic I can sign a 5 year deal and then retire and be paid for five years right? What if I'm put in prision? Under your logic I'm still drawing a check...right?

Those are entirely different situations which have no relevenace to Bagwell. Those situations are breach of contracts. Just like Pokey Reese this spring. No, the team doesn't have to pay.

Bagwell did not break his contract by hurting his shoulder. The Astros have to pay him

Remember Albert Belle? He signed a huge contract and immediately retired. Why do you think they were so relieved they had insurance? Because the Orioles knew they HAD to pay him.

If you still don't believe me, check here:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2302547

Bagwell is guaranteed about $17 million in 2006 regardless of whether he plays. But if he retires or deems himself unable to play, the Astros can file the claim by Jan. 31 and collect $15.6 million.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11045761/

Bagwell will get his $17 million regardless. The best way for things to unfold is if the claim is honored, and the Astros get their insurance money.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3607494.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/spots/3607494.html)

Bagwell will get the $17 million due on his contract in 2006 whether he plays or not. Basically, if the company finds Bagwell can't play, the Astros would recoup most of that money.

"This isn't about money for Jeff," Axelrod said. "Jeff is guaranteed his full salary regardless of what happens if he's deemed to be disabled or he's deemed to be able to play. It's not to him about the greediness, as some people seem to have asserted in some commentaries."
Sorry, I've just heard a million people claim the only reason Bagwell is showing up is so he can get paid. Not only has Bagwell not acted that way in the least, it's not even factually accurate.

traderumor
03-27-2006, 04:10 PM
His career AVG/OBP/SLG overall is .297./.408/.540 so there's a noticeable difference upward vs. Reds pitchers.For efficiency, you ought to copy this statement, keep it handy, and just paste in the numbers for AVG/OBP/SLG as I'm sure it is true for at least 95% of all hitters against the Reds :)

DropDocK
03-27-2006, 04:15 PM
Yeah I am going to miss watching him sit on the toilet

:devil:

Cyclone792
03-27-2006, 04:40 PM
For efficiency, you ought to copy this statement, keep it handy, and just paste in the numbers for AVG/OBP/SLG as I'm sure it is true for at least 95% of all hitters against the Reds :)

That's not a bad idea. :evil:

I was in a rush this morning so I wasn't able to extract the Reds totals from his overall numbers. Doing so shows just how much more damage Bagwell did vs. the Reds compred to everyone else combined ...

Bagwell vs. Reds only = .306/.423/.577 for an even 1.000 OPS
Bagwell vs. everyone else (excluding Reds) = .297/.407/.539 for a .946 OPS

There ya have it ... nine points of BA, 16 points of OBP and a remarkable 38 points in slugging percentage ... for a grand total of 54 points of OPS. I honestly expected it to be worse, but that's still quite a discrepancy.

Sea Ray
03-27-2006, 04:52 PM
What would his stats vs the Reds have looked like if it were not for Scott Sullivan?

gilpdawg
03-27-2006, 10:32 PM
Good luck Bags. Always liked the guy. Collected his cards for awhile when I was a lad. He killed us over the years, but I've always thought he was a heck of a player, and a class guy as well. Bagwell and Biggio ARE the Houston Astros. I can't imagine one of them missing. Sort of like Larkin here. Like sand thru the hourglass......

redsmetz
03-28-2006, 11:32 AM
Now the AP is reporting that the Astros insurance company is declining their claim for Bagwell be disabled to play:


HOUSTON (AP) -- An insurance claim filed by the Houston Astros to try to recoup $15.6 million of injured first baseman Jeff Bagwell's contract has been denied.

The Astros, who in January deemed Bagwell too injured to play, filed the claim the same month to try to get back most of the $17 million Bagwell will earn in the final year of his contract.

But Ty Buthod, a partner for the Houston law firm Baker Botts and an outside attorney for Connecticut General Life Insurance Company, confirmed Monday to The Associated Press that the Astros were told a few weeks ago that their claim would be denied.

"The Astros took the position that Bagwell was totally disabled in January 2006 even though he played in September and October 2005," he said. "Connecticut General determined that there had been no adverse change in Mr. Bagwell's condition between the end of last season and the date the policy terminated on January 31, 2006."

Buthod also noted that Bagwell's position in the contract was listed as "professional baseball player-non-pitcher."

"He was certainly able to perform in that occupation at the end of 2005," Buthod said.

Bagwell has spent the spring trying to prove to the team that he is able to play despite a chronically injured right shoulder.

The 37-year-old Bagwell started several spring games at first base but had to leave early in two of them because of soreness in his shoulder.

A spokesman for the Astros did not immediately return a call from The AP on Monday night.

Wayne Fisher, an attorney for the Astros, told Houston television station KRIV that if the insurance company doesn't change its mind, the two sides would be headed to court.

Astros owner Drayton McLane, who spoke with KRIV and the Houston Chronicle, echoed Fisher's stance, telling the station, "I feel like we have a very, very good claim about Jeff Bagwell's injury, and we feel very strongly we will win the case. So we are going to follow it aggressively."

Bagwell, a four-time All-Star, leads the franchise with 449 home runs. He has 1,529 RBIs and 1,517 runs. He returned late last season and could bat but couldn't throw. He went 1-for-8 with an RBI in the World Series.

He is the only first baseman with 400 home runs and 200 stolen bases in his career. Bagwell has been the Astros' first baseman on Opening Day the past 15 seasons.

Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved..

Chip R
03-28-2006, 12:03 PM
Now the AP is reporting that the Astros insurance company is declining their claim for Bagwell be disabled to play

That's a shame. ;)