Astros Hot Stove Noise 11/19/08: Valverde and Wigginton to be traded?
by Stephen Higdon on Nov 19, 2008 9:05 AM CST
in Hot Stove
Email
PrintAlright, it's a slow news day again, and I expect it to continue to be one of those days. So I'm taking what I can get this morning, and it's Richard Justice, who provides some pretty intelligent insight into why it is that Drayton will force these trades.
RJ/the Astros' brass have calculated that payroll would be $120 million if you just froze the roster (I'll do some number crunching as to the validity of that latter, for now a strong part of me wants to call B/S on Richard Justice). Justice then goes on to lament the fact we can't sign Pettittte or Randy Johnson if that is the case, at which point this post almost became a FJM-wanna be post, but it's immediately followed with some rational commentary.
Justice ponders who would play third base and who would close? While ignoring the possiblity of just slotting Tejada over and cutting our loses with a glove ready, bat deficit Manzella or whoever else is qualified in our farm system, he throws out Chris Johson, who no one believes is ready. Justice's latter question, who would close? Is by far the scarier scenario to contemplate: Coop would be forced to have a closer by committee. I truly believe his head would explode as he tried to strategize platoon splits, leverage, and usage patterns as the game progressed -- as opposed to just pressing the 8th and 9th inning buttons on the bull pen phone.
Finally, Justice wants to know who we're going to get in return. To which I'll add: good question. Any thoughts on possible match-ups for Wiggy and Valverde?
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
actually
if we trade valverde why don’t we just keep making deals? wandy and wiggy are coming off big years- get what we can for them now…this would go against drayton’s desire to keep costs down, but a trade for tejada where where the astros pay a portion of his deal would re-invigorate our farm system like wade wants.
by Evan Hochschild on Nov 19, 2008 9:22 AM CST reply actions
teams?
mets for valverde? indians for wiggy? although the mets seem intent on signing either k rod or brian fuentes…
by Evan Hochschild on Nov 19, 2008 9:24 AM CST reply actions
Unfortunately for the Valverde trade scenario....
the closer market now appears to have an excess of supply over demand. NY articles indicate that the Mets are comfortable with the idea that they can wait and pay a reasonable salary to land a FA closer without parting with any players.
The disappointing aspect of Justice’s discussion is his claim that the Astros believe they can contend with a roation of Oswalt, Wandy, Wolf, Moehler, and Backe/young pitcher, without Wiggy or Valverde. As Quail argued in an earlier article, the in-between strategy which is neither rebuilding nor realistically contending, is the least compelling strategy.
Sorry
In my morning fog I missed the fact you’d already noted this article.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Nov 19, 2008 9:44 AM CST up reply actions
I'm coming down on the hold'em both
One: I don’t know that I trust Wade to get a the proper return or, as clack points out, the market is even favorable for us to get a decent return.
Two: We’re too close to having the appropriate talent to make a run at the playoffs before we spend years in mediocrity paying for the past four or five years of farm system neglect.
Suck it up Drayton, sign a good pitcher and lets do the damn thing already. Stop talking about being a champion and actually do something to make one.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
I'm not sure how they get to $120 million...
unless they are factoring in a really high salary for Wolf. Just as a quick and dirty (I don’t have much time before work), I figured that the “current” budget now stands at, say, $95 milliion as a result of players signed at the end of 08 and Hawkins so far. Suppose the combination of Lee’s salary escalation and arb for Wandy and Wiggy adds $10 million incrementally. Suppose Valverde gets $3 million more. That is $108 million. Are they figuring Wolf at $12 million/year? Of course, I could have missed something…and I still don’t know if Woody Williams’ salary is including in the starting point budget or not. If it is, that frees up another $6 million.
Me neither
Adding all the increases for everyone’s contract (Lee, Blum, Erstad, Hawkins, Villareal, luxury guesstimates on arbitration rewards) I came out $110 million and some change. But Richard Justice claimed $120 million without Wolf, so there’s clearly some fudging going on.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Nov 19, 2008 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
Just as a way to inject some longer-term thinking, I started asking myself “What would put us in the best position to win in 2010/2011”?
If we trade Valverde now, presumably for guys who are young and major league ready or will be ML-ready in 2 years, we won’t get full value because there are a lot of closers on the market, and for many teams it will be cheaper to just pick up a FA.
If we just keep him for the last year of club control, then this time next year, we’ll either have to offer him a multi-year contract at market value to stay with us, or let him walk and try to collect some draft picks. Draft picks in 2010 won’t help us in 2010, and probably not in 2011. A multi-year contract at market value ties up a lot of money.
So here’s the best 2010/11 option I see with Valverde:
Sign him now to a 2-3 year contract (I’d prefer 2), and trade him in 2009 when he has more value (either in-season or end-of-season). You have to sign him to a 2+ year contract if you think you can trade him next offseason at a higher value.
stealing from your Ricky Bennett FanPost
Sutton is a multi-positional player…he seems more Major League ready than does Chris Johnson. Something to keep in mind, if Wiggy does in fact get moved..
by Evan Hochschild on Nov 19, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions
The biggest problem with sliding Sutton in as a Wiggy replacement is defense. He led the Hooks in errors last season (26). In 2007, he mostly played 3B and made 10 errors in 96 games (compared to Wiggy’s 2008 season of 82 games, 6 errors) . It’s not clear, though, what kind of errors he’s making…throwing, fielding, judgment.
But scouting comments that I’ve seen say that regardless of his defense, his bat will find him a position.
does anyone have a problem
with drayton saying that oswalt and berkman are untouchable? should they be?
by Evan Hochschild on Nov 19, 2008 10:40 AM CST reply actions
as much as it pains me
No, neither should be untouchable. Berkman would command a high price if we were to trade him to whomever loses out in the Texiera battle. Oswalt would do the same for the loser in the Peavy deal. But getting either of them to accept a trade might be tough, and there are better trade options. If you can get rid of Tejada or dump Lee’s contract and sign Dunn, then it would be better.
Trade them both
of course, this is contingent upon Drayton being unwilling to spend $150 million next year. If he were willing to increase payroll significantly, then it’s a different story, and I’d say only Wiggy should be traded.
Trade them both for prospects who will be ML ready in about two years. Close by committee, with (wait for it…) Hawkins doing most of the work (I know, I know, he can’t close… give him another chance). But I think Coop has the wherewithal to figure out who should close out a game.
Move Tejada to third, pick up a back-up SS in free agency (Everett comes to mind), and give Maysonet or Manzella a shot. Prepare for real contention in 2010.
We need to deal both Berkman and Roy O, Sell them on playing for a contender, Hell after the Braves get Peavy sell them Roy for there top Prospects Roy would go for that. Then send Berkman to the Rangers for some of that super depth of Pitching and catching prospects that they have and then give it a year. We would be just like Tampa Bay!!!
Berkman to the Rangers?
They got Chris Davis there and he’ll be there for the next decade.
They might take Oswalt though and give something like Harrison/Hurley, SS Andrus, Salty and maybe an OF. That’s giving you a chance to fill some holes right there.
Richard Justice is full of shit
I read this article last night/this morning and it pissed me off so much because he’s so full of shit about what he’s saying. He leads the article with a headline that says Valverde and Wiggy will definitely get traded. First of all, he’s talking out of his ass and speculating. But he’s taken seriously because he’s a writer for the Chronicle. But he has no hard evidence to back this up. He throws together some payroll numbers to back his argument (which some of you say aren’t even accurate.)
As far as trading the two. I don’t believe Valverde will be traded. With the (probable) loss of Brocail, it would be too much for the Astros bullpen to handle. Plus the closer market is over-saturated. We wouldn’t get much of a return for Valverde at this point. Reason number 3: Wade traded 3 players to get Valverde and he produced last year. I don’t believe Wade is going to give up one of his successful trades from last year.
As for Wigginton, it’s a different story. He had a career year with the bat last year so he’s going to make a couple mil more in arbitration. But will last year’s performance be a turning point for Wiggy or is he going to go back to his previous level of production. That’s a question that’s harder to answer. There are also no Type A third basemen on the market right now and only a handful of Type Bs, so Wiggy could be attractive. Wade may believe that he can have Blum, Erstad and perhaps Newhan fill time there so he doesn’t have to spend any extra money. They all had some shiny moments last year and I think it may have been enough to infatuate him. Not that I think that it’s a good plan.. but I could see this happening.
Sell-high
on Wiggy, I say. Keep Valverde, he could be Type-A when he hits free agency or we deal him when there’s a smaller market for closers.
Good call
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Nov 19, 2008 6:01 PM CST up reply actions
Valverde
Keep him till the trading deadline. If the team is in it, rock on and take the two draft choices. If things don’t look so good, he’ll bring a ransom.
That's definitely the best way to play it
The qualifier is: our front office never thinks it’s out of it.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Nov 20, 2008 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Crawfish Boxes
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
TCB Tweets!
Current Series
3 game series vs Rockies @ Minute Maid Park
|
Colorado Rockies
Friday, Apr 6, 2012, 6:05 PM CDT |
||
| Sat 04/07 | 6:05 PM CDT | |
| Sun 04/08 | 1:05 PM CDT | |
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chicago
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Cincinnati
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Houston
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Milwaukee
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
St. Louis
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
(updated 2.14.2012 at 6:04 PM CST)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
