Arbitration Deadline Approaches for Astros
Monday is the deadline to offer arbitration to Type A and B free agents. So, while we try to read the smoke signals drifting up from the Astros' decision to temporarily suspend the Wolf negotiations, we also can ponder the Astros' arbitration decisions for Wolf, Brocail, and Loretta.
Although I have been a proponent (in the past) of offering arbitration to the maximum number of Type A and B free agents, in order to maximize the number of free draft choices, I have to admit that the decision appears more dicey than usual this season...as in, how much are the Astros willing to gamble in order to acquire draft choices?
Take Brocail, for instance, because this is a tough choice. The Astros get the maximum reward (first round draft pick) if Brocail is offered arbitration and signs elsewhere. That is a very inviting scenario. But what are the odds that it plays out that way? Since Brocail likes Houston, he could accept arbitration and end up getting his previous salary or even more, which the Astros had balked on giving him in the first place. If Brocail turns down arbitration, his free agent market will be limited by the fact that many teams won't give up a first round choice for a relief pitcher. But that doesn't mean there would no market for Brocail in that situation. Teams like the Yankees, Angels, Red Sox, and Dodgers likely already know they will lose their first round choice on a more significant Type A signing anyway, and Brocail would be valuable to any contending team. My guess is that the Astros won't take the chance on offering him arbitration. If I were making the decision, I might roll the dice, but then it's not my money.
Offering Wolf arbitration makes some sense. There is a decent chance he signs elsewhere, and the Astros get supplemental round picks. If Wade wants Wolf so badly, then he wouldn't be worried if he accepts arbitration, and the Astros can get Wolf without a multi-year contract in that scenario. Chip Bailey, the Chronicle's fan blogger, speculates that the decision to back off negotiating with Wolf is part of a strategy to offer him arbitration and force Wolf to make a choice whether he would accept a market priced 1 year contract, which he would get in arbitration. The down side of this strategy, if we are to believe the latest from Wade, is that the Astros can't afford Wade without trading some important pieces. So, the Astros would let Wolf's decision dictate whether they have to trade other players. My guess is that the Astros offer arbitration to Wolf. My decision would probably be the same, except I would be gambling that Wolf accepts a multi-year free agent contract elsewhere.
The tea leaves seem to indicate that the Astros would prefer to go for a low salary option at utility infielder, meaning that they don't want Loretta and his contract back. Loretta prefers a full time second base job anyway; so it seems unlikely that he would accept arbitration. At first glance, this seems like a no-brainer for offering arbitration. However, the Astros probably believed Loretta wouldn't accept arbitration last year, and he did accept it. Given that history, maybe the Astros will fear the same thing might happen. Given that Loretta has value to the team if he stays, and that his salary won't be huge anyway, I see no reason not to offer arbitration. I have no guess what the Astros will do, though.
Because the dollars at risk for Brocail and Loretta are not massive, probably on the order of a couple of million each, one would think the risk of offering arbitration is reasonable. However, the way Wade describes it, the Astros' budget is so tight that the front office can't buy a box of paper clips without getting approval from Drayton. If the budget is so tight that utility infielders and back up catchers will bust the payroll, then maybe the Astros will conclude that any risk associated with arbitration will be too great to take. I hope that's not true, but keep it in mind.
And that brings us back to Wade's comments about backing off Wolf, for now because of the threat of a $120 million payroll. If nothing else, this has sparked some mystery in the Astros' hot stove season. What does it mean? I have seen a lot of different speculation on Astros' blogs and message boards. Is Wade engaging in brinksmanship with Wolf, as Bailey's blog seems to suggest? Does this mean a trade is in the works?
McTaggert at the Chronicle has his own speculation. McTaggert says:
But it appears there's no room at the inn for Wolf, Valverde and Wigginton. Someone apparently has to go. Who will it be? I wouldn't trade Valverde. It's hard to compete without a top-notch closer. LaTroy Hawkins has closed in the past, but I wouldn't put much confidence in him. If I were the Astros, I'd re-sign Wolf because pitching is at a premium.
That leaves Wigginton, at least to me, as the most likely person to be gone. The Astros have a couple of third baseman prospects in Chris Johnson and Drew Sutton and could move Wigginton for pitching. I could be completely wrong in all of this, but we'll see.
As I think about it, let me suggest another possibility: perhaps Wade is waiting for events over the next week in order to see who will accept arbitration. For instance, if he offered arbitration to each Type A and B free agent, then he knows that he must make trades if they all accepted arbitration....at least, if you assume the validity of his statements about the budget constraint.
Comments
Agree with McTaggart
We can’t trade Val unless we are positive we can sign another closer. I’d rather just keep him.
by goingforthecorner on
Nov 29, 2008 2:13 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
My Predictions:
Wolf gets offered arbitration. This is pretty much the kind of “best-case” scenario we envisioned back at the time he signed…he does well enough to make the grade as a type B, we offer him arb, and he declines and goes elsewhere and we pick up a draft pick. And honestly, if he accepts arbitration, and he only ends up with a one-year deal, I won’t be too upset, since he’s still a competent pitcher (just not as good as we’d need).
My gut says Loretta will not be offered arbitration. Since Wade can’t do anything about the big salaries on the team, he’s got to cut where he can at the margins. The only way I can foresee Loretta being on this team next year is if Wiggy gets traded, in which case Wade will have to get creative at 3B, perhaps with some combination of Blum, Drew Sutton, and Tejada. In that situation, it’s probably best to have some veteran infield backup.
I say that Brocail just might get offered arbitration. Wade likes the guy, and we know he can be solid for at least a few months. It’s entirely possible that us declining his option was simply a way to throw the dice on arbitration with him, setting up a sort of “win-win” situation. If he lands elsewhere we get a draft pick. If he accepts, Tal Smith is pretty good at arbitration, and we could probably expect to get brocail for $3.5 million, plus or minus a half million. The value of the draft pick is worth the gamble, and the worst case scenario is that you end up overpaying for a guy you like, but probably not by too much (in baseball salary terms).
So basically, ditto, clack. I’m not so sure I added all that much to the conversation. An it’ll all be a moot point in about 12 hours.
by AstroAndy on
Dec 1, 2008 11:55 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
I can't see them offering Brocail arb
But at this point I’m wholly confused as to what is motivating our front office.
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 DyingQuail on
Dec 1, 2008 12:39 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
interesting...
notion about the Astros’ possible motivation for declining Brocail option. I hadn’t really looked at it that way.
by clack on
Dec 1, 2008 4:00 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree
It’s essentially no more than a 1/2 million dollar gamble for a draft pick.
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 DyingQuail on
Dec 1, 2008 8:26 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs


















