Is Ed Wade Crazy Like A Fox?
I've been considering this more and more as all the arbitration talk rolled by on Tuesday. What if there's a direction we're not seeing with the Astros? What if Ed Wade is playing the market with the best of them?
Let's look at the facts: Jose Valverde is getting no interest whatsoever in the hot stove. Granted, a guy like Jason Bay also isn't getting talked about much. The thing that has me thinking the silence on Valverde isn't just his agent's lack of media sources is that the market for pitchers may be depressed this winter.
Take a guy like Joel Piniero. Obviously, he's not CC Sabathia, but he is one of the top pitchers on the market. Jon Heyman said on MLB Network last night that Pineiro would ask for 30 million over 3 years and wouldn't come close to that. If Piniero, a starting pitcher, couldn't get 10 per, how is Valverde, an easier-to-replace closer, going to get 8 or 9 million?
What I can see happening is Valverde figuring out his market potential isn't great this season and signing with the Astros for 6-7 million. At the same time, Wade is negotiating for a Houston-friendly 5 million over 2 year deal with Hawkins, giving him back the back-end of his rotation for just under 10 million. That would leave him around 5 million to work with to fill out the roster. Sure, maybe Tejada doesn't re-sign, but I already see that possibility as remote.
See, his comments to McTaggart on twitter last night only underscore my point. Wade pulled the greatest manipulation move every by offering Valverde and not Hawkins. With Valverde, he can say that the Astros want him back badly, that's why they offered him. With Hawkins, he can say that as a sign of good faith in negotiations, they declined to offer him. Thus, he's created favorable negotiating positions with both players.
I know, I know, this seems too far-fetched to be true. After all, the Astros should have better ways to spend the 15 million in the budget, right? Hmmm...
Ed. note: This is what happens when you think too much about the offseason. You start seeing competence on the part of the Astros front office. I'm going to lie down now...
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I was going to write an article...
with some thoughts about Astros’ strategy, now that it is post-arb deadline. But I’m glad you opened it up so I can just make some comments (I wasn’t sure that I had enough to justify an article).
1. My sense is that the market prices will be depressed (relative to 2005 – 2007 off seasons) for the “middle class” free agents. Most of these players are substitutable, so that it’s hard for these players to hold onto a big advantage in the market (not so for impact players like Holliday). As an example, look at Valverde’s situation: how much of an advantage does he hold over players like Rodney, Dotel, Soriano, or Gonzalez? Maybe some, but is it worth millions?
2. Many teams’ front offices obviously foresee a depressed free agent market. That is the only explanation for the large number of Type A and B free agents who were not offered arbitration (Randy Wolf…a big surprise). The Dodgers didn’t make an arb offer to a single one of their seven Type A/B free agents—a record. The Brewers, who normally always offer arbitration, didn’t offer arbitration to any of their five A/B free agents. (I would guess that we will hear more talk about collusion from agents as we move into the off-season.)
2. This could make a number of players more attractive now that they no longer bring the loss of a draft choice (only a 2d rounder would have been at stake for the Astros). I like the idea of Polanco at 3d base, and he will not cost a draft pick.
3. However, from the Astros’ perspective, they may actually hold a competitive advantage bidding for Type A free agents who were offered arbitration. The loss of a first round pick should significantly depress the salary offers in general for these players. But the Astros are among the 15 teams who would not lose a first round pick, and at most only risk a 2d round pick. The teams with bigger budgets tend to be among the other 15 teams who lose a first round pick, meaning that the teams with the ability to increase the bidding will be discouraged from doing so. If the arbitration offer lowers the market for these players by more than $1 million (guesstimate), I would think the loss of a 2d round is justifiable.
4. No. 3 means that some back end relief pitchers like Soriano, Betancourt, and Gonzalez could produce a bargain for the Astros.
5. Turning to davoag’s points…The potential to sign Valverde for a reduced price seems to assume that Valverde will decline arbitration. I could see the scenario playing out if Valverde declines arbitration, tests the market, and then realizes that a one year reduced price contract with the Astros is his best bet. The question might be whether Valverde’s agent reads the market as negative at this early stage and accepts arbitration (doubtful, I think). I don’t know that both Hawkins and Valverde will be signed by the Astros. Hawkins will have some suitors; supposedly the Rockies indicated they will be in contract with him, and the Twins have always expressed some interest in bringing him back to his first team.
Interesting note: of the six “closers” listed on mlbtraderumors free agent page last night, five of them were offered arbitration. So Valverde is basically on "equal footing with the other free agent closers…if a team wants an established closer they’re going to have to give up a draft pick.
Doesn't make sense
“With Valverde, he can say that the Astros want him back badly, that’s why they offered him. With Hawkins, he can say that as a sign of good faith in negotiations, they declined to offer him. Thus, he’s created favorable negotiating positions with both players.”
This logic makes no sense whatsoever. What’s to stop it from being reversed? What’s going to stop Valverde from saying, “you haven’t shown good faith in these negotiations by offering me arbitration. Now I’m leaving.”? What’s to stop Hawkins from saying, “you didn’t offer me arbitration, so you must not want me back badly. I’m leaving.”?
Ultimately we don’t know what Wade’s rationale is. None of us are in the front office and we don’t know about all of the variables involved. The most logical idea is that the Astros think it would be a bad idea to allocate their limited sources to two guys capable of closing and that a decision had to be made. They must believe that Hawkins is more likely to sign, and because they can’t risk both of them accepting arbitration, they offered it only to Valverde because it’s more likely he leaves, and thus more likely we collect compensation on him than on Hawkins.
Wagner signs with Braves
7mil with a 6.5mil option for 2011 if he finishes 50 games.
by Timothy De Block on Dec 2, 2009 11:50 AM CST reply actions
I just hope
Valverde doesn’t accept, then get $10M, because that leaves about $6M to find a third baseman, 4th OF, a starting pitcher, and a catcher. That said, I like the moves. Hopefully, you either arbitrate a lower than expected # ($7M), or he doesn’t accept and you get a free 1st rounder.
The fact remains that without upgrading the rotation, this team is a non-contender. As it stands, the offense is average to below-average (adding a good offensive 3B—Tejada—would make it average to above average), the bullpen is average to above average, and the rotation is below average to horrible.
It's about age
The player’s age is what matters. Young players are worth more. Older players are worth less, especially older pitchers. Ignore rumors and news reports and follow common sense. Younger players typically decline arbitration, because the FA market values them enough to overcome the draft pick penalty. Older players typically accept arbitration, because they know that the odds are that the next season won’t be as good as the previous one.
So the Astors offer Valverde arbitration knowing that he’ll decline and they’ll get 2 draft picks. They decline to offer to offer it to Hawkins, because arbitration would pay him for his previous production and not 2010, in which the numbers say that he’s likely to decline.

by 






















