Wednesday Morning Astros, etc Round Up
As Ivan Rodriguez heads out of Houston, Zach Levine looks back on the era of Astros baseball in which he donned the starred hat. Oh Pudge, we hardly knew ye...in a sense. In another, more tangible baseball sense, we knew him all too well as a below replacement level catcher who didn't help the Astros defense all that much, and was a sieve with a bat in his hands after May. Drayton wanted a big league catcher on the team to start 2009, meaning that Humberto Quintero and JR Towles weren't ready for primetime. Q isn't and will never be, and JR still has time to prove us wrong.
The Dallas Morning News introduced readers to Jose Vallejo and Matt Nevarez. He calls Vallejo a top 20 prospect, suggesting his high ceiling and athleticism should play well for him in the Astros' system. On the flip side, Matt Nevarez is running out of time to prove himself. The Astros will need to place him on their 40 man roster in order to protect him from the Rule V draft. Should they do so, he has only a few seasons to make a positive impression on the major league level before he becomes a free agent outright.
What would Jose Vallejo have done as a major leaguer this season? Well it's not great to say the least: .215/.263/.293.
As far as what the Rangers will have to pay in terms of salary for Rodriguez' services, Evan Grant chimes in that:
Rodriguez is owed about $300,000 in salary, but he’s on the brink of a number of incentive thresholds. He has 344 plate appearances at this time and will get $200,000 when he reached 350. He gets another $200,000 at 375. Other incentives for 400, 425 and 450 seem unreachable. If he plays in seven more games, he’s also due another incentive bonus for reaching 100 games. So there could be up to close to $1 million remaining in payment.
The credit for this deal occurring lies with Rangers' GM Jon Daniels. It's not as if Ed Wade is exhibiting his plan to rebuild the Astros by trading away veterans for youngsters. Daniels had a need, and he did what he thought was best to satiate that need by trading for Pudge.
However, if we examine why the Rangers needed a backup backstop, the situation makes Daniels not appear as savvy in making this late season trade for a hometown favorite. Remember last season, when the Rangers were out of the race early, and they had in their stable three young catchers? Max Ramirez, Jarrod Saltalamacchia and Taylor Teagarden were all thought to be potential catchers of the future for any major league team. It was inconceivable that at some point the Rangers wouldn't trade one if not two of them. Depth is depth, but for a rebuilding team, a young catcher is worth the weight of his gear in gold.
Rumors and potential deals swirled concerning Ramirez possibly heading to a team with a need like the Red Sox. It made sense to a great extent- Ramirez hit well in the minors in 2008, and contending teams like Boston had aging, somewhat unreliable options at their disposal. From his position of strength, Jon Daniels did not trade any of these young men. They stayed with the organization, and to the surprise of some, the Rangers are in contention in 2009 a year or two ahead of schedule.
It's difficult to say what the Rangers could have gotten for Max Ramirez or either of the other two top catchers, but suffice it to say that it was probably someone who could have helped their club in 2009. Maybe Daniels thought that one of his catchers would put it all together and be the player to catch 130, 135 games for him. That hasn't happened, and now a position of strength isn't so fortified. Say what you will about a veteran presence, but it would have surprised many last season to be told that the Rangers would trade prospects of any sort for Ivan Rodriguez in 2009. The Rangers are going to good for many years to come, and Daniels should get the lion's share of the credit. It's funny though, how much things can change in a year's time, and goes to show that even the most well equipped teams on occassion have to acquire the Pudge Rodriguezes of the world.
Just to get rid of all the post-Pudge reporter opinions (a DQ insert):
Alyson Footer probably provides the most informative of the recap/reaction pieces. She starts by looking at Matt Nevarez and has this to say:
Footer also touches on how the deal went down between Jon Daniels and Ed Wade. For the most part it's all pretty nonchalant information until she mentions that Pudge inquired with Ed Wade about coming back to Houston 2010 before he left for the air port. The plot thickens, I suppose.
Although Drayton McLane wants everyone to know that this does not mean the Astros are going into rebuilding mode, some of the players think otherwise. The most outspoken among them, Roy Oswalt.
I've got to give Roy credit on this. Whether or not it's actually possible to moves the pieces he wants moved (Hawkins, Valverde...?) remains to be seen. Oswalt has a friend in the media on this one, as JJO chimes in with similar sentiments.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't know why
they are so high on Q, and don’t want to give JR Towles another shot. Footer basically said that Towles will be called up in September as an emergency catcher…
Also mentioned is that if the Rangers make the playoffs the Stros get another PTBNL, so time to start routing for the Rangers.
by Timothy De Block on Aug 19, 2009 7:37 AM CDT reply actions
Perplexes me too. Plus, Towles is a bible thumper like Drayton, so I don’t think its a character issue. Developing Towles could give us a very nice trade chip if Castro pans out. Its not like he could be worse than Q and Pudge.
by seanbergmanrules on Aug 19, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions
What or who, exactly, did Astros receive in the Pudge trade?
First we hear Jose Vallejo and Matt Nevarez.
Then it’s Vallejo and two players to be named later.
The it’s Vallejo and a player TBNL IF the Rangers make the playoffs; or it’s Vallejo and one PTBNL for sure (What happened to Nevarez in all this?), with a third PTBNL if the Rangers make the Playoffs.
What’s the deal?
Oh yeah – and maybe Pudge returns to the Astros in the Spring.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Aug 19, 2009 8:56 AM CDT reply actions
at least the difference in what the Astros and Rangers were saying about the number of players....
who were traded makes a bit more sense now. Rangers were saying two players and the Astros were saying three players. That makes a bit more sense if one of the players is contngent. (The Astros naturally stating the trade in its most optimistic form.) When I saw the differences between what the two clubs were saying officially about the compensation, I thought there must be a contingency for adding another player, but I thought the contingency would be how Pudge performs. I didn’t think about a contingency based on the Rangers’ playoff hopes.
some comments...
1. It seems to me that the Rangers should be glad that they didn’t trade Max Ramirez to the Red Sox. If Saltamacchia has a career ending injury, or a debilitating one, then the Rangers would have no quality depth at catcher for the future without Ramirez. Perhaps the Rangers should have regrets about not trading Salty in the off season, but my recollection is that the Red Sox and other teams felt that he might end up as a 1st baseman instead of catcher.
2. Solomon’s piece in the Chronicle compares Oswalt’s comments to Wagner’s press statements which got him traded. He thinks these are the type of comments which will get him in trouble with management. I just don’t see that. My immediate reaction to Oswalt’s comment is that he was trying to play the good soldier, i.e., he was trying to say something which was supportive, or at least recognizing a positive side, to what the Astros are doing. On the other hand, Oswalt seems to imply that the Pudge trade is intended to bring help to the big league club
next year(Roy says that is what he is looking for….a good 2010 club). Well, looking at the these two players, that doesn’t seem likely under even the most optimistic scenario. And it’s not likely to happen with any waiver rrade. Moreover, additional waiver trades seems unlikely, since the players have to clear waivers.
3. Nevarez is kind of like picking up a really good Rule 5 pick without going through the Rule 5 draft. I see some comparison to the Astros’ successful Rule 5 pick, Wesley Wright: both are A- ball pitchers who were stuck in a deep farm system as the 30th or so rated prospect and come to the Astros and become, say, the 15th rated prospect. If Nevarez can improve quickly, maybe he can make it to the big league bullpen sometime during the 2010 season.
4. Does anyone think that the Astros’ interest in a young closer indicates a recognition that the Astros will be desperate for a closer in the future?
I should preview my posts more often...
the “next year” in a quote box was supposed to be in italics. I pushed the wrong button. LOL.
Roy Oswalt statement
is more to the point, that Drayton McLane has promised him that every year there will be “competitive” team on the field. Roy isn’t going to go look up the stats of the players in return, he hears "a pitcher from A Ball that strikes out a lot of people that will be in AA ball in the Stros organization, and a AAA second baseman who is defensively sound (obviously something a pitcher wants to hear).
With the bullpen being relatively old, and possibly blown up in the off season (Valverede FA, Hawkins FA, Brocail possibly done, Sampson who knows, Arias struggling, Byrdak FA) Matt Nevarez is a move to add bullpen depth to the system.
by Timothy De Block on Aug 19, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions
Roy Oswalt statements
here’s a link to Roy Oswalt’s interview:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/video?id=6971659&rss=rss-ktrk-video-6971659
In sum, He said there are teams that could use some current Astros. The players must be on the other team’s roster by August 31 to play in the post season so Astros ought to take advantage of the situatonand trade for players that can help the Astros win in 2010 (not in 2012 !!)
Oswalt wants STARTIG PITCHERS who can pitch 7 oer 8 innings a game (And over 200 innings a season). Anything less than that destroys the bullpen guys.
Once that’s done, get some defense ! (that must be a dig a the left side of the field (Holes all over the shortstop – third base – left field this year)
In sum of the in sum – Roy says trade for starting pitching who are hosses; and do it this month.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Aug 19, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Doesn't it though
Roy seems to be saying find teams in the playoff hunt, trade them player(s) that can help them, and demand a top dog major league starting pitcher in return
and add defense
But Lee, Berkman and Oswalt himself probably cannot be traded.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Aug 19, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
it's also next to impossible because the trade deadline has passed.
And even if somehow you can get high quality players to clear waivers, you have to ask which contending teams are willing to give up good starting pitchers in return? Most contending teams are looking for additional starting pitching, and I don’t know of any contending team which is so deep that it can give up a 200 inning pitcher without affecting its playoff chances.
the rumored prices for a "hoss" are crazy
Melvin tried last off-season, at the trade deadline and I’m sure he’ll try this off-season. I was kind of hoping that Stros or Reds would go into full blown rebuild so that the brewers could get a year of Wandy or Harang – I know you would hate that. But other than that, there are no easy solutions. Talk radio here has lots of angry condemnations of him. One call in show, he went through available options and almost all of them have turned into questionable to bad investments. Heck, he offered CC 100 million and was willing to go up but didn’t get a chance.
I don’t think its coincidence that the team has drafted a swarm of pitchers the past couple years and even did a quasi-yankees/sox thing where they draft questionable to sign guys and pay them over slot.

by 

























