Jose Valverde signs with Tigers
by David Coleman on Jan 14, 2010 3:48 PM CST
in News
Email
PrintYahoo!'s Tim Brown is reporting via Twitter that Jose Valverde got a two-year deal from the Detroit Tigers. The contract is worth 14 million with a 9 million option.
Obviously, this means the Astros land the No. 19 pick in the 2010 draft and No. 34 overall (in the compensation round), according to Brian McTaggart. I couldn't be happier about this, considering what the Astros did with the 21st pick last season (Jiovanni Mier). Another way to look at this is that the Astros gained 7.8 million in the deal (19th pick worth 5.2 million, 34th worth 2.6). It was the best-case scenario for the Astros and made Wade's decision to offer arbitration work out.
Again, my prognostication skills get a workout. From my profile of Valverde's free agent market:
[Valverde] will sign a two year deal for somewhere around 18 million, with a possible third year option for 10 million.
Four million off, but nailed the length and almost nailed the option. Not bad at all.
What do you think? Was that too much money for Valverde? Are you sad to see him go for that kind of contract? React away...
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I generally was of the view that he would get about $8 million/year. However, I think the market forced that figure to come down to $7 million/year because Valverde waited too long, until most of the closer openings were gone.
Yeah, those numbers seemed to be the consensus of a lot of people (you included). I’m just married and thus don’t get to be right very often. Have to take the small wins when you can :)
by David Coleman on Jan 14, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions
The interesting question: would the Astros have been better off with Valverde at $14 million for 2 years or Lyon at $15 million for 3 years?
(And, yes, this is hindsight.)
Without the draft pick considerations, I would say they would be better off taking Valverde at $14 million. The draft picks make it a closer call, and perhaps means that the Astros made the right choice.
If this were a sign-and-trade for two high draft picks and Brandon Lyon’s already-signed contract, would you view this any differently?
by David Coleman on Jan 14, 2010 4:24 PM CST up reply actions
I wonder if Wade would have signed Valverde if he had been available for $14 million over two seasons prior to the winter meetings? Wade was apparently prepared to pay Valverde for $8 – $10 million in arbitration. And Wade seemed willing to negotiate with Valverde for something along those lines after he offered him arbitration. But Valverde got upset because the Astros didn’t offer him a multi-year contract along the lines of $12 million/year.
I was just about to make a post to this effect. Given the Astros organizational situation, I’d say this is just about the best-case scenario.
I’m not totally sure we’ll see much drop-off in our relief corps…I know there’s some general skepticism on this board (and I’m a part of that) about using WAR for relievers, but Valverde was worth 0.7 and 0.8 WAR in his two seasons with Houston, and Lyon put up 0.7 and 0.7 WAR over those same two seasons.
And just think, if we hadn’t signed Brandon Lyon, the Tigers might not have signed Valverde.
And just think, if we hadn’t signed Brandon Lyon, the Tigers might not have signed Valverde.
That’s pretty speculative. Rumor had it the Phillies had an offer on the table for Lyon, and we had to outbid them, so there’s a good chance the Tigers would have lost him anyway.
That picture is perfect...
…for my reaction to this fantastic news. Bold prediction: Our farm’s organizational ranking jumps ten places a year from now.
And yes, I think the team made the right choice to let Valverde walk, though signing Lyon instead of giving Hawkins his two year/$7.5 million deal still seems like a mistake to me.
My Worry
is that we don’t sign all our draft picks. McClane has spent a lot of money this offseason, and he does have a habit of investing in the wrong places (more than willing to shell out 2 or 3 million for an Erstad or Moehler, not willing to pay an extra 100k to get Stubbs signed). I hope he has changed, and realized the value of draft picks, but I can definitely see him not signing someone, or directing the team to draft based on signability instead of talent.
by seanbergmanrules on Jan 14, 2010 5:28 PM CST reply actions
I think those days are behind us
Ed Wade and Bobby Heck haven’t shown any signs of following that trend in the past two drafts, and it appears as if Drayton is trusting Wade to know what he’s doing. I can see that being a topic of conversation when Wade interviewed for the job. Coming from a cynic, I actually have faith those three picks could turn in to something very nice.
I think the Astros probably do still look at signability with respect to the No. 1 draft choices. And the Astros still don’t seem to go above slot very often. That said, I’ll take the additional high draft choices even if they do draft conservatively in order to stay within slot and for signability. Heck has shown that you can find good draft picks even if they are constrained by slot dollars.
The other thing to keep in mind is that McLane reeled in spending because of his desire to sell the team. A team with a 95million payroll is more attractive than one over 100million.
by Timothy De Block on Jan 15, 2010 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
Fangraphs lambasts the Tigers for this signing.
The criticism of the Valverde deal is similar to Fangraphs’ criticism of the Lyon signing. I think the criticism, in both cases, is overstated because it relies on FIP values for relief pitching performance without any consideration of leverage. It’s possible that Detroit has other needs which were more deserving of the money—-I can’t really say. But I think the Tigers got a top tier closer at a discount price (albeit with a draft choice causing the discount). I think Valverde is underrated here.
It’s the old argument of whether “clutch” is a repeatable skill. Cameron had been pretty blatant that he doesn’t believe it is, and if you take that assumption as a given, his arguments make a lot more sense.
Me, I haven’t really studied up on the issue so I’m not sure what to believe. I’m inclined to think the value of pitching in high leverage situations is overrated by general managers, the media, and many fans, but that’s just a gut feeling. That gut feeling also disagrees with Cameron’s opposite extreme, but you know, just as an instinctual thing.
Actually, a couple of months ago (I think), one of the Fangraphs writers seemed to agree that the Fangraphs calculations may understate some pitchers’ value because it doesn’t include leverage. The article said that there is a reasonable argument for including leverage. But I can’t recall if Cameron was the author or not. (Probably not, based on what you say.) What I do know is that other measures of relief pitcher value, whether Win Shares or Baseball Prospectus, do incorporate a leverage component.
FanGraphs Pitcher WAR Does Include Leverage
Our pitcher WAR does include leverage for relief pitchers. It’s a regressed gmLI. It doesn’t make a colossal difference, but for someone like Valverde, you’re looking at about a 25% increase in WAR due to leverage.
thanks for the information. I wish I could find the previous article I referenced in my post. (Is there a search function for articles on fangraphs?) Also, when the Hardball Times stats are incorporated into Fangraphs, will Pitching Runs Created and x-FIP be included?
Funny. The best signing for an Astros fan
is Jose Valverde signing with Detroit. I’m not saying that the other signings were terrible but this is huge for us to get 2 first round picks. They could like usual play the “lets not spend much” card and I wouldn’t mind a whole lot because we’d still be having a better draft than most teams.
He won’t get the chance. Arias, Lindstrom, Gervacio and Lo will all be nipping at his heels. Jose is better than all of them, but we really need the draft picks.
by seanbergmanrules on Jan 15, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly
Our closer situation is by no means great but it could be good enough and we desperately need those picks. This could fully restore our minor league system if last years draft crop continues to make strides. I’m not looking for anything from us in the short term. I just want us to be a force in a few years and the picks will help us accomplish that more than this years closer situation.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
