So the Astros might have to get rid of one of their productive players in order to keep the payroll under control.
Ty Wigginton's name has come up. Jose Valverde's name as come up.
Both will get considerable raises. Both were productive last season. Wigginton hit 23 homers with 58 RBIs and hit .258. But he was as good as any player on the roster when the Astros made their late-season "run" to be slightly better than mediocre.
Valverde had 44 saves in 51 opportunities and got better as the season went on.
Valverde would have the most trade value. His loss would also have the biggest impact on the roster.
If they can get something for Wigginton, so be it. He was solid but replaceable.
But the idea of trading Valverde is foolish. The Astros have no viable potential replacement. They would have given away two of baseball's top closers in back to back seasons after handing the Phillies a World Series and Brad Lidge last year.
Owner Drayton McLane has mastered the art of being competitive enough to keep people in the seats. But last season's roster overhaul was a one-trick pony. Without further quality moves, this team will be fourth in the division at best. The loyal fanbase will further erode. They will not continue to pay ridiculous ticket prices simply for the priviledge of watching Lance Berkman play.
So if there is no help coming -- at best, they will bring back Randy Wolf -- and, in fact, the team will be weakened, Astros fans will want to know why.
Two words: Miguel Tejada.
In retrospect, it was a complete disaster.
First was the bad press. One day after the deal, Tejada showed up in the Mitchell Report. Astros GM Ed Wade looked foolish. Later, questions about Tejada's actual age came up. While that is relatively unimportant, on the heels of steroid issues, it added to the appearance that the trade was stupid.
Then there was the practical results. Tejada played an adequate shortstop, hit .283 with a pedestrian 13 homers and 66 RBIs -- often from the No. 3 spot in the lineup in front of Lance Berkman and Carlos Lee.
Outfielder Luke Scott, one of the throw-ins in the deal, hit .257 with 23 homers and 65 RBIs for the Orioles. In addition, the Astros gave up two of their best pitching prospects -- Matt Albers and Troy Patton. Patton was injured in the spring and did not pitch. Albers was 3-3 with a 3.49 ERA, which would have ranked fourth on the Astros' staff.
Trading Albers and Patton crippled an already weak farm system and prevented the Astros from making other moves. Albers would have made a nice piece of a Jake Peavy trade package,.
Forgetting the fact that the Lidge to Philadelphia deal was a disaster, the Tejada trade might have set the franchise back years.
Tejada will make $13 million this year -- well above his actual value -- and is untradeable because of his contract. The Astros have no young players worth trading because they gave them away in the Tejada deal.
If they chop payroll by trading Valverde, they will be significantly weaker, all because of one bad trade.
For better or worse, Miguel Tejada will define Ed Wade's role as GM.
Right now, it's for worse.
Comments
I am for the first time not going to any games in 2009 because I dont see any effort by drayton to "build a champion".
Troy Patton and Matt Albers are both recovering from torn labrums and may not have any value at all in the future depending on their ability to rebound. Given the uncertainty of both pitchers, the trade looks more like a straight-up Tejada for Scott swap, actual value-wise.
Sports writers seem to write things that make little sense when there is nothing in the news. Let's see, we lost pitchers from the worst farm system in baseball...not that big of a loss. We pick up a shortstop who no matter what his legal or age problems are is the best hitting SS we have had in a decade...the player we traded for him, although one of my favorites, was in a no play situation in our OF. And last off season we would have taken a box of rocks for Lidge...find something new to write about please!
There is a real good chance that Patton and Albers will both be fine, but a GM should be judged on the intelligence of a trade at the time it was made. Tejada had clearly gone into a decline in '07. He certainly shouldn't have expected much better numbers from Tejada than he put up that year. Scott was 29 years old and likely would not get any better, but he was cheap and productive. Albers and Patton had (and still have) worlds of potencial. The trade would have been bad if it was Tejada for Scott. Yes, Tejada is the best hitting SS the Stros have had in a while, but I'd be curious to see a comparision between the net value of Tejada last year verses. Everett in his "best" year. I'm betting Everett's great glove would have made their values pretty close.
Tejada is as great of a competitor as this franchise has had in many years. Ranks up there with Biggio. Still has plenty of gas in the tank. I havent seen anything from Scott thus far. And the 2 young P's are just that, young,minor league P's who havent accomplished anything yet and the clock is ticking on them.
In hindsight, it was a good trade. If,for nothing else,maybe Tejada'a competative spirit can rub off on some of the young guys on this team before he leaves us
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!