There are pretty obvious signs that there is flexibility in Houstons budget. They bid on prospects like Luis Robert who cost $20M+. How were they going to pay for that? They were about to trade for Britton who has an $11M salary. So while they probably don't have the ability to just absorb a $60M contract out of the blue, they probably do have enough room to take on enough to make the idea of trading for Verlander worth talking about.
Here is specifically what the article said. They definitely meant an additional 30 on top of the 20 needed to just get a filler type prospect. "In other words, to get something like the Wilson/Avila return, this model would suggest that the Tigers would have to pay almost the entire freight on Verlander’s remaining contract, kicking in something like $50 million of the $64 million he’s still owed."
But then the article goes on to say that that is unlikely. So in order to get a back end of a top 100 type prospect plus fillers then they would probably just need to cut the future cost down the middle. The additional 30 million was considering an elite prospect package in return.
In other words, to get something like the Wilson/Avila return, this model would suggest that the Tigers would have to pay almost the entire freight on Verlander’s remaining contract, kicking in something like $50 million of the $64 million he’s still owed. Perez was a FV 50 before the season, but now is probably a FV55 based on BA's recent Top 100. Assuming Astros would throw in a couple of lottery tickets, it would be very close to if not better than the package for Wilson and Avila (a declining FV50 and a FV45). If Verlandar contract was much closer to his actual value than the 20 million suggested by the article, someone would have claimed him. I'm not sure how much Detroit will pick up, but it isn't going to be cheap as Detroit will need to cover discrepancy in contract in value and then buy prospects.
Maybe because it makes sense? I mean you obviously don't want to just throw that money away. I don't think any team would. I would imagine burning money in that way gets you fired quicker than not making a deadline move lol. Especially considering he is a very serviceable bench type of bat. So I don't think the question is could they have afforded liriano...its more like, would the liriano money be worth lirianos production. ESPECIALLY after moving him to the pen. I think the answer is "no" without moving aoki in the deal just because it would be stupid in that case.
Yes, it makes sense, but when Nook said "We had to move Aoki's salary to take on Liriano's salary",and you disagreed, you were actually agreeing? Whether Astros hit hard budget, were trying to save a little money for someone else, or it would be stupid based on Liriano's production, Aoki salary dump was needed to take on Liriano's. Frankly, I think it was a combination of it would be stupid to take on Liriano's salary at that price and that the Astros are either close to hard budget or wanted to use the money in another deal.
I disagree on the "we can't afford it" in terms of being cheap while also in a matter of fact tone that seems to be a common narrative without any real proof. We are willing to spend wisely (it seems and there is actually proof of) and unwilling to spend stupid. Nothing wrong with that imo.
How much did they bid on Robert? Would the Astros have done anything different if they signed Robert? I typically don't assume an offer was legit unless a team spends it elsewhere. On Britton, we don't know that money wasn't included and money being included is the type of thing an owner is more likely to veto. I have a hard time believing Luhnow was holding back a significant sum of money at the deadline unless it is earmarked for something else (e.g. Crane will allow him to pocket annual budget savings to future extensions). It isn't like Crane is giving him such huge budgets that he can't spend all of it.
While the hitting has been pretty consistent, pitching wise, its seems what we need changes month to month. First we needed starters to eat innings, then we needed more RPing, now we need starters again. While this makes sense in any case, any acquisitions between now and the playoffs should be the best arm available. How can we predict what we will need 2 1/2 months from now? Look how much the landscape has changed in the last 2 1/2 months?
Verlander was runner up for AL Cy-Young last year. He's been pretty damn good (ace-like) over the last two months, with the exception of one start. He still throws 100 mph gas. He's pretty damn good still. I'm also in the camp that a trade to contender could further re-energize a pitcher of his caliber. Who are you going to spend his money on next off-season? Arrieta? Tanaka? Cueto? Darvish? From that list, only Arrieta would be worth an upgrade for me, but of course there is no guarantee we could sign any of those four. There also might be a draft pick cost for signing them? I'm not as clear on MLB rules so I might be wrong there. IMO, Verlander is our best option for 2017 and I want the front office and ownership to go for it. There would be zero hit to the 2017 budget in a Verlander trade. We have $22M coming off the books after the season in Beltran and Gregerson (EDIT: Make that $26M if we're counting Aoki's/Liriano's salary). The concern about his option vesting is overblown to me because that means he was dominant in 2019 -- which is a good thing, not a bad thing.
He's been very good his past six starts. HRs are still up - but he's drastically reduced his walks, which had been a nagging issue all year. But.... he was not good for his first 17 starts (4.35 FIP; 1.52 WHIP). I keep going back to Randy Johnson....... same age; same first half struggles..... Plsu, Verlander was REALLY good after the break last year so the idea of him turning it one down the stretch.............. Every day, I talk myself into it more and more........ Dallas Keuchel, George Springer, Jose Altuve.... also, remember: free agency is not he only way to add salary.
Verlander is owed: 17----- 7.5 million 18----- 28 million 19----- 28 million Realistically the Astros would likely need Detroit to pay 25-30 million dollars of that amount. If they did that, the Astros would be paying him roughly 15 million a year for the next two seasons. The Astros are getting out of Gregerson's deal (6.25 million), Beltran's deal ($16,000,000) at the end of this season. So assuming that the budget is roughly higher, but not too much higher, the Astros could make a deal for Verlander if they are willing to not make any notable free agent signings this off season. That would mean not replacing Beltran or Gregerson on the free agent market. It is likely a deal for Verlander would have Sipp and Singleton going back to Detroit rather than a simple cash transaction. So the Astros avenue for improvement would mostly be through trades involving pieces like Fiers or prospects. I think it is a long shot honestly. Detroit will want good prospects back and the Astros won't be crazy about giving up prospects. Right now we can say we don't need to replace Beltran's bat because we have such a potent offense, but a lot can change quickly. So it is a real risk to take that route. A healthy top of the rotation of: Dallas Kuechel/ Justin Verlander/ Lance McCullers sounds pretty good on paper.... especially with the likelihood that Verlander can go over 200 innings.
One of the guys people were upset we didn't trade for: Wouldn't be changing our outcomes any more than Fiers, Morton, Peacock, or McHugh. LMJ would still be recovering, and Keuchel would still be trying to find himself. And those last 2 guys would still be the keys to succeeding in the playoffs. I'm using Quintana's real returns (note: this is with the advantage of going from AL to NL) to illustrate how little these options seem to move the needle for us, and why Luhnow likely didn't want to spend a ton for these starters. I understand some people wanted Gray, and others Verlander. And maybe one of those 3 guys will end up significantly better than our current group of starters...but the odds always seemed low, and Quintana is showing that. (To be clear re: the Verlander talk...I'm on board with bringing him in, esp with his recent success. But just saying I understand the hesitation with any of them and the unwillingness to part with serious prospect value.)
None of the players listed are due to hit the market before Verlander's contract expires, assuming he isn't top 5 in the 2019 AL Cy-Young. We add another $13M in relief after 2018 in Sipp and Morton coming off the books. I didn't include Marwin in that money because I'd like to keep him or we'd need the money to replace his (2017) production, but he's another $5M expiring. I'm not saying it's likely -- far from it -- but I think the fans and media should be pressuring the ownership to make the move. Luhnow won't be giving up his best prospects if he's paying a large sum of Verlander's deal.There hasn't been one article criticizing Crane for his tight purse strings, only for Luhnow and his inability to close a deal. Assuming the hold up is money, Crane deserves to be roasted. In my ideal world of having an unlimited budget, I would add Verlander and Votto, move Gurriel to DH. That would be the kind of addition that makes a great team a legendary one, as Dallas says. And we don't need to replace Beltran's bat because Beltran is terrible. He's more of a negative than positive for me in our lineup. He shouldn't be our full-time DH as is. I think we have in-house options that would give us more production than 2017 Beltran has.
I'd be ok going in house to replace Gregerson and not replacing Beltran. We've got a handful of in house options like Tyler White... or DH bats are usually cheap towards the deadline (see Alonso, Yonder). Verlander is also a legit innings eater. Not sure how that will weigh on him, but he goes deep and can throw 110+ pitches with regularity. As an aside, if Verlander is still a top 5 Cy Young candidate in 2019, I would actually think his 2020 option for 1 year at 22 million is cheap...
Since hitting his nadir in June (.200BA), he hit .275 in July and .321 here in August. He is at least trending in the right direction.
