Wandy Claimed on Waivers (UPDATE: Rockies claimed him)

This from Jim Bowden... exactly the attitude the Astros need to take on this.

http://twitter.com/#!/JimBowdenESPNxm

 

Yeah, don't understand it either. Its almost like when they got rid of gonzo,caminetti,finley just cause. Not to mention he's a lefty and pitches in a hitter freindly park. Don't understand the move.

 

yeah, that didn't work out at all (not saying i want them to get rid of wandy for nothing, just that i wouldn't use a trade right before the team started it's best 10-year run in franchise history to make this point).

 

↑↑ ba-DINK! :grin:

 

I don't really mind losing Wandy. He isn't really going to be a contributor once we are finally good again. And I don't think we should be paying a quality #2 starter 14million+ when he is going to be on the decline by the end of his contract.

I'd rather the team just save the extra $, but I do hope that we can get a few decent prospects for him if we can work out a trade with the Rockies.

If we get Wandy of the books, and Lee off the books. At the end of next year we are going to have a TON of available money to spend on the major league club.

And I think that available money should be used once we realize what positions we are set on with our young guys to guy out and get a legitimate star on the roster.

 

Who says he's going to be on the decline? He's a soft-tossing lefty, the type that traditionally age very slowly. He'll be close to a decline, sure, but it's quite reasonable that his current level of production could last until he's 37 or so.

That said, it's not so much about Wandy as it is about asset management. I'd love to deal Wandy, if we get a decent return for him. Same principle as with Pence and Bourn. If you can get younger, cheaper players that won't be nearing the end of their primes come 2014 and 2015, go for it.

That said, getting nothing is not an acceptable option. Many of the Wade-haters in this very thread cling to this idea that Wandy had substantially more value a year ago, until his contract extension. OK, fine. If he would've had substantially more value as a short-term rental, then hold onto Wandy for two more years and revisit the idea in 2013. It's not like his performance is slipping.

Even with Wandy, the Astros have all of $47 million on the books for 2012. That shrinks to $27 million for 2013, once Lee's contract is off the books. There's plenty of money for free agency already. With Wandy, it's just about how best to manage the asset. Ideally, you could trade him for something of substance now. If not, revisit the idea in 2012 or 2013 when his contract is a year or two closer to expiration. The key to the rebuilding cycle for the Astros is going to be acquiring young talent, and Wandy's good enough to fetch it. If not now, then in the offseason, next deadline, or two years from now. There's already enough payroll flexibility - no need to let an asset go for nothing that can potentially be flipped for talent later on.

 

Totally agree.

That said, I wanted Wandy (and Meyers) flipped for assests last year. It would be better if it happened sooner rather than later.

Make a good move, Ed. It might be your last chance with our team.

I hope another team picks up Wade when we let him go, so he can trade all their best players to us for peanuts and make us contenders.

 

While Wandy's rate of decline may be in question, certainly no one thinks he is going to get better. That said, I agree with the above IF we can get a decent return. Last year would have even been better.

 

He doesn't really need to get better to get a return on him. He's been consistently a top-15 or so pitcher in the NL the last 4 years. He's signed for several years, for a not-ridiculous salary for a #2 pitcher. That *should* fetch something pretty decent.

 

We found out at the trade deadline that may not be the case. But my point really is that his trade value will not get any higher than it is right now.

 

I'm with you, dude.

I miss Pence, but I feel that we got a decent return for him. Bourn, I'm not totally convinced yet, unless Schafer turns out to be a fixture for us in CF the next couple years. We'll see how well Santana does.

If not, we still have options.

I'd like to see Paredes using his speed and his arm in the outfield because I'm not sure that he has the reaction time to handle 3rd, but I still love him as a player. He plays hard and he produces at the plate.

 

good for them. rockies seem like a strange team to claim him if they didn't plan on giving up something significant. actually, seem like a strange team to claim him either way. i guess they are just smart enough to go get a great pitcher while available, and while they are somewhat competitive.

 

They prob. claim him to block him from the Dbacks.

 

It's a no-lose situation for them, even if they don't want to offer anything of note. If the Astros give him up, they get a really good pitcher for a reasonable contract. If they Astros don't, they lose nothing.

 

you could say that for any team that claims any player. that's the definition of waiver claims process.

colorado just seems like an odd fit, at first glance.

 

Curve ball pitchers have had notorius problems in Colorado, although Wandy has pitched very well there.


The rockies probably realize this is a low risk move. The Astros aren't likely to just give him away, and they aren't obligated to make a deal. So worst case they keep wandy away from other teams, or they get a really good pitcher with a reasonable contract for nothing.

 

For those of you just joining, Cat is bringing the truth in this thread.

 

Not necessarily - the team is stuck with the player, so you have to want the player. A team that isn't really a contender in the next year or two (say, the Astros) would not want to put in a claim for Wandy, because they'd be stuck paying a pitcher for no reason. Or a team like the Reds or Phillies, who have immense depth at starting pitcher, would have no reason to put in a claim because it's a bad use of money.

But the Rockies are looking to improve and contend next year and need good pitching. So for them, claiming Wandy is a zero-risk way to get a #2 starting pitcher without having to negotiate it through free agency.

 

Yes, it can.

No one is denying Wandy's ability. As Major said, he's been a top 15 pitcher in the NL for four years. The issue in question is the contract. Personally, I believe the contract concerns are largely overstated. I think they're mostly bluffs from rival GMs who have seen Wade cave in the past (either in terms of prospects required, cash given, or both), and use the likes of Jon Heyman to apply pressure. Heyman should better think about the motives of his sources, but that's a separate discussion.

But here's the thing. If it's true, the concern with Wandy is his contract. Fine, then revisit the issue in 2013 when his contract is either a few months or a year from expiring. As long as Wandy keeps pitching like he is - and he's shown no signs of slowing down - he has the potential to acquire a significant haul of young talent. If teams won't give that now, citing his contract... don't dump him for nothing (or take pennies on the dollar). Hold him and revisit the situation as time progresses.