That exercise made me wonder how Correa would handle LF for ~80 or so games if Paredes is flat set against playing LF. We know he’s got the arm and bat for it. He’s a slow runner but not slower and than Yordan.
NBA has corrected the loopholes with the new apron rules. Teams already over the aprons are grandfathered in, but making trades and draft pick punishment is changing the landscape dramatically in the NBA and the teams over the cap will have to adjust pretty soon. I think we need salary floors to protect city fan bases like Pittsburg from being the glorified minor league teams they are now. An effective salary cap would do wonders for the competiveness of mid market teams, but I don’t think it will happen. Teams like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Mets have no incentive to support a salary cap and like it or not, they are the real power brokers in MLB.
In a vaccuum I would much rather Paredes is on the team but. . . But Walker isn't going to bring back the same return AND you probably don't save much more salary, despite him making twice as much. Average of Fangraphs 4 different projections: HR: Walker 28, Paredes 19 R: Walker 72, Paredes 57 RBI: Walker 80, Paredes 57 OB%: Paredes .342, Walker .301 SLG: Paredes 437, Walker. 427 WAR: Paredes 1.9, Walker 1.2 There is a legitimate chance that Walker is better than Paredes in 2026. Because they will need to pay $5-10M of Walker's salary to trade him, the savings in payroll will be very close. But the difference in talent that Paredes will bring back is much much better. I don't want to trade either of them but I think the Astros think one must go. If Altuve is playing 125+ games at 2B I would rather have Walker to his left than Paredes. I think it is better for 2026 AND the future to trade Paredes than Walker.
The big market teams will still spend. If the smaller market teams spend more, the players will have more money. The small market owners have minced no words about how the system works to their advantage with revenue sharing and refusing to sign any FA’s or extend a homegrown player. Oakland/Sacramento/Vegas will spend more now because they’ve hoarded for more than 5-7 years and they’re anticipating a boost of interest Pittsburgh should be spending more to build a potential winning team around Skene’s prime. Cincy and Tampa could spend more as well. The small market teams are some of the most profitable in the game once revenue sharing is disseminated. Those fan bases (with tax funded stadiums) deserve better vs. owners using their teams solely to maximize profits.
The number stats should factor in games played. Paredes is younger, on a better contract, and, I’m guessing can play multiple defensive positions adequately. I think it’s best to keep them both unless you can unload Walker without eating a lot of salary and/or giving up assets. If you can Paredes would be an extension candidate at a reasonable price.
I can not help but recall that Houston under spent the league by miles as a part of their rebuild and eventual run of a winning tradition. There are legitimate reasons for teams to regulate their own spending both high and low. The issue of regulating draft picks is separate from those and is a way to protect all teams from destructive spending in either direction.
The 4 teams you mentioned made a $21M profit on average in the last season per Forbes. The Red Sox made a $120M profit. I expect owners make more than Forbes projects, but I expect that is grossly slanted towards the big markets like Boston, LA, and NY. On revenue sharing, the big markets only make what they do because the small markets also exist (i.e., revenue sharing is not a gift). Even if every cent of profit was squeezed from those 4 teams, it still would not match squeezing the most profitable of the big markets (this changes a lot year per year depending on what the big markets are investing in capital improvements). I enjoy watching MLB games streamed. I enjoy watching games in person. If the goal is solely to take money from the owners, the players with at least 6 years of service are not close to the most underpaid of the people that allow me to watch games (e.g., minor leaguers, people working concession stands, guys who developed the software used to stream games). Personally, I have no issue with the small market owners making on average as much as Christian Walker. 2 wins worth of profits is just not that much relative to what is needed to make the postseason and how much goes to the players. I want parity of opportunity more than making the small market owners make less. In the millionaire vs billionaire fight, I choose baseball, me, minor leaguers, and nearly everyone involved in making games possible over both the owners and players with 6 years of service. I do get that franchise values go up, but that only happens because the owners make money. I guess I just understand that the purpose of MLB is to make owners money, even small market owners, in exchange for providing me and other baseball fans with entertainment. For my entertainment value, the big markets making a ton more money and being able to routinely win more games hurts me more than the small owners making money in exchange for 2 wins.
I have been for extending Paredes for the past couple of seasons. Setting that aside Paredes usefulness for the 26 season is as the starting 3rd baseman (he is more useful there than Correa can be) He lacks the quickness for 2nd base, the bat for first base, and the legs for left field. If the team is resolute about keeping Correa at third the best use for Paredes is to trade him for a 2nd baseman or a left fielder. A player with one year left on his contract at one of those positions of need would be a fair trade. A year from now the Astros will be ready to graduate an excellent second baseman and a couple of good outfielders from their own system. My first choice would be to trade Correa while he still has some value. Failing that trading Paredes is the next best option.
Chandler Rome has been the one I have heard it from. Listen to his podcast. In several of them he has stated some form of "these guys are all everyday players and reducing their playing time reduces their effectiveness as well" And " I don't see how they can all stay"
Even the small market owners themselves say the published numbers aren’t the real margins. No small team owner would still be in the business if their “losses” were as published year after year. They’re also short-sighting the revenue gate (which they’re willing to “waive”, as nobody watches shitty teams that aren’t putting resources into winning). I’ve already forgotten what we’re arguing about… I think everybody wants parity. I just see more shitty teams not trying vs. big market teams putting the big market profits back into the team. Maybe they just need to go to a relegation/EPL style system…. Somebody more familiar would have to explain if that model is “better” or “worse” as it seems every game (even the shittier teams) has a rabid fan base and each tier knows what to spend (or what not to spend) to potentially generate wins or advance tiers. Or they just bite the bullet, pool all the TV money, and realize the NFL model does work provided you don’t give a **** about 90% of the players.
Chandler does not work for the Astros. This is his opinion based on the cost it is for the team to pay for Paredes to stay. Even tonight Dana Brown was asked about Paredes and Walker both having a place on the team. Dana’s comments were intentionally vague, stating they are both currently on the roster and he believes there are enough ABs for both players. He also said they are constantly looking at trade options, and the focus is on a backup C. Paredes or Walker will only be dealt if the right move comes along. If it improves the team, one will be moved. The Astros are not going into the season with Allen as the only player that can backup 3B, SS, and 2B. I am curious what the intent is with pursuing a backup C. Does this mean Salazar is gone? Or are they shopping for a AAA C?
Were you hoping Tampa would be extend him or Chicago? He hasn’t been here a couple of seasons And LOL at you thinking he doesn’t have the bat for 1B
I really, really don't get the Paredes trade fascination. If a star level player is coming back then OK, but there being a "logjam" is stupid AF. Even assuming the highly unlikely scenario that Walker,Correa,Pena,Altuve and Yordan all stay healthy, there are more than enough plug and play scenarios to play him every day. He can play both corners and has thus far played at a perfectly OK level at 2B. Even if we can't move Walker just play him at 2B and accept the less than ideal defense. We have plus defenders all over the field, poor defense at 2B won't kill the team, hell we've been doing it with Altuve for years now.
Exactly. And what star player would they bring back to be in the same situation? You either love depth or you don’t.
Chandler Rome does not work for the team but he has sources, is constantly around the team, and hears things. I truly hope he is wrong but he says the Astros will not make any of them bench or part time starters. Apparently: Walker, Paredes, Altuve, Correa, Pena, and Yordan will all start everyday outside of rare off days That only works if Altuve or Yordan are in LF. I think the best thing for the team is each of them take 3 -4 days off per month. But I bet Walker, or more likely, Paredes get traded in the next 6 weeks. Not what I want, just what I expect.
He is constantly around the team, and he hears things, but he also writes stories to draw interest. He has a legitimate motive for making educated guesses, or opinions, that draw interest. When I have spoken with him about it, he never sites a source for this stance. He uses logic and knowledge of the Astros interest to have financial flexibility to argue it would be in their best interest to trade Paredes.
