Mark Berman: Astros offering Carlos Correa a 5 year/160 million dollar contract

You start 8 hitters and 4 starting pitchers in the playoffs. 2 or 3 top-notch relievers is important, too. Still, that's 14 or 15 spots. I wouldn't think sacrificing your best position player for the sake of guys on the bench is going to increase your chances of winning another title. Talking FA in 2023 or 2024 is fine, but keep in mind you want the best team in 2022, too. If you have to move Odorizzi or other edge pieces in the future to keep the core together, you do that.

 

That's fine, and a valid point.

But payroll is based off of 40 players and 162 season is a grind.

If you tie up your payroll in 6-10 top players and then just fill the other 30-34 with scrubs you are just as likely to miss the playoffs.

How many games have the Astros top 10 players missed due to injury each of the past 5 years?

Having quality depth is what has made the Astros a playoff team year after year.

Look at the Angels with Trout, Ohtani, and Rendon.

 

Except that's not what's happening. You had $195 MM for 19 players, most of those not being scrubs. Most of the remainder are going to be close-to-minimum salary guys and/or in the minors also making less than minimum salary.

You have people coming up for arbitration in a few years but you also have people coming off the books over those years.

It seems the payroll in that scenario is very managable, though it would help if the Astros stopped pay $6-$8MM/yr to middle relievers for no reason.

 

I was referring to what happens if you sign Correa for $32 mil AAV.

For 2023:
Correa $32
Bregman $30
Altuve $29.2
Verlander $25 option
McCullers $15.95

That's over $132 mil for 5 players.

Another $20 for Neris, Odorizzi, and Maldonado.

How much does that leave for Tucker, Alvarez, Valdez( arb2), Urquidy, Javier, Stanek (arb3), and Maton( arb3)

That is close to a $200 mil payroll ( if avg arb salary is $6 mil = $194 mil) for 15 players.

Min salary for 11 remaining 26 man roster players
$2.25 for minor leaguers on 40
$16.5 mil benefits.

2023 payroll is over $219 million.

 

It was fine when Springer, Correa, Bregman, Gurriel, McCullers, Valdez, Tucker, Alvarez, etc

We're young and cheap.

But how many $20mil+ AAV players can any team have and still round out a competitive team?

Altuve and Bregman are free agents in 2025

Valdez, Tucker, Alvarez, Javier, and Urquidy in 2026

Who stays and who goes?

If Correa resigns that will be a big factor in answering that question.

 

My argument is that we will be losing half of great players in 25/26, so we might as well sign correa and keep the band together for the next 3 years and get another world series. That will be a decade of contending with essentially the same core group which is really long. At that point, we could always trade Correa for prospects since he will be only 30 years old at that point.

 

I agree, win as much as you can right now. You know this team can get to the world series every year as currently constructed. Ride that out. If it bites us in the ass in 5 years, oh well. The run they will have gone on will be completely worth it. Give me wins right now, not hypothetical, higher risk wins in 5 years.

 

But so what? If you keep Correa and lose someone else instead, it's no different than losing Correa and keeping that someone else. Except that for the next 2-3 years, you have them both. It's seems weird to say "we don't want a $30MM/yr player now because we might lose a $30MM/yr player in 2026". Presumably, you can make the same argument in 2026 about some future potential star too.

 

This seems totally reasonable, though. That's likely right around the luxury tax threshold and you have an elite team that will contend for a World Series title each of the next 2 years. If you have any holes, you can free up salary by trading Odorizzi or some of your arb-eligible solid talent. What's the problem with that?

 

Bingo. Let's make that decision in 2026 after we play for a championship one, two, or three more times.

 

The Astros know more about Correa's future value than any other team, and certainly more than you or I do. They seem to have decided, (and I agree) that Pena is their best option. Pena gives them the best chance to win now, and to continue winning through the twenties.. Setting aside the issue of money we are talking about the difference between a healthy young shortstop that is very good now and likely to get even better with experience and repetitions, to a very good shortstop with injury issues that is certain to decline over those same years. Pena is the obvious play and if you add money back to the equation it becomes a no brainer.
It is tough to see it happen but the nature of the game is for older players to lose what made them great and be replaced by younger and better players. The Astros where Correa's team but they are fast becoming Tucker's team. When it is his time to go fans will be just as desperate to hang on to him. But go they all must. It is just another aspect of the game we all love. Relax and enjoy the off season. It will all begin again in the Spring.

 

In a similar fashion, we had to make the difficult decision to let the charismatic Luis Valbuena go in 2016 in order to pave the way for youngster Alex Bregman at 3B.

 

But Tucker would never do this...

 

The main issue is that Peña is not that young. He’s 24 and hasn’t faced a single MLB pitcher. By the time he’s rounding into form (presuming he sticks), the team will likely be searching for replacements for Altuve/Bregman.

They’re not all going to adjust like Correa/Alvarez did. The more plausible scenario is he’s more like Tucker/Bregman… where they don’t fully adapt till year 2 or 3.

 

By this standard, no team should ever sign someone else's free agent. The Phillies know more about Hector Neris' value than any other team, and they didn't think he was worth paying what the Astros paid, so it was a bad move, right?

 

Bregman's been hitting since game 11 of his career. He is basically like the polar opposite of Tyler White's career.

 

I remember when Tyler was basically a better Max Muncy. That would’ve been great, but it’s not reality.

 

But not all teams are equal. They may all have access to the same information, but if they all valued everything equally and could predict equally then that would be true.

But that's not the case.

Otherwise the Twins would have never traded Ryan Pressly. The Pirates would have hoarded Cole. Etc.

Some teams are just better than others at seeing potential based on viewing data.

 

So teams have the coaching staffs and players to take advantage of certain skill sets. For example, the Astros has one of the top defensive infields in the major leagues which is great when paired up with pitchers that produce a lot of ground balls. Pair that same pitcher with the NY infield and you are going to give up a lot of hits.