Exactly. If you guys take the Astros blinders off... you'll notice that nearly every "good" team has a bullpen guy with a similiar track record/stuff to Dan Wheeler. Hell, Jay Powell AND Dan Miceli both had Wheeler-like runs with the Astros. If Wheeler had proved to be a dominant closer in his breif stint this season (think Todd Jones for Detroit), it would have certainly helped his value... but the bottom line is that he's a guy who's a control pitcher, that doesn't necessarily have an "out" pitch. Sure, Wiggington doesn't solve any gaping hole the club had... but he something the Astros could use especially if Loretta AND Lamb are going to be dealt this season (or both leave as free agents in the off-season).
Wheeler himself will be a 30 year old. We already have Qualls locked up for the next 3 years, and Lidge (if the club doesn't deal him). Out of the three, Wheeler is the one I'd have been looking to move. If Loretta/Lamb leave or get traded, the options at 3b/1b are limited to Morgan Ensberg.
I'm not so sure people are putting such a premium on Wheeler. I think the consensus is that Wheeler was the cheapest reliever to obtain and would bring little back for the 'Stros. To me, with this in mind, if your return for Qualls is significantly better (which it should be given age and contract) you keep Wheeler and move Qualls. Wheeler's track record in Houston has been very good up until this season (of turmoil for all our relievers). Moreover, Hunsicker seems to think Wheel's is still a viable commodity. Hell, it wasn't that long ago that many of us were applauding the way he handled the various promotions and demotions of the year (sans the shove incident). I'm not pro trade for sake of trade. To me, on face value Ty represents an upgrade to no one in our current infield utility group. Not only this, it would seem to be a downgrade if one of our guys is moved out (lamb or loretta) and he is their primary replacement. However, I will concede that if a corresponding trade of said players nets a return greater than the loss, it could be a good deal. Long story longer, I question whether moving Qualls would have been a better long term move than moving Wheeler.
How long term are you looking to go? Berkman and Oswalt are 30, Lee is 30. The club can't be trading simply for 20 something year olds who may or may not pan out in 5 years. And if you do think they should take that approach, then why hang on to any of our good players... trade Berkman before he starts to decline (which he may have already), trade Oswalt. Trade them all! But in all seriousness, Qualls can likely get a decent prospect in return... but he's also under organizational control for 2 more years than Wheeler/Lidge, and would be nice option that you don't have to worry about replacing in the bullpen next year. Wheeler, on the other hand, remained a question mark.. not just for this year, but for next year as well.
I agree with everything you said, but Wheeler has been one of the best relievers in the NL the past 2+ seasons. Wigginton has never been anything more than slightly above league-average. That's why I think Wheeler is worth more than Wigginton. It seems like a cop-out trade. Yeah, Lamb and Loretta may be gone next year, and yeah, Wigginton fills that hole, but dealing something of value to fill with a crappy player who just happens to fill that hole, is not a good business decision.
That didn't come out very well. Here's another shot at that last paragraph. It seems like a cop-out trade. Yeah, Lamb and Loretta may be gone next year, and yeah, Wigginton fills that hole, but dealing something of value in exchange for a crappy player who just happens to fill a hole, is not a good business decision.
I'm not convinced that Qualls will not still be dealt prior to the deadline. By the way...Wheeler had a 4.80 ERA when we got him from the Mets. This is not the first time Wheels has had trouble. He had two good season with us. Even taking those into consideration, the guy has a career ERA of 3.99.
I just think you may be overvaluing Wheels because he has been pretty good for us lately. Pretty good WHIP at 1.19, with an ERA over 5. That is solid, not spectacular. And he is not exactly a young buck. Like you said, Lamb and Loretta may be gone next year... Personally I'll withhold judgment on this trade until I see what other moves we make. Purp hopefully has other moves in mind with this surplus of IFs.
Actually it is a good business decision because they will pay a little more for a guy that spells Mike Lamb (who will make double what he makes this year) so the Astros pay less. Apparently the D-Rays are paying part of Wigginton's salary this year, so from a business standpoint it makes sense to get essentially the same player for less money. Its a bad baseball decision, pending what impact it has on other trades that Purpura and Co. make.
If Wigginton was the same player that Lamb is, then I'd agree. But he is not the same player, far from it in fact. I know this is not an earth-shattering trade that's going to sink the franchise one way or the other, it just seems like a case of poor GM-ing to me. It's filling a hole for the sake of filling a hole. It's also a classic case of buying high, selling low - Wheeler's value is as low as it's been since he came over to Houston, while Wigginton's value is probably as high as it's ever been.
The problem with this deal is that it looks like one of those deals that only works out in tandem with other deals. We fully expect Lamb, Loretta, and maybe Jennings to get dealt. If those three get dealt then this deal could look better depending on who the club gets in return. Unfortunately though, the full value of this deal will not be realized until this off-season. It was apparently a cost cutting move, so we won't know how much money we saved until we see the contract that Lamb signs. I think the club expects it to be in the five million territory and we already know that Ensberg will command that much if they offer him arbitration. So, we are looking at what the club could bring in with the extra money. IF the club acquires other good future pieces for Lamb and Loretta AND they use the financial savings on more good players then this trade will look very good. If Pupura sits on his hands and says "we're done" then it looks short-sighted. It's not that I thought Wheeler was that good, but the market was established with Linebrink. Wheeler could have returned at least two or three good prospects because unlike Linebrink, he won't be rental for the Drays. Ultimately, if even one of those prospects pans out it will be worth more than a player like Wigginton.
The probelm with this theory is that the Milwaukee GM has spent a lot of time since that deal trying to defend it. He has gotten roundly panned for giving up way too much. Don't expect all GMs to overpay just because he did.
who's TB's gm again...... ya, wheeler for wigginton .... give me a break, I know you could have gotten more then that.... like a previous post said .... he was Released from the Pirates b/c he couldn't cut it there.....
Really? 5+ ERA middle relievers with mediocre stuff get a lot more than .275, 25 home run third basemen? And by your logic, Bobby Abreu must be pretty worthless considering he couldn't cut it with the Astros.
Not a good trade. We already have a third baseman who is better than Wigginton; his name is Mike Lamb. If Lamb was made the everyday starter you could expect .295 25HR 90 RBI type numbers.
im not too mad that we traded wheeler, i just think if we traded qualls instead, we would have gotten alot more in return from another team. wheeler has had 5 bad outings, and they were all in the month of june. he seems to be back on track. i think getting someone else in return for qualls would have been better and we wouldnt lose too much as far as the bullpen impact goes.
What money? Wheeler makes less than Wigginton and they have effectively released Ensberg and will probably be eating the remainder of his salary.
