The Astros are on the verge of signing a potential Hall of Famer as a free agent for the second team in a week as baseball sources indicated Tuesday night that they are close to an agreement with right-hander Pedro Martinez.
Martinez pitched for the Dominican Republic in the World Baseball Classic earlier this month and worked three scoreless innings in relief against The Netherlands. He drew limited interest on the free-agent market, though, after going 5-6 with a 5.60 ERA in 20 starts with the Mets last season.
Martinez, 37, has a 214-99 lifetime record in 17 seasons.
The Astros signed free-agent catcher Ivan Rodriguez to a one-year, $1.5-million contract. He also has been using the WBC as a showcase while playing for Puerto Rico.
This (and the Pudge signing) are exactly what a team like the Astros should do. They are bad and have a horrible farm system, but they do have some valuable pieces. Why not try and catch lightning in a bottle at the tail end of Oswalt and Berkman's peak? Chances are it won't work, but it's not like it hurts to try.
Yes, if signing these guys made signing international players or draft picks impossible, they would be bad. But the Astros haven't signed international players, or refused to pay bonuses to draft picks simply because ownership doesn't want to pay for it. Period. Anything else you hear is a lie. Drayton is has gone back to his penny pinching grocer supplying ways, nothing more.
Since the Astros refuse to sign bonsues to draft picks or sign international players, why would one think their management is smart enough to pull off a divison winner? They've been gasping for that lightning-in-a-bottle division win since Phil Garner's turn as manager (and with most of the same players too).
Signing Pedro and Ivan Rodriguez makes sense from an organizational-filler position just because their farm system is so bad, but signing those players does not make them contenders. In addition, if the farm system had been managed better, signing Pedro or Ivan Rodriguez would not even come up.
Not sure we were disagreeing there. I just said that signing Rodriquez or Martinez would block, effectively, nobody. I don't mind the "lightning in a bottle" approach because aside from trading everyone with value (what 5-6 players, maybe, given recent signing money, maybe not) there's not much else to do. Perhaps log a couple of 100 loss seasons to get the top picks, I suppose.
And yes, some of my comments are residual anger at the Astros not signing any top picks2006-2007, because they wanted to hold the line on "slot money" or some other BS. That was a disgrace and bush-league. Teams that paid more than "Selig-approved-but-bears-little-relation-to-reality-slot-money" signed far more valuable talent than their "slot" would have otherwise allowed.
I am happy to hear that Draytron realized that having a farm system was worthwhile after all. I'm glad the Astros, once a pioneer of Latin American player development, are getting back in the game. That's nice. 10 years too late, but nice.
I agree in part, that the moves as organizational filler make sense in a vaccuum. But my argument was the moves make less sense unless the Astros are a contender and I don't think the Astros have a team that can outperform the Cubs, Brewers and Cardinals. Thus, might as well ditch the lightning in a bottle approach (since it didn't work the last few years either), and either spend the money wisely on the draft or save it for a rainy day.
My overall argument, though, was the Astros are poorly run to the point that they didn't have options besides Pudge or Pedro to consider... and now have to find a third baseman to replace Aaron Boone (of all people).
Well, given that Drayton spent a good amount of money after the 1st round last year (drafting Castro was possibly a signability thing, though it could have been about not drafting a guy who would be both quickly ready for the major leagues and blocked by Berkman), and that he put money into renovating the Astros' DR complex and signing Chia Jen-Lo, I think it's reasonable to say that the Astros are beginning to spend money on their farm system again. Perhaps they're not spending as much as they should, but the 2006/2007 years when most of the Astros' higher draft picks were left unsigned are over.
I suppose we'll see what Drayton does in the draft in June. Until then, it's pointless to speculate on how this affects the Astros' system.
I dunno, if Pedro's getting his Smoltz money is this really what the Astros should be doing? In any other division, I'd definitely think not, but in the NL Central adding about 75 years of age to your battery in the form of former studs with a questionable amount left in the tank might just be crazy enough to work.
I'm a Pedro fanboy, but I think his signing makes much more sense.
You're not going to catch lightning in a bottle with Pudge. He is what he is: the same below-average hitter he has been for the past four years. You'd be much more likely catching lightning in a bottle with JR Towles, who, with a year of experience under his belt, might be ready realize the potential he showed in the minors (see: Iannetta, Chris).
I don't think Pedro is really blocking anyone. Felipe Paulino, maybe?
I like it as well. They have a competitive offense, their bullpen is decent. Oswalt, Wandy, Pedro can be a very competitive top 3 starters. Yeah the 4/5 is pretty shaky but this could plausibly make them competitive. If it fails you can flip guys mid season and start the long rebuilding process they will need to do soon.
I think Ed wade is trying to assemble the ultimate 5 years ago team. By this I mean if it were 5 years ago then this team would be the best team in the league. Imagine if Wade could find a way to sign Jeff Kent, Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, and Roger Clemens, it would be the best 5 years ago team in history.
Houston is trying to win 82 games again... if it doesn't catch up with them this year then it will next year. I forsee a 110 loss team either in 2010 or 2011 when everything just falls apart.
The Pedro signing is defensible, but the Pudge signing is not. The Stros need to see what Towles can do. We know what Pudge will do, give you good defense, poor OBP, middling power, lots of GDP. Pedro on the other hand wouldnt be blocking any talented pitchers worth noting in a short contract.
Towles has had a chance, he needs to show something himself. Pudge isn't much of an obstacle if the guy would hit at any level like he did for a little while with Houston. For whatever reason, Towles has not done that. There's a spot for him if he does - Pudge is not expensive, or an obstacle for anyone playing well at the catcher spot, should that person exist in the Houston "system".
By the way, what talented starters would be blocked in Houston by Pedro? I'd be overjoyed to hear there are some. As I understand it, Pedro might cost one of the following immortals a start: Mohler, Hampton (assuming he's not injured already) or Backe.
Right now the battle for the last spot in the rotation is between Russ Ortiz and Capellan, so Pedro would be a much better option than those 2. Actually, Pedro would be the number 3 or 4 starter on this team behind Oswalt and Hampton, maybe Wandy.
I believe there was an article on this site a couple years ago explaining all denial quotes that GM offices and player agents have when discussing free agents or trades. Just because Wade never talked to Pedro doesn't mean he or his office has not talked to his agent.
this signing probably isn't happening. so much so, competing sites are dogging BP for running it. I hope for John's sake he's got the story right. I wouldn't really hold it against him, in the rush to break 'new news' writers are often wrong, see Ken Rosenthal who's still one of the best. from rotoworld, who's wrong about specualtions about 77% of the time:
The Astros said they have had no contact with free agent Pedro Martinez and they will not announce his signing during Wednesday's press conference.
"We have had zero conversations with Pedro," GM Ed Wade said. "I have absolutely no idea where that is coming from." It's coming from Baseball Prospectus, which may have blown it big time by running with this story.
32 comments have been left for this post.
This (and the Pudge signing) are exactly what a team like the Astros should do. They are bad and have a horrible farm system, but they do have some valuable pieces. Why not try and catch lightning in a bottle at the tail end of Oswalt and Berkman's peak? Chances are it won't work, but it's not like it hurts to try.
If you are misallocating monies that would be better spent on international signings and draft picks then you are hurting the franchise.
Yes, if signing these guys made signing international players or draft picks impossible, they would be bad. But the Astros haven't signed international players, or refused to pay bonuses to draft picks simply because ownership doesn't want to pay for it. Period. Anything else you hear is a lie. Drayton is has gone back to his penny pinching grocer supplying ways, nothing more.
Since the Astros refuse to sign bonsues to draft picks or sign international players, why would one think their management is smart enough to pull off a divison winner? They've been gasping for that lightning-in-a-bottle division win since Phil Garner's turn as manager (and with most of the same players too).
Signing Pedro and Ivan Rodriguez makes sense from an organizational-filler position just because their farm system is so bad, but signing those players does not make them contenders. In addition, if the farm system had been managed better, signing Pedro or Ivan Rodriguez would not even come up.
Not sure we were disagreeing there. I just said that signing Rodriquez or Martinez would block, effectively, nobody. I don't mind the "lightning in a bottle" approach because aside from trading everyone with value (what 5-6 players, maybe, given recent signing money, maybe not) there's not much else to do. Perhaps log a couple of 100 loss seasons to get the top picks, I suppose.
And yes, some of my comments are residual anger at the Astros not signing any top picks2006-2007, because they wanted to hold the line on "slot money" or some other BS. That was a disgrace and bush-league. Teams that paid more than "Selig-approved-but-bears-little-relation-to-reality-slot-money" signed far more valuable talent than their "slot" would have otherwise allowed.
I am happy to hear that Draytron realized that having a farm system was worthwhile after all. I'm glad the Astros, once a pioneer of Latin American player development, are getting back in the game. That's nice. 10 years too late, but nice.
I agree in part, that the moves as organizational filler make sense in a vaccuum. But my argument was the moves make less sense unless the Astros are a contender and I don't think the Astros have a team that can outperform the Cubs, Brewers and Cardinals. Thus, might as well ditch the lightning in a bottle approach (since it didn't work the last few years either), and either spend the money wisely on the draft or save it for a rainy day.
My overall argument, though, was the Astros are poorly run to the point that they didn't have options besides Pudge or Pedro to consider... and now have to find a third baseman to replace Aaron Boone (of all people).
Well, given that Drayton spent a good amount of money after the 1st round last year (drafting Castro was possibly a signability thing, though it could have been about not drafting a guy who would be both quickly ready for the major leagues and blocked by Berkman), and that he put money into renovating the Astros' DR complex and signing Chia Jen-Lo, I think it's reasonable to say that the Astros are beginning to spend money on their farm system again. Perhaps they're not spending as much as they should, but the 2006/2007 years when most of the Astros' higher draft picks were left unsigned are over.
I suppose we'll see what Drayton does in the draft in June. Until then, it's pointless to speculate on how this affects the Astros' system.