Four Questions The Winter Meetings Raised for the Astros
Can they maintain the 5-year rule on signings? Jose Abreu or Josh Bell? What characteristics does Crane want in his new GM? What's the reputation of the front office?
Baseball’s Winter Meetings, the annual business meeting and trade show for the sport that turns into the biggest week for offseason moves, came and went this week.
It was uneventful in most ways for the Astros, as the team did not sign a player or make a trade this week. Justin Verlander did sign with the Mets, but the choice to sign Jose Abreu and Rafael Montero made it likely they would not re-sign Verlander. The front office is shifting its financial resources from its deep rotation to cover holes in the batting lineup.
But even with the lack of moves made by the Astros, there were several stories that happened at the Winter Meetings that touch on the Astros. They raise important questions, especially about the long-term future of the team.
Can The Astros Maintain Their “Five-Year Rule?”
The big story of the Winter Meetings was not just the size of the contracts given out to some of the most prominent free agents, but the length. Trea Turner and Xander Bogaerts both got 11 year deals; Aaron Judge got a 9-year deal, and Brandon Nimmo was signed for 8 future seasons.
The extra years (especially on the Turner and Bogaerts contracts) seem to be away to reduce the annual luxury tax hit on each year of the contract, and the last two or three years of each contract seems more like deferred payments (though these payments come with a roster spot attached).
The approach of adding on extra years to a contract stands in opposition to the implied rule that the Astros front office has maintained over the last decade—they will not offer contracts that go over 5 years of free agency. Jim Crane covered 5 years of free agency for Jose Altuve when the team signed him to an extension in 2018 (it runs through 2024). And they have not given out a contract with a longer length.
Those who sought longer term contracts—Gerrit Cole, George Springer, Carlos Correa—were allowed to seek those contracts in free agency. Those who were willing to take shorter term extensions—Altuve, Alex Bregman, Yordan Alvarez—were signed to contracts.
Can the Astros maintain their unofficial 5-year rule in the face of other teams signing players to longer and longer contracts? If players know they can get paid big (though not huge) dollars through their 40th birthday, will they be willing to take shorter deals that make them free agents in their early 30s like Bregman and Alvarez did?
The Astros have a number of star players entering their arbitration years, and who seem prime extension candidates—Cristian Javier, Kyle Tucker, and Framber Valdez. Their agents have to be happy to see the free agent market heat up this offseason. It makes him worth more money in his next contract.
If the Astros maintain their adherence to the five-year rule, it is likely that the players (especially Tucker) will find a longer term contract elsewhere when they reach free agency. Of course, the Astros track record of replacing players who leave via free agency gives one confidence they could survive this. Another attitude one could have is not to worry about it. These three are all Astros for several more playoff runs.
Should The Astros Have Signed Josh Bell Instead of Jose Abreu?
The Astros had a hole at first base and addressed it earlier this offseason by signing Jose Abreu to a 3 year/$19.5M per year contract. Josh Bell was the most likely alternative to signing Abreu. Bell signed instead with the Guardians for one less year and $3 million less a year.
Are the Astros better off with Abreu? Obviously, the front office thinks so. The Guardians and the Padres both offered Abreu three-year contracts as well, and Houston won out.
And history tells them that they are right. Abreu has a career slash line of .292/.354/.506 for an .860 OPS & 134 OPS+. Bell is behind Abreu in each category--.262/.351/.459 for an .810 OPS and 120 OPS+. Advantage Abreu.
One big difference between these two players is the pandemic-shortened 2020 season. Bell had a dreadful season, posting -0.5 bWAR. Abreu had a great season; he won the AL’s MVP award.
But since then, it’s still advantage Abreu. He has put up a slash line of .284/.365/.463 over the last 2 seasons; that’s an .827 OPS and 129 OPS+. He’s been worth 7.2 bWAR. Bell has slashed .264/.355/.448 for an .802 OPS and a 126 OPS+. Bell has been worth 6.1 bWAR.
These numbers are close but there is a consistent edge for Abreu. Abreu’s biggest deficit to Bell is in age. Abreu will turn 36 in January while Bell turned 30 in the season. But the age gap may be made up for by durability. Bell has played in 300 games over the last 2 seasons and made 1215 plate appearances. Abreu has played in 309 games and made 1338 plate appearances, 123 more than Bell.
What is Jim Crane Looking for In a New General Manager?
On Tuesday, the Houston Chronicle published an interview columnist Jerome Solomon did with owner Jim Crane. We learned a little about Crane’s thoughts on why he decided to move on from James Click as genera manager and what Crane wants in his new general manager, But the key word in that sentence is little. Solomon was not all that interested in the topic, and placed it at the end of his column.
Solomon wrote that “Crane says their issue was simply a difference in management styles.” What were those differences? Why did Crane think those differences were more important than being successful at winning baseball games? Why couldn’t Crane adjust to Click’s “management style?” I think these are important questions to answer, particularly in understanding how Crane wants to improve on Click. Solomon did not.
Solomon does relay one quote from Crane about Click. ““He did a lot of good things and made some good moves. He is a smart guy.”
That’s not much insight into why Crane upended such a successful franchise.
Turning to the search for Click’s replacement, Crane gave some boiler plate quotes. “I’m a CEO. I like to know how everything runs and what everybody’s doing. I kinda know how baseball works. And I try to get the best information before making decisions.”
But Solomon provided a few bread crumbs, writing that “[t]he next Astros general manager could be in-house, but there is no leader in the clubhouse.” And that Crane says “his new GM could be someone from what he describes as the ‘Analytics Age.’”
One the one hand, that quote could be worrisome. The Astros have succeeded over the last six years by being one of the most analytically inclined teams in baseball, and looking to push the cutting edge, particularly in player development. It would be worrisome if the next GM wasn’t from the “Analytics Age.”
On the other hand, this isn’t a direct quote and could be highly subject to Solomon’s interpretation of whatever Crane said. Solomon is a generalist and, to the best of my knowledge, has never focused on analytics in his understanding of baseball. So his writing may just reflect his rudimentary understanding of baseball analytics. After all, it would be hard to hire a GM these days who isn’t part of the “analytics age,” since it’s been going on for over 40 years in specialized media and over 25 years in baseball front offices.
Overall, the interview with Crane leaves those of us trying to understand where the front office is going in the future with almost as many questions as we had before the interview.
What Do Baseball People Think About the Astros GM Job?
Speaking of the Astros general manager job, one of the opinions I have expressed since Crane let Click go is that move reduced the value of the Astros GM job across the world of baseball.
And so it was encouraging to read this tweet from former Astros beat writer Jose de Jesus Ortiz.
Some of the people that Ortiz spoke to in San Diego think the job is valuable. But it still leaves a lot of questions. Are the people Ortiz spoke to among the Top 30 baseball executives in the world (probably not), or do they have influence with those people (more likely)? Did these “baseball officials” bring the Astros job up to Ortiz (that would be promising) or did Ortiz bring it up and their responses were thus based on trying to please the questioner (less promising)?
Another piece was less sunny in its opinion of the Astros front office. Patrick Mooney and Britt Ghiroli of The Athletic talked to a number of agents and reported their quotes, though these agents were “granted anonymity to feely share their thoughts.”
The authors asked a number of questions about the business of the game and its top teams. Among the eleven questions was this one: “The Astros won another World Series after their cheating scandal, and then owner Jim Crane fired GM James Click. How would you describe Houston’s operation?”
The responses were less positive than the ones that Ortiz reported.
“Unconventional.”
“Unstable.”
“You hear about how the Astros had a chance to acquire (Willson) Contreras from the Cubs and Crane comes in and vetoes that deal…It’s mind-blowing to me that you’d want to get involved at that level (as an owner).”
“Houston does not run their team with emotion. Their ownership group runs it like a business. And when I say business, I mean a cutthroat business. James [Click] did a really good job, obviously, but they feel like they can plug somebody else in there and win. And they might not be wrong.”
““Can I say clusterf—? This is The Athletic, so yes, right? They’re a clusterf—. But they’re too talented for Jim Crane to mess up, and they will be for a while.”
“Jim Crane really runs the show, anyway. But I think they’re going to be fine. They got a great f—ing team. Their pitching is just ridiculous.”
While these two reports seem to be contradictory (and certainly were treated that way by Astros fans responding to them on Twitter), reading them in detail allows one to find a synthesis between the two.
Baseball officials have great respect for the Astros talent, and they find that the way Jim Crane runs the team is domineering, different, and could be a turn-off. They know the team will be successful on the field and the chaos in the front office will not change that.
Will that be enough to chase away an effective GM to replace James Click? Again, the fact that our team wins might be enough to lure one in. Or the fact that running the team without emotion means one can lose their job even after winning the World Series may mean that Crane will only be able to attract a lesser quality GM.
If you look at the Click firing like you would a divorce, it makes a lot more sense. If you've got unreconcilable differences, it doesn't matter if you just won Couple of the Year. And, frankly, I know people love a good train wreck but I prefer a quiet divorce to one where all the dirty laundry gets aired. Those journalists that hate the Astros love to pour more fuel on the fire. I could care less what a bunch of agents think of Crane's management style. I've been following the Astros since the Astrodome opened. I waited a LONG time for that first WS appearance only to see the team get swept. Crane has delivered. Plenty of good GM's will want the job. The Click firing may make them leery and they'll have their own questions but they'll interview for the job. There are only 30 GM jobs. The only one open right now is with the team that just won the WS and haven't missed the playoffs since 2016. No candidate that's interested is going to pass because Click got fired.