One of the more curious developments thus far into the offseason is the Houston Astros’ interest in paying big money to a free agent reliever. The team was linked to Andrew Miller before the left-hander signed with the Yankees, and was also reportedly pursuing closer David Robertson before he agreed to a deal with the White Sox.
For a club committed to the slow build and applying sabermetric principles to long-term roster construction, this is a strange turn of events for the Astros’ front office. Houston did improve by 19 games last season, avoiding 100 losses for the first time in the past four years. But while the A’s are trading themselves out of contention for 2015, do the Astros really have the goods to stay ahead of the Rangers and compete with the Mariners and Angels in the AL West?
If the answer to that question is no, does it make much sense to invest so heavily in a closer, a player who will contribute 65 to 70 innings at best and likely have fewer save opportunities for an Astros team that figures to have a lesser number of leads to protect?
According to MLB.com’s Brian McTaggart, Houston offered a four-year, $40 million deal to Miller — more than the $36 million package he eventually accepted from the Yankees. Robertson agreed to a four-year, $46 million contract with the White Sox. It’s not known if the Astros’ offer exceeded that — perhaps something closer to the $52 million Robertson was originally seeking — but another top free agent reliever opted to sign with a contender, rather than take more money.
Looking at Houston’s bullpen last season, it’s apparent why general manager Jeff Luhnow feels the need to make a drastic addition. Astros relievers finished last in MLB with a collective 4.80 ERA. A .260 opponents batting average and .741 OPS also ranked among the bottom five teams in baseball. No team blew more saves than the Astros last season, squandering 26 opportunities. Only the Rockies blew a higher percentage of saves than Houston, which convered 54 percent of its 57 save opportunities.
via Kim Klement-USA TODAY Sports
With that level of performance, maintaining the status quo isn’t an option. Blown leads seemed to be viewed as even more demoralizing for a young team like the Astros, according to new manager A.J. Hinch.
“There’s no doubt that the fastest way to turn a team around is winning games that you’re ahead,” Hinch said in an interview with the Houston Chronicle‘s Evan Drellich. “Demoralizing a team with blown leads are difficult. Now on the flip side of it, if you have a shutdown team and you can’t score runs, that’s not a great way to live, either.”
Hinch’s last comment calls into question why the Astros aren’t looking to boost their offense instead. Houston scored 629 runs last season, ranking 29th out of 30 AL clubs. The Astros also finished last in the league with a .242 team batting average and ninth among AL teams with a .692 OPS.
Houston does have some pop at DH with Chris Carter slugging 37 home runs last season. Rookie George Springer belted 20 homers in just 345 plate appearances. As a team, the Astros actually hit the third-most home runs in the AL with 163. Power may not be the problem. However, the cost of power on the open market likely is an issue.
Look at the kind of money hitters have been getting so far during the offseason. Hanley Ramirez received $88 million from the Red Sox, who also paid $95 million for Pablo Sandoval. Victor Martinez resigned with the Tigers for $68 million. Nelson Cruz cost the Mariners $57 million. The Braves signed Nick Markakis to a $45 million deal. Adam LaRoche got $25 million from the White Sox. Even Torii Hunter signed for $10.5 million.
There’s not another bat left on the free agent market that looks to be an obvious upgrade over left fielder Robbie Grossman, who won’t provide much power but has hit for average during his minor league career and is under club control for another six seasons. Could the Astros pursue a trade for someone like Yoenis Cespedes, Justin Upton, Evan Gattis or Marlon Byrd? Yes, but those players would cost the Astros valued prospects, where a free agent would only cost the team money.
I would argue that the Astros would be better off pursuing a starting pitcher. At least a starter could contribute 160 to 200 innings and help establish those leads that Houston management is apparently so concerned with protecting. But Jon Lester is about to demonstrate that signing an ace-level starter will cost at least $150 million, and Max Scherzer will likely top that by January.
Maybe after the market settles, Houston could pursue a Brandon McCarthy or Brett Anderson type of arm. Yet for a rotation that finished with a 3.82 ERA, ranking ninth among AL teams last season, the Astros may be fine in this area and don’t want to pay the loads of cash it would take to bring in an impact No. 1 starter. And if the team decides it eventually does, it might be better to wait for next winter when the market for starting pitching will be much, much deeper.
So if the Astros are looking to spend some money this winter, that leaves relief pitching as the best option. And if Houston prefers to add a capital-C closer, Sergio Romo, Francisco Rodriguez and Rafael Soriano could fill that role. They could even probably do so at a cheaper price than Miller and Robertson cost.
How Hinch (with Luhnow behind him) chooses to employ a top closer could be fun to watch. Would he keep that guy restricted to the ninth inning or use him more often for four- and five-out appearances? Might he even use that reliever in a high-leverage spot earlier in the game?
It still seems curious that a team like the Astros wouldn’t try to take a chance on someone like Sergio Santos, Jason Motte, or Chris Perez and flip them for prospects at midseason if they re-establish their value. But maybe Luhnow will eventually get there. Or he figures his team is already playing that game with the likes of Jose Veras, Jesse Crain and Chad Qualls. So perhaps it’s time to try something different.
And isn’t something different the least we expect from this Astros team?
