 |
| We shall see if the hat fits |
The Astros signed centerfielder Preston Wilson today to a deal that will run at least one year, but could last as long as four.
Wilson played last year for Colorado, until the last-place Rockies ditched him for salary reasons, and prospects, to the Nationals.
You may remember him, as I do, striking out in key situations during several matchups between the wild card-contending Nats and our beloved '05 Astros.
Wilson can punish a poor fastball, but good heat makes him wilt, and superior breaking stuff can get him, too. Worse, he does not bring any significant plate discipline to the table. The Astros could use some power -- what team couldn't?-- but where they are really substandard is in OBP, and Wilson won't help there.
Of the 41 National Leaguers who drove in 72 or more in 2005, Wilson ranked 36th in OBP and 32nd in BB/(AB+BB). (To show the difference between Wilson and two of our favorite players to pine over, I'll simply note that Brian Giles finished first of those 41, and Adam Dunn finished second.) People may look at Wilson and say that strikeouts are overrated, and I'd agree, if you walk a lot.
Wilson does not.
If I were Jason Lane, I'd have a bad feeling about the signing of Wilson, even though he did outslug Wilson by 32 points. The Astros have never given the underconfident Lane the space he's needed to really grow into the role many Astro fans have foreseen for him, and this may be the club's way of shortchanging him again. Yes, it's true that Lane had a worse OBP than Wilson, but I might reply that the 31-year old Wilson is unlikely to improve in that area, while Lane, 2-1/2 years Wilson's junior, is.
At any rate, I think it's more likely that Lane becomes a fourth outfielder again, while Burke stays in left and Taveras in center. Less likely, Burke is traded. Burke improved streadily through 2005 and even if the Astros ultimately plan on moving Burke, they probably see 2006 as his showcase year, and figure it foolish to trade him before he can be displayed.
While Taveras is not entrenched, I think that the Astros--rightly, in my mind--would like to continue the Taveras experiment, and see if Willy can take another leap forward, as he did so notably in 2005.
This afternoon, Tim Purpura spoke of adding a run-producing bat to the middle of the order, and the email those of us on their list received proclaimed that the Astros had added a former RBI champ. Both statements are true, while somehow missing the point. You could just as easily say that the Astros have added a bat that will swing and miss a great deal, while it is much harder to win an RBI crown in Houston than in Colorado. And the loyalist in me is screaming that once again a company man has gotten screwed.
I'm sure the first time Wilson connects in the seventh inning of a tie game against a mediocre middle reliever, I will hop enthusiastically aboard the PW-train. That's my nature. The uniform makes me a fan. Hell, I liked Carl Everett when he wore the navy and gold. But to me, today, it seems as if the club has made a move simply because they felt pressure to make one.
What do you think?
0 recs | 4 comments
<AOL>
Me, too.</AOL> The Astros seem to have something against Lane. Part of me thinks that if someone else were my favorite player, the Astros would start hating on him instead of Lane.We already have a number of guys who had over a hundered Ks in 2005. We don't need another one.
Astro Annie - January 3, 2006
I agree
I agree with you. He should fit right in with this free swinging club. But I'll withhold final judgement until we see what else they do. There is bound to be another move. Hopefully.LJ - January 4, 2006
Ouch
No love for Preston, huh? He wasn't top on my wish list, but I think he'll be an upgrade in LEFT FIELD. I personally don't think this means Lane sits, but I could be way off base, and this could also signal more moves to come (letting them dangle Burke, Lane, or Taveras... although I would hate to see any of them go). It seems like we're all assuming that Berkman gets most of his time at 1st, which I think is probably the case. There's a lot of smoke-blowing going on in that article on the official website, but I agree with some of the basic points: that this gives us flexibility with what we can do with our outfield, based on who's healthy, who steps up in spring training, etc., and it adds run production to the middle of our lineup, which was a must for our off-season, in my opinion (particularly if we're holding out hope for Roger's return).littlevisigoth - January 4, 2006
Disagree
Berkman's going to be playing first base more then not. I see Bagwell starting once a series, maybe twice in four-game sets.Seeing as PW can play all three of the outfield slots, I foresee this:
Days when Bagwell plays: Berkman/Wilson/Lane
Days when Bagwell doesn't play: Wilson/Willy/Lane
Bruntlett will take Viz's spot in the roster and Burke will take Bruntlett's old spot. Also, I see Burke entering a lot of the games in the late innings.
I'm hoping that PW will find comfort in our Crawford Boxes. If he does, he'll be a good fit here. Seeing as the Astros felt the need to sign somebody by the fans and probably by Roger, he's probably the best somebody that was left on the FA market.
Furthermore, IMO, it opens up a slightly more quality players that could be possibly be in a trade for Tejada. A Lidge/Lane or Willy/Zeke or Wandy trade could be quite enticing. Then it leaves Everett to be traded to the Bosox since a quality SS is something they need badly.
saylinara - January 5, 2006
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of The Crawfish Boxes to post a comment.