%20%20--%3E%0A%3Csvg%20version%3D%221.1%22%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20xmlns%3Axlink%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F1999%2Fxlink%22%20x%3D%220px%22%20y%3D%220px%22%0A%09%20viewBox%3D%220%200%201055.1%20200%22%20style%3D%22enable-background%3Anew%200%200%201055.1%20200%3B%22%20xml%3Aspace%3D%22preserve%22%3E%0A%3Cstyle%20type%3D%22text%2Fcss%22%3E%0A%09.st0%7Bfill%3A%23231F20%3B%7D%0A%09.st1%7Bfill%3A%230E203C%3B%7D%0A%09.st2%7Bfill%3A%23EC4324%3B%7D%0A%09.st3%7Bfill%3A%23FFFFFF%3B%7D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0A%3Cg%20id%3D%22Template%22%3E%0A%3C%2Fg%3E%0A%3Cg%20id%3D%22Layer_2%22%3E%0A%09%3Cpath%20class%3D%22st3%22%20d%3D%22M58.3%2C200.3h82.4c12.4%2C0%2C21.7-1.5%2C28-4.5c20.2-9.6%2C30.2-26.1%2C30.2-49.3c0-3.2-0.2-9.3-0.6-18.3h-65.1v14.9%0A%09%09c-0.9%2C3.9-3.4%2C5.8-7.5%2C5.8H73.2c-5%2C0-7.5-2.5-7.5-7.5V59.2c0-5%2C2.5-7.5%2C7.5-7.5h52.5c5%2C0%2C7.5%2C2.1%2C7.5%2C6.4v10.8h65.7V55.7%0A%09%09c0-16.3-3.8-28.3-11.4-36.1c-8.8-12.9-24.7-19.3-47.4-19.3H58.9C47%2C0.3%2C38%2C1.7%2C32%2C4.3c-21.3%2C9-32%2C26.1-32%2C51.4v88%0A%09%09c0%2C16.5%2C3.6%2C28.7%2C10.9%2C36.6C20.1%2C193.7%2C35.9%2C200.3%2C58.3%2C200.3z%22%2F%3E%0A%09%3Cpolygon%20class%3D%22st3%22%20points%3D%22596.6%2C64%20596.6%2C0.8%20400.1%2C0.8%20400.1%2C64%20442.7%2C64%20442.7%2C51.3%20466.1%2C51.3%20466.1%2C148.1%20442.1%2C148.1%20%0A%09%09442.1%2C199.9%20554.8%2C199.9%20554.8%2C148.1%20531.5%2C148.1%20531.5%2C51.4%20554.8%2C51.4%20554.8%2C64%20%09%22%2F%3E%0A%09%3Cpolygon%20class%3D%22st3%22%20points%3D%22942.4%2C148.5%20942.4%2C200.2%201055.1%2C200.2%201055.1%2C148.5%201031.8%2C148.5%201031.8%2C51.2%201055.1%2C51.2%201055.1%2C0.8%20%0A%09%09943.1%2C0.8%20943.1%2C51.3%20966.3%2C51.3%20966.3%2C80%20888.9%2C80%20888.9%2C51.3%20912.6%2C51.3%20912.6%2C0.5%20800.1%2C0.8%20800.1%2C51.4%20823.5%2C51.4%20823.5%2C148.6%20%0A%09%09800.1%2C148.6%20800.1%2C200.1%20912.6%2C200.1%20912.6%2C148.6%20888.9%2C148.6%20888.9%2C116.4%20966.3%2C116.4%20966.3%2C148.5%20%09%22%2F%3E%0A%09%3Cpolygon%20class%3D%22st2%22%20points%3D%22315.5%2C83.9%20299.6%2C34.9%20283.7%2C83.9%20232.2%2C83.9%20273.9%2C114.1%20258%2C163.1%20299.6%2C132.8%20341.3%2C163.1%20%0A%09%09325.4%2C114.1%20367%2C83.9%20%09%22%2F%3E%0A%09%3Cpolygon%20class%3D%22st2%22%20points%3D%22715.6%2C83.9%20699.7%2C34.9%20683.8%2C83.9%20632.3%2C83.9%20674%2C114.1%20658%2C163.1%20699.7%2C132.8%20741.3%2C163.1%20%0A%09%09725.4%2C114.1%20767.1%2C83.9%20%09%22%2F%3E%0A%3C%2Fg%3E%0A%3C%2Fsvg%3E%0A)
4 bad Astros contracts they will regret having on their books this offseason
The Houston Astros have some contracts on their books that are...less than optimal.
The Houston Astros have some interesting choices to make this offseason to be sure. While the 2024 roster should have a lot of familiar faces, this is a Houston team that could use some upgrades and depth on their pitching staff as well as potentially an outfielder. Certainly not an extensive shopping list, but enough to keep Dana Brown busy this offseason.
However, the Astros' payroll situation does present a bit of a problem. Owner Jim Crane isn't exactly known for being a free spender and Houston is already projected to exceed the luxury tax in 2024. That could obviously change once contract option decisions are made, but the fact remains that Houston probably won't have a ton of money to work with and a lot of that is unfortunately on them.
Here are 4 bad contracts the Houston Astros will regret having on their books this offseason
Just to be clear, these are not contracts that were necessarily mistakes to give out at the time, although a couple of them were certainly questionable. These are simply deals that are taking up valuable payroll space right now that do not seem likely to give the return on investment that Houston would want especially going into an offseason where they have some needs to address if they want to keep their competitive window open. It also isn't a lock that these guys will be bad players in 2024 especially given the raw talent some of them have.
Let's take a look at four Astros contracts that are going to make this coming offseason all the more difficult.
Rafael Montero
When the Astros signed Rafael Montero to a three year, $34.5 million deal after the 2022 season, he was coming off a fantastic season where he posted a 2.37 ERA in 71 appearances. He missed a bunch of bats, had a reasonable walk rate, and there weren't any pitching peripherals that indicated that what he was doing was smoke and mirrors. If he was truly THAT guy, $11.5 million a year isn't completely unreasonable for a bullpen arm of that quality when looking at the market.
However, 2023 was a disaster for Montero. In 68 appearances with the Astros this past season, Montero put up a 5.08 ERA with a 4.46 FIP and getting to that point required him to have a good second half. Some of that was bad luck on balls in play as evidenced by his underperformance of his FIP, but he still wasn't anywhere close to the 2022 version of himself.
In hindsight, this deal was always a bit questionable given Montero's track record. He had never appeared in more than 44 games in a season before 2022 and before that magical season, he averaged a 5.18 ERA during his time with the Mets, Rangers, and Mariners. Rafael also has always been a perennial underachiever when it comes to his FIP which could be indicative of a more fundamental problem beyond "bad luck".
This is a cautionary tale that buying into one good season for a reliever that is already north of 30 years old isn't a great idea. Now, Houston is stuck paying him $11.5 million for the next two seasons and that money would have gone a long way to beefing up the rest of the roster.
Lance McCullers Jr.
This is a tough one because, on balance, Lance McCullers Jr.'s contract extension was a good idea when it was signed back in 2021. Houston penned him to a five year, $85 million deal despite the fact that he had to have Tommy John surgery and missed the 2019 season. When he has been on the mound, the results have been very good and Lance clearly wanted to be in Houston.
The problem, of course, has been his health. Aside from his Tommy John surgery which shouldn't be a dealbreaker in this day and age, McCullers Jr. has never exactly been an innings workhorse. His career high for innings in a season by a mile was 2021 where he threw 162.1 innings and finished in the top 7 in Cy Young voting with the next closest mark being 128.1 innings in 2018.
Lance's tendency to be dinged up has proven to be problematic since 2021. Again, the results were still good when he was on the mound as he had a 2.27 ERA in his eight starts in 2022, but arm troubles limited him to those eight starts and he was out for all of 2023 after having surgery to repair his troublesome flexor tendon and to take out a bone spur in his throwing elbow.
Could McCullers Jr. come back in 2024 and be good enough to justify the $17 million is going to make next year? Absolutely. However, betting on him staying healthy may not be the wisest decision and that is a lot of payroll space being taken up by a big question mark.
Jose Abreu
So the good news here is that Jose Abreu seemingly got back on track during the 2023 playoffs. In 11 games during the 2023 playoffs, Abreu posted a .945 OPS with four homers and was a big reason why Houston was able to advance to the ALCS at all this year. He was exactly the guy that Houston wanted when they brought him in on a three year deal before the season.
The problem was, well, the rest of the 2023 season didn't exactly instill a lot of confidence. Battling back issues for most of the season, Abreu's first season with the Astros did not go well as he slashed .237/.296/.383 with 18 homers which was easily the worst season of his career up to this point. You will not struggle to find Astros fans that were clamoring for Abreu to be jettisoned before Houston's postseason run.
Look, the guy was battling an injury and that does explain a crummy season. Abreu also seems like a decent enough guy who is loved in the clubhouse and who was working hard to get himself right. However, he was also always going to be 36 years old for the the entirety of the 2023 season and old power bats who have already seen their power dip (he had just 15 homers in 2022) are a risky demographic.
Houston placed their bet and now have to hope that the $19.5 million a year they are paying Jose the next two seasons doesn't come back to bite them when they are trying to get extensions or moves done this offseason.
Justin Verlander
This is a big one and it also isn't the easiest one to parse as a problem contract. When Houston managed to re-acquire Justin Verlander at the trade deadline, it was a surprisingly aggressive move from Dana Brown who openly decried the inflated prices on the trade market (and rightly so). However, with the injuries to the Astros' rotation and where they were in the standings, it was nice to see Brown act with some urgency to give the team a real boost.
Moreover, Verlander gave the Astros exactly what they needed. He posted a 3.31 ERA in 11 starts with the Astros after the trade deadline which is nothing to sneeze at. Verlander was also good in the postseason with a 2.95 ERA in his three starts. Again, no issues there.
The problem is that Verlander is clearly not the same pitcher he once was and is going to be 41 years old next season. His stuff has already declined significantly and, most importantly, he is making over $43 million next season and his $35 million option for 2025 has already vested. The Mets sending over a decent chunk of money in the trade that brought him back helps a good bit, but that is still a lot of money tied up in a guy in the twilight of his career.
Does Verlander have another good season or two in him? Maybe, maybe not. However, there is some real opportunity cost in having so much tied up in one aging guy and those resources may have been better spent on someone else or even multiple guys. Hindsight is 20/20, but this one could be rough over the next couple of years.
More Astros News from Climbing Tal's Hill
manual