Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Would firing Ed Wade be popular?

Richard Justice's new offering says that (presumable) new owner Jim Crane's first decision has to be about Ed Wade, and that firing him would be "popular," but might not be the right thing to do, and then makes a case for why Wade should stay:

Regardless of whether Wade is around the next few years or not, someone is going to benefit from the unseen good work he has done. If he’s gone by then, here’s hoping someone remembers he did his part.

I'm not so sure it would be a popular move. I don't know how the mind of the casual fan works, but it's pretty clear that there are some exciting things about the farm system that had been sorely lacking for some years. Maybe the casual fan doesn't see that. Who knows? I'm not a casual fan. And I'm guessing you aren't, either, or you wouldn't be here.

But it's important to note that Wade has a contract through 2012, and getting rid of him would cost some money. Of course, if you're about to drop $680m, what's another couple of million to get the guy you want?


Eric said...

I think more casual fans see how abysmal the team has been since Ed Wade took over and want him fired.

As a more devoted fan, I see the improvement in the minors but wonder how much of that is Ed Wade versus how much is Bobby Heck. Also, to what extent would the minors have improved regardless of who the GM was, because they were so awful when he came in. Even though they have improved, could they be improved even more by someone else?

While Richard Justice focuses on Ed Wade's contributions to rebuilding the minors, he ignores Ed Wade's disasterous free agent signings. More than anything, it's giving contracts to people like Kaz Matsui, Pedro Feliz and Bill Hall that should have Jim Crane wondering if he's the right guy.

There's also legitimate questions about whether he got enough for Roy Oswalt and Lance Berkman. Cleveland is in first place right now because of what they got back when they traded away their star players. I don't think at this point one can say the Astros put themselves in a similar position with last season's moves.

Ed Wade may be better than the Astros' record indicates, but there's plenty to justify letting him go. I'll bet the next Andrew Friedman/Jon Daniels type is out there waiting for an opportunity to turn around a bad team like the Astros. Jim Crane should find that guy.

Anonymous said...

I wish someone would explain the Bobby Heck lovefest. After two or three drafts under Heck, the Astros minor league system is Jordan Lyles and everyone else, and even Lyles isn't all that special (i.e., mostly seen as a No. 3 starter).

Anonymous said...

Agreed all the Bobby Heck lover boys come from MLBtraderumors where Ed Wade is a very dirty word. Mike Arbuckle and Bobby Heck should get all the credit even though the boss Ed Wade hired him.

I like Ed Wade, but I like Andrew Friedmann more.

BTW, the casual fan here is just as much of an idiot as Richard Justice, so he would know how the casual fan feels by looking in the mirror.

Anonymous said...

Eric, I don't see what questions about the Oswalt/Berkman trades you are referring to. We received more in WAR for Oswalt than Johan Santana, CC Sabathia, and Cliff Lee netted when traded. Berkman netted us Paredes and Melancon (our closer and a guy known as the heir-apparent to Mariano before traded to Houston.)

Ed Wade makes questionable free agent signings, but who doesn't? Many GMs make bad FA moves, plus Wade has to overpay guys to compete with other clubs (i.e. Brandon Lyon, Kaz Matsui and Bill Hall.)

All I'm saying is, the Ed Wade hate comes from upset Philly fans who hated him before they won World Series and kept hating him just to keep themselves from looking like hypocrites and losing pride because of being wrong.

Anonymous said...

Weren't there a bunch of comments here re: Ed Wade, Bobby Heck, etc.? What happened?