Royals and Hudson agree to $500K deal

by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 1:49 PM EST

Genuine Royals baseball news in January is pretty rare and often not exceptionally interesting. This is one such story:

The Royals and pitcher Luke Hudson agreed on a one-year deal worth a little more than $500,000 on Tuesday, avoiding arbitration.

It's a raise from the $422,000 Hudson made in 2007 when a shoulder injury limited him to just one start. Hudson underwent surgery in June but is expected to be recovered enough to compete in spring training.

"When he's healthy, he's got some pretty dynamic stuff," Royals general manager Dayton Moore said. "The quality of his pitches is very good. We're counting on him coming in here and competing for a job."

The Royals have seven players still facing arbitration: John Buck, Jorge De La Rosa, Esteban German, Ross Gload, Jimmy Gobble, Zack Greinke and Mark Teahen.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/royals/story/436601.html

My generous arbitration estimate for Hudson was $700K, so I'm glad to see him settle for less than that. For what it's worth, here are my generous arbitration estimates for the remaining players:

Buck - $1M
De La Rosa - $800K
German - $700K
Gload - $1.3M
Gobble - $1.2M
Greinke - $1M
Teahen - $1.6M

I tried to make these estimates fairly generous so that I wouldn't overestimate how much money the Royals had remaining for free agents. By the way, the Royals current payroll (including these estimates) is $59.7M, which would leave $7.3M to get the payroll up to last year's $67M total major league payroll.

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

looks like a bargain

by royalsreview on Jan 9, 2008 12:58 AM EST 0 recs

He's good back-of-the-rotation depth

If healthy, he may well end up in the rotation. I still think he'd make a better starter for the Royals than Bale.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 1:08 AM EST 0 recs

Agreed

Bale does not excite me at all, and Hudson while not exciting has been pretty consistant (prior to his injury)

I'd rather be watching baseball.

by Sisquatch Kids on Jan 9, 2008 12:24 PM EST up 0 recs

He looked pretty good

two years ago. I'm all for giving him a shot, especially at that price. I did want to ask a question though. Does De La Rosa have trade value? A lefty with good stuff can usually bring something back in return, but George is so hot and cold. Does he have any trade value if packaged with a Dejesus, Gathright, or (insert your favorite trade chip here)?

by royaldaddy on Jan 9, 2008 1:33 AM EST 0 recs

De La Rosa has some trade value

But until he puts together one decent season, that value is going to be low. We could trade him right now for a similarly iffy player with talent but who has been short on major league results. He could also be a throw-in on a bigger trade involving DeJesus or someone else.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 2:21 AM EST up 0 recs

He'd be a good throw in

on a trade, I agree. In that deal, he might net a better player. On his own, he might net an A Ball pitcher or so.

by lordbyronk on Jan 9, 2008 11:43 AM EST up 0 recs

I agree, De la Rosa would be good trade bait,

but he would sold low right now. If he can have another good spring he might be moved for more quality in June. But then again, if he has another good spring everyone in KC will be optimistic about him all over again.

Even the 5.50 ERA De la Rosa is still a passable #4 starter, and actually above league average in the #5 hole. But the Royals can't be satisfied with results like this indefinitely if they really hope to build a winner in KC.

I can't figure out De la Rosa. I started to write a Decision Time diary about him but I just couldn't make it worth reading. I've got nothing. Maybe it is time to send him to the pen and see if he can trip over the same magic rock that Grenkie found there.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 9, 2008 12:02 PM EST up 0 recs

I think

Its time to cut bait on DLR. I think we should send him to Omaha. I know he's out of options, but I don't think there's a great danger in losing him on waivers, and even if we do, oh well.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 9, 2008 12:32 PM EST up 0 recs

I don't see a reason to spend the 7.3 million

just to get to last years payroll. They tried and failed to get many of this years big free agents. Part of that will probably go to a rehabbing pitcher with a contract full of clauses. I say save it and boost nest years pay roll to 75-80 million. Also I agree with you about the Royals news in January.

by TXroyal on Jan 9, 2008 2:00 AM EST 0 recs

Never spend just to spend

We should only spend money if it is smart to do so. The Royals definitely can use one more starting pitcher. Right now, a pool of not great pitchers would be competing for two rotation spots. And, as I pointed out in another diary, most teams end up giving about 30 starts to guys out of their top 5, so every team really needs to go 6-deep with their starting pitchers.

So, the Royals need a starting pitcher, hopefully for a one-year deal. There are many decent second tier FA options out there. Any of them would likely improve the team and help prevent us from rushing someone like Hochevar.

And, for what it's worth, given the nature of the Royals large and increasing revenues, I wouldn't be surprised if next year's payroll is in the $80-85M range.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 2:18 AM EST up 0 recs

I like it

Cheap and low risk.

"I'm tired of all these stupid a$$ questions every day. Why the f**k would I hit Brett for Miller?" The rest is history.

by DC Royal on Jan 9, 2008 10:26 AM EST 0 recs

I like Huddy

I'm a Hudson fan - he strikes me as a bit of an intellect, at least moreso than your average jock.

But we can't really count on him for anything. If he's healthy and can contribute great, but to be honest, I'd rather see what your younger arms can do in the rotation. Hope he doesn't mind pitching in long relief.

But I agree, good low risk, high reward signing.

Supposedly Dayton was on Roger Twibell's show this morning saying that they plan on majorly investing in Latin America this winter, saying something to the effect that just because we spend $600k on a Latin guy and he doesn't pan out, doesn't mean we shouldn't keep doing it.

He also said he really wants to add one more starting pitcher and singled out Jon Lieber as a guy he liked.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 9, 2008 10:45 AM EST 0 recs

Latin American investment

That is exactly what the team should do rather than wasting the money on Kris Benson, Steve Trachsel, or Jeff Weaver.

Lieber on a cheap, short-term deal would not be a bad idea either.

by Gopherballs on Jan 9, 2008 11:35 AM EST up 0 recs

Hudson

would be fine in the back part of the rotation or as a long reliever/spot starter. This is a great deal for KC. The key for Hudson is staying healthy.

by lordbyronk on Jan 9, 2008 11:44 AM EST 0 recs

I am glad Hudson was retained on the 40-man

roster. He is a very good organizational depth type of pitcher. He was the best Royals starting pitcher in 2006. If he can repeat that performance in 2008 he will be a league average #3 starter. That might be on the optimistic side, but not beyond reason.

I guess the starting pitching depth chart going into Spring training will look like this?
Meche
Bannister
Grenkie
Bale (?, I think so unless the Royals sign a FA)
Hochevar
De la Rosa
Davies
Hudson
Nunez (Maybe he should be moved up? I expect AAA in April.)
Duckworth
Wright

Does that look about right? Not too bad. I went ten deep before I ran out of realistic options. Plus Soria and Gobble both could be moved into the rotation if Hillman wants to roll the dice with them.

When it comes to building a pitching staff, Moore knows what he is doing.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM EST 0 recs

My guesses

NY, you might be right, but I suspect those arb-eligable Royals will win somewhat higher awards than you suspect. Who knows, by just for fun, my guesses:

Buck will break a million.

De La Rosa, who knows? $800K sounds good.

German, I think he will go for a bit more than $700K. Remember, arb decisions go back two years and he was great in 2006.

Gload, I bet he hits the $2M range.

Gobble, He was great in 2007. I think he might go for a bit more than the $1.2M you predict, but I bet that is in the ballpark.

Greinke, Tough call. He missed 2006, and I don't know what the arbitration judge will do with that. I've got no insight here. $1M wouldn't surprise me, but then again, neither would $700K, or $1.5M.

Teahen, I think you are going low on Teahen at $1.6M. Remember, Emil got $1.8M his first year and he did not have the same track record as Teahen. I bet this one is over $2M. I'll stick my neck out and predict $2.4M. I'll stick my neck out further and predict that Moore sinks some of that extra cash into signing Teahen to a LTD that makes everyone in KC happy.

It will be an interesting few weeks as these deals are announced. If any go to a hearing I think the most likely one will be De la Rosa. Strong cases can be made for him being a passable back end starter and for him holding on to his spot on the roster by his finger nails.

Rock Chalk Talk for pretty good KU College Baseball Coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 9, 2008 12:15 PM EST 0 recs

Agreed

I think Dayton really likes Mark Teahen, so I wouldn't be surprised either to see him signed to something like a 4 year, $20 million extension. Would it be money well spent? I guess that entirely depends on whether or not he improves on last season. If he can be a .290/.360/.450 player, then yeah, that's money very well spent.

by dman126 on Jan 9, 2008 1:07 PM EST up 0 recs

I would love to see that

and go into 2008 with the players that we have. We need to keep the core together as long as possible.

by lordbyronk on Jan 9, 2008 1:13 PM EST up 0 recs

We'll see what happens

From everything I've read, arbitration decisions go more by counting stats than averages. So the number of plate appearances or innings pitched a player has had is extremely important. This really hurts the arbitration awards for part-time players. Playing time is going to limit the awards of players like this:

German (627 AB, 7 HR, 80 RBI in the last two years)
Gload (476 AB, 10 HR, 125 RBI)
De La Rosa (209 IP, 13-18)
Greinke (128.1 IP, (8-7, 1 save)

You may be right about Buck going over $1M, but probably not by much. You may also be right about Teahen getting up to $2M, but I doubt it goes over that. We'll see.

I probably disagree with you.

by NYRoyal on Jan 9, 2008 2:11 PM EST up 0 recs

Hudson+Grienke

Hudson
Definitely a bargain on him there, if healthy.

Grienke
I imagine he gets more then $1M after the season he had in 2007.

The internet's latest attempt at understanding what is going on inside baseball

by bheikoop on Jan 9, 2008 12:26 PM EST 0 recs

Hold Glass Accountable in 2009 and beyond

It's all well and good if the Royals don't spend the excess budget money this year, especially since to do so may not be worthwhile.

HOWEVER, I sure hope the Star (and everybody else) REMINDS Mr Glass of the same come the 08 and 09 off-seasons.

As an accountant, I can tell you budgeting on a yearly basis MAKES NO SENSE IN THIS INDUSTRY!
Think about it - entry level salaries are more or less fixed, but the huge majority of your payroll costs are spreadout over typically 3-5 years, because that is the normal contract length for the higher dollar players. I would budget based on a 4 year cycle, thus giving the GM the flexibility he needs.

by loyal2s dad on Jan 9, 2008 1:50 PM EST 0 recs

Agreed

The Diamondbacks recently went to a 3 year budget, which seems to make more sense, since like you said, most contracts are in the 3-5 year range, I'm surprised more teams dont do this

I may be drunk, but tomorrow I will be sober and you, ma'am, will still be ugly. - Winston Churchill

by fats on Jan 9, 2008 5:42 PM EST up 0 recs