I posted this yesterday, but it got lost somewhere in Yuku bullshit land, so I'll give it another try.....

The problem with going with hard and fast salary limits for closers is that it doesn't take into account the more pertinent question of what percentage those closers are taking up on the payroll. In general salaries are going up, so 10 million for a closer doesn't seem unreasonable on its face. However, this assumes that overall team payrolls are going up at the rate of inflation (at least baseball's version of inflation). Here are the payroll figures for the Astros since they have moved into MMP.

2008-- 88.93 M. . . . . .3.15. . . . .7.1%. . ..1.3%
2007-- 87.76 M. . . . . .2.94. . . . .2.4%. . ..-5.2%
2006-- 92.55 M. . . . . .2.87. . . . .9.1%. . ..20.5%
2005-- 76.78 M. . . . . .2.63. . . . .5.6%. . ..2.8%
2004-- 74.67 M. . . . . .2.49. . . . .-2.8%. . .-9.3%
2003-- 79.95 M. . . . . .2.56. . . . .7.6%. . ..26.0%
2002-- 63.45 M. . . . . .2.38. . . . .5.3%. . ..5.1%
2001-- 60.38 M. . . . . .2.26. . . . .13.0%. ..17.7%
2000-- 51.29 M. . . . . .2.00. . . . .N/A. . . . .N/A

Overall. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .57.5%. . . .73.4%

Okay, what are you reading? Well, the numbers on the fire left are the Astros' payrolls since they moved to MMP. The second number is the ML average salary for that year. The first percentage is the percentage increase (or inflation rate) for average salaries and the last number is the Astros rate of inflation. It's tempting to look at the overall numbers and say, "wow, the Astros have increased faster than the rate of inflation!" This is true, but the devil is in the details. Most of this percentage increase can be found in three seasons (2001, 2003, and 2006). The fact remains that the Astros did not match inflation in six out of the nine seasons.

What does this all mean egghead? Well, it means that the Astros are relatively conservative in how they spend their money. Sure, we could prattle on about how Drayton doesn't really want to be a champion based on these numbers. I could show you more numbers where the Astros actual revenues are growing faster than the rate of inflation, but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. The point is that you can't look at increasing player salaries and naturally assume that overall payrolls are jumping at the same rate. If that were the case, I'd swallow a 4 year, 40 million deal for Valverde. The reality is that as a percentage of their payroll, a ten million contract for a closer would be a heavier burden than for other playoff contenders. The Reds just overpaid Francisco Cordero to be their closer. He had a pretty good season. Where did that get them?

My plea to trade Valverde has nothing to do with how he performed. He did what he was supposed to do and that might be a large part of the difference between the 2007 club and 2008 club. However, I say this knowing two things. First, Smith is absolutely right about how we overachieved. We are not a reliable closer away from the playoffs. Having Valverde get 50+ saves next year is not going to be the difference. Secondly, paying him to be that guy will hamper our ability to improve our club given the spending history of the franchise. Drayton has the right to control spending and we can be a playoff team with those limits, but it requires some creativity. Holding onto the "tried and true" importance of the closer is not what I would call creative. This is especially true when that closer is your most tradable commodity.

I am a senior writer at thefantasyfix.com and a staff writer at bigleaguesmag.com. The Hall of Fame Index is also still for sale and as relevant as ever.