In 2011 the Astros won 56 games. 3 seasons later and folks around here are happy with a "potential" of 11 more wins and a loss total of 95. How many more consecutive horrible seasons where management fields embarassingly low payrolls (which equates to not trying to compete) are you ok with? FYOT Fix your own thoughts
By MLB I mean the League Office, who the Astros were in communication with while this whole thing went down and gave if not explicit at least tacit approval.
Well there were occasional pop shots because of the CSN disaster. Expect more traffic if that isn't sorted by the time Rockets season begins.
The second I start thinking like you is the second I stop watching sports. It obviously makes you miserable, but I typically don't have hobbies that make me that way. It's been disappointing to watch the Astros suck for so long, but when they show a reason to be encouraged, I'll embrace it instead of ****ting all over it. To each their own, though.
It doesn't make me miserable, I and others just don't choose to be apathetic and buy in to the weak excuses Astros management is throwing out.
Everyone seems to be on one side of the fence or the other You either trust in Luhnow/Crane 100% and just buy into anything they do Or you hate both of them, think they are the worst, and rip apart every move that is made It's been a rough few years for the franchise And a rough summer for Astros/Rockets fans in general So I guess this is the result
I'd like to see myself as somewhere in the middle. I like the new regime as a whole, and I've been impressed with some of their innovations... But I do get annoyed when people react when certain moves are "questioned" (as if this regime is totally infallible when they really haven't accomplished anything significant yet). I think that's part of being a diehard fan...you have to be able to question certain aspects of your team's decision processes when you're not happy with the results. It doesn't mean you don't support the team, or are simply trolling. I actually think blind homers are just as annoying as people who loathe everything Crane does. There are always two sides to every decision, but I definitely see some here with the ability to "spin" every decision in the Astros front office's favor. Regardless, I still think everybody wants the same thing. Some are prepared to withstand decades of losing (I think) if it means a huge payoff and years of continuous success, while others would like to see more tangible results sooner.
Yea, I'm somewhere in the middle also. I'm lean the other side than you, as I can't stand Crane, and don't see the magic in Luhnow. I don't loathe everything he does though, and when they make good moves I don't seek out something bad to say about them like some. I WANT them to get it right and have us winning consistently again. I do wonder, if not for the prospects that Ed Wade brought in right before he was fired, how Luhnow/Crane would be viewed... In any case, I hope Correa is a superstar, McCullers/Folty are front line guys, and Appel turns in to a legit #1.....just wish it was ok to agree with some moves, and voice displeasure with others . . .if not for that 2-3 week stretch where we really played well, the Astros forum wouldn't be so garmish
I know I don't feel that way. I was highly critical of the 2013 draft and have had my disappointments with certain trades Luhnow has made (most notably Wandy trade). Despite that, I support the team. I want more than anything for this team to be successful. That is why I generally back Crane/Luhnow.
Again, the Astros' plan was to spend every dime of their allocation, including offering a third round pick five times his slot value. I can't answer as to how they acted with Aiken but I find it hard to believe they made an offer they had no intention of paying - why do that? There is no net benefit to them to offer him $6.5MM - again, a deal he agreed to - only to yank it away. If they wanted to nickel and dime him, they would have done so from the outset.
I don't think he (or anybody else) is doubting that they wanted to spend the full slot. However, when there's the possibility that you get NOBODY vs. two promising HS arms over the matter of $1.5 million, it could be perceived as being a little nickel and dimey. I don't think the Astros handled the situation all that well, and they got a proportional response from team Aiken (who also probably could have withheld going public with their "anger"). Of course, we still don't know what the ultimate concern on the MRI was. The only thing the Astros can do is root for his arm to get injured, and root for a surgery to be unsuccessful, and then they can say "See, we told you so!"
Well, sure - if we conveniently forget that his MRI produced what the Astros felt was a significant red flag.
It wasn't significant enough for them to walk away from Aiken. Hell, they even caved last minute and offered him $5mil. They would have been better served not doing that if they wanted to stay with the red flag story.
Because signing him would've meant they could've signed Nix above slot at no penalty. They only upped that offer so they could get Nix.
It was significant enough for them to walk away unless they got both Nix and Marshall, too. I don't know why we're pretending we don't know what the process was. It's pretty obvious what the decision came down to. If the decision was Aiken/Nix vs. No. 2 overall in 2015, the red flag was enough that they preferred the latter. If the decision was Aiken/Nix/Marshall vs. No. 2 overall in 2015, the overall talent was enough to take the Aiken risk. As far as why they "caved last minute" and offered $5 million, that goes back to Marshall as well. It's pretty clear that after the MRI, the Astros pulled the $6.5 million offer and offered the minimum $3.1 million simply to give them the most options. From there, they opened up talks with Marshall and ultimately got a number from him, and when that happened, they knew the max they could give to Aiken (about $5 million was the figure outside sources came up with as well) to make it all work.
