Still saved money to be used elsewhere and got rid of a negative player for nothing player. Two pluses.
He certainly had a bad year for the A's, but he was not a negative player for the Astros. And if saving that small amount of money (for baseball) is that important to the Astros that they needed it elsewhere, it does not bode well for the future.
This was Lowrie's slash line after coming back from his injury last year (around 190 plate appearances): .194/.265/.341/.606 I am guessing he produced a negative WAR during that time frame.
Other than his hot start prior to the injury, he has been very unimpressive the last 3 years offensively, considering he shouldn't be playing SS anymore. At the end of the day, Lowrie wasn't going to be the primary backup at any spot (Marwin had that role), so it was him or Valbuena that needed to get moved, because you weren't going to maximize your roster spending $7.5M for a guy to rarely play. Luhnow clearly made the right call.
Astros didn't trade the ABs he had in Houston. They traded his future ABs and what the A's got is a player providing negative value so far. That money is worth about a win's worth of a player on the free agent market. Basically, Astros are looking to win deal by a win and a half without any contribution from McCurry. Considering McCurry's expected value at time of deal was about half a win, that's pretty good relative to what was involved in the trade.
Exactly. Anyone poo pooing about the Lowrie trade still, with all the facts laid out, and the benefit of hindsight, doesn't really make sense. It made sense at the time of the deal, and everything that has transpired since only reinforces the decision.
Could be. But that also means that his first 75 at bats, those before his injury, must have been really, really phenomenal to end up with 1 WAR for the year when over 2/3rds was negative. Of course, if the object is to just try and cherry pick stats that support our position, I guess I could point out that this year during away games when facing a left handed pitcher, he has put up a 123 wRC+. That must point to positive WAR
Okay, is that how it works? So if Lowrie has a good year next year and put up 2 WAR with no contribution from McCurry, then Luhnow lost the trade? Of course, my point had nothing to do with Lowrie or McCurry, but with why fans feel it necessary for their team to "win" a trade, when it is seldom clear cut.
Yep...his first 75 plate appearance, his OPS was .999, but then he was horrible (Carlos Gomez horrible) after returning from his injury. Point being....Lowrie was not an overall productive player from July of last year through this year. No telling what he would have produced had he stayed in Houston, but all things being the same, Luhnow did not "lose" this trade.
I don't think you actually have a point considering I did not exclaim the virtues of Jed Lowrie, other than to say he was not a negative player for the Astros. Now, you can hem and haw, and slice the data any way you wish, and play all the games you want, and the simple truth will always remain that he produced 1 WAR for the Astros in 2015. That, by definition, means my statement will always be correct, unless he is once again traded to the Astros. But you are absolutely correct that I said point blank that Luhnow "lost" this trade. My words are right there for everyone to see. But I am having a little trouble locating them. Perhaps you could help me out?
Have y'all seen the tumble in production of Vince Velasquez. It seems the league has caught up to him or he's gotten fatigued. And it's time for him to make his next round of adjustments or dig deeper. So far it's pretty much the same trend as when he came up with the Astros, he came in plowing down hitters and then he got hit hard. He's pitched twice the amount of innings this year over last year, and it's almost statisticaly the same result. So right now the trade is still pretty even. Giles has rebounded and all of the guys traded away have stumbled a bit. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/velasvi01.shtml
generally I agree with you that there's still a lot of time to judge this trade. But to be fair to VV, the vast majority of his recent decline is just in his last 2 starts, both against the Dodgers. They aren't a juggernaut, but they are a top 5 NL offense. His only other demolition this year was against the Cubs--also a good offense. Good offenses don't excuse awful outings at all, though. Trade is still relatively even.
As I can tell, former Astro players doing well are: Chris Carter: a .220 hitter who smashes 30+ HR, gets about 80 RBI's, and walks about 75 while striking out close to 200 times. Villars: he's establishing himself as a future all-star. Grossman: After turning down a comfortable contract by the Astros, he was virtually released, and now he's build his value again. Good for him! Other Former guys but having unimpressive showings are Jimmy Paredes, Mike Folty, Domingo Santana. Anybody want to add other former Astros Players and what they are doing now?
Durability was probably the number 1 reason they traded VV. He had never pitched over 110 innings in his career and that was back in 2013. It's true he's at double the major league innings as last year, but he did throw 33 minor league innings in 2015, so he's at about 50% more IP than last year. That's still a huge year-to-year increase. VV's had a couple of nagging injuries, same as nearly every season he was in the Houston system. It's probably a combination of that and as you said hitting the rookie wall.
Hypothetically, no, it will not mean Luhnow lost the trade. He got rid of a player who was of negative future value (based on expectation and actual future production) and who also made too much money, while also gaining an asset in the process. How that asset actually pans out and decisions related to him are different stories.
I guess that's good for Chris Carter but that profile is not something I'm missing from the Astros lineup. Villar's turned himself into a great fantasy player with all that playing time, but reports say he's still making the same boneheaded plays.
With shutdown by Phillies near, Vince Velasquez wants more progress In his first seven starts after a three-week stint on the disabled list, Vince Velasquez permitted 13 runs in 41 innings. He allowed three home runs. He failed to pitch deep into games, but the hints of effectiveness were enough. Then, Velasquez faced the first-place Los Angeles Dodgers twice in a week. He allowed 14 runs in 10 1/3 innings. He surrendered six home runs. His season ERA rose to 4.14 from 3.33. On Tuesday, Velasquez threw 111 pitches, his highest total since the 16-strikeout game in April. He is up to 113 innings on the season after throwing just 88 2/3 last season, and he knows the end is near. The Phillies will limit his innings. But Velasquez wants a little more time. "I don't want to stop right now, at the stage I'm at right now," he said. "I want to finish on a better note. This is a tough team. I'm glad it's the last time I'm facing them. I can't express how tough this team is. Their approach is difficult." Both Velasquez and his manager, Pete Mackanin, saw improvement in the second start against the potent Dodgers. He avoided the sort of ambush he faced at Dodger Stadium by applying a more sensible mix to his pitches. He still flashed the powerful fastball that will always determine his fate. His 10 strikeouts were his highest number in three months. He walked just one. Los Angeles homered on three fastballs last week. They did the same thing Tuesday. "He made some mistakes," Mackanin said. "He needs to polish it up a little bit, that's all. ... Other than that, he pitched a lot better than he did last time we faced these guys." The Phillies have not publicly identified Velasquez's innings limit; the team could make the decision without a set number in mind. Velasquez does not believe he has much time remaining. He hopes to make it count. "It's not the ending point," Velasquez said. "I want to have a few more starts. Probably three or four more starts, I would say, and finish strong."
Brady Aiken got his first win last night: Link Hope he can come back from what was probably his first major set-back in life. The picture in the article definitely matches reports that he put on 20-25lbs after the surgery. His thighs looks much bigger compared to his frame now. He was a skinny guy before.
I tend to just look at the guys who haven't reached free agency yet: C: Carlos Perez is a fringy player but would be a decent backup or great 3rd catcher. 1B: Carter is what he is. Hits home runs but all in all a below average player. 2B/SS: Villar is a potential star and will be an everyday player for somebody for awhile. Torreyes is still out there as a AAAA infielder. Kike Hernandez is a good utility guy who could be more. 3B: Brett Wallace has settled in as a decent bench corner infielder, although he has taken a step back from last season. Dominguez is a AAAA 3B. OF: JD Martinez is still one of the best hitters in the league. Grossman has broken out but will remain to be seen if he can sustain it. Jack Shuck is a AAAA guy. Santana hasn't done much for the Brewers. Alex Presley is a AAAA guy. SP: Velasquez has cooled but still looks like a potential FoR SP. Obie and Clemens are AAAA. Tropeano had TJ. Straily has been a really good BoR pickup for the Reds. Mengden had a breakout year and looks like a potential MoR guy. Cosart has taken a huge step back and looks like a guy that will either flame out or have to move to the bullpen. There are probably more. Martinez, Villar, and Velasquez are the only ones who would've made an impact on this year's Astros team and are probably moves Luhnow wishes he could redo. Grossman and Mengden could be added to that list, and Hernandez is a good player but all in all that trade worked out so I doubt Houston regrets it.
