I have a feeling Tyler White is going to be a lot of people's undercover favorite Astro this year, myself included. Seems like a great guy, and it's a wonderful story.
And if White does indeed hit at the ML level, AJ Reed suddenly becomes a more expendable, extremely valuable asset. Between White, Gonzalez, Valbuena, Duffy, Gattis, Moran (who might also be expendable)... Reed won't have a clear path to the bigs. ETA: I don't think he *will* be traded - or should be traded. But if a knock-your-socks offer is made and White is delivering, Reed is possibly more expendable today than he was yesterday is all I'm suggesting.
Reed/Moran/Martes/Musgrove Have to be our top four untouchables right now. Musgrove is going to be at worst a really good 3rd pitcher.
Yeah, I don't think the team ever saw Gattis as a long term solution at the DH. If both White and Reed deliver on their potential, it's Gattis who will be sent packing (likely via trade).
this. Although (and I'm not saying you are) many posters are quick to point out Gattis' failings (primarily .avg, obp) but he did lead the team in RBI and HR after a miserable 0-23 start (or something close to that). I think if both White & Reed emerge, he is the logical candidate to trade, but I'm not sure I would be willing to ship him off this year if we are in the middle of a pennant race. It would be risky to rely on 2 rookies to pick up the slack, especially with the power numbers that Gattis provides. I'd love to see White excel and take control of the 1B job this year, then have Reed come up later in the year and produce off the bench. I think Valbuena would be easier company to part with at the trade deadline and then we reevaluate for 2017 (as I believe Gattis is still under team control another 2 -3 years?) . Moran may be the right guy to take over 3B, White DH, Reed at 1B, but thats a lot of youth to rely on for a team with WS aspirations.
I am pretty sure Astros saw Gattis as a starter during his team controlled years. He looked like a guy that was wearing down due to catching prior to last year.
Sure; but Gattis doesn't fetch the same haul as Reed likely does. Again, I'm not suggesting the Astros *should* trade Reed; I certainly understand that even if White nails down 1B for the next decade and blocks Reed's "natural" path, that they can find several other paths for him. I'm merely suggesting that, if, say, Jose Fernandez was made available... this winter, Reed was likely untouchable. If White proves legitimate, well - Reed might not be *as* untouchable.
This is like Tony Kemp-Altuve all over again!!... except this time, both White/Reed should figure to get consistent AB's as long as there's a need for a DH. At this point, I'd venture to guess that Bregman is more likely to be shopped/moved for that once-in-a-lifetime deal vs. Reed... and Bregman likely has more trade value than Reeds anyways. Or, you simply mark Bregman/Reed/Martes as untouchable... and then you realize that the system is still stocked enough to get quality/star players in return (you just have to give up more of them).
Only in relation to your feeble attempts to bring it up as often as possible (while routinely butchering the actual context of the original discussion - example: trying to compare it to this). Long-term, the best outcome is that both White and Reed are line-up fixtures for the next decade. But as the team's needs evolve, the dynamic may have shifted just enough to push Reed - if ever slightly - out of the untouchable camp, which is where I would wager he was planted firmly this winter.
White already pushing Reed out of 1st base job long-term, and off the team to boot. Ok. Pretty sure it will require more than a month in Florida to make those evaluations. And I'm not sure exactly what sort of "huge package" this team needs that they would trade Reed for. As other posters said, I think White may make Gattis (and Tucker) unnecessary pieces very quickly. All signs thus far point to them considering Reed untouchable.
I know you're doing your best to hedge that you don't think he should be traded... but you're basically saying just that as meticulously and carefully as possible, with a lot of words. I don't think White's development has any sort of impact on Reed's possible tradeability... or vice versa. They're both possible fixtures... and they're both in for some learning-curve struggles once they start facing real MLB pitching, which will delay any sort of possible assessment on them. Just like how I didn't think Tony Kemp's development had any impact on making Jose Altuve possibly expendable (and you don't think that was a similar discussion??).
Great news, I'm glad the guy made the club. I love to see guys like him get a chance to make a name for himself. Now, lets just get AJ Reed up here in a couple of months.
Please, for all that is holy, don't. Don't try and tell me what I really said, or what you think I really said - especially in a forum where what I said is readily available. I literally clarified my initial post because I specifically did not want to appear to be advocating for a trade, flat-out stating that he should not be traded. So any hedging is on you. My post/thought process was specifically about the constantly evolving nature of baseball. If White is indeed legitimate - a relatively unexpected development - does it change - in any way - their perspective on Reed? That's it. Me, yesterday: "while routinely butchering the actual context of the original discussion..." Sure enough... The genesis of the Altuve/Kemp discussion, which occurred when Altuve's '14 season bottomed-out, was a growing fear that Altuve's '13 season was more exception than rule and that he was possibly becoming the one-dimensional hitter we all feared he might really be. It had nothing to do with Kemp's development, other than it potentially expediting moving Altuve. But that concern/conversation about Altuve would have happened with or without Tony Kemp. What's maddening is that, while you conspicuously trot this out routinely in my general direction, you conveniently forget many posters - staples in this forum - were not only of a similar mindset - but were actually the initiators. (Buck was the first to kick it around.) It's just flaccid internet "gotcha" bull****; no other reason to bring it up. Everyone owned up to it and moved on. Everyone but you. No, Not remotely. This is about a well-regarded, previously successful prospect seizing a position that - again, under the premise that he nails it - at least initially blocks a more highly-regarded prospect and how that might change dynamics, thinking, etc., of the organization moving forward. There were rumors the Astros kicked Fernandez's tires; whispers of interest around Price, Grienke, Cueto... it may have all ultimately been idle fan speculation (wishful thinking), but if they did/do want a frontline ace... you're (probably) not going to land a pitcher of that caliber - certainly not in trade - without a prospect of Reed's stature prominently involved in the discussions. Has he moved from "no way" to "hmmmmmm..." with White's emergence and the abundance of CI/DH bodies? That was all I was wondering...
One of the great things about this section of ClutchFans is Ric and Nick debating 575 different things in 575 different threads.
