Quote:
Originally Posted by HillBoy
Nothing of the sort Cat. I'm merely pointing out that the mere act of rebuilding in and of itself doesn't necessarily translate into the desired results (i.e. a playoff team). The key word you used here is "develop" and unless that actually comes to pass, it won't matter. It's far easier to screw up an organization (and believe me, the Houston franchises have that part down pat). It's a different matter altogether to actually put together a winning organization. The Astros haven't done that yet - they may eventually do so but I don't expect that to happen for at least 4 or 5 years.
|
Understood, but that 4-to-5 year time period is true no matter what league or division they're in. This is a franchise that needed to be completely ripped apart, and it only truly started in the second half of 2011 (Pence trade, new owner/GM). It takes time.
The other thing I'd point out to you, since you look at things from a historical standpoint, is that the Astros actually do have a positive rebuilding track record. The last time they committed to a true rebuild was the late 80s and early 90s, and it set the stage for an incredible 12 years. Honestly, from 1994 through 2005, there Astros were one of the three or four consistently-best organizations in all of MLB. The problem has been getting them to tear it down. Now that it's happening and a good GM is in place, I think there's more reason for optimism than there has been in a long time.
Quote:
|
I don't like this move to the AL at all in part because of bulls*t way it was done and in part because of the severe competitive disadvantage it puts on an already woebegone franchise. Nothing I've seen to date suggests that they won't be just another Seattle or Kansas City in the AL West. That may well change in time but for now, that is the reality of the situation.
|
Right now, they're the Pirates (Pittsburgh's success this year notwithstanding) of the NL Central. Is being Seattle or Kansas City that much worse? No matter what division or league the Astros are in, they're not going to be good right now. The key is 2015 and later. And honestly, it's tough to make too many proclamations right now on what the AL West will look like then. These things are cyclical, and things like the massive contract LA gave to Pujols may end up hurting them a few years down the line.
Quote:
|
Porter seems to be a great guy and all that but in the end he'll be judged on wins and losses just like Mills and without the talent to compete in about two years, folks here will be calling for his head just like they did with Mills. He not only has to win games with little to no talent in a tough division, he also has to somehow energize the fanbase by making the ALastros respectible. That's a tall order and I can't help but feel that he's a dead man walking.
|
The reason Mills was fired had little to do with people "calling for his head". You're right, if the team doesn't win (no matter the circumstance), there will always be a few casual fan idiots calling for the leader to be axed. But that has 0% to do with why the decision was made. Look across the organization - it's a bloodbath in essentially every department.
Brad Mills was Ed Wade and Drayton McLane's guy. That's why he's gone.
Honestly, even if the Astros had overachieved all expectations this year and won 70+ games... I
still don't think Mills stays, because the decision had little to do with temporary on-field success (or failure). Big picture, Jeff Luhnow wants his own staff that share his views and can be molded. With
his guys now in place, there will be a much longer leash and a more patient evaluation process.
Quote:
|
Mr. Fixit was the name Wade gave to himself and it stuck. I kind of think it's pretty descriptive for what he does. But Wade's history suggests that he has a shelf life. The only question that remains is whether or not Wade has managed to break the cycle with the Texans or will his history repeat itself. You can chose to ignore Wade's history all you want but it is what is. However, after watching the Cows under Jason Garrett, I have to conclude that Wade got jobbed by Jerral Jones because nothing much has really changed since he was let go.
|
The problem I have with your logic is that you always try and turn things into extremely broad
patterns, instead of evaluating the specifics of a given situation. For example, with Wade defenses, all the "coaching" in the world can't do a lot if the talent isn't there to back it up. In several of his past situations, including Dallas, there was a decided shift in organizational philosophy to using high draft picks on offensive players, as well as age-related attrition on his defenses. Look at what happened in his later years in Dallas. 2008? Felix Jones. 2009? First rounder traded for Roy Williams. 2010? Dez Bryant.
That's not happening with the Texans. The defensive core is young and extremely talented, and they're
still using high draft picks (Mercilus) to bolster depth. The "Mr. Fix It" tag does speak to his coaching, because he's consistently been able to do better things with similar personnel to his predecessors. But the idea that he's good
at first, then magically gets "figured out", is both too simplistic and illogical. There are a lot of unrelated factors involved, but you miss them trying to tie everything together under one pessimistic umbrella.