Unfortunately, that strategy could lead to a bunch of guys getting big arbitration raises around the same time... and if we're still in penny pinching mode (mostly based on the lack of a competitive TV deal), could lead to guys getting traded despite having years of club control left. Hopefully that won't be the case. I've always been in favor of aggressive promotion, sink/swim mentality. The guys who are good usually stick. If they're good, but just not ready yet, they usually are able to accommodate demotion and learn from it. If they don't accommodate demotion, then you have to wonder about their mental fortitude to begin with... and if they were never going to be good, you find out about them sooner rather than later.
It definitely could become a problem, but I won't be complaining if we have a bunch of guys worth big arbitration amounts. I understand the organization making the moves they have. I think the organization should look to fast track prospects in the near future. I think you have to look at having Correa/Appel/Folty/Ruiz/McCullers/Velasquez/DDJ/etc in 2015, plus a possible call-up of Rodon.
Agreed that too many prospects turned into good MLB players is a "good" problem to have... just want to avoid the potential backlash of masquerading as a small market team in a mid-to-big sized market.
Those guys have been very young for their level, can't see a single case there where a guy really SHOULD have been moved up but was not (except Springer) . . .if they were old for a prospect at their level, that would be a different situation Specifically, DD struggled mightily at Lexington in 2011 so there was certainly no reason to start him anywhere else. When he was successful there in 2012 he was moved up to Lancaster where he struggled. Repeating that level last year he was very successful. Can't see any reason at all to criticize how they have moved him along. McCullers was 19 most all of last season, Correa still is 19. You have more than just "numbers" to look at with kids that age, I see no reason to think they "haven't been moved rapidly" when they are in their teens . . . With Singleton, probably maturity issues more than anything have held him back. I seriously doubt that when he was busted for mar1juana the organization was "shocked" I just don't see anyone other than Springer who hasn't moved as quickly as what should have been expected. Back to my original comment, I think Appel being started at CC is a sign they do think he can move quickly and could get here this year, and his situation is a lot different than those other guys as he is a 4 year college guy as opposed to a teenager Of course, like you say, maybe I "just don't realize" what i'm talking about, lol
Most everyone is going level by level, each season. A standard progression for most prospects, but often not the case for highly regarded prospects, who often reach the majors sooner. I actually think the team has taken the right approach to all of this. They are thinking to the future, and not the present. Springer skipped A-ball, so it isn't like they didn't thrust him forward. Read into the Appel to CC as they didn't want to send Appel to Lancaster.
They really need to fix their high level A ball "launchpad" situation. Inflates average hitters into potential power ones... only to send them crashing down. Potentially ruins arms that get rocked eventually there to the point that the organization will avoid sending pitchers there.
Lancaster isn't an ideal affiliate but its not like it doesn't serve any purpose. It got a really bad rap when it took over as the A+ affiliate in 2009 for the reasons you mentioned, but in reality that was right in the middle of the low period of the farm system. Mediocre players were put into the affiliate and mediocre players came out. Players like Kody Hinze and Koby Clemens put up big numbers, far outside their career averages, and came crashing down in AA. Not unexpected. Jason Castro, Springer and DDJ are examples of hitting prospects who succeeded there and didn't bomb later. On the pitching side, Folty spent some time there and had above-average numbers. When evaluating pitching in Lancaster, context is a huge deal. The league average ERA is 4.65. Having a guy have an ERA in the low 5's isn't terrible. The Jethawks had a couple of Astros' 2nd/3rd tier pitching prospects this year that put up low 5 ERAs with great peripherals. Aaron West had a 5.22era in 108.2 innings but had 9.28K/9 and 6.59K/BB ratios. (You could also reasonably expect a regression of his ERA because of unusually high .384 BABIP and low 57.9% LOB). Luis Cruz put up a 5.16 ERA with 10.2K/9 and 3.23 K/BB ratios. In a small sample size (17IP), he went on to AA and put up a 0.53 ERA with 11.1 K/9 and 2.1 BB/9. I forget where I read it but an article mentioned that the Astros sent pitchers to Lancaster to toughen them up. The coaches told em to not worry about stats and just work on honing their pitching, which at A+ makes a whole bunch of sense. As long as the pitching prospects continue to develop and put up promising peripherals, Lancaster is as good a place as any for an affiliate.
They sent Cosart & Wojiechowski straight to CC when acquired (different regimes though), while both had been in FSL (A+). They left Folty there for 26 innings. They aren't sending Appel there. I think even the organization would prefer to be out of there. They just don't have good options available. I think it will be interesting to see how many innings we see Velazquez & McCullers pitch there.
I agree with both of your points. I can't imagine Lancaster is an ideal HiA affiliate but it is a HiA affiliate. They'll send prospects there who need HiA time and fast-track the ones who don't. Folty showed he could handle HiA right away after spending two years at LoA and Appel's best attribute is that he's very advanced and likely wouldn't benefit from HiA. I'd bet Velasquez and McCullers both spend 2/3rds to a full season there. It's unfortunate for McCullers that he gets to work on his changeup in such a hitters environment, but he'll find out really quickly if it'll be a workable pitch or not.
You do realize that was during the Wade/Purpura/Mclane regime, right? At this point I don't know if you're being serious or trying to hard to troll.
No, its not. The Astros are not going to risk having guys potentially throwing their arms out, or possibly affecting their mechanics, when there's close to zero chance of quality starts or getting into any sort of rotation routine. Sure, they have to have guys there to fill out a roster... and guys pegged to be future relievers aren't going to be affected as much... but I highly doubt they send any pitching prospect they have a lot riding on there for an extended period of time. As for the hitters, not sure what benefit they have to being there either... can't trust the good numbers, and can't trust anybody who doesn't put up good numbers.
That's just wild and ludicrous speculation. Why would pitchers be throwing their arms out or affecting their mechanics? There's absolutely nothing to suggest that pitchers are overexerting themselves in Lancaster. The manager wouldn't let any pitcher, prospect or not, self-destruct. Quality starts aren't the focus of pitching development at the HiA level. Refining pitches, developing secondaries, control/command, etc is the focus. Luhnow's development program cares so little about throwing quality starts that they have a tandem pitching system in place that makes it impossible to throw any quality starts. As for hitters, you gotta consider the scouting reports in addition to the numbers. The coaches and scouts will let the team know whose numbers are real. Other than Lancaster and High Desert, most of the Cali league plays fairly neutral anyway. You just have to look at the road numbers to get an idea of a player's park neutral stats. The Astros had the chance to get out of Lancaster in 2012 and re-upped til 2014. They had the chance to at minimum move to a different team/ballpark within the Cali league and stuck with Lancaster. I'm sure if an FSL or Carolina team opened up they would have jumped, but they had the chance to swap affiliates from Lancaster to 2-3 other Cali teams whose PDC's were up in 2012 and chose to reup (short-term) with Lancaster.
Who are these people? I only follow American League baseball, sorry. I do still have a snocone cup autographed by PCL MVP James Mouton, talk about a guy they rushed to the bigs too early....
Baseball Prospectus released their top 101 today, and 5 Astros were named to the list. All but 1 were in the Top 50. For the lazy (the list is free, c'mon peeps): Spoiler 5. Carlos Correa 20. George Springer 21. Mark Appel 43. Mike Foltynewicz 57. Jonathan Singleton Breakdown of Top 101 Believe it or not, the Astros did not have the most prospects on the list. The Twins led the way with 8. The Cubs, Royals, Pirates, and Rangers had 7 apiece, and the Red Sox had 6. The Astros' 5 put them in a tie with the Orioles. Singleton was the only 1B listed. Correa was the #3 shortstop, behind Bogaerts and Baez. Springer was #3 OF behind Buxton and Oscar Taveras. Appel was the #10 RHP; the 9 above him are: 8. Taijuan Walker 9. Archie Bradley 10. Kevin Gausman 11. Noah Syndergaard 12. Yordano Ventura 13. Lucas Giolito 15. Dylan Bundy 16. Jonathan Gray 19. Jameson Taillon Folty was 20th in the hierarchy of right-handed pitchers. Correa was the top 19-year old. In the age 22 group, Appel was #5, Foltynewicz #10, and Singleton #14. Springer was the top 24-year-old prospect on the list. Tool-wise, Correa got 6s for his power, glove, and hit tools, and a 7 for his arm. Springer got all 6s for power, speed, glove, and arm. Appel got a 7 for his fastball and two 6s for the changeup and slider. Folty has an 8 fastball and a 5+ curve. And finally, Singleton got a 7 for power and a 5 for hitting.
Read the Astros section in the new BP 2014 book... unfortunately it was written by Zach Levine (former Chronicle writer, and only been at BP for a few months), thus it wasn't the level of in-depth analysis I was expecting (was more of a rant typical of your usual hack Houston Chronicle writer). One thing they pointed out was the relatively low return the Astros has achieved thus far in trades, and whether or not this has hindered the speed of the rebuilding plan (whether it was Wade's trades or Luhnow's). After the Oswalt, Berkman, Bourne, and Pence trades, the Astros have Chris Carter, Domingo Santana, Jonathan Villar, Brett Oberholtzer, and Jon Singleton as the eventual players who would be considered potential difference-makers on the future roster. The one Luhnow trade highlighted isn't looking too promising as of now... Carter's WAR continues to dwindle in the new projections: Melancon (all-star reliever) traded for Jed Lowrie (all-star SS, when healthy) traded for Chris Carter (all-star strike out king).
They got Stassi and Peacock for Lowrie too. I think they like Stassi a ton so we'll see how it sorts out.
Yea it's a WAR now vs WAR later argument. Stassi and Peacock both profile as starters and Carter is already a legit DH. It's perfectly reasonably to believe their cumulative WAR will exceed Lowrie's moving forward. Getting 3 players for the 2014/15 clubs is more important to the Astros than 1 player (Lowrie) for the 13/14 club.
We also have Weiland, who came with Lowrie, and dealt Fernando Rodriguez in the deal with the A's. Not that either of those guys matter much. I definitely still make both moves. Interesting that McCullers doesn't make the BP list, given that he has ranked so highly by BA & MLB.com.
