In the NFL, it's hard to build a good team due to injuries, premium on QBs, and having so many positions to fill up. In the NBA, it's hard to build a team cause superstars are rare. but in the MLB, it's not that hard to build a good team. You need: 1. Pitching 2. Timely hitting That's pretty much it. All MLB teams should spend at least 85% of their early draft picks on pitchers, cause that is what is the most important part of a team. You can buy bats in free agency, easy, but with pitching, in order to have enough depth, you need oozes of pitchers in the system. As far as the bats go, you need guys who have patience, and to take advantage of walks and stretching out the opposing pitcher. Look at all the Playoff teams, none of them have extraordinarily good hitting, they have elite pitching and average hitting. I can easily look and see why the Astros were good in 05 but never since, it has a direct correlation to their pitching staff. In 2005 we had one of the best rotations in the MLB. Bottom line, if you subscribe to this philosophy, you will never have seasons as bad as the Astros had these last 2 years. You obviously won't be contenders every year, but on the whole you will be a winning ball club.
The Orioles do not have elite pitching, at least starting pitching. I wouldn't classify the Cardinals as having elite pitching either. Definitely not when they won the WS last season with no Wainwright. The Rangers had a great offense, with mediocre pitching. We weren't exactly a powerhouse from 2004-2006, despite our pitching, though 2004 actually wasn't that good of a rotation due to Miller & Pettitte getting hurt, and leaving it to the likes of Brandon Backe & Pete Munro
I do think pitching is the most important thing still, but we can't lose sight of how important offense is as well.
Pitching and Defense are important, but I also think back to all those gems roy pitched that we lost 1-0 due to lack of offense. Growing bats in the system is important as well, and they cannot simply be "bought in free agency," not everyone has the resources of the Yankees or now the Dodgers.
It's not that hard at all. That's why teams go from mediocre to great all the time. It's so easy, great teams are popping up everywhere. And you always get to keep your stars since they get injured way less than the NFL and they grow on trees unlike the NBA. Facetiousness aside, the lack of a salary cap in MLB is the equalizer to this discussion. It's *hard* to keep the great players you develop. Unless you're the Yankees. And even the Yankees don't field a truly great team every year. It's *not* easy to build a *great* professional team, not in any league.
We still lack a potential #1 starter in the system. Jordan Lyles Jarred Cosart Nick Tropeano Mike Folty Vincent Velasquez Lance McCullers Kevin Comer Joe Musgrove Asher Woj None of these guys jumps out at me as being a possible frontline starter. Some might have potential to be a #2, but it's still alot of projection. What's weird is that our best guys: Folty, Lyles, and Trop all have 55-60 fastball velocity, pretty good command, plus changeups, but they can't spin the breaking ball. That's what's keeping them from getting to that next level. Honestly, I think Vincent Velasquez might have the most potential out of the bunch.
League ranks of playoff teams: Offense: Texas #1 *NYY #2 *Detroit #6 Oakland #8 Baltimore #9 *St. Louis #2 Washington #5 *San Fran #6 Atlanta #7 Cinci #9 Pitching: Oakland #2 *Detroit #3 *NYY #5 Baltimore #6 Texas #7 Washington #1 Cinci #3 Atlanta #4 *San Fran #5 *St. Louis #6 * = still playing It's pretty clear that great pitching is a necessity to make the playoffs, but great hitting seems necessary as well, especially to advance in the playoffs. BTW, last year's champion, St. Louis, was ranked #1 in offense and #8 in pitching. The runner up (Texas) was #3 in hitting and #5 in pitching.
This is a stupid ass thread. NFL teams turn it around faster than any other team sport. Its much easier to do it in the NFL. Baseball is the hardest. Your draft picks don't make it to the team until years after they're drafted unlike the NFL or NBA where they play right away. Plus , in the Astros case, the team was dismantling itself for an eventual sale. It'll be a couple of years before the decisions made by this new regime finally take effect.
you just threw out a bunch of conjecture with nothing to support it. Find something, ANYthing that supports it and I'll listen.. but Major's post above is more than enough of a statement saying that you need both. That is, to win, you need to be good at everything. If the point of this thread was to crap on the Astros, good job.. but if you actually think that all teams should spend most of their top draft picks on pitchers because it matters that much more, then I don't think you have a leg to stand on
I agree with the OP. You gotta draft 85% or so pitchers early. And then draft position players late. Only time you draft position players early is when they are 5-tool guys and they are standout (Griffey, Jr., etc.). Otherwise, load up on the pitchers, develop them, keep the best ones and trade the rest for good position players to give you offense.
You can hit pitchers late in the draft just as easily as position players (which is to say not really easy, but possible). RoyO was a late round pick. Our current top pitching prospect was a 38th round pick. Ryan Braun doesn't have 5 tools, but I'd say he was worth the 5th pick he was taken with.
85% doesn't mean anything. OP used the number. I agree with OP. We should draft mostly arms in the early rounds of the draft. The only time you don't is if there is an obvious 5-tool guy sitting there that everybody knows is a superstar in waiting. To the poster that said you can find good arms at the end of the draft. Sure you can. You can draft an All-Star catcher in the 62nd round. You can draft a hall-of-fame pitcher in the 20th round. That's not the point. The point is pitchers, specifically starting pitchers, have more trade value than position players. To win a World Series these day, you have to have 3 ace starters, guys that can go out every 5th day and hold the score down consistently, quality guys that can go on 3 days rest once the playoff season begins. The odds of winning a WS without that....very low....almost nil. The best, most efficient way to acquire arms is by drafting them in bucketloads. Remember, some of them are going to fail. Still more of them are going to suffer injuries to their arms. A winning organization has to stockpile arms.
There's no such thing. This isn't the NFL, or NBA. The #1 pick is just as much of a gamble as the 100th pick. There is no 62nd round. Shows how much you know about baseball. You need good pitching, I agree, but you don't "need" 3 aces. I'm not sure if any team has 3 aces. I somewhat agree here. I wouldn't mind if the Astros went pitcher heavy in next year's draft. And to the OP: Yes, building a winning baseball team is easy. It's so easy that the Yankees have 27 world series championships, the St. Louis Cardinals have 11, and everyone else is in single digits, or has no trophies. If only the Astros would hire you to run the team.
Not just as much of a gamble. There is diminishing return. There used to be. He is referencing Mike Piazza who was taken in the 62nd round. Phillies: Lee/Halladay/Hamels, Nationals: Gonzalez/Strasburg/Zimmermann, Giants: Lincecum/Cain/Vogelsong/Bumgarner Of course they should. We still lack that true star pitcher, and a good bullpen has become a necessity.
And where are the Phillies and Nationals now? You can argue the Nationals might still be in it if they had Strasburg, but they knew what would happen with the innings limit. My point is, you don't need 3 aces to win a world series.
I agree you don't need it, just pointing to the fact that there are teams that have them. Even us against the CWS, we had the aces, but we got swept because our offense outside of Berkman wasn't reliable.
A lot of disagreement is with "mostly" and "early". I assumed the OP meant we should spend 8 of our first 10 picks on pitchers. Which I disagree with. You sound like you might mean use 85% of all of our 1st and 2nd round picks over the next 10+ years on pitchers...which I might agree with--or at least understand and not have an issue with
