Ok cool, I think I understand. I agree with your overall premise, and I certainly would not want to tank for the first pick. I will have to disagree with you saying there was a cost, if you are saying that sucking was the cost. We received the 1st pick because we sucked and are not a good team, it is not that getting the 1st pick caused us to suck. We were going to suck regardless, and that is a result of simply not having the level of talent compared to our competitors. At the end of the day, the organization as a whole (from each minor league team up to the big league team) needs to drastically improve the talent of our players. Having the first pick is no guarantee, but it might just provide our front office an inch of an advantage, and at this point, I will take whatever help, small or large, that I can get! I will agree with you whole-heartedly that the decision makers are more important to a successful draft than draft position. Although Bobby Heck and Ed Wade haven't had terrible drafts in my opinion, if you give me a choice to have the first pick and those 2 or the last pick and Andrew Friedman and his gang, I take Andrew Friedman and gang along with the last pick every single time. And about your analogy, I think what I am trying to say is this: I sure hope that I never get shot in the leg, but if I do get shot in the leg, I hope it is right across the street from the hospital. Hopefully in a few years we can be discussing playoff baseball and the Astros in the same sentence, not the draft during the playoffs.
Well, I simply can't argue with you. My calling it "cost" was certainly circular logic, or perhaps begging the question--incorrect, at any rate. That said, juice points out a pretty real "cost": you might have to pay $8MM for your pick, even if he doesn't measure up to the last guy picked #1. Ouch. Indeed! And here's where we're the same only different. While I'm grateful for the hospital, I'd rather not get shot in the leg in the first place.
You and juice are certainly correct, but there is risk every transaction a team makes. It boils down to a cost/benefit analysis. But I sure as heck rather take an $8M risk on a first pick (would still have him under club control for the subsequent arbitration years, which would still be a bargin or "cheap"), as opposed to signing Woody freaking Williams for 1 year $5M or whatever it was (and lose a pick, on top of that!). Although you do have to over-pay some draft picks to sign them, in my opinion it still pales in comparison as to how much you have to over-pay in free agency, so it is still less risky generally. And lol on the analogy! Neither of us want to get shot in the leg, that is something we can both agree on. Rep for that.
Bryce Harper played JC ball but only to be drafted at 17, technically he could be considered a high school player. DD
Well yeah, signing oody illiams (no W's for us...) was a bad move. But it's not like the only options are draft #1 or make incredibly stupid FA signings (giving up picks in the process). The Hunsicker-run Astros teams of the late 90s managed to stay extremely competitive, draft very well, and build the #1 rated farm system in all of MLB, all without ever picking #1. So the first pick in and of itself, while risky in terms of cost, may be a good thing: but I like what we were doing in the late 90s better. :grin:
He was referencing high school pitchers that went #1 overall, so Bryce Harper would not qualify. I would be very surprised if we selected a high school pitcher with the first overall pick.
I just used oody illiams (haha, I like that) as an example, trying to show that the "cost" is relative, and that I rather allocate our funds to draft picks and international signings as opposed to marginal-at-best, over-paid veteran free agents. I understand that those 2 things are not mutually exclusive. The Hunsicker-run Astros were certainly successful, and I look forward to that in the hopefully not-too-distant future, but I would be remiss to not point out that the downfall of our farm system began when he traded away the farm (pun intended) for Randy Johnson. Not that I disagree with it. We had a great team, and that is a time to take a risk on that final piece to get you over the hump. So I am not faulting him, because who knew we would get man-handled by a roided-up Kevin Brown, not to mention the terrible scheduling that allowed him to start 3 games in a 5 game series. I still probably make that trade, but in the end, that was a really steep price for a rental player.
Indeed. In fact, spending on marginal FAs while going cheap on international signings and especially draft picks is how Drayton really drove this thing into the abyss. I would agree that the decline of our system, top-to-bottom, began on Hunsicker's watch, but I would argue that it began ca. 2002-2003, not after the '98 RJ trade. Even after trading away those assets, the Astros still rose to the top-rated (according to several outlets) organization in 2000 and 2001. It was in either 2002 or 2003 that he began a string of three or four just bad drafts, while also losing draft picks for FA signings like Kent, Pettitte, and Clemens. Drafting HS guys that you know won't sign for you unless you break the bank, then offering $900K, is one way to freaking kill your farm system. Then Purpura turned chicken **** into "Holy ****!", and the rest is history.
Absolutely. I believe when it comes to position players, the bias is actually towards high school over college, though there isn't the kind of stark split you see with pitchers.
@jim, I think it was incompetent management moreso than incompetent scouts. however, that is only an entirely uneducated "hunch". I'm entirely unqualified to answer a question like that.
Appel is a hometown kid too Born in Houston and grew up in Post Oak area Family atteneded UT and Rice.
I like to think of myself as an optimist but I'm afraid it could be many years before we are actually a contending team. I know we have some young talent, but seems like the players we have (minors and majors) are mediocre at best. For me I don't see any players that excite me and make me think they could be a big-time talent. We need to pray that Wade and the scouts have an amazing next couple of drafts.
As some others have said, its the organization as a whole that is going to determine when/if we get good again and how soon. The point someone made regarding Washington and how Strasburg isnt going to save them nor will they ever be good is a reflection of their organization, and no infusion of draft picks alone is going to change anything significant there. For Astros fans, its going to be in Crane's (assuming the deal happens) hands. Who he hires, fires, and how he runs things will mostly determine our fate. The #1 pick could help. But those relying on it to turn the team around im afraid will be disappointed unless the our organization makes significant strides as well.
What if they purposely draft a player who they don't sign to get the No. 2 pick of the 2013 draft who may be more of a sure thing? I feel electric arms are overrated. They need the smart, control power ace not just the pure power pitcher. Would probably point more at Appel then. Really want them to draft nothing but pitchers in this draft.
