I like Marisnick, Rasmus, and Preston Tucker. They all have traits as players that are easy to root for. All three are legit ML's, an now a team like the Astros has money to go after a better OF. So, its time to chase the complete finished product, and let the super subs or the roller coaster type players make room in the outfield.
Tucker is gonna be trade bait this offseason. Fairly young player who has been a productive ML hitter should be attractive as part of a trade package.
It really would... if you can't win with that nucleus plus the young pre-arb guys... I don't see the vast concern with worrying about what we're going to do in 5-7 years when all those guys are up for contracts and there's a question about who can be affordable and who has to be let go.... at that point, you've either had a perennial winner that made all the spending worth it, or you've had a colossal flop that needs to be torn down (again). But, we all know they're not going to sign all those guys... mainly because it takes two to tango.
He might be part of a package but his appeal is fairly limited, IMO. He's a poor fielder (which makes him a bad fit for any NL team) and he was absolutely dreadful against LHP, which makes him a prime platoon candidate. His ceiling is essentially platoon DH, and, frankly, those guys are sorta dimes a dozen.
No interest (personally) in the aces at their likely asking price... Are we sure Gordon can replicate what he's done in KC elsewhere? I just worry that he's a... for lack of a better term, "system" guy who might look decidedly different outside of KC. I don't know... at his price/age, he sort of underwhelms me..... My preference is for them to leverage their system to trade for contract-friendly vets. For instance, I'd much rather pay prospects for two years of CarGo than $100+whateverMM for Gordon. Same with Chapman. My concern for the rotation is less pronounced.
In the minors he was very good against lefties, he hit .319 vs lefties in 2014 with 7 homers, and remember, he hit .282 that year.
It's well documented that Grienke wants to stay in the NL and has zero interest in going to the AL. Everything I've read about Price is that he REALLY wants to be a Cub.
I don't post here much. Always have watched the minor league development over the last few years and watched the majority of the second half of the season..... Also don't know a ton about baseball but here are my thoughts... Keuch+McCullers seems to be fine for a 1-2. We need to be more than fine though. Need to acquire a better #2 to push McCullers down. I guess that someone like Price is possibly better than Dallas as well but you get where I am going with that. McCullers as #3, McHugh as #4 and either Velasquez or Appel as #5 to start the year. If we want to firm up that back spot in the rotation with a veteran I can see that as well. Too many guys in this lineup just hacking away. I get that we want to hit homers but Rasmus, Gomez, Gattis, Valbuena and Carter on one team is just too much. Replace one of those guys with a fairly elite bat that improves upon the efficiency while maintaining power stats. IE Chris Davis seems like a good option but I don't know much about him. Would love to lose Carter, Gattis and Valbuena while replacing them with Davis+good contact hitter and keeping Rasmus and Gomez. Love watching Correa and McCullers. Intend on following them closely. Get rid of everyone in the pen other than Sipp and Gregerson.
We already have one of best number 5 starter in baseball, Fiers. He is a very good number 4 and in many rotations could be a number 3.
don't see why he wouldn't be able to replicate his performance. his elite defense and his ability to work counts and get on base shouldn't change. if we want to lessen the boom-or-bust-ability of our lineup, integrating pieces like him is what's necessary. trading for contract-friendly vets is good in theory, but the players you are talking about are unknown (obviously). you don't know who will be available, it takes two to tango, and you're likely talking about in-season trades. i'd rather go into the season with a lineup that isn't in flux for a change. we're at the point where that should be the case. i don't necessarily have a concern for our rotation. it's obviously good, at minimum. but i think we're in perfect position to make it (a lot) better. doesn't sound like it's going to happen, but if i'm ever going to throw silly money at an available ace, now is clearly the perfect time, imo. i share Nick's sentiments that i could really care less what our financial situation is 5 years from now. if you told me we would win 1 world series in the next 5 years, but then we'd suck fiercely for a decade again, i would sign up for that in a heartbeat.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Astros?src=hash">#Astros</a> have outrighted RHP Samuel Deduno off the 40-man roster. Following the move, the club now has 36 players on the 40-man roster.</p>— Houston Astros (@astros) <a href="https://twitter.com/astros/status/664215247000047616">November 10, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But depleting the system comes with a cost as well. The downside of free agent contracts is a "potential" money crunch in the future (which still remains to be seen... additionally, we don't know which players are must-signables and which ones will be ready to be replaced).... but the upside is that you acquire these players without having to give up anything. They're going to have to do it all... you're not going to build a team solely on a farm system, you're going to have to trade off the excess prospects before they become useless... and if there's a need to be met in the short-term and you have to pay extra to get it, they should act on that as well.
Gordon hit 20 points lower on the road but with substantially more power. He could hit 20 homers playing for the Astros. He really doesn't overwhelm anyone, except with the fact that he doesn't really have any weaknesses. You can stick him in the outfield, not have to worry and can bat him anywhere in the line up. He hits lefties and righties and he makes solid contact. I think that leveraging the farm system for controllable talent will be something the Astros will continue to do. However, I don't think they want a dry system either. It will be a balanced approach.
The length of the contract really comes into play. Part of the appeal of Gordon to the Astros may well be that he will sign for 3-4 years and that will not really have an impact to their long term situation because he would be coming off the books at the point where finances will really matter. Same reason I could see them kick the tires on Cueto at 5 years.
It's easy to say that, but it rarely holds true. No one can guarantee a World Series - all they can do is build a good team and hope for the best. I don't think anyone here was content with the last 8ish years of sucking after the great 2001-2005 Astros run. I'd much rather try to be the St. Louis Cardinals and implement a system of sustainable, consistent success than try a boom-and-bust type approach where you have a few great years and then create a rebuilding mess. They certainly should target high-end improvements, but they should also be judicious and not just throw caution to the wind. That kind of crap is what led to Carlos Lee and things like that.
Absolutely, it should... and nobody really knows what is going to impact their long-term situation. If in 5 years, the only player they're looking to retain with upside is Correa....and they didn't win a championship during that time with Springer/Altuve/Keuchel... are we really going to be better off at having avoided potentially trying to make this team as good as possible when the payroll is minuscule (and will be minuscule till all those guys need to sign their first free agent contract). I've always wanted to avoid signing any starting pitching for more than 3-4 years... but that's presuming you have a normal payroll to begin with. The Astros have the envious/unique advantage of being able to contend with a low payroll (but it doesn't necessarily "have" to be low, given their market size and stadium deal)... I say we maximize that.
Doesn't have to be all/nothing... Signing Carlos Lee is not what got the Astros in their situation. Not drafting well, trading prospects, and not signing draft picks for an entire draft had more of a deleterious effects on the future than one bad contract (which actually wasn't that bad considering he was a productive player for the majority of it... far better value than what the Cubs got from Soriano, which was the other big-money player that year). Would you be against them trying to be the late 2000 Phillies with an even deeper farm system and more MLB-ready talent? Right now, they're implementing more of a TB Rays model than anything else... if they acquire and sign a few high priced players, they'll be more of the Cardinals hybrid model that still places an emphasis on player development, but they go out and acquire/sign big money players to fill in the necessary gaps.
Sure - but the argument I was commenting was all or nothing: i share Nick's sentiments that i could really care less what our financial situation is 5 years from now. if you told me we would win 1 world series in the next 5 years, but then we'd suck fiercely for a decade again, i would sign up for that in a heartbeat.
point was now is the time to go all in/maximize their chances of winning a ring. i'm in favor of whatever astronomical contracts are necessary if they improve our chances of winning a title. would price or grienke improve our chances of winning a world series in the near future?
