i posted it last week - heard it from a "friend of friend" who's connected within the astros. could've very easily been fisher who had the issue (likely) but it did involve a failed physical.
The Yankees got Aroldis Chapman for a mediocre set of 3 prospects and a set up man. Now there are reports that the White Sox are shopping Dave Robertson to have the money for a bat like Cespedes or Upton. I wonder if the Astros over paid for Giles? Obviously Giles costs less financially and is under team control for 5 seasons instead of 3 for Robertson and 1-2 for Chapman, but the prospect cost was huge.
Chapman is a free agent after the 2016 season providing he hits 138 days of service time during the 2016 season. He is undergoing a domestic assault investigation. He is projected to make around $13 million in arbitration this year. If he is suspended more than 6 weeks, he will probably not qualify for free agency but will have another big arbitration settlement in 2017. (obviously he won't get paid while on suspension). Using foresight, the Astros didn't overpay for Giles. Using hindsight over the next x years, they may have.
Mediocre and setup man is probably being too kind. I don't think it means we overpaid, simply that Chapman killed his value. The return they were getting from the Dodgers was much better. I'm not sure how I feel about Chapman. On one hand, we could have easily gotten Chapman in addition to Giles and formed what would have been perhaps the best in baseball. On the other hand, the fact that Chapman discharged a gun during a domestic altercation is extremely unsettling.
It is an interesting question and I suppose the crux is whether the front office should have anticipated that the closer market would stabilize. Also, how much of it was a mandate from the owner to get a closer now. I suspect that the Astros did not think that Robertson would be available from the White Sox (who want to move salary) and the Reds GM does not want to make a deal with Luhnow (they hate each other). Also I suspect the Astros have real budgetary limitations and taking on Chapman or Robertson would eat up the money available after Rasmus and Sipp.
Not sure they would be unwilling to take on those contracts... just that there's a fair to decent chance that Giles can provide similar (if not better) production than either of those guys for a fraction of the cost (salary-wise)... and leaves far more flexibility for them to make additions now and at the deadline. If Giles continues on his current track record... he'll make more than Robertson/Miller and probably equal Chapman in salary-impact once he's past his arbitration years. I'd rather get in on the ground floor of a closer anyways... Giles is basically the very next best thing to developing one yourself (in terms of youth, injury-risk, controllable years, and salary per year).
They would rather spend their funds on other needs than a closer. They are going to pay Giles very little over the next few seasons, where as Chapman will make 13-16 million next season and Robertson will make 12-13 million a year the next few seasons. The Astros can divert than money and spend it on offense or a starter...... we are saying the same thing. No doubt Giles will make a fair amount of money when he is arbitration eligible, but he isn't making 12-16 million a year in the next few seasons. I don't care about getting on the ground floor of a closer other than the controllable years and age. The Astros got both of those benefits, but at a heavy cost. I just wonder if the Astros would have made the deal for Giles had they know Robertson would be available? As for Chapman, it is my understanding that you have a better chance of being hit by a comet than getting Jocketty to make a deal with Luhnow....... the hatred is very real and very strong.
I strongly suspect that if Jockey refuses to discuss reasonable deals with a team with a loaded farm system like Houston, his owner would have a conversation with him. Making your team better overrides any personal disgust with another GM.
Seems like they had a pretty good idea of what it would take to get Miller and then the market for Chapman fell apart after his domestic stuff. Its not a stretch to presume that they just like Giles that much more. The Red Sox gave up a good amount to get Kimbrel... who is older and more expensive than Giles. Frankly, I don't think the Astros really gave up more than they had to... not if you consider Appel to be far from the talent that was drafted #1 overall, VV to be a chronic injury-risk, Obie to be nothing more than a fill-in guy, and Eshelman to be a control-artist that typically will take a few more years to develop than a power arm. They gave up nothing that is counted on to be a key component of this team for the next few years. What's telling is that most Phillies fans/experts think VV can go to the bullpen and be "just as good as Giles"... which is a completely baseless assumption and actually devalues the trade from the Phillies perspective.
If Chapman gets suspended for 1/8, 1/4, or 1/2 of the season (or worse, has reoccurring issues), they'll have paid for at BEST, a partial season. The Astros weren't in a position (after his problems) to take a chance on a part-season closer. The Yankees (with Betances and Miller) can deal with that better given their needs.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yEpdoAZiHWQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Discuss deals? Sure, they had conversations last year before the deadline. Get a deal finalized without the Astros grossly paying more than other clubs? That is a different animal, especially when the valuation of prospects is somewhat subjective. The owner would have no reason to talk to his GM when the issue is subjective prospects. Some of the issue could be that the Reds GM values prospects differently than most. Just look at the Frazier deal. The Indians tried for weeks to get Frazier but the Reds asked for 3-4 of the Indians top prospects. The Indians counter offered but Frazier went to Chicago for what many in the industry view as spare parts. The Indians were left miffed. So where do you draw the line? I don't know, but I do know that the Astros decision makers feel the personal feeling of Jocketty influence dealings.
That is fair, and his salary would prohibit adding other pieces through free agency. However what about Robertson? The Astros were interested last year. I suspect they didn't think he would be available.
Giving up our top 2 pitching prospects is a bitter pill to swallow if you ask me. I would have rather given up Lance mccullers, which the phillies clearly was taxing the astros for taking him off the table. I think Vaesquez + Appel is > Lance mccullers alone. Of course I understand why the astros HAD to keep Mccullers, because the guy looks like the second coming of oswall. But still, the phillies might have gotten 2 aces in this deal.
VV and Appel are future aces, this coming from the guy that was furious we gave up a future ace trading Cosart. If a guy has hype he must be an ace amirite. This success of this trade will depend almost solely on how Giles handles being a closer in a pennant chase. It's not a guarantee, but if he's as good as he has been the last 2 years this trade is a win. If he fails and flames out to the point of being an ineffective reliever, which seems unlikely but we have seen it, then this trade is a loss because we did cash in assets on him, regardless of how the assets pan out.
I said they are potential aces. But even if they are not, they are both listed as top 100 prospects in all of baseball. Giving up both of them is pretty desperate move. Again, I would have rather had both of them (and the depth they provide) than just 1 of lance Mucullers. You may disagree.
VV had a fair amount of MLB exposure last year... enough to know he has promise, but he's still far from a sure thing. The only reason Appel is listed is because he was automatically put on that list when he was drafted #1, and he's slowly slid ever since. Had he never been drafted #1, he'd never be on that list to begin with. Define desperate? They're trying to win now... they traded pitchers/players who weren't sure-fire contributors or even guaranteed to be on the MLB roster next year... and the guy they got back is a young/club-controlled flame-thrower (something this bullpen simply did not have). Its also hilarious that you would rather have two unknowns instead of a guy (Lance) who has already shown the ability to dominate MLB hitters, and happens to be younger and healthier than either VV or Appel.
They traded 5 pitchers, 2 of which are in the top 100 prospects. They also last year traded foltynewicz for Evan "homerun-or-bust" Gattis. Also, VV and Appel are far from unknowns. Basically the astros in the last 2 offseasons have emptied out their potching projects for Gattis and a closer. Heck I would have rather given up Bregman than Appel. Giving up - VV, Appel and Folty is going to hurt for a long while is all i'm saying. Also, I recognize that they have to keep lance. That's not even debatable. But giles are WAY TOO EXPENSIVE and the gattis deal looks terrible now.
