McCullers is younger than both. He's more proven than both. Velasquez has suffered an injury every year and Appel has struggled in the minors. So were Ezequiel Astacio, Troy Patton, Taylor Buchholz, Jordan Lyles, Matt Albers, Jason Hirsh, Scott Elarton, & Tim Redding. More recently we gave up Jared Cosart & Mike Foltynewicz. There was also Wade Miller, Billy Wagner, & RoyO. Wagner and Oswalt were both top 20 prospects. One ace out of all those guys, and he was #13 on BA's list. Of course, our current ace wasn't close to being a top 100 guy.
yeah, maybe they didn't know he'd become available. But we don't know his price either (yet). Maybe they knew, inquired, and found that his price was similar to Kimbrel's? (i.e. would rather pay for Giles). I have to imagine they checked in on options like him rather than only asking about guys reported in the media. Until Robertson is actually dealt, it's hard to know. Hell, even then it'll be impossible to know what they said to the Astros to try and get them to overpay vs. what they actually accept if the market dries up. It was already a deeper market to trade vs. sign FAs, so trades were more expensive than they would be at other times.
so they're known quantities, that are together better than a guy who put up a 3.22 in the AL as a rookie. And they're also known quantities that might be aces but also might not be what ?
The Yankees got Chapman "cheap" because his value tanked when the Dodgers deal fell apart and the allegations came out, not because Jocketty preferred to work with the Yankees than some other club. The original deal with the Dodgers was going to be a steep price. I don't think Astros fans should judge the cost for Giles based on what Chapman cost. Judge the cost based on what Giles actually gives the team.
yes they are known quantities, that's why they were able to nab the most expensive closer to be traded this offseason. I've said repeatedly that they HAD to keep lance. But do I wonder that having appeal and VV would have been a better trade off, yes I do. The only way it wouldn't be a btter trade of is if Lance actually is the next oswall, which remains to be seen.
The Astros still have Michael Feliz, Francis Martes, & Joe Musgrove, plus several other guys with potential to vault upward. We didn't empty our pitching prospects. We gave up a lot, but only Velasquez looks like a potential plus pitcher. The Gattis deal doesn't look terrible, other than we could have traded for someone different. Folty stunk in the majors again (5.71 ERA). Ruiz struggled in AA. Thurman struggled in AA and the Arizona fall league. Meanwhile, James Hoyt, who we got in addition to Gattis ended up with good numbers in AAA after struggling to start the season. 12.1K:2.0BB
if they're known quantities, do you think Appel and VV are sub 3 ERA guys for the next 10 years? 3-4 ERA guys? 4-5? Will they be ML starters for 5 years? 10? Will they both ever see the minors again? Are they done improving, or do they have a lot more improvement in them? It's also weird to me that you think the trade is dependent on Lance's future performance but not on Appel's or VV's. (even if you're one who thinks future performance is how you judge past trades... I'm not in that camp.)
What? Folty last year had an ERA of 5.7 and WHIP of 1.62 ... in the NL. Gattis was a central part of the Astros making the playoffs and led the team in HRs and RBIs. In what way does that trade look terrible?
I know that both have the talent to be sub 3 era guys, yes. Both have the talent to be top of the line starters in the majors. What's really funny is if I said JD Martinez was the stupid deal in history of the astros, you never let a guy go like that. Oh yeah, I'd have 100 people saying, nobody could have known that this is what JD Martinez would become. It was a good deal at the time, and we had XYZ in the minors. The facts are the vast majority on this board thought JD Martinez was a limited player when he got traded, but that turns out not to be try. What I know is that Appel was the #1 pick in the draft for a reson. And that VV was a highly regarded picher that shot up the rankings for a reason. Where they stand now in their development is besides the point. They will develop, and when they do how will this trade look down the line 3 or 4 years.
Having the talent is not the same as being known quantities. [ignoring JD stuff because that's been beaten to death..no point] This is the crux of where we disagree and what's causing this discussion with everyone. Where they stand in their development is ENTIRELY the point. The assumption that "they will develop" is entirely wrong. There is a litany of prospects who didn't develop--or didn't develop into what they were "supposed" to be--but had the talent to do so. For you to assume that these 2 prospects are different from the history of the game and have a 100% chance of developing into what their talent proclaims them to be is just flawed. In fact, taking that position would lead one to never trade top 10 draft picks...might as well let them all develop and become studs. I'd start throwing out names of failed top 5 picks, but you probably haven't heard of them because they're nobodies.
That and every single MLB team, since they all passed on him as well. By this standard, you should never trade or give up on anyone because they might turn into JD Martinez. There have been a lot of dumb statements in this forum, but this one just suggests you actually don't know anything about how baseball works.
And your assessment is that they won't develop. I bet that was the same assessment you help for JD Martinez as well. I think your position really revolves around what you WANT to believe is true rather than what is the most likely scenario. I thought JD Martinez was a very good talent that could be part of the core going forward with altuve, and I got shot down be every poster on this board saying that he was a limited player. The point is that your assessment is probably pretty flawed. My assessment is based on reality that young player will develop and players who have the talent to be drafted #1 (are certainly not throw ins to any deal). That's insane. You want to blind yourself to all of that history and talent and say well they SUCK right now, therefore the deal is a good on.
The narrative that the Astros somehow decimated their pitching depth in the minors is still being tossed around?
You're making massive assumptions and not reading posts. I'm not assuming they won't develop. No one knows. I'm saying that there are probabilities with all of this stuff. Based on history and how guys typically progress (i.e. the only info we can actually rely on...and things that Luhnow has way more details on than we ever could), it's more likely than not that Appel's growth is stunted and that VV could have some injury issues throughout his career. Will both of those come true? Impossible to know for sure. What I do know is that, given those probabilities, it's a lot less likely that either of them ever reaches "ace" status. I don't WANT to believe anything, but the most likely scenario is the one that uses past information to predict the future--not the one that assumes history never repeats itself (even though it has many times in the past)
I don't think that anyone believes that Jocketty wanted to work with the Yankees over other club. I suspect that either the Chapman domestic violence facts are far uglier than we realize, the market for closers has dried up somewhat OR that Jocketty values prospects differently than most people. All you have to do is look at the Frazier deal. Yes, the original deal with the Dodgers was going to be far better than what the Reds settled for.
I just can't believe that anyone thought we were going to get arguably the best closer in the game with many years of control left and not have to "overpay" with prospects. Let's see how 2016 goes before we label this the worst trade in franchise history.
Seems like it could be a combination of domestic violence ugliness + his contract status. If Chapman had 2 years left, they could probably wait this out, find out his sentence, and then deal him later. But with this being the only season, Jocketty probably assessed the risk and said, "let me take what I can get"--given that a heavy suspension would leave him valueless and sitting on the contract potentially until the trade deadline (or even beyond).
Even knowing what I know now, the Randy Johnson trade was a great trade for the Astros and the city of Houston.
We also know what Jocketty wanted from the Yankees prior to the domestic violence issue. The Yankees pushed for Chapman previously and the Reds wanted Severino and one of Judge or Bird. After the domestic violence issue his value plummeted. The Dodgers wouldn't trade for him AT ALL. This is a case of a team getting stuck holding the bag when a player loses a ton of value and taking the best they could get.
