Sure - by that standard, if they always draft well and replace current great players with new great players, then they have a 100+ year window, so there'd never be any reason to invest in the "now".
That is the objective. To not have windows, but wide open doors. We can't guarantee to remain competitive forever without unlimited budgets (like the Yankees basically had), but we can do our best to make sure we don't have sharp downturns.
Even teams with unlimited budgets have sharp downturns... But they have a far easier ability to buy players/prospects to get out of it.
IDK, Yankees haven't had a losing season since 1992. I don't know what it is like for the Yankees to be bad.
50 years with no WS title IS GETTING OLD. By definition. We've had "10 year" projections now 5x and counting...and we had 'windows' in 1980, 86, 97-2001, 2005 , 2015. So maybe 6 or 7 years of legit contending, and out of those, arguably maybe 3-4 where we had a shot at winning the WS (1980,86,98,05, and now 2015). I'm not convinced anyone can argue any of our 5-10 year plans have actually been successful in terms of winning (the late 90s comes closest) to where we had the chance of building a dynasty like the Yankees, Braves, Cardinals etc.. why? In part (bad) luck, in part incompetent management, in part under-performances, in part injuries, in part cheap owner, in part another super team takes the crown from us (see: NY Mets)...that's my point. LOTS OF UNCERTAINTY. Thats why even "if" we think we have a 5 year amazing outlook, does anyone want to guarantee we'll make the playoffs every year in the AL WEST? I like our chances ,but does that mean we are successful? So why wouldn't you, in that case, say wow, we came 4 outs from beating the eventual World Series Winner, and had we won, probably would have had a really solid chance against the Blue Jays and who knows the outcome...let's go "ALL IN..there is a Window NOW" (the Mariners are retooling, the Rangers beat us for the AL West Title, the A's are crafty ,and the Angels have the $$$--should we wait for them to get ahead?) So we find ourselves in a situation where we are in the bottom half, if not bottom third in team budget, have some great talent on the squad and arguably (yes arguably because nothing is certain) one ace and one big bat away from "likely" making the playoffs and making an even bigger push toward the big prize, now that this team has experience etc. You have 1 year of Colby Rasmus left...he who obviously thrives in the post season. You have probably 1 year of Gomez left. A big part of championship teams is club house familiarity and chemistry and the Astros seem to thrive on that so far...so could be right that this isn't a 'all-in' year, and its a wait until 3-5 years 'because we'll be good' every year apparently. Some people are happy to wait another 50 years. I'm not. I want this team to be successful build on what we did last year and have an owner say 'f it" lets do what it takes. I'm not for ditching the farm, or not giving prospects a shot, but I hope, HOPE, that Crane opens his wallet if it means adding the last piece.
The Astros right now lack the finances to truely go for it. Had Rasmus not taken the qualifying offer you may have seen a 6 year/ $110,000,000 for Cespedes or Upton.... But now the budget is tighter and there is no spot to play an outfielder that strikes short of the offer hoped for ($150,000,000). My guess is we get Fister or whoever else is left holding an empty bag when the market dries up.
This is silly. You're talking across numerous ownership groups, GMs, managers, front offices, etc. And of course players. To throw all that on the current group and say "I don't care what you've done or what promise you show, gimme gimme now because Mike Scott didn't deliver for me" is just...off base.
Nope. It's about seizing an opportunity and recognizing that in baseball a lot of externalities influence the process. Silly is not capitalizing on a window of opportunity. All of you optimists hoping a 5 to 10 year plan will yield results based on a schedule are seriously misguided. I applaud Luhnows plan, it's working , but by all accounts it's two years ahead of schedule. Should we just stick to the plan because the GANTT chart shows success in 2017? That's stupid
I didn't say "don't capitalize". But your entire premise has been that the last 50 years of no championships has been too long, and therefore we need to move even faster / push harder. I'm saying that reasoning makes no sense. I agree that we should capitalize in general. At the same time, you have to at least THINK about the future while spending for the present. You just start changing where you sit on the scale...it used to be 5/95 present/future. Last year it was maybe 30/70. Now we should be closer to 70/30 or something along those lines. If you're saying we should be 95/5 or 100/0...I disagree.
All certainly true - but that's true of all teams at all times. It doesn't make sense to say the Astros, at this moment, have a 10+ year window as though it's some unique thing due to our circumstances. 10 years from now, every team in baseball has basically the same window, minus a few centerpiece players here and there that are just getting established - and even they may or may not good or still on the team in 10 years. When looking at windows, you're generally looking at what you currently have established and can get project forward. Many of the players that will be on the team 10 years from now haven't even been drafted yet or are Single-A type players today. My only point is that you can't project anything out that far.
You can't have great certainty in any specific year either. Nationals were locks for playoffs last year. A couple injuries and a team wide case of choking outside guys that got choked literally did them in.
Glad he's off the market. I don't understand why some fans here were hoping to pay a high strikeout masher for past performance as he enters his 30s. Sportscenter effect I guess.
If we aren't getting production we can always pull the trigger on a trade for a 1B/DH. I don't expect that to happen though. I think Gattis is gonna be closer to his Atlanta numbers, and I think Reed is gonna be a stud. I'm curious how the White/Tucker/Singleton situation will play out. I think it's a lock that Reed will be held down a few weeks to get that extra year, but I think White can make the team opening day. If Singleton does win the job out of ST, White could find himself roadblocked if Reed does well. You also have Preston Tucker floating around. Not to mention the possibility (even if it feels unlikely) that Singleton may hit well enough to demand AB's even after Reed is ready. I've always felt it was much more likely than not that at least one of our three 1B prospects was gonna be a very productive hitter, which is why I never felt like going after a 1B was a priority. Maybe multiple guys hit well, and we have very valuable assets to address other issues.
Would love for Luhnow to sneak in on Cespedes and get him on a short term (2-3 years), high AAV deal. Would make sense on a lot of levels just don't know if Crane is giving Jeff the financial flexibility he needs.
