I'm not at all surprised. Funny thing is, if we didn't have White & Reed in the minors, I think we'd have offered him arbitration. Of course, he'll eventually come crashing down. It just depends on by how much and when.
I think Carter is a guy that needed a change of scenery and wouldn't be having the same success if he were still here, with Singleton, and Reed looming in the background, and White breathing down his neck.
Chris Carter has a stretch or 2 like this literally every season. Sometimes early, sometime late, sometimes in the middle. I've said since the middle of last season if you give Carter regular AB's all year, his OPS will always end up in the high-700's with a ton of K's and 30 plus HR. (since 2012, he's averaged 38 HR and 96 RBI per 650 PA). Last season the Astros (understandably) started benching him near the end of last season, and I think we missed some good Carter time when he was sitting out. I was fine with the Astros moving him, because I don't think that level of schizophrenia is good for a contending team, particularly when you have 2 potential studs who are worth a look, and a guy in Gattis who can give you very similar production (at least based on track record). But once you start with him, you have to ride him out all year. If Milwaukee looks to move him, I wouldn't want my team to go after him unless your lineup is already loaded and you can just tolerate his wild mood swings near the bottom of the lineup, come what may. I fully expect bad Carter will make his presence felt.
so...should we have kept jed lowrie? He's hitting 309/349/361. I was okay with moving him at the time, but man these cheap moves look bad in hindsight. Hindsight is 20/20 but it looks like we should've kept Fowler and never traded that haul for Gogo.
The Fowler trade is one that gets glossed over, but may be turning out to be among the most painful. Straily is already gone and Valbuena is getting near the end of his rope. If we have Fowler last year, then we'd have no reason to pull the trigger on the Gomez deal. Domino effect, man.
Their minor league scouting section has been extremely successful, particularly the ones covering the short seasons and A ball leagues. The upper minors scouting is pretty average and the major league level scouting definitely leaves something to be desired. Although major league coaching shares some of the blame.
No, we should not have. #1 - At the time, we weren't expected to be good in 2015. #2 - I don't think he'd have re-signed with us (he nearly left Chicago)
Yes. Salary dump. Bad trade. But Oakland Jed Lowrie >>>& healthier than Astros Jed Lowrie. Front office is getting killed on the trade front. In other news, when/if Rangers OF gets healthy, looks like DeShields will be the odd man out.
I don't know about that. Fowler was about the same player last year as he had been the previous 2-3 seasons. I am not so sure the Astros wouldn't have still gotten Gomez or another bat. Part of the issue with Fowler was his glove.
What do you base this on? How is their upper minor league scouting mediocre? Concerning their major league scouting, they were moving Fowler and didn't expect to get much in return at all. It isn't as if the Astros expected Valbuena to be anything other than what he is. They targeted Hamels and he has done well. Kazmir struggled but they didn't pay a large amount for him and his fastball started to lose a few ticks after he joined the club. They held onto Dallas K when they were terrible, even when there was a lot of interest. I am not saying they are special at scouting at the big league level but most of the moves they made were either where they had no leverage (Giles, Fowler) or guys that they knew they would get a safe return on (Gomez; whom they are likely to get a #1 pick for). I don't have much issue with Luhnow, he has made mistakes, but the issue I have is that I don't think people realize the constraints he is under financially. He had to get a closer, long term and not spend much money. He had to add a pitcher on short money (Kazmir), he had to move a player that the franchise was not going to spend money on (Fowler). When you tell a GM to add talent, under long term club control AND don't spend a lot of money; this is what happens. Chapman isn't on the Astros because long term the owner wasn't going to spend big money on him. Hell, Cole Hamels was a possibility because his contract was locked in long term AND the Phillies would pay a big chunk of it for better prospects. The amount of stress being put on this club's scouting and development is dangerous IMO.
That is what happens when you tell your GM to win short and long term, don't spend money and also make sure the players you get are under long term control. There is a reason that Luhnow was so happy to get a pitcher like Fiers. He knows that he will not have to find a way to get a #3 or #4 starter with a limited budget over the next few seasons. Honestly it has gotten absurd. I have defended the ownership up until I had multiple people close to situation tell me that the expectation is to win and not spend money. Well, this is what you get....... spend money if you want anyone to really care.
Do you have "inside info" and know that Luhnow has had financial restraints put on him? Most of the finances make sense to most of us. If you want to plan on keeping Altuve, Springer, Correa, Keuchel long term, that could be $100 million per year combined at some point, right? Takes a lot of long term planning when building a club that is so young, and has so much young talent in the system. Obviously if you could get a guy like Chapman (if the abuse stuff hadn't happened) then you are not committing long term money. I think they would have went hard after Chapman if not for the abuse stuff. Other side of that coin though, how much do you pay in prospects for what could turn into a one year rental
Yes, I have been told by several people that work for the Astros that the GM has a very tight budget. As it was told to me, the front office was told to keep the payroll below 100 million dollars. With Rasmus taking the qualifying offer, the Astros did not have much money left to spend. As it was told to me, the front office is very aware that they are expected to win the division and compete for the World Series with a payroll 70 million less than the Angels, 65 million less than the Rangers, 50 million less than the Mariners (the numbers I was given). The front office knew and knows they have issues and are frustrated trying to make it all work with such a huge disadvantage. There is no reason for the Astros to have a bottom payroll, when the players will not be free agents for years. You know that I have supported ownership on here, and it was only very recently when I had two different people say the same thing in different conversations. There is absolutely no reason the Astros payroll isn't 25-30% higher in the short term than it is right now. When people consider the moves that the front office has made, they need to consider them under the unrealistic constraints put on them.
He gets hurt only in Houston. HOU: 166 games | 650 PAs | 570 ABs OAK: 317 games | 1322 PAs | 1200 ABs
