MLB.com is by far the worst source for grading prospects IMO. Besides that, I'd take our farm and Altuve, McCullers, Springer, Correa, and Bregman who are all 26 and under and are by far more talented than the names you listed on the Rangers.
I'm from Southeast Texas, 90 miles from Houston. Been an Astros fan since I was four, had season tickets for five straight years including the WS run and was a part of all of it. That said, while I hate the Rangers, I don't want my GM making a move just to spite a team...ask the Mavs how that worked out with Chandler Parsons. And how do you know we could have easily matched their offer? Are you part of the Brewers front office and know how they value different prospects? I'll tell you right now they don't use mlb.com prospect lists. Also, you have Stearns as the GM there and given he likely knows our prospects very well, we may have had to given up more than we wanted.
If Lucroy was controlled for a number of years, it might be different even without the SP. But his contract is this year and next, similar to Gomez's last year. That's not a long-term future. It's an extra 1 year, with a free agency period coming up with little to no SPs out there. So we'd still be a prospect trade away from that elusive pitcher. I think Luhnow decided to keep the prospects knowing that cashing in for a pitcher is more pressing in this market. Perhaps Sale or someone similar will be available this offseason.
They've made deals. Off the top of my head, Lackey? Mujica? Axford, Broxton. Obviously the ones I mentioned were the biggest ones. They always add something when they need something. Sure, you don't need to sell the farm or make a big splash every season... But this idea that they should stand pat because it's the Luhnow farm system is a little jaded as well.
I wasn't saying the Rangers have a better farm than Houston; they don't (especially not now). My point was to dispel the notion that trading for Hamels, Lucroy, and Beltran meas the Rangers have a crummy farm and will be a losing franchise in 3 years. They have a pretty good farm and a solid core of good young major league players. It's going to be tough for Houston to ever overtake them as division favorites/winners without making big moves for proven major leaguers.
I'll agree with that but at the same time, we traded for Hamels last year and he rejected our package. Things would have been a lot differently if he comes here, the Gomez/Fiers trade doesn't happen probably, and the Rangers rotation would be complete trash. That said, would you rather have our current MLB roster and farm or theirs? I'd choose ours without a doubt.
Maybe you're targeting specific people here. I don't think most people are saying stand pat purely because it's the Luhnow farm system. Moreso because the right value wasn't present for the guys that were out there. And, as a few of us have said, the right opportunity (a stud SP) wasn't available to start the domino of paying more than expected value because it was time to cash in. Still results in being ok with standing pat this time around. I expect a big consolidation trade in the offseason
Gonna sound homer, but I honestly believe that if Hamels would've come to Houston last year, they would have won it all. I would also choose Houstons farm/roster (it's close), but if you add payroll to that calculus it makes it a harder choice. Also, if I'm making the choice, and I'm GM, I go get Lucroy and keep him out of Arlington.
Respectfully, I do not really care how MLB.com rates the Rangers system. Their ratings are notoriously outdated and inaccurate. Obviously, minor league player development is dynamic and can change in a short period of time. Having said that, right now the Rangers system isn't terribly well stocked, especially with players likely to make a real impact in the the next 12-18 months. The Rangers have young talent in the big leagues, mostly with middle infielders. Desmond, Lewis, Beltran, Moreland and Holland all are free agents after this season. Darvish and LuCroy are both free agents after next season. Choo has 4 years and 80 million left on his deal AFTER this season.... Fielder is in his mid 30's and the Rangers personally owe him 72 million over the next 4 seasons, and he is going to be coming off a very serious injury. Beltre will be 38 years old next season. The Rangers rotation will have plenty of holes over the next two seasons. They are saddled with long term contracts with aging players that have not produced and/or remained healthy. The Rangers will have to spend a lot of money wisely, and put a tremendous amount of pressure on a raided farm system from 2017 onward. They are built to win this year and next.... after that it will be really hard.
My standpoint is that any team with a core in their prime for contention should be doing everything (within reason) to maximize the talent around them. Of course, nobody wants to ever bottom out in the future if everything is traded away... Then again, they have a finite amount of chances with a prime Altuve and up-and-coming superstar Correa. The 90's Mariners come to mind as a team full of talent that still was very keen on hanging on to prospects and trading pending free agents in part due to the strength of their farm system... And they ended up with nothing.
I for one will be keeping a close eye on Lecroy and Beltran. How they produce for Texas will determine (in my mind) how I feel about us passing on them.
Alright, thanks for the clarification. So if you think his terrible production is hurting the team, then that's hard to argue. I just find it interesting that you then took it a step further to try and imply that there is more to the story (which is possible, but as you were not able to provide any support, I can only assume there is zero truth to it, or I'd go crazy believing all of the conspiracy theories on the internet). There's either personal bias, or an ulterior motive with your post, that's all. I get that we as fans have the right to be real frustrated with his bad production, and you can almost feel the anger increasing after each time he swings out of his cleats, but to just make up stuff, and spread hate seems like it accomplishes nothing. And I think you're a good poster, so others probably respect your posts too, so I'd just hate for baseless speculation to be believed by others.
This idea that the Astros are in full control of player movement really and truly needs to stop. The Astros "passed" on them? How do you know that? They may have made a better offer and it was rejected... These deals are not done in a one-team vacuum. Not landing Lucroy, Beltran - or any other traded player - does not automatically mean that the Astros didn't make a concerted effort. But if they don't have the right mix or quality of players, they can't force a team to take a deal.
This. I'm sure the Brewers called the Astros after getting the offer from the Rangers and they held all the leverage at that point. It's not a guarantee that we could have "matched" their offer.
Right--consider fantasy sports, which perhaps people here have real experience with. You can try to trade for a player...sometimes, the other party gets a better offer and just accepts without ever coming back to you. Sometimes they come back to you and ask for something you find ridiculous, before making a deal you find inferior. If this type of logic doesn't even hold water in a fantasy sports league, how are people trying to use it in real life with more complex entities and many more people involved?
I find it a little hard to believe that Stearns would deal with Daniels without at least letting Luhnow know where things stood. All things being equal, Stearns would very likely rather deal with Houston given his intimate knowledge of their farm system. Hell, he's only a GM because of Luhnow in the first place.
Its true, i dont know how things came down. I do know the Rangers got their guys and we didn't. Its either because we offered less or didn't offer anything to begin with, or the Rangers have some sort of magic control over player movement that we do not. Perhaps justifiably, the point can be made that the Rangers went all in and we did not. If so, that sounds like we passed, which is what i said to begin with, and you are now calling me on. Which is it?
