Not really too sure that we would be limited to Hill if we got EE. In fact, I would think that we are more likely to go after an "elite" guy (I'm thinking more a FotR guy like Quintana) if we do sign EE. Makes the current window more defined and worth going "all in" while still saving major pieces of the core long term. Also, I am more interested in seeing guys like Martes play in an Astros uniform than getting a guy like Hill for depth. That's what Morton was to me.
If you believe this, than Hill is the way to go IMO. A trade for Sale or Archer could very will cost Martes, and Hill is way more than just a guy who adds 'depth'. The main concern with Hill is health. Whenever Hill is healthy, he is one of the very best starting pitchers in baseball. Last year his peripheral advanced stats (FIP, xFIP, SIERA) were better than both Sale and Archers. I believe his health and age concerns could get us a discounted price for Hill without having to mortgage our future to trade for an elite pitcher. I wrote more about why Hill to the Astros makes sense here
I'm sure Houston was pressuring EE to sign before the CBA was finished since depending on the changes the big market teams may open up their wallets. Would love to see EE in Houston's lineup but if he goes elsewhere there are plenty of good bats still out there (Fowler, Beltran, Napoli, Holliday, Desmond, Bautista, Trumbo, Moss).
It's a lot more than he is likely to be worth (track record of 36-38 year olds making $25M/yr isn't very good), but if Houston wins it all in '17 or '18 it will have been a very good signing. No more talking about Crane being cheap.
