http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/galler...w-mccutchen-offseason-stories-to-watch-121216 The addition of a starting pitcher would complete their offseason, one in which they already have acquired catcher Brian McCann, outfielder Josh Reddick and outfielder/DH Carlos Beltran. So, which starting pitcher are the ‘Stros going to land? The White Sox’s Jose Quintana? The Royals’ Danny Duffy? One of the many available Rays? The Astros and Rays, despite talking all offseason, have yet to find a match. The Royals, who want to compete in ’17, would need to be compelled to move Duffy. As for Quintana, the White Sox’s initial ask was for right-hander Joe Musgrove, who showed flashes of excellence while producing a 4.06 ERA in 62 innings as a rookie, plus arguably the Astros’ two top prospects, righty Francis Martes and outfielder Kyle Tucker. Nova and Hammel probably are a cut below what the Astros want to acquire — a legitimate complement to lefty Dallas Keuchel and righty Lance McCullers.
Musgrove, Martes, K Tucker.. yeah, too much. I wonder how far they came down from there after a few days
I just wanted to come in here and say I hope everyone doesn't write off AJ Reed. His first 120+ PA are eerily similar to Anthony Rizzo's. I am not saying he is going to be Anthony Rizzo, just that he is still a big time prospect.
Appreciate that. I wonder what Cubs fans thought when they watched Rizzo. Because sometimes the stats don't reflect the PAs--a la Bregman's first 40. (Or White's first month the other direction.) Did Rizzo look similarly overmatched to what we saw from Reed? Not to say there haven't been guys who looked ridiculously overmatched and then come around to be very good. Let's see. I sure hope he finds something!
I might be going out on a limb here but I'm saying Musgrove will have very similar numbers to Jose Quintana or Danny Duffy in 2017.
If he doesn't get traded, I hope he uses his time in spring training (or AAA to start the year) to be prepared as the first call up if anyone on the infield goes to the DL.
I was very impressed with Musgrove during the season. I think he is a good pitcher who has a lot of upside... I think he is ready to contribute to a major league rotation right now so I'd be pissed to see him go for anyone less than a #1 or #2 type.
Compare their BMI's too! If Reed slims down from fat to simply just "big", he's going to have a much better chance of improving.
Yep I don't understand trading Musgrove in a package for Quintana. We need to add to the rotation not trade one arm for another and Musgrove is already a key piece in 2017.
Musgrove is not Quintana... And everyone who thinks he has a chance to be similar to Quintana why risk it? Just go get Quintana. I swear it's amazing you guys want to keep prospects under the notion that they MIGHT be as good as the person you are trading them for. Also, our OF is stacked, we dont really need Tucker. I would say Tucker and one of Martes/Musgrove for Quintana then nab EE for his dropped rate and lets win this. I don't usually use the "It's Happening" gif, but if they made those 2 moves I would post it on every board in this forum.
Except Quintana is a massive upgrade of that one piece, in all likelihood. I'd love for Musgrove to be as good as Quintana...but in all likelihood, he won't be.
Quintana is not a massive upgrade of Musgrove, he's about half of a run better in ERA and Musgrove will take steps forward as he continues development. McHugh is really the replaceable part of the rotation, Morton is really a better version of an innings eater at the backend of the rotation.
That's laughable. 1/2 run era is a substantial upgrade and he has been outstanding for 4 years and has a club friendly contract. You have massively overvalued Musgrove.
Was about to post this.. the difference between a 3.00 ERA and 3.5 ERA is huge. Imagine a .250 batter and a .300 batter. And if that isnt wrong enough, you are even wrong in your comparison. for 2016 season, Musgrove had a 4.06 ERA, same as his career. Quintana had a 3.2 ERA with a 3.41 career ERA. thats more than half a point. And if Musgrove takes a step forward that would make him Quintana.. why not just get Quintana in case Musgrove DOESNT take that step?
Caveat: Please be aware that the following is a very ball park guess based on information cobbled together from different sources based on what prospects of different status actually produce in the majors. My numbers are not perfect and frankly off by a good degree (but not by enough that the argument should be off), but I suspect this type of valuing of prospects by the Astros using their own system of calculating value is why Quintana is not an Astro. Quintana will likely be 4 to 6 times as valuable per year than Musgrove. Musgrove has two additional years. Tucker projects to be between a 1/3 and 1/2 as valuable per year than Quintana based on what prospects of his status produce on average. Tucker has 3 additional years. Martes projects to be 1/4 to 1/2 as valuable per year as Quintana. Martes has 3 additional years. Prospects are highly variable so they undershoot their projections nearly 50% of the time, but they also overshoot their projections about 50% of the time. Typically, prospect for players costs about 20% more expected WAR as the prospects have more risk associated with them (i.e. players have risk as well..just less). Astros aren't going to pay over 70% more in expected WAR for a likely one year boost in WAR. Odds are two of those three are producing a combined value of close to Quintana from 2018 through 2020. 2021 through 2023, the three prospects will outproduce Quintana's contract which will have expired by about as much as he outperformed them during 2017. PS. As soon as I hit post reply, I suspect Astros will have already traded those three for Quintana.
I don't mind trading Martes, Musgrove or Tucker. It's just the idea of trading all of them that bothers me (and likely the Astros FO). Musgrove is projected to be a solid reliable middle of the rotation guy, but he's probably a year or two from that. Quintana is already a strong #2/weak #1 and has four years of control. I'm honestly a little surprised Chicago is thus far insistent on absolute top 30 guys. A lot of the other prospect for ace trades had filler back-end top 100 guys.
I 100% understand this; I support the idea of collecting and, to an extent, relying on this kind of analysis. However... projecting *anything* of 2 kids who've never stepped foot on a MLB field ("They better not!" - Bo Porter) is sooooooooooooo risky - at the expense of acquiring a 180 on the risk scale - that I can't help but reject the idea outright on a purely emotional basis. Quintana is one of the best pitchers in baseball (this board, as well as AstrosTwitter, are vastly underrating him) and if he, as he enters his prime, maintains his ascendancy, I'm OK with any future ramifications if I get 4 years of a 5+ WAR starting pitcher. This isn't 2006-2011, where McClane was irresponsibly dismantling his pipeline; Crane and Luhnow have shown a commitment to maintaining a robust farm system, and replacing Musgrove, Martes and Tucker (only 1 of which, IIRC, was a high pick) is far easier, IMO, than landing an ace on Quintana's level.
