All they lost was the utility of trading those prospects in another deal. Hader may eventually prove to be a power bullpen arm but even those are not THAT rare. For as good as Jansen has been, he is only getting an average of the QO the next 5 years. Knowing which prospects to hold onto and which to move is what separates the good from the very good organizations. The Braves during their primary 10-15 year run dealt a number of "can't miss" prospects for established players and didn't regret it. Hell, even Dave Dombroski gets criticized for supposedly ruining farm systems. However if you go look at the trades he has made, he has gotten the better end of the deal 85% of the time. Hell he traded what was viewed as a kings ransom for Miguel Cabrera and never looked back. If Tucker and/or Martes really are "special" then hold onto them (like the Red Sox held onto Bentitendi) otherwise move them for players that are better. Right now the problem is that Luhnow seems to think a lot of his prospects are special, and I don't believe that is realistic.
Dont know if i agree with the last statement but the rest is spot on. I think trading for pitchers is just inherently risky and why so many get dealt at the deadline instead of off season. If the only way to get Sale was Bregman then i think Lunhow may have made the right call. Not only is bregman cheaper etc he also plays everyday and was having ML success. Plus there's no guarantee that Sale lands us in the postseason last year. Even if we get there Dallas and the rest of the staff was having down years, maybe it wasnt the best to go to war. If our rotation is lacking this year and he Doesnt make a move at the deadline then by all means he deserves a buttload of criticism. But the core of Altuve, Correa, Bregs, might be the best trio outside of Chicago. Anyways we'll know soon.
I don't think the Astros should over pay just to make a move. No one was willing to deal a Bregman type player, that is why the White Sox ended up with the package they did and didn't get Bregman, Turner or Bentatendi. However, the Astros have not really addressed the top of the rotation in 3 years. They have traded for a rental (Kashmir) and a bunch of #4-5 starters. They passed on signing Lester or Cueto or Scherzer or Kuroda or Samardzija. As a result there is a hole in the top of the rotation.
Agree, and I think they were a bit too optimistic about their in house options. I think they thought they could turn around Fiers and Fister like they did for McHugh, but even Collin hasn't been the same guy he was early in his Astros career. It will be interesting to see what they do the rest of this offseason and at the deadline. This team is a solid rotation away from being a legit great team on paper ( depending on how the offense performs to expectations of course ) Quintana would be a major step in the right direction but i think we might wait until the dealine to get him. I think even with our rotation now, we give Dallas and Lance and Collin a chance to carry us early and then make a move to bolster for the postseason. Essentially i dont think we will be hurting for wins during the Reg season.
Do we really know if Luhnow has made anybody besides Bregman off limits? Reports FWIW are that they wanted Musgrove, Martes, and Tucker. Thats 3 top 40 prospects, 2 of which could be front end guys this season. I dont blame him for balking at that and wanting to work that down.
I'm not opposed with starting the season with what we have and making a midseason trade if necessary. Keuchel McCullers Martes mcchugh Morton/musgrove/fiers Could be more than enough with dat offense though. Yool C!
Would be pretty shocking if Martes started the season in the majors; absolute best case scenario is he is up by June. Keuchel, McCullers, McHugh, and Morton are locks, so Musgrove, Fiers, and to a lesser extent Devenski, Feliz, Rodgers, Peacock, and Paulino will compete for the 5th spot and 1 or 2 long relief roles.
I'd guess that Musgrove is #5 and Fiers is in the pen with Devenski and the rest. I don't think Peacock is on the 40 man by the end of Spring Training...if he even makes it there. If there's a move between now and the start of camp, Peacock and Chapman are likely the first to be waived. (Well, at least I think so. I didn't think they'd make it through last season and they're both on the current 25-man.) Martes will be handled like the rest of the top prospects. He'll start at either AA or AAA and, if he's doing his thing, will be up closer to mid-season.
If everybody is healthy, rotation is fine. But that's the biggest question mark.. .and chances are, they're not all going to stay healthy.
There have been multiple reports the last year that Tucker is close to, if not untouchable. Similar things have been said about Martes. I believe McTaggert has said the same recently. Gammons on the radio in Chicago said that the Astros view Tucker and Martes as top 10-20 prospects in all of baseball and would require something special to move them.
I don't think Houston assessing Tucker/Martes as ranked in the 10-20 range among all MLB prospects is all that far off. But what constitutes "special"? I would consider a 4 WAR pitcher with 4 years of cheap control pretty goddam special.
They won't, but that is a problem for most teams (even workhorses can get hurt, like Pettitte did in 04). Unfortunately LMJ and especially Charlie Morton are basically expected to miss starts this season. Musgrove will have an innings limit and will probably miss 3-4 starts by design. Currently, our rotation goes 6 deep, and Fiers is not going to happy about going to the bullpen. Paulino and Martes are great options to have as the season goes on to replace those guys.
Hard to believe this is a guy that was available to anybody 2 different times as a minor league free agent.
I suppose it is in the eye of the beholder and how "special" do the Astros believe Martes and Tucker really are. Do the Astros believe that Martes will be a 3-4 WAR pitcher for an extended period of time? Do they think Tucker is going to have a Hunter Pence type career or something even better? How certain are they of their projections? Is Tucker more Rocco Baldelli than Shawn Green? Is Martes like Francisco Liriano and lacks a passion for the game? A lot of uncertainty involved. The Astros know Martes and Tucker better than anyone in baseball, but are they biased because they developed them? Basically with Martes you are only getting one more year of control than with Quintana, (5 to 4). So the Astros have to really think Tucker AND Martes are long term 3-4 WAR players with a reasonable degree of certainty to not make the deal.
If the Astros truly expect both Tucker and Martes to be perennial 3+ WAR players then they are betting against HEAVY odds. Even if both are among the Top 15 prospects in the game the chance of either (much less both) being that productive are less than 25%.
Is Feliz completely out of the equation to be a starter? I thought part of the reasoning to limiting his appearances last year was with that in mind... he's certainly a bullpen weapon as well, but would probably be more valuable as a starter.
Hinch essentially has said Feliz will be be in the bullpen this year with Devenski in the mix for starting in Spring Training, but that it could change: http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2016/1...springer-feliz-and-devenski-heading-into-2017
