Did he really do just fine with the Cardinals? In his 7 years of draft responsibility, he has 15 1st round draft picks. Only Colby Rasmus(2005) and Lance Lynn(2009) have produced a career bWAR in excess of 10. 9 of the 15 failed to reach the majors or had career bWAR less than 1. Excluding those 1st round picks, he drafted only 2 players - Jon Jay(2006) and Matt Carpenter(2009) - that have produced career bWAR over 10. Only Trevor Rosenthal(2009) and Luke Gregerson(2006) seem to have a chance to join that crowd. Sorry to disagree, but that does not seem all that impressive to me.
Definitely agree with this, though probably more happy about it than Nick is. Astros aren't going to make big trades at deadline as a buyer unless they are in the spot that wins mean a lot more than usual. Though if the Astros are in first place easily, I do expect Luhnow will try to fortify tean for playoff run using depth from farm system. Is Brett Phillips the highest rated prospect Luhnow has traded?
Teams are made up of more than just really high WAR players... they scouted/developed/promoted plenty of guys who helped either supplement the major league core, or who were used to acquire other MLB talent. Staying in contention for over 10+ straight years doesn't happen without not just minor league depth.... but minor league depth that can actually contribute something at the MLB level. At the end of the day, with the Astros, they may only have Correa, Bregman, and LMJ to be counted on as Luhnow's main drafted success'.... but there will be plenty of other role-player types or guys traded for established players that go on to shape the future success of his tenure.
2005: Rasmus, Jaime Garcia 2006: Ottovino, Jay, Craig, Gregerson 2007: bust 2008: Lynn, Siegrest 2009: Miller, Kelly, Carpenter, Rosenthal, Adams 2010: bust (although Tyrell Jenkins has a shot to be decent) 2011: Wong, Maness, Tilson I agree the Luhnow's rep as a draft wizard is overstated. But I don't think it's as bad as you described. But it is interesting to see that in hindsight those drafts aren't as productive as they looked like they would be when Luhnow was hired by Crane. He largely got the job based on the 2009 draft, which had 5 guys advance to the majors very quickly.
Wasn't sure where Folty or Ruiz were when they were traded... and Appel was still artificially ranked high based on his draft status. I'm not unhappy with the "stay the course" strategy....its just a very real possibility that this team may end up consistently good, make multiple playoff appearances, and still may not have that front-line pitcher (or perfect storm of circumstances) that pushes them over the top.... and much like the majority of my Astros-loving fandom life, I'd end up disappointed.
You are catastrophyping this course. This course may come up fruitless, but so can any other course. This course is likely the best chance Astros have of winning World Series as long as they aren't a top 5 spender (i.e. able to use money a lot more often instead of prospects for depth, injury replacements). Luhnow has gotten the Astros into being a team I love. I favor this style of team building. I have no fear risking the team on the "unknown". It is tough to quantify, but these guys feel like Astros (except Beltran who is the Devil until he hits a homer in the regular season). I know you don't like this type of team building. I just hope you can put trust into Luhnow that he knows what he is doing. I don't think the course will change until Astros get much closer to the point that they think they are losing Correa or they just have average to star players everywhere.
Even if it is Tucker and Martes I think you just make the trades. Tucker, Martes, and Musgrove is more likely what they are asking if the deal hasn't been done yet.
I think the gap has to be substantial, meaning Houston is either not willing to include either of Tucker/Martes, or only include 1 of them, and Chicago is demanding both. If the disagreement is only about a potential 3rd piece (I.e. both sides agree on Martes and Tucker and are just haggling over Musgrove), I think they would have worked that out by now.
Agreed. At this point, the Astros are better off reassessing our starting rotation issues (if we have any) come the trade deadline. As a fanbase, I feel we want to see a move happen, but not for that steep of a price. Yeah, no prospects are "forsure" guarantees but maybe some fortune falls our way. Who knows, maybe a team falls out of the race come July and some SP on that particular team is having a All-Star season... then we make that push (at a lower price) for that particular pitcher. Could work, could backfire. But i trust Crane to give the ok to make that WS push and that means snagging a frontline SP. Our only enemies are the Indians/Red Sox IMO and they have superior staffs. All in all, we can all agree that a WS won't run through Houston if a frontline SP isn't acquired (in all likelihood). But that can change before Aug. 1st.
I don't dislike it. If I did, I wouldn't be here. There are certainly parts that are less than desirable... like turning your team into a laughing stock/joke. I know some have short memories and will easily forget those years, but if you truly love this team, there's no way all of that doesn't affect you. Also, I dislike them thus far masquerading as a small market team that will spend only when crane gets out of debt or when the team is extremely good (when they almost paid for Hamels). I guess I don't like having a team-poor owner (which is what Crane became when he desperately overspent for the Astros and a now defunct network)... which basically necessitated the embarrasing years. Far from catastrophying this course... just making sure people still realize that the goal is a World Series title. Not the best farm system title, not the most WAR/$ title, not the winning arbitration title, not the reclamation project title. It's still slightly annoying to realize that the Cubs employed nearly the exact same rebuild strategy at around the exact same time....but they were prepared to invest the resources (in a not so irresponsible manner) to give the rebuild the best chance of working out.
Hmmm, I never considered 10 WAR for a career to be a high WAR player. Without the guys I mentioned, all he scouted/developed/promoted was about a dozen 1 WAR per year guys, an average of one and a half guys per year . Again, not my definition of just fine. I think most scouting directors could lay claim to similar achievement achievement, including Tim Purpura. As far as staying in contention for 10+ years, it does not seem that his draft choices had much impact.
Again, you have to look year to year at both deals made with his draft choices, and the players that made up the everyday lineup on WS teams that were his draft choices. The farm system never really bottomed out, without having the luxury of a high pick. Injured players had adequate replacements. Rotations and bullpens had depth. Otherwise, you're basically indicting the "cardinal way" (something so many fans here have been enamored by) as merely something anybody could have overseen.
I am not trying to make it look bad. Just trying to show that the belief that he will continue his success in Houston now that he isn't drafting in the top 5 is not based in reality. Most of those guys you mentioned are at best role players, and pretty much the definition of replacement level. While it is always an achievement to just make the majors, posting .6 WAR like Wong did last year in his 3rd full year is not a great success story. That is what I expect future drafts to be like in Houston, not because he isn't good at his job, but because draft successes dim as they get farther from the top pick. This is why I said relying on 4 2nd/3rd round picks in the upcoming draft to replenish the farm is not realistic in my opinion.
Okay, then tell me which of his draft choices were instrumental in their WS appearances or were used to trade for players that made significant impact. You say that it never bottomed out, yet I have shown it has not provided the support/replacements/depth you claim. Being enamored by a false narrative is not my concern, but yes I think even Tim Purpura can point to a Preston Tucker level player or two on average.
Picking at the top of the draft netted the Astros Correa and Bregman. In the process they also whiffed on Appel, whiffed on Aiken (which got them Bregman). Remains to be seen what happens with Tucker, who may be traded. You're basically trashing every single other draft pick and suggesting that Pupurra (he who oversaw drafts where nobody signed) would be equivalent. As far as the Cardinals program, you again exclude deals they made (involving prospects) to help the major league team. They also acquired minor league guys who were developed and graduated in the system overseen by him. Lynn, Carpenter, Wong, rosenthal, Adams all expected to be key parts of their current team. I've criticized Luhnow for plenty regarding the MLB team... but never for one second have I doubted his ability to build and sustain a farm system. It's night/day from the Pupurra years.
The goal is WS. Not winning enough games to appease Gammons. I don't care about laughingstock thing if it gets the Astros to their goal. Oddly, I blame previous owner and GMs for not maintaining a farm, trying to long to win, and drafting horribly. Astros would still likely be a bad team if they didn't go the route they took and being a sub 0.500 that long would have made theme a laughingstock anyway. On Cubs, they are there as WS Champs recently instead of Astros because they have more money, Astros made one big mistake, and Harris couldn't hold a lead. They do employ similar strategies as Astros just with more money. I don't see owner changing and I don't see Astros being a top 5 market any time soon. Houston may be big, but has not been great for sports revenue outside football that its size would indicate. Goal may not be to maintain a farm, have highest WAR/$, but without money there just isn't any way to win than a team that spends more unless you get more wins per buck. You can't get more wins per buck without a farm. Go Astros!
Its bullshit to blame the market size. Houston remains a top 10 media market, which should drive both media revenue, ad revenue, and ultimately attendance sales. The Astros are a small-market franchise largely because of their owner's debt and how he was swindled into overpaying for the franchise. They bought a defunct network with absent broadcast rights fees.... and now they get below average TV money in comparison to their market size. However, MLB streaming revenues along with revenue sharing is at an all-time high. As attendance continues to go up (with improved team performance), Crane will not only have to put the profits back into the team... but hey may have to put in a little extra to ensure a championship. Sure, Drayton was certainly chasing it in the end... but the Astros also were far more profitable after moving into MMP than any year he was ever at the Dome, and he did put that back into the MLB team.
Drayton created network mess. Whoever bought Astros would be in same situation, but go ahead...whine about things that happened years ago. Astros are back to being good faster than expected. Damn you Crane!
