Sipp is bad and Hoyt is already in the minors. Martes has had 1 bad outing since moving to the pen. Gregerson hasn't been lights out but he's been generally solid. Your post is a very Trump-ian reaction to the minor slump this team is in.
Of course this isn't the last chance. But it is A chance... a very realistic one... far more realistic than anything the future could possibly hold. If its not deemed necessary or worth it to make a move now, when things are in striking distance, I feel that you could make a case to never make a move. Always go towards the future.... But, as we well know, that is not what is going to happen. If they fail now, and fail again next year, the regime will start to get slightly more aggressive (desperate), and they will make more short-sighted moves to capture what they have left of the Springer/Correa/Altuve regime. Then, once they've tried and tried (and if they ultimately fail), they'll befell the safe fate dealt to many of the recent regimes that seemed destined for greatness, but never actually got there (90's Indians, 2000's A's, later 2000 Rays). In many ways, its almost not a great thing to have such highly thought of prospects permeate your top 10... because that's what rebuilding teams want, a top 10 prospect... and right now, the Astros best highly outweighs other contending team's best, but it still remains the cost to play in the current trade deadline game.
Some extra thoughts, given that its Jeff Bagwell's day and all: No team wants to end up pulling a Red Sox/Bagwell short-sighted-like decision... giving up on a prospect that ends up becoming a HOFer. It's pretty much a worst-case scenario for being a buyer at the trade deadline, and opens it up for all sorts of second-guessing down the road. That being said, the Red Sox traded away a prospect for relief help at the time (that did help them clinch and get to the playoffs)... lost out on a future HOFer that would have certainly fared just as well (maybe better) at Fenway... but still eventually won a world championship (two, in fact) before that same team they traded him to ever did. Just goes to show you that even if you do eventually lose a trade... both short term AND long term... it still won't necessarily change the outcome of rings in the decades to come.
The Astros have the same prospects... some are on the MLB team now, losing value, and others are deemed too valuable to trade. The quality of prospects the Cubs have given up would have several of the followers of the minors here spinning in disbelief (in regards to "future WAR", etc).... then again, they did win it all last year, so you can't really argue with any of it...can you.
They can call it a win because they won it all... otherwise giving a top 5 prospect in all of baseball (to the Yankees, no less) for a half season rental who re-signed with the Yankees would have been an abject failure. For Gray or Britton I'd be ok dipping into the wel.
If that's the argument you're gonna make, we should just trade every prospect we have, becuase even if they all become HOFers for someone else, it won't hurt us if we win a WS...in 2035.
Unfortunately, that's all that matters. Just like having the best record in the AL will be a footnote if they don't win it all. It sucks that the end result is really truly important in judging a team's success/failure.
I will be curious to see what they give up for Wilson. They gave up one really good prospect for Quintana and another good but not great prospect. Regardless the Cubs have added a #2-3 starter under long term control and one of the top set up men in a few weeks and the Astros have added no one thus far.
Buyers should buy when they're close... Sellers should sell when they're not. And the point of that story wasn't to follow-suit with giving up future HOFers left/right (or trading all your prospects)... it was to point out that even if you ultimately lose a trade long-term here/there, the franchise can still recover... and eventually prosper. We still know nothing more than that NOW represents the best chance the Astros have ever had in their franchise history. Better than 1998 (when the Braves still finished with a better record than them, and would have given them hell in the NLCS if they weren't Sterling Hitchocok'd), better than 2004 and 2005, and better than 2015 where their aggressiveness apparently back-fired. I too can dream of a future rotation of Whitley, Perez, Martes... with Tucker batting cleanup, circa 2020... with Springer/Altuve going to be free agents, and Correa one year away. It's just that a ****-ton of things can happen to prevent that dream from becoming a reality.
This is my biggest concern. I get not wanting to overpay for a marginal SP upgrade but if they don't make a move to shore up bullpen then it sends a bad msg to our core guys IMO.
I tend to think we put way too much weight into postseason performance. Look to the EPL where there isn't even a playoff. Those six months we'll have finished up by the end of September matter. To me it's tremendously important for these Astros to win more than 102 games, so that we can say we witnessed the greatest Astros team ever. Post-season success is great too, but no one ever faults the powerhouse 90's Braves for example for only winning one World Series. It's much much harder to do what they did with perennial success than it is to get a flash in the pan and win it all a la the Marlins. Give me perennial contention, a pleasurable viewing experience most nights from spring to fall, and a shot at the World Series year in and year out. That's not to say I'm against acquiring anybody...but I do think it's necessary to keep perspective in all this. For every Tucker, Martes, Bregman, Whitley, AJ Reed, Franklin Perez that you keep, if a third of them "pan out" and say one out of the six (say Tucker) turns into an all-star, well then, that cycle of club controlled talent is what keeps you good for a long time.
Looks like the Cubs are about to get a stud RP and a talented C for a borderline top 100 prospect. The market has not been unreasonable this year so far. Luhnow HAS to do something.
I'm not sure "1/6 of your star prospects will pan out" is the angle you want to use when arguing against trading for established talent.
We have the talent in the minors. Get it done! The emotional clubhouse boost is necessary in addition to the acquired player.
