I do, not hiring Dusty. Click so far should be judged for this odd year on how Santos and the Dominican guy (I cant remember his name.) turn out in a few years.
Click knew that Verlander was done. That is a big part of factoring in what moves to make. They knew that Yordan was likely headed towards issues as well. A staff of Verlander/Greinke/Valdez/Urquidy with McCullers and Javier in the pen is a lot more viable than Greinke/Valdez/Urquidy/McCullers....
Click is unlikely to be good as Luhnow because Luhnow was literally the best GM in baseball. How many teams in the history of baseball have won 100 games 3 years in a row? Maybe Click turns out great however him being as good as Luhnow is just not likely..
Luhnow was also the GM when they lost over 100 games 3 straight years. He presided over what is arguably the worst 3 year stretch in mlb history.
He told us what his strategy was, and it worked. Carlos, Bergman, McCullers etc where a direct result of tanking and getting good draft picks.
Of course. But calling a guy “the greatest GM in history” when his tenure was ~.500 and he won 1 WS is a little much. Luhnow deserves credit for creating a plan and seeing it through to results. But his real win was being able to convince Crane to endure all that losing (along with hiring Strom). General analysis of his trades, drafting, and free agent signing portrays him as fairly average.
True, Luhnow had a plan and didn't make 1 move if it affected the teams future. He didn't care about winning when he was building what could've been a dynasty. He was always a big picture thinker. Genius level thinker.
I don't know about this, those Verlander/Alvarez/Pressley etc.. trades turned out pretty well. For different reasons there was 1 trade that brought about his downfall. (Osuna)
He didn't get rid of Keuchel, and signed Altuve to and extremely team friendly deal. He drafted Correa, LMJ, Bregman, Tucker. Traded for Verlander, Cole, Osuna, Greinke, Alvarez Built a farm system based on signing almost all picks that helped facilitate a lot of the above moves... and other than Hader, they still haven't really traded a guy that you wish they never would have. That's not average... even if you want to include his "misses" like Gomez, Appel, Aiken (that still all led to key pieces - Appel - Giles - Osuna, Aiken - Bregman). And you haven't yet factored in the exponential financial impact that this team's winning created for Crane and the net value of the franchise. 3 straight 100 win seasons, playoffs in 4 of 5 years with lots of home games within. Sellouts consistently on weekend series, including during the school year. Increased tv/radio ratings that will serve them well in future deals. It's not just 1 WS or a ".500" tenure... Houston's love affair with the Astros has never been more noticeable or profitable.
On the 0.500 record, he was handed a dud. Since his first drafted player made the majors to his suspension and subsequent firing, the Astros were the best team in baseball. Though, on the Astros sign stealing....the buck stopped with him as no way Crane is going to take the fall. Luhnow's biggest asset was a vision and communication. Getting a core of Springer, Altuve, Correa, and Bregman all at once is incredibly strong and allowed for error outside those 4 guys. I don't know if what Luhnow did is repeatable in today's game without a lot of luck. At least, not right now. What the Astros need is someone that can build major league depth on a shoe string budget while using a large budget on stars.
Agreed... should really be the vision for all teams, not just mid-market or big market. Small market teams that do well make a **** ton of money with increased attendance... when they don't do well they still make money with revenue sharing and TV deals. These teams should be required to spend at some baseline level, and not simply be major league farm systems for bigger market teams.... except for that small window (that may come about every 5-8 years) where it all clicks and you have everybody in their prime, and you make a run.
Like I said, average. For every trade win (Verlander, Alvarez, Pressly) there’s a loss (Gomez, Villar, Laureano). For every good waiver claim (McHugh, Harris) there’s someone he let go for nothing (Martinez, Grossman). For every drafted gem (Correa, Bregman), there was a bust (Appel, Aiken). I have no issue with calling Luhnow a good GM, but that’s based on his ability to execute his tanking plan, not on any elite roster building prowess. He’s not “the greatest GM ever” by a long shot. There’s a litany of guys he’s let go or traded away that have put up really good value for other teams. It’s easy to build a good farm when you have the top 5 pick 4 years in a row. It’s easy to add young talent when for 3 years in a row you trade away every veteran of any value. We can banter infinitely answering each good move with a bad move. Bottom line is he had a plan and executed it, then flew too close to the sun and was fired. Id need you to show your work to prove the financial benefit of tanking then winning is “exponential” compared to just consistently trying to win. I do agree that there’s a net positive from tanking (assuming it works), but part of the analysis would be the negative financial impact of the cheating scandal that happened under his watch.
On small market teams, they spend a much larger percentage of their revenue than the larger markets. If people want a floor, there needs to be more revenue sharing, and pre-arb (minimum salary should be in the 1-2 million range instead of ~500K) and arb salaries should increase proportionate to revenues. The reason baseball revenues aren't going up is almost all related to there not being a reason to spend.
But even with your above examples... the wins outweighs the losses (Villar?). And the wins on the field were actually real, not mythical or WAR-based. Also, you can't use Aiken and Bregman at the same time. Aiken led to Bregman. You can't ignore Keuchel turning into a cy young pitcher on his watch, or Altuve turning into an MVP on his watch. "litany"? Beside Hader, who do you really want back? Its also easy for teams to ignore the farm and not commit to signing quality picks. You saw it first hand here. His #1 and #2 guys that helped groom the foundation were immediately sought after as GM's when positions became available. Other teams have tried to emulate the same strategy and haven't seen the quick turnaround. Its not as easy as simply just "tanking". You can see how much the franchise value escalated between previous winning eras and the 2015-2019 era. And how did the cheating scandal impact them negatively, financially? Which sponsors did they lose?
All teams should spend more. Small market teams can afford to spend more than they do if they truly want to compete regularly (and not just when the stars align). Big market teams could spend less than they do, but they don't, and they also don't want to have years where they don't compete. I thought they set a record in revenues last year? And Turner just negotiated an increased tv package recently.
Hard to give extra credit for Bregman without deducting for Aiken. Getting a star player with the #1 overall pick is what you’re supposed to do. Hader, JD Martinez, and Ramon Laureano are established stars Luhnow all but gave away. Enrique Hernandez, Domingo Santana, Jonathan Villar, DeShields, Folty, Musgrove, Velasquez, and JD Davis have all put up at least one 2+ fWAR season for another team. Robbie Grossman, and Teoscar Hernandez both look like they have broken out, and there are a lot of prospects in other systems that might end up being mistakes for Luhnow. It’s really hard to gauge the cheating scandals financial impact due to the pandemic. Hopefully next season we can get a better idea of how many people lost interest due to cheating but the pandemic will taint that data as well. I do not believe your claim that zero companies pulled or failed to renew sponsorship due to the cheating.
You also presume that there would be a spot for all of those players, while discounting what the return was (Musgrove was worth giving up for Cole. Deshields/Davis not everyday players that would not have a spot here regardless). Laureano is not a star, but they regret that. I forgot about J.D.... certainly a solid negative that Luhnow readily admittedly regrets. But if he gets blame for letting go those that were already there, he then gets credit for the ones that he kept and then they flourished under his time... Springer, Altuve, Keuchel... and that again outweighs any of the above replacement players. Could also add Gurriel who still gets underrated (even in this discussion). Also, still not getting your Aiken/Bregman reasoning. Yes, they wanted Aiken... but Bregman was the consolation. If Aiken was healthy, he likely is a stud. But he wasn't so their backup pick, Bregman, also turns into a stud. One has proven himself... the other theoretical. Thus you get credit for the proven outcome that didn't cost them anything other than having to wait a year to draft again. You'll have to show your work there... all sponsorships at MMP were re-upped, with some new ones added.
