Again, if you read my post fully, I was referring to the entire period 2007-11 as a whole. How is it everyone missed that? But ill add, that this latest year is only one where they did the right things at the right time. Do you really want to argue that last year they should have traded Wandy and Myers instead of extending them? How many potential prospects were lost by that move alone? Or what their draft signing resume looked like previous to last year?
Again, the Astros added 15 young players over the past year due to trades. There was no need to sign every draft pick, and it's rare when that happens - if it ever does. They are also signing international players that aren't eligible for the draft. Incidentally, the article was wrong as in 2008 they drafted and signed Castro, Lyles, Seaton, and Shuck among numerous others. It was the 2007 draft that was a disaster as they had no picks in the first two rounds due to free agent signings and then did not sign their 3rd or 4th round picks, but they did sign 20+ players. Do you REALLY think they only spent $65.00 on the 2007 draft or did you miss the article's hyperbole.
2007 was an embarrassment, which is the primary reason we were 21st. Actually it is amazing we could come in at 21st, with how 2007 went. You can see how amazing the Braves system is, yet they came in behind us. The Phillies came in behind us. The draft is only one part of the equation. Do you know that we were 3rd in international spending last year?
You can't change the past drafts and only in 2007 was their really a fiasco over the past few years. They have made significant progress in their signings since the 2008 drafts. How is it that you have missed that? You didn't even know they drafted and signed Castro and Lyles in 2008 and thought they may have only spent sixty five dollars. You cited this years draft where the Pirates and Nationals spent so much money and the Astros "only" spent 5.5 million, therefore I was asking if you thought this year's draft was a problem.
I didnt know what they spent in 2008. That why I asked if that report was accurate. But no, I didnt think they only spent $65. But it was apparent that they didnt spend much. So 2007 was the year the report meant. And by the words you gave it alone, it WAS a disaster.
More on rebuilding through the draft and trades: It is possible that the starting lineup next year will consist of Shaeffer (acquired in rebuilding trade), Martinez (drafted and signed in 2009), Paredes (acquired in rebuilding trade), Altuve (signed as an international player in 2007), Wallace (acquired in a rebuilding trade) and Castro (drafted and signed in 2008). Their bullpen will continue to be very young and their starters will have at least 3 relatively young arms in Norris, Lyles and Sosa (or someone similar). Question marks at SS and left field although I wish they would just bite the bullet on Lee and eat an enormous part of his salary in a trade or release him outright. So, they are rebuilding, they are signing draft picks, they are trading veterans for draft picks, they are fast tracking minor leaguers. No team will sign all 50+ draftees. No team will completely gut all of their veterans for youngsters. No team will be perfect in their acquisitions or make trades at the right time and if fans expect them to than this fans should stick to playing video games where they can make their own moves.
I was quoting the article. I didnt write it, or did you miss that? Its true that I dont keep up with every player they draft and what year they drafted him. But id say if Lyles and Castro is all we have to show for 2008, it was very weak one.
Yep their draft in 2007 can be labelled a disaster due to not having and/or signing their top 4 picks and in looking at the players they did choose and sign, none of them really stand out. That being said, Altuve could be considered a 2007 drafted player since he was signed as a 16 year old back then. And again, 2008 - 2011 were successful with respect to signing players. Out of their top 10 round selections, they only failed to sign 3 and one of them they redrafted and signed. Those drafts have also already produced at least 4 players who (barring injury) will be significant contributors next year. You can justifiably complain about 2007, but you're not paying attention if you complain about 2008 - 2011.
Do you watch baseball? It is not football and basketball where draftees may make an immediate impact. To already have the 20 year old Lyles pitching and Castro having significant playing time in 2010 is almost unheard of. Other players from that draft are in line to be called up in the next year or two. If you hit on 2-4 major leaguers in any single draft you have had a good one. Generally draftees (even first rounders) take at least 4 years to progress through the minor leagues. There are exceptions, obviously, but they are few and far between.
What the article I quoted says is what the article says. I thought some folks here might enjoy it. As far as what I think, here it is. The Stros are in last. They are in last by a good bit. They have already traded away their best assets (Kepp, Pence & Bourn), and their remaining assets (Wandy and Myers) were made worthless due to ill-timed extensions. So, from this point on, the only way we are getting better is through the draft and through player development. The thing is, all the other teams are getting better through the draft and player development also. So in order to make up ground on those teams, we have to do better than them. Merely holding ground compared to them will only lead to us continuing to be worse than them. So, in reading the aforementioned article, I got the impression that not only were we not average, but below average. Perhaps now you can see where im coming from. Sure, money spent doesnt tell the entire picture. But its tells part of it. Yes, we got some guys coming up that will contribute. But so does everyone else. To me, the equation boils down to this: Is everything the team is doing, draft, trades, signings, hirings, firings, contract extensions, waivers, ect..........closing the gap between us and other teams? My answer
The problem is that you read that article and concluded the Astros are not signing their draft picks. In 2007 that was true to the point where they did not sign their top two draft picks (rounds 3 and 4). As mentioned in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 they only failed to sign two of their choices made in the top 10 rounds (three if you count the one they redrafted and ultimately signed). You seem to be arguing they are not doing enough to rebuild through the draft because this year they only spent 5.5 million in bonuses and the Pirates and Nationals spent more. You seemingly ignored the fact that they signed 16 of their top 17 picks this year and are looking solely at signing bonuses as to whether or not they had a successful draft (with respect to signing players). You use the Pirates spending tons of money as a good sign for them, yet the Astros signed more of their draftees than the Pirates did this year. Bottom line: The Astros were very successful and/or in contention for the playoffs late in the season from 1994 - 2008 with the exception of 2000 and 2007. This generally precluded them from being sellers and they were mostly buyers during that time frame. That served to gut their farm system. They also signed some high priced free agents to try and maintain those winning ways which cost them high draft picks. 2007 was essentially a turning point and they started focusing more on the draft and signing their choices beginning in 2008. They 'over-slotted' for Lyles and that will seemingly be a good decision. While trying to continue their win now philosophy in 2007 and 2008 (and 2008 was a hurricane away from quite possibly making the playoffs), they lost the opportunity to get younger and rebuild their farm system. They are rebuilding and will hopefully get better soon. After all, those massively spending Pirates have not had a winning record in 18 years and we certainly don't want that for the Astros.
No, I didnt conclude we were not signing our draft picks (except for those in 2007), I merely concluded what we were spending less than most other teams during the 2007-11 period. Yes I wondered about those 13 we didnt sign this year, but that was not the main thrust of my argument. How many times do I have to say this? OK, in 2008-11 we signed the lions share of our drafts. So no, im not ignoring it. Just saying that merely doing what other teams are doing isnt going to close the gap. Now answer my question. Do you think those drafts allowed us to gain ground vs what the other teams drafted and signed during those same years? How successful they were 4 or 5 years ago is irrelevant in regards to the team we have now and what team we will have in the years to come.
I'm pretty sure most clubs don't end up signing a good majority of the later round picks. Most of those guys are headed for college to raise their value and would only sign for an amount that most teams would easily turn down.
I have no idea if those drafts allowed the Astros to "gain ground". Only time will tell and 2011 is not soon enough to tell about the drafts 2008 and later. How successful they were 4-5 years ago is DIRECTLY relevant to the team the Astros have now. As I stated, since they were successful they forfeited draft picks because of signing free agents, they drafted lower, they traded away their farm system for players to win now. How can you not see that? Had they not lost draft picks due to free agent signings, had they not traded away their farm system, had they picked higher in 2004 and later would have allowed them to have an entirely different make up. With respect to not spending as much as other teams, that is irrelevant considering the Astros HAVE been signing the vast majority of their top picks over the past 4 years. Since they haven't had top 5 picks they haven't had to break the bank as the Pirates did this year and the Nationals have done the past 3. The true test will be next year when they have the number one overall pick. Incidentally, how many other teams have given a 2.6 million dollar bonus to a 17 year old international player in the past few years?
While the Astros were successful, they all but gave up trying to build through the farm system and essentially shut down their Venezuelan academy (where they were the first club to open an academy there). The Astros drafted poorly in 2000-2003 (drafting based on signability rather than on talent), netted Hunter Pence in 2004 and then continued to draft poorly 2005-2006 (again drafting for signability). 2007 was an absolute disaster and was the death knell for the farm system prior to Wade and Heck beginning the rebuild in 2008. The Astros signed Carlos Lee (losing their first round pick in 2007 to the Rangers), they signed Woody Williams (losing their second round pick to the Padres). Which gave them the 111st overall pick as their first pick in the entire draft, where they selected Derek Dietrich (whom they failed to sign, they also failed to sign Brett Eibner in the 4th round and Chad Bettis in the 8th round --- coincidentally all three players were gone by the third round in last year's draft). Had the Astros offered arbitration to Clemens, Pettitte and Miller, they would have received (2) first round picks, (3) supplemental picks and (1) second round pick. That's six potential prospects that didn't make your system due to lack of priority of the farm system. I'll be the first to say that going for it was awesome and I loved every second of being in contention for the World Series. But to completely ignore the situation with the farm system and player development was just plain dumb. This is why Gerry Hunsicker was a damn good GM, because he always kept an eye on the farm system when making acquisitions for the major league team. Hunsicker warned that you couldn't "keep drawing from the well" without there being some consequences. Trading prospects for bad players (Jason Jennings), not offering arbitration (Miller, Clemens and Pettitte) and getting picks in return (2007), closing the Venezuelan academy (talent pipeline gone) all contributed to the plight that the Astros are currently in. The Astros made some solid picks this past draft, I really do believe that Springer will be a five tool player. Armstrong was a ballsy pick and the Astros loaded up on pitching. The bonuses for international signings have jumped quite a bit in the last three seasons, I believe that the Twins gave the highest bonus for an international player to Miguel Sano three years ago. I know the Reds paid a pretty penny for Aroldys Chapman as well.
Jared Your further more detailed explanation adds to my contention that the decisions made years ago directly affect the curent product. The Lee signing has hamstrung them the past few years and will continue to cause a problem next year. At least over the past few drafts and the trades over the past year have them going in a set direction and not floundering to contend, but it may take a few years to see good results. Hopefully, this is a rehash of the Biggio, Bagwell, Gonzales, Caminiti, Kile early years that led to prolonged success starting in the mid 90s.
The Astros have not drafted well, period. If i'm right, looking at our current roster only 5 players (Norris, Bogusevic, Martinez, Lyles, Shuck) that we're actually drafted. Bogusevic has already failed at what we drafted him for, and in round 20 martinez is frankly good luck (we passed on him 19 times) And our new top 10 prospect list Only 3 (Foltynewicz, Springer, DeShields) DD and Folty are struggling in the lower levels, and Springer hasn't even played. Our whole farm turnover has come through trades, so I think we need to look long and hard at our Draft team, because they simply haven't got the job done.
