It was absolutely fantastic on paper. We'll see what it looks like it 2 years and 5 years. I only see one guy who sniffs Houston by 2014.
For me, it's hard to believe that most of these guys that will be drafted next year will be right in my age group. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Cavan Biggio with a grand slam in the <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%2523ProspectClassic">#ProspectClassic</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%2523mlbdraft">#mlbdraft</a></p>— conorglassey (@conorglassey) <a href="https://twitter.com/conorglassey/status/220298643712913410" data-datetime="2012-07-03T23:31:04+00:00">July 3, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fontana and Rogers are both polished college players who could sniff the major leagues fairly quickly. That's two.
07-07-2012 ........................W...L.......% Seattle.............35..50-.412 San Diego.........34..51-.400 Chicago Cubs....32..51-.386 Colorado...........32..51-.386 Houston............32..52-.381 Yup. We have done it! Sole possession of the worst record in baseball folks.
I agree with a lot of you. I do think the Astros are in good shape. We've shored up the farm system and cut the payroll It's actually pleasent to watch the young guys progress and see positive growth. I also agree with that comment that the Astros are about 1 more solid daft and 1 more solid trade or 2 away from being a solid ball club.
Yes. We are in last place again. We need another year of getting a first pick and finally get a stud pitcher.
A pitcher is a must. We got some good infielder talent this year. Plus McCullers who I like. I think he will be a good rotational pitcher. We need a flat out Ace! A stud arm. But I don't see it in 2013 Unfortately. Hopefully someone separates the the pack. 2013 is a lot like 2013 as far as a cluster of talent at the top but no consenus #1 Going to be interesting But yes, once again a legit pitcher is The way to go.
What I hear you saying is that you hope that the best/consensus player is a polished, high ceiling college arm like David Price. Someone who can step and immediately become our #1 pitching prospect but also has a measure of certainty in starting. Cosart and McCullers are both 50% on relieving. At the risk of continuing to ignore that need again, I think the Astros need to go BPA again. We have a lot of good prospects now but we still don't have a date on which we can absolutely say we'll be starting to contend. We can't pass up a consensus bat; even if he's a shortstop (unlikely).
If there is a David Price in the draft, and a Byron Buxton BPA type... Taking Price without hesitation.
Totally agree, we're in no position to be getting cute in the draft. We should be taking BPA for the forseeable future. We can only hope to duplicate this year's draft next year IMHO. Having that first pick is golden as far as the flexibility it allows you later in the draft. I was pissed about the whole AL thing but Luhnow has been top notch so far. I can't wait to see what he can pull off for Wandy and Myers. I have to say my confidence in this organization is really building. I'm stoked about the future of this franchise.
David Price was a consensus top overall pick. Byron Buxton could have gone anywhere from 1-8 in a weak top of the draft. Big difference. If there's a Justin Upton-type HS bat and the top starter is Mark Appel, I take the HS bat. Even if Appel goes back in the draft, I want no part of him at the #1 spot. Reports are that talent-wise he would have slotted at the top of the second tier of starters in the 2011 draft behind Cole/Hultzen/Bauer. That 2011 class was already considered a step below Price.
I reluctantly agree here. Reluctantly because looking at the farm at a glance, we seem to have far more and developed position players than pitchers that are tallied to hit the majors in the 2-4 year range. But, big but, I cant see us passing on several gems just to get to the best pitcher available either. Hopefully by the 2013 draft, the consensus #1 will be a pitcher. If not, we will have to rely more on the guys we have or supplement our starting staff with a few hand picked FA's or trades once the day comes when spending money plugging a few holes makes some sense. Another possible scenario is that if we do end up position player top heavy in the prospects dept, we can deal a few of them to get pitching that way. This may be the primary reason I still hold to the "best player available" strategy. We could, for instance, have more than one super prospect at the same position(s). That would give our hand a lot of flexibility in filling out our roster and at the same time have some very coveted trade chips.
I generally agree, but it will depend on how next year's talent looks like Remember, we were literally 1-2 hours away from picking Appel this year. He's a fantastic talent that will do well in my opinion.
Of course. We may never know what the FO's final read on Appel was though. All we do know is that Luhnow balked at paying him $6m. There were rumors that the Astros contacted 4-5 of the top 8 prospects in the final hours. We already knew they were high on Correa pre-draft. I agree the talent is there, but there were legitimate questions about Appel's make-up because he didn't put up the dominant senior season everyone expected. Make-up is the difference between an Appel and Price. Think Matt Garza vs. Price.
Kevin Gausman is now saying he might return to LSU. If he and Mark Appel both return for their senior seasons, the 2013 draft is going to look A LOT stronger. Hopefully one or both of them improves into a consensus pick, or at least something more like Gerrit Cole certainty if not Price level. ____________________________________________ A quirk of the new CBA to follow is the consequences of not signing top 10 picks. The new rules greatly skew the amount of draft pool money that is slotted to the 1st round pick, and if they don't sign you lose that money from your pool. Previously if your first round pick didn't sign, that didn't hinder your ability to sign later picks to overslot contracts. Now if a top 10 pick doesn't sign that has major repercussions for both top 10 round players and post-10th round players. Example if for some reason the Astros failed to sign Correa then they wouldn't have the money to sign McCullers. Then they would lose McCullers slot value and it would create a monster downward cascade. Basically their entire draft would be ruined. The Astros are an extreme example of that based on how Luhnow drafted, but its possible. Sounds like major leverage for top ten picks right? Sort of. In exchange for that leverage, the draft picks now have a ceiling on the maximum they can demand. And teams still continue to get compensation picks in the next years draft if their players don't sign. But again, teams that didn't draft as shrewdly/aggressively as the Astros wouldn't be as affected. What does all this mean? In exchange for a draft cap, the new CBA makes signing top 10 picks a giant game of chicken. The Gausman and Appel cases are going to the set the tone for this CBA. I have every reason to believe one of these types of cases in going to blow up in a team's face and be the impetus for draft revisions in the next CBA. I have no idea why they didn't just do defined pick values like the NBA. It's the only way to ensure talent is drafted from best to worst, irrespective of team preferences. It's truly stunning that for all the problems the NBA has with player compensation, they actually got the draft part correct.
^ Those guys want overslot deals, so being out their slot bonuses really isn't that bad for the teams. Appel will be a senior, which takes a lot of his leverage. He's not going to get $3M from independent ball. Gausman will only be a junior, so I think it isn't a bad choice for them.
