8 and 12 for Toronto is like 10, 14 and 16 for us. I understand there was probably a bit of a premium because we're in the same division, and maybe he didn't like out prospects as much, but I find it hard to believe we couldn't beat that package. We could have found a way to involve a 3rd team to get a Lawrie level player to throw in, hell we could have got him from Toronto and then sent him to Oakland. Seriously, they could have had any 2-3 prospects they wanted aside from Correa. I brought us the possibility of adding Donaldson earlier in the offseason, and the fact that he was traded, for a less that spectacular package, and we didn't get him really pisses me off. This non-move is the worst move of Luhnow's tenure IMO. Donaldson level players are hard to come by, and he fills a position of need.
Exactly. Those guys don't grow on trees and even with all our prospects we still haven't acquired a MLB-ready, high upside 3B guy. Prospects alone don't get that deal done. Particularly in our system where the best prospects aren't ML-ready. If the #1 thing Billy Beane wanted back in a trade was a ML-ready, high-upside 3B back in exchange, then Luhnow had no chance.
I think it would have been difficult to match deal because of Lawrie. Appel and Moran are very close and will be MLB ready during the coming season. Folty is there at least for bullpen purposes. Astros still have Santana and Torreyes in AAA. The Astros have Springer, Singleton, and Marisnick as young guys at MLB level. While you are technically correct, you've made it sound like there is going to be this big wait in prospects when there are going to be many guys make it to majors this year that are prospects. Just not Correa. Even then, Correa and Appel both probably could play in majors right now if MLB rules didn't punish team for doing OTJ training at the MLB level.
The Astros have been in rebuilding mode so long I feel like people have forgotten how to think like a legitimate competitive team. Yes, the Astros have a lot of prospects at the AA/AAA and even MLB-cusp level. What they don’t have a lot of is young, ML- productive talent. That’s a huge difference. Teams know that prospects don’t pan out. A young player that has produced something at the ML level (1-2 WAR) is far more valuable than untested prospect in most situations. (i.e. why a lot of the Cosart trade outrage was justified). In the last few years, the consistent theme is that young, productive, pre-arbitration talent is what everyone is asking for in return. That’s how you get Drew Smyly as the centerpiece for David Price or Shelby Miller for Jason Heyward. The Astros don’t have a lot of that. They’ve got Altuve, Springer, Keuchel, McHugh and Carter. The A’s wanted a third baseman in return. We didn’t have one to give, boom eliminated from contention.
If anything this drops the asking price for Castro, IMO. I know catchers are at a premium, but Donaldson was a top 5 MLB player for the past two years. If Donaldson only nets a couple of 8-12 prospects, what is Castro realistically going to reel in?
Are you purposely ignoring Brett Lawrie, the 26 y/o centerpiece of the return package who Steamer projects for 4.0 WAR next season?
Exactly! Your earlier post was right, we have been in rebuild mode so deep, and so long, that so many Astros fans view the prospects above mlb talent. Lawrie is actually only 24 yrs old, and has already hit 43 HR and stolen 29 bases, among other things. We do not have a guy that age, with those proven abilities, and a much higher ceiling. Lawrie has a LOT of value, so him plus prospects was not a bad haul for Oakland. Something we could not match
Cosart outrage should have stopped as soon as guys saw Marisnick play. Cosart trade most likely makes Astros more relevant faster as the Astros got Marisnick. Astros have 2 young outfielders in the 1-2 range. Altuve is still pre Arb, Keuchel, McHugh, and Oberholtzer are all 1+ WAR range. Castro, Conger, Carter still have value. Along with the guys that are close in the minors, I think the Astros have plenty of young MLB talent, MLB ready talent, and close to MLB ready talent. They just aren't likely to trade it to get older and less years. As I said, Astros weren't close to deal because of Lawrie. On Astros not having young MLB ready guys, the Astros have them...as MLB players and should have some prospects there in less than half a season
Highly debatable. Cosart was worth 2.1 WAR last year, which would have been top 5 on the team. THE ENTIRE TEAM. It's at best an even argument that Marisnick and Moran will be worth more than Cosart next season (i.e. more relevant faster), but I'd bet on Cosart being more valuable given his track record. I rarely say 'you're wrong' on a forum but this is one of those instances. You're wrong. An organization with plenty of talent would not have finished dead last three years in a row before finishing 4th worst last year. The Astros are ML-talent poor. Luhnow and Crane can spin it anyway they want, but the Astros are ML-talent poor. You named 10 guys who could be worth 1-2 WAR, playoff teams have 20-25 guys who average out to 1-2 WAR. If they aren't willing to trade for veterans with less years then they need to quit now. Mature, competitive clubs make those deals. I took the Fowler trade as a good sign but they need to follow up on it more. Among the < 2year experience or under 25 crowd (prospects or MLers), who besides Springer and Obie do you see being worth more than 2 WAR? I see zero according to Steamer projections.
I'm not ignoring Lawrie. Lawrie is a good player, and definitely has some remaining potential. But facts are facts, and the guy has not been able to stay healthy in 4 seasons. He's played 43, 125, 107, and 70 games, respectively. Lawrie's lack of stability and ultimately, productivity is apparent. When Lawrie has been healthy, his stats are not eye-popping in any sense. Lawrie was an incredible prospect, so yes, he can still turn it around. But labeling him as a "centerpiece" for a top 5 player is laughable. Donaldson had the second highest WAR in the past two years, behind Trout. Now, a TOR beat reporter noted Lowrie's injury frequency is a byproduct of how hard he plays the game. That's good to see, but his injury stints cannot be ignored. OAK MUST be enamored by Lawrie because they coupled him with (1) back-end starter, and (2) prospects ranked 8th and 12th. Despite Lowrie's questionable potential, I still think the Astros could have produced a much better offer.
You're focusing way too much on the old prospect rankings. These lists were updated months ago, and Barreto is raw and will easily rise. Heck, Ben Badler tweeted that Barreto has a good chance of making it into the top 100. Focus more on the player themselves than a simple prospect list you found on the internet.
The old style turf in Toronto can't be ignored when it comes to Lawrie injuries also. And in the end, you might think it is laughable to consider Lawrie the centerpiece of a deal, but obviously Oakland did not. We simply have no mlb ready 3b that we could have sent back to them to make this deal work. Maybe, just maybe Luhnow loves Moran and Ruiz, but Oakland thinks Lawrie is a LOT better
Maybe, but i'm not sure that Beane was worried about sending Donaldson to the Astros and the Astros making them pay. I mean sure, we are in the division and all, and the Astros certainly could be a team to deal with in the fairly near future, but I just have a hard time thinking Beane is worried so much about the Astros that he would take a lesser deal as long as it meant not sending Donaldson to us
One of the things I'm becoming concerned about is that Luhnow and Co are going to ride this prospect honeymoon phase too long and its gonna be 2017 before he starts signing or trading for legitimate core players. By that time some of the top prospects will have busted and others (e.g. Springer) will be arbitration eligible and start becoming expensive.
I don't have any specific trade offers in mind, but we have depth across the farm. Moran or Ruiz, or both, plus Hader and another piece or two? I would do that in a heartbeat for Donaldson. JD is under team control for 4 more years, and he can be an MVP caliber player. I think we have the farm to take that type of hit, especially with two top 5 picks and a late compensation pick coming in June. I use it as a reference point, yes. My point is, OAK's new prospects aren't elite yet. Yes, they definitely have upside. Your quote proves my point: "Badler (whom I respect) tweeted that Barreto has a good chance of making it into the top 100." I'm not saying Barreto will be a dud, but the Astros already have several top 100 prospects, and we have another big draft coming up. I understand OAK likes the players they received, they are one of the best scouting teams in the game. I just think it's feasible that, given the depth in our system + 2 premier prospects coming in, that we could have offered far better prospects than TOR. This is all true. TOR's turf is awful. Perhaps playing on grass will lessen his injuries. And yes, we do not have a current 3B option for OAK to (not laughably) consider. But this trade, as Josh Reddick indicated, puts OAK in a rebuilding mode. If they're in rebuilding mode, choosing Lawrie + weaker prospects over a haul of better prospects is baffling to me. You're 100% right. They must be very high on Lawrie, and who knows, maybe he'll finally put together a respectable season. I really respect Beane, and this certainly isn't the first time he's unloaded top players. I just think we could have made a better offer given the fact that OAK looks like they're rebuilding. But yes--even despite our prospects, Dominguez could've been a deal-killer.
You and any other person would do that in a heartbeat, because Oakland wouldn't do that deal in a million years. Trading an MVP caliber caliber 3rd baseman with four years of team control for 2 B-level and a couple of C+ level prospects who are at best a year away from sniffing the majors would get Billy Beane laughed out of baseball. That's basically the package the Astros got for Cosart and barely better than what they got for Bud Norris.
