This. A combined two runs in the first two games, both of which came in the 9th inning of an already decided game, coupled with the fact that the hitters just look completely lost at the plate is not exactly a recipe for attendance success. Fans have put up with the mediocre teams of the last few years, but they can't be patient forever waiting for a winner to magically appear from a franchise that's lost any sense of positive direction.
Unless you're the Yankees, you will have seasons where you have a "piss poor product on the field." Point me to any team that doesn't spend like crazy (and several that do), and I will show two or more "piss poor product on the field" seasons since 2001. These things -- attendance included -- are cyclical. '96-'05 was fun, fun, fun. '06 and beyond has *not* been fun. Here's hoping they build it back up again. Here's hoping Wade/Heck were good starts, regardless of whether they can finish it.
what? Come on. Drayton is cheap. I don't care what happened between 1993 and 2006. Drayton is cheap, and the evidence is that we're having 2 or 3 bad seasons after 9 out of 10 good ones. It's all on Drayton!!
I will be shocked if attendance is an issue come summer time. people still love the park its still school year people
The mediocre product put on the field the last few years is part of what has prevented this team from being good now. You have two choices: 1. Make trades, spend more money to put a functional but mediocre product on the field this year, and repeat this process again every year. 2. Accept a year or two of being terrible, while setting yourself up to be good again a few years down the road. The strategy that the Astros are (finally) taking is #2. Would you prefer #1?
Most of the people in this forum seem to want both. Trade Oswalt. Trade Berkman. Trade Lee. Win games. Get great pitching. Get great hitters.
I am absolutely in favor of #2. I would argue that they are not taking that strategy though- it's time to put Oswalt and Berkman (after he's healthy) on the block and truly rebuild. I'd be much happier and much less pessimistic about this team if we had some truly top prospects in the system and even more young guys in the bigs. I'll take a 60 win team with a future over a 75 win team full of patchwork and without a future anyday. We are creeping in the right direction, but it's still not there. It sucks right now because I have almost no desire to see them win because I know we don't have enough.
It's easier for me to root for a bunch of young guys that lose than it is for me to root for a bunch of rich old guys lose. Move Berkman, Roy -O, Pray for Lee, If only Matsui
but that's the point. They need to do some work to get those top prospects into the system due to the Purpura suckage, among other things. Last year + this year will do work towards those prospects. As for Oswalt and Berkman.. you're arguing that they're not taking the strategy. But then you're saying that in order to take that strat, you think they have to put those guys on the block. Well, guys that like are typically moved around the deadline (esp. if you want good returns). Plus, with Oswalt and Berkman having down years last year and injuries and all, the best bet is to hope they come back strong before the deadline to drive their value up. So even if they were going to move either or both, I don't think you'd know anything until deadline time approaches. And wouldn't it make sense to say you're willing to keep them (or planning to keep them) to help drive their price up for teams that really want them? last year the team mistakenly thought they might contend for a playoff berth. This year there is no illusion. They're coming into the season knowing what's going on. I think we'll see Oswalt (at least) traded given he stays healthy..
I totally agree and have been advocating that for a few years. I was really not happy that they didn't trade Valverde/Tejada at the deadline last year, though at least they got some picks for Valverde. However, between no-trade clauses and Drayton wanting to put a sorta-almost-functional product on the field, I've given up on that. I do think they are much closer to #2 than they have been the last few years.
I know what you mean. The time to trade them was really after the 2007 season, when the farm was in shambles and our roster was nothing special. Then they overacheived in 2008, thanks to Moehler pitching out of his mind for a lot of that year and then trading for Wolf...this fooled management into thinking they could patch together a contender (even though they took a step back from that by letting Wiggington go). Hopefully Roy and Lance bounce back and there is a good market for them. But then again, I don't really see them dealing them at all if they are performing. I just have a feeling that we are stuck with this team and we're not going to advance the rebuilding process at all.
I would absolutely prefer number 2 rather than what's been going on the past few years. My somewhat buried point was simply that they could have started the process of being terrible at an earlier time. (Last year's trading deadline? The offseason before that?) It's much easier to stomach losing if there's the potential to grow out of it with a bunch of young players. Berkman, Lee, Matsui, Oswalt, and Tejada last year are not young players and at least some of the above have to/had to be tradable to some extent. There was simply no excuse for playing Matsui over Maysonet last year, IMO, when the latter was both younger and performing better.
Berkman - no trade clause and no desire to leave Houston at the time Lee - same exact situation Matsui - oft-injured, over-paid, untradeable Oswalt - no trade clause but MIGHT consider a move as he as indicated Tejada - should have been moved for whatever we could get for him at the time
