We got some minor leaguers back in some of these trades too. How are they faring for us in the minors?
While I agree, small sample sizes prevail in that. Folty & Ruiz were awful last season. Fiers was very good last season. Chris Carter is having a great season, albeit for another team.
Bottom line for me is that Luhnow gave up a ton for Gomez and Giles and those moves were made in lieu of other acquisitions. He has a LOT riding on the outcome of those 2 trades and I would argue that no 2 players are more responsible for Houston's horrendous start than Gomez and Giles. More importantly, if this is the kind of return we can expect when Luhnow ships out prospects for players, the next 3-5 years is going to be nowhere near as fun as we were hoping.
They are going to have to make trades while they can. They have a glut of prospects, even after trades, that don't have any place to play up here... and as they get older and on to the higher levels (even if they're still good), they start to lose some value. Keep in mind they also had a trade worked out for Hamels... for even more prospects. If you strongly believe they'll be unable to replenish the farm.... and hence why you don't want to trade prospects... that's understandable (but not really that accurate). But complaining about trading prospects for established players... only when the established players don't live up to their previous track record... is just plain hindsigh. They can certainly do nothing, and hang on to any/all prospects... I'm sure just building contending teams with nothing but homegrown players nearly always works out.
the funniest part there is that Folty has been so unsuccessful at the ML level as a starter that we would have traded him in multiple different trades by now. He would definitively be gone with someone else hoping they can reclaim his SP value. Given how early we made the move, I have to think we got the most value possible to this point.
I don't think you can talk about a glut of prospects when half our lineup is just bad and we're rolling out the likes of Scott Feldman and Doug Fister. You don't just trade guys because they may not start. VV in the bullpen would have been just fine. Same with Appel. Domingo Santana in right would be just fine. They're all under 25 years of age. Luhnow went for it and it kind of blew up in his face so far. Unless Gomez turns it around then those trades will really look horrible.
When you have a deep and very good farm system, you will not be able to keep all of your prospects and you will lose some players that turn out to be very good. The Astros situation is no different. The Gomez deal needed to be made, the Astros needed to be energized and at the time seemed like a solid move. I will not be overly harsh on the Astros for that move. Luhnow had payroll constraints, and had to get a player with more years left on their deal. Concerning Giles, I felt that Luhnow overpaid at the time. I was surprised by the sheer number of prospects given up. Having said that, the Astros lost to the Royals because of their pen. The need for an elite relief pitcher was obvious. Luhnow was not given unlimited funds to spend. The relief pitchers available (Miller/Kimbrel) all had a very high asking price. Giles is/was under team control for the rest of this decade. The Astros paid a heavy price for that. We call all sit here and criticize the move, but almost everyone agreed that the Astros needed a dominant relief pitcher. Giles will figure it out, and the Astros will most likely lose on this trade because a relief pitcher has limited value. As for VV, keep in mind that he has never in his life pitched over 110 innings in a season. He is also a big injury risk at 24 years old. I am sure the Astros wish they still had him, but they have other highly thought of pitchers that will get their chance. I think we are only now seeing how big losing out on the Cole Hamels trade is on the Astros. The Astros had the best offer and for whatever reason Cole wouldn't come to the Astros. He completely changes the dynamics of their rotation. Kuechel/Hamels/McCullers/McHugh/Fiers would be very good.
Again... more hindsight. When Gomez/Giles were traded for, there was valid expectation they would live up to their track record. Meanwhile, every single one of the players they let go were relative unknowns. Sure, some had more potential than others... but that's the risk every prospect-for-established-player-trade comes with (and I honestly can't believe people are losing sleep over Appel right now). Again, if you want them to do nothing... and just keep (hoard) all prospects as a "strategy", then that's fine. They will be attempting to be the first WS team ever to do it with nothing but home-grown players. I have no problem with going for it when the opportunity presents itself... of course it's unfortunate when the established players don't quite live up to their track records. The Cardinals have made several trades over the years for established vets that didn't work out. Some did. In the end, if they're in contention, they don't stop trading.
At this point, can anybody really fault him for it though? Ended up picking the place his wife would be most happy with... AND he ended up picking the better team (as far as last year goes) as is. As far as the Astros being on the no-trade list, but the Rangers not, that's probably more due to the 2011-2013 team performance (when the list was first made).
Well put Cole on the Astros last season and would the Rangers have made the playoffs? Would the Astros have beaten the Royals? Many question marks, from a purely competitive view point, I would still long term rather to be on the Astros. Having said that, I understand many factors come into play including family and personal preference. No, I don't blame Cole for going where he wants to go.
From what I recall... Cole wasn't quite the difference-maker that he was expected to be. Then again, I don't see Rangers fans whining about the prospects they lost even with blowing the series to the Blue Jays. Certainly, its a move that will continue to pay dividends for them given the window of contention... and nobody should be scared of trades that don't work out. If the Astros have another trade that presents itself like this one (and they're not the worst team in the AL), they should continue to go for it.
Not saying the trades are great right now, but Velasquez and Santana are the only players traded that would be helping this team right now. Maybe Appel, but I think he just needed a change of scenery. The other prospects might be good down the line, but we've got plenty of promising prospects in our system still for the future. We took some risks on trades, but in the big picture we are still in a great place as an organization. Plus there's still a lot of time for Gomez, Gattis, Giles, and Fiers to get it going and turn it around this season.
Houston relieved James Hoyt in the Gattis deal. He is throwing really well in AAA and will probably be called up soon. He is a potential closer. They also received IF Jonathan Arauz in the Giles deal and he is still in Extended Spring Training. There are no other prospects that came back in any of those deals that I know of.
I honestly wish the administrators would douse this thread in lighter fluid and strike a match... it's such a waste of everyone's time. Every MLB team has some 200+ players in its organization; this isn't a symptom of some large-scale management problem; it's math. It's not even an issue exclusive to baseball; every team, in every sport, has a long list of former players who "haunt" their franchise. The depth of the average, uniformed fan's whining has grown insufferable - you whine about EVERYTHING: the players we have, the players we don't have... you whine when they win; you whine when they lose... nothing seems to ever be good enough, to the point I can't fathom why you even bother - everything is just the worst, oh, woe is me! The Astros are fine; no one should be surprised by a step back (especially if you read my posts this past winter). They're still positioned to be a long-term threat in the American League.
I don't mind the GAttis trade as i view Folty as a reliever and not a starter. I do like Ruiz, but we have Moran, who i like more.
Long term threat? Only if most of the following occurs: Keuchel or McCullers pitches like an ace, the other pitches as a number 2 and Giles resembles a closer. The rest of our pitching (McHugh, Fiers, the rest of the bullpen) is fungible, easily replaced and most probably won't be here in 2-3 years. But if we don't have an affordable No. 1, No. 2 and closer (Crane is too cheap to go out and buy those types of players), then this team will be a sub .500 team. Which is what we are right now. I'm not concerned about the offense, but we do have too many of the fungible guys hovering around the Mendoza line (this is more of a short term problem, those guys, i.e., Castro, Valbuena, Gomez, likely won't be here next year). The core of Altuve, Springer, Correa will be fine long term.
