Do we really expect the Astros to support the long-term payroll that most of these proposed trades would necessitate? Frankly, I have a hard time believing the Astros will add many more "new" big salaries going forward, as they will instead probably use that money to bring back their own free agents. Having guys like Tucker and Fisher not only keeps payroll down but also provides insurance in the (quite-possible) event that George Springer bolts in free agency in a few years.
Realmuto and Yelich are cheap contracts for what they offer. If you can get those, you let Springer, DK, and Gonzalez walk next year and re-sign Altuve and hopefully Correa (may not be possible under any circumstance). Getting a long-term solution at catcher for the money and years under control that Realmuto would represent is too good to pass up (in my humble opinion). Of course I don't think we really have a chance to get Yelich without giving up too much. But if it "just" costs us Tucker and Martes and another 2nd tier prospect or Fisher, I would do it in a second.
No, the Astros are not going to be adding long term expensive contracts in free agency AND keep their core players beyond the next few seasons. The reality is that the Astros likely will not be able to keep a lot of their own free agents from a financial perspective. They are better off signing players at a discounted rate that they view are under appreciated by the market (Morton), trading for younger players they feel have high upside (McHugh), keeping/developing minor leaguers (Bregman, Peacock) and trading the other young players they don't have faith in (Musgrove) for better players that are not free agents yet (Cole). Last, being very selective in the players they resign (Altuve) and letting other ones leave (Kuechel). It all comes down to the strategy of the Astros. Is it to maximize the next 2-3 years? If it is, then you deal for players like Realmuto and Yelich, and let Tucker and Martes go elsewhere unless you are convinced they will be a great player. If you are going to lose more (Kuechel/Altuve/Springer/Marwin) than you are going to produce (Tucker/Martes/Whitley); then the Astros may determine that a shorter but better window is the better strategy for the franchise. Theo Epstein in a more candid moment said that from the day the Cubs won the World Series, he knew the window was 3-4 years most likely. That is from an organization with really deep pockets. The reality is that the Astros window to win a Word Series again may only be 2-3 years.
These past two years, Yelich slashed .290/.373/.460/.833; 125 OPS+. To properly contextualize those numbers, here’s what World Series MVP George Springer has done the past two seasons: Yelich: .290/.373/.460/.833; 125 OPS+ World Series MVP George Springer: .271/.363/.487/.849; 134 OPS+ Those were Springer's age 26 & 27 seasons; Yelich's age 24 & 25 seasons. So he's essentially already George Springer but two years younger. We get so caught up in language.... "superstar," "ace," "elite"....... Christian Yelich is one of the best young outfielders in baseball on a remarkably fair, below-market deal. He'd be an unbelievable add to the 2018 Astros. Better than Tucker 2019 and beyond? That's the question - but definitely next year...
20-25 HRs? Says who? He has only topped 20 once in 4 complete seasons. Only double digit homers 2/4 seasons. It seems like he is who is. About 15 to 20 homers with some speed and good on base skills. I'm not saying not to trade for him...but Tucker is too steep. Tucker is made available only for those rare instances when absolute top guys come available. Chris Sale types. And even then luhnow has shown an unwillingness to budge on his "untouchables."
Next year for sure. You are right, beyond next year is the question. Nobody is saying yelich isn't one of the top young outfielders in the game, but Tucker is arguably the best OF prospect in the game. You could argue that Tucker has more value than yelich at this point especially considering the state of the industry. Especially considering that we don't necessarily have a gaping hole that yelich would fill right now. Comparing him to springer is a bit unfair as well bc we don't have to trade a top 10 prospect for springer. Also convenient to compare the last 2 seasons...what an injustice to springer. Instead of sifting through stats for what best suits you why don't you throw them all out there? What about yelichs first 2 seasons compared to George's? Yelichs best ops+ is 135 while every other year is below 120. Springer averages 132. This really isn't the discussion, I know, I just can't believe you just said "yelich is essentially springer." LOL
The point is that Yellich could very well be exactly what Tucker turns into.... and everybody should/would be happy with that sort of development. There's also the distinct possibility that Tucker doesn't live up to his prospect potential... it happens every year with prospects, and will continue to happen every year till the end of time. Its happened to Luhnow prospects as well, so no "process" or "system" is immune to it. For the record, I want them to hang on to Tucker unless its for a truly special player under the most special of circumstances... but I also respect the vast differences between producing at AA and AAA, and producing at the MLB level.
Okay so let's just say that he's a consistent 20 HR type of guy. Tucker is an unknown and Yelich is a known commodity. Therefore it makes sense to trade Tucker for Yelich. It's fun to think about Tucker's potential, but there's a better chance that he never reaches Yelich's level than he does. That's just the fact of the matter when it comes to evaluating prospects. I'm not saying Tucker doesn't have unbelievable potential but I don't think you're going to find anyone claiming that Tucker's potential is more than 20-25 HR's 80-90 RBI's and a .280-.300 AVG. I have to believe that's his ceiling. So if his ceiling is exactly what Christian Yelich is (minus Yelich's GG level glove), it makes all the sense in the world to trade him for the known commodity.
Oh I understand the known commodity vs unknown. I get it. But you don't trade prospects of Tucker's stature for a good hitter. You just don't. Especially when you already have the deepest lineup in the game. Save that level of prospect for when you need him. Whether it's on the field or in a deal.
I agree with your entire post. Who do you consider special players and what are special circumstances?
I expect Astros give Altuve an extension before he hits FA, Springer is re-signed in 2021, Correa in 2022, etc. Don’t forget just how much revenue the Astros are going to have from merchandise that continues to fly off the shelves, sell outs, etc Holding onto guys like Tucker, Fisher, Whitley, Bukauskas, Martes, Alvarez, etc is the way you go about surrounding stars with quality talent or just creating new stars. This is how you replace/upgrade Reddick, Gattis, Morton, etc I think the Astros window can stay open
No he's not. It's not gaping, yet - but we don't have an everyday LF. He's as good as Springer and two years younger. Springer made his MLB debut at 24; Yelich was 21. The point of comparison is that, theoretically, Springer is reaching his peak and Yelich, who has presumably not peaked, is matching Springer's output. If the Marlins offered us Yelich straight-up for Springer, all the emotion of the postseason performance aside, the Astros would abject fools not to jump on that deal.
Yelich is a border line star with 5 years of control entering his prime. I think you value Tucker too highly.
Mike Trout? (Who’s so disgruntled, and wants to win, he demands a trade right now) I’m sure there’s others I’m not even thinking about... but given that Tucker is likely their best prospect, for me it would have to be for something that certainly moves the needle (even if his ceiling is still where Yellich is now).
The more I think about it, the more I think--at this point for this team--it makes sense to hold onto Tucker and Whitley at all costs, unless someone in the Trout range (like @Nick suggested) becomes available. My only reason? The team just won a WS and has upgraded significantly from that. With this team, I think you hold the stud prospects and roll with what you have...until June. If things aren't where they should be, or if multiple injuries occur--then you look at the trade market at that point or in the offseason. Tucker and Whitley will hold their trade value into the deadline and very likely into the offseason. If this team can win 98 games without trading them, it makes more sense to do that than to spend assets to get from, say, 98 to 102. And longer term (when factoring in costs and potential future holes due to free agency), it makes sense to hold the prospects as well.
Frankly there is always a risk with young players. Although there is usually a consensus in the physical talent and ability for a prospect, the elephant in the room is, how does a player makes adjustments when the league exposes a hole in the arsenal? Guys like Brett Wallace were great AAA guys, but could not make adjustments fast enough in the majors to stay relevant. Even now, I am somewhat concerned going with a Derek Fisher / Jake Marisnick combination; the fact that Marwin Gonzales should be able to step in eases my concerns. So there are options, but I'm hoping that Derek Fisher takes this opportunity and seizes the moment. And there is no telling what Kyle Tucker will do, but I'm confident the Astros know what they are doing with Tucker, as proven by their handling of Springer, Correa, Bregman who were fast tracked because of their talent and makeup. For having a good stable of prospects coming up is critical for the long term. Because with the type of play exhibited by the players, it's obvious you can't pay them all.
Wow...just wow. Derek fisher...it is perfectly fine and acceptable to plug him in on opening day in the 7/8/or 9 hole and if he doesn't work it is perfectly ok to give Tucker a shot after the break...you know a consensus top 10 prospect OVERALL (much less just OF) in ALL of baseball. He is not as good as springer and funny that you just say it matter of fact instead of backing up such a bold claim. He is only matching his output in your mind as a means to back up your argument. Reddick has more comparisons to yelich than springer does. Sometimes it's a pretty simple answer...you are just pretending to be smarter than everyone with such a claim.
Honestly? Tucker and/or Whitley may be ready by June. With Yelich/Tucker, it ultimately comes down to this... Yelich is obviously the better player in 2018; he's probably the better player in '19, too. After that, though... it's those final three years of Yelich's deal ('20, '21, '22), when he's 28, 29 and 30, when the scale likely tips back to Tucker, given his age and cost (he'll be 23, likely entering his second full season in the Majors).... So how much is two years of a sure thing worth? I would guess the Astros have a formula for it and can can you a fairly accurate answer.
Tucker the prospect is pretty valuable. What he becomes is an unknown, sure. But his prospect status could net us pretty much anyone available or who could come available. Which is why you hold onto him. Who knows what becomes available as the season progresses.
Yes, I agree. And my add-on was meant to say that in calculating "how much is 2 years of a sure thing worth", you have to consider that they're starting from just-won-WS-and-upgraded-significantly status. To me, that changes the calculation to "not enough unless the upgrade is of insane proportions" because your need of those 2 years of a sure thing is much lower.
