Agree with everything you said . I think the haul would have to be massive but I can’t help but wonder if it wouldn’t be worth exploring. He’s a permanent DH that gets chronic injuries in his hands and will likely sit out 60+ games a year, realistically, and given his track record. If the Astros want to reload for the next 5 years, trading him should be on the table even if the probability is low. I also would want to get a highly regarded pitcher with 3+ years left on a team friendly contract like a Skenes type (as mentioned below). But given our minor league infield situation is suss and honestly the fact the team has remained competitive without him (and Tucker and Bregs) got me thinking…
I understand the logic, and the idea that Altuve may spend the last 2 years of his contract/career being unplayable in the field adds to the incentive to potentially trade Yordan. But I really wouldn’t like that trade, even though I think it is fair value and I would be excited about that haul of prospects. To me the bottom line is teams should never trade hall of fame caliber players with multiple years of control remaining. Just don’t do it.
I do not know what we could get but I know what I would ask for. One top 5 prospect One top 10 prospect One top 25 prospect One top 50 prospect One top 100 prospect That is just a starting point and getting it all is highly unlikely, I do not care about proximity to the majors or position or who has the depth to make it happen. If somebody wants him, putting together the best package they can would be up to them.
It becomes a ponzi scheme of trading great players to try to get more great players, who if they succeed, you then trade away. It's not a winning proposition because prospects take time to produce, you lose in the interim, fanbase drops off, revenue drops, and then the prospects might all fail anyway. Look at the Nationals, who actually did acquire a star talent in the Soto trade. Yordan is a guy who took a team-friendly deal to stay here long term. He's a ridiculously good postseason performer. And the fact that he's limited to basically DH makes him probably the only type of star the Astros with their current spending limits could afford to keep.
even if he only plays 100 games at most per year ? Also do we think we’ll sign him when he is a FA again or some other team will outbid us like with every single FA we have ever had. I get the sentiment, I don’t WANT to trade him, but I’d look into it if it meant keep the Astros competitive another 5 years
Astros showed they can extract good value out of a rental superstar with the Tucker trade. So we can revisit potentially trading Yordan in Nov 2027. At that point if it’s clear they won’t be able to extend him and Altuve has gotten unplayable in the field, then another Tucker-style trade will make good sense. In the meantime they should try as hard as they can to win while they still have him. If Alvarez is really only going to be available <100 games per year, then his trade value will go down accordingly and it still doesn’t make sense to trade him.
Rockies get: Dezenzo, lower level prospect Astros get: Thairo Estrada Rental 2B with some power and speed. Terrible year last year and just came off the IL, but looks good in a tiny sample and could be a potential tail huge upgrade at 2B for us
I would consider that a pretty awful trade for the Astros. Estrada is not much better on offense than Dubon and worse on defense.
This is true in a vacuum, but once you start looking at it in from a real world view and flesh out the details, I don't see it that way. It's not a ponzi scheme because there is a real and legitimate reason for trading away the player(s). Maybe they have an expiration date. Maybe the roster construction limits the amount they can play, and therefore their value. This is not the same as trading away Tucker or Yordan despite them currently being penciled in as the primary option at a position until they choose to retire. Trading away a player who is expiring or is limited to a position that has another reasonable option is just smart. The execution just needs to be on point.
I don't follow, because we are specifically talking about Yordan. Who has multiple years left. And there is not a reasonable replacement for him on the squad. Roster construction isn't the issue. Altuve being a negative defensive player is not a reason to get rid of by far our best hitter, who happens to play DH. That would make our team worse, now and for the next few years.
Yordan is a tough situation. I hate the thought of even considering a trade. But there are legitimate reasons other than "we can get a bunch of prospects for him" to consider it. He and Altuve are both under contract through 2028. There is a possible future where both of them are limited to DH. Yordan has continuously missed time with injuries, which actually makes itceasier to fit he and Altuve on the same team, but reduces his on field value and makes a trade more reasonable. And if both can only DH, you really only have one of them regardless. To your point. If Altuve was a negative defensive player then trading Yordan does not necessarily make your team worse as you suggest. Let's say: Altuve is 4.0 WAR offensively and -1.0 WAR defensively for 3.0 composite. Yordan is 6.0 WAR offensively and doesn't play defense but would be -1.0 if he did. You lose 2.0 WAR by putting Altuve at DH, pending what the player at his defensive position does. Trading Yordan can bring in a plus defender. Let's say 3.5 WAR offense and 1.5 defense = 5.0 overall + he brings in 3-4 other top prospects The team is even overall from just swapping Yordan and this 1 player and gets 3-4 more rolls of the dice on top of it. FWIW: I know offensive and defensive WAR are not apples to apples But it was the easiest way to explain and it doesn't change the point or results, just the calculus.
You've created an imaginary scenario that would never actually happen. You know how many hitters had a bWAR at or equal to 5 last year (total WAR, counting offense and defense)? 18. How many of those play 2B? One, Ketel Marte. How many play OF? 4. Judge, Duran, Soto, Greene. You're not trading away Yordan and getting a star level current player, on a good contract, plus a bunch of prospects. You're just not. Stop. Duran was a one year wonder, Marte is in his 30s and has had one season at that level, and you're not getting Judge, Soto, or Greene (we couldn't afford the first two contracts anyway). If you wanted a 5 WAR player in the OF, we could sign Tucker, but we definitely won't, which is why we traded him. The hypothetical trade you suggest doesn't exist once you look for real world examples. You trade Yordan and you give up 6 WAR in your lineup without adequate replacement - but not just that, you give up the only bat teams fear. It's not a recipe for postseason success.
I don't want to trade Yordan I was simply expressing what possible scenario would justify it. And, yes, its highly highly unlikely.
I think everyone else knew what I meant. If you don’t, that’s a you problem, Copernicus. The rest of my post was self explanatory.
Did "everyone else" read all your stuff? Which posts? First, Second, or the Massive Wall Of Text you ended with?
I know two paragraphs is a lot for you to read, but if that qualifies to you as a wall of text, maybe you’re dumber than I thought.
