sure, but those guys (excluding patton and albers) are 28-30 years old and are, more or less, mediocre major leaguers - the astros already tried the AAAA route in 2006-2007. dealing valverde and tejada (as well as lee) feels like change for the sake of change because i don’t think their ROI would ultimately be worth it. the focus needs to be on replenishing the farm system, not rearranging chairs on the deck of the titanic. valverde might fetch you a serviceable prospect (i’m dubious; he’s been fairly average this year). if so, you do it; absolutely. tejada, though –i’m afraid we’re stuck with him. had he not fallen off a cliff (i looked up his stats – good god! since may, his OPS is under .650; he’s slugging less than .300 since june – BRING BACK ADAM EVERETT!!), he, too, might have had some value. but look at what’s happened since we dealt for him: the mitchell report, a federal investigation, he aged two years… and he’s still owed roughly $20M. plus, the sucking. i would be floored (also giddy) if a team was dumb enough to take him off our hands. also… (see below) why? what’s the difference? you’re trading mediocre for mediocre – how is that better? i’d prefer he play out his string (hope he can get back on whatever he was in on in may and start to hit again) and then walk away and be done with him, nice and easy, rather than have, you know, some middling AAAA guy bouncing around. that’s like breaking up with a girl and then finding out she gave you an STD, you know? my fear is two-fold: 1) oswalt hasn’t been oswalt in too long for me to think this year is the definitive aberration everyone assumes it is; 2) regardless, he ain’t getting any younger and every year you hold on to him brings you one year closer to being stuck with an aging, expensive pitcher on the downside of his career who’s value has evaporated. i would have dealt oswalt this winter; i think he would have fetched a santana-like premium. now teams have roughly a year and half of “uh-oh” red flags on him; not sure he’s in santana’s class any more, value-wise. (though, admittedly, aces are always a hot commodity. still, you need to strike – if you’re going to rebuild/retool/whatever – while the iron is hot.)
i think more damage was done on purpura’s watch, frankly. hunsicker had a good-to-great team and leveraged a strong farm to try and find the final piece time and time again. i can’t begrudge him for that at all and i doubt few of us would undo any of the deals he made - even with the benefit of hindsight. and when you’re successful, you’re picking later in rounds, have less patience for youth, more money invested in the major league club, etc. pupura, though… maybe he was hog-tied by drayton, i don’t know – but he took over a mediocre team and then did some absolutely terrible things to it in a really short time: made three ineffective and wasteful trades; failed to properly leverage the arbitration process; dropped a brinks truck in carlos lee’s lap (while being out to lunch on hunter pence); didn’t sign top draft picks… again, i don’t know the who and the what and the why; just that it happened on his watch.
I hear ya...I thought you were being critical of leveraging the strong farm, though. I think Hunsicker gets a pass for the current state of the Astros. Purpura only served as GM for 3 seasons. I'm critical as I can be of Tim. But we have this sort of aura for Hunsicker...who was a very good GM...but who had a hand in the demise of our farm system. Frankly, there wasn't much left there when Tim took the reigns as GM...maybe that had more to do with Gerry's departure than we might think.
Trading Oswalt is on hold, since he has the hip injury. It would be tough to trade him based on his stats this year, as his value would be at its lowest point in a few seasons. I think you would hold onto him until the offseason (at least) when his value might be a little higher. With Valverde, I don't think you can expect stud prospects. I think there are multiple relievers out there similar to Valverde, whether they are closers or guys who have been setup men with similar/better numbers (Hutson Street, George Sherrill, Damaso Marte). As for Carlos Lee, he has value, but $18.5MM for the next 4 years is a lot of money, especially for a guy that is already 32 and carries some extra weight. I would think that would limit the numbers of teams interested, but he would bring a couple of solid prospects. Blum is 35 and has an OPS under .600. I don't think there will be much interest. Erstad is versatile, a good defender, and a solid hitter. He's 34 and not an everyday player, so I would think there would be interest, but he wouldn't fetch a big return. Berkman has the most value, but trading him means you are committing to at least 2-3 years of losing. But, if you don't trade him, will the team get better while he is still productive?
no, not at all. merely pointing out that we're now cashing those checks. which is why he shouldn't have traded six young players (well, five; not sure wheeler qualifies as “young” though i think that was perhaps pupura’s worst deal) for three older players, two of which were pending free agents and none of which were difference makers. they just made so many bad decisions in such a short amount of time, post hunsicker, that it's hard not to compare and contrast the two regimes, with gerry emerging looking like the smartest human being ever. sure, maybe hunsicker saw the writing on the wall and got out just in the nick of time; perhaps drayton stripped pupura of any power and pulled the strings… who knows. except that the post-hunsicker have been well below average.
sabathia fetched a top-line prospect despite a terrible start to the season. and he's a pending free agent. oswalt's owed $45M over the next 3 years (and is just 30). the club also has a $16M option for 2012 (or a $2 or 3M buyout). in this market, that's beyond reasonable and would make him very attractive... assuming he doesn't continue to struggle once healthy.... just to clarify, that's $18.5MM a year for the next 4 years. plus the roughly $5M he's still owed this year. a team trading for lee would be absorbing $80M in guaranteed money. for an overweight, 32-year old defensive liability. i just can't see him being moved.
No kidding. I was so royally pissed when that deal went down. Still am. I may be in a minority that feels this deal was marginally worse than the Jennings deal, but I do.
Sabathia had a terrible April, but his May and June were great. Being a free agent hurt his value, but he also comes with Type A compensation if the Brewers don't sign him. So thats a sandwich round pick, and the Indians 2nd (assuming their 1st would be top 15), or maybe their 1st. I still think the Brewers overpaid, as LaPorta looks like a beast. If the Astros could get a Laporta type hitter plus a good SP prospect, that might be worth it. I'm a pirate fan and I usually prefer to make the trades. The pirates have always half-assed the rebuilding. The Ramirez fiasco was driven by money, and the return on that trade was horrendous. Looking at the pirates, Bay and Nady are under 30 and have very reasonable contracts next year ($$ 7.5MM or less). Marte will be gone also, as the pirates won't pick up his $6MM option. I'd trade all 3 for 5 good prospects, at least 2 pitchers. I'd even look to trade McLouth is someone came with the right offer. The talent just isn't there. And that goes beyond the ML club. You need depth throughout the system. Just trading Nady will bring a couple of good prospects, but not enough to put the organization in a place to contend in the next 2-3 years.
Trading Roy Oswalt reminds me of Seattle trading Randy Johnson.... Sometimes players underperform because they are just unhappy. DD
A lot of the same was said about Berkman this time last year. "He's done." "Trade him now." I know pitching and hitting are 2 different things. That doesn't mean that Oswalt can't turn it around. Especially now that pitcher's careers are lasting longer than before. That said, I'm on the record as saying, while Oswalt is by far my favorite pitcher in the game, he's the best commodity we've got to get a high level prospect or 2 in return. I would hate to see him in another uniform, but sometimes you've to do what's best for the long term. I don't think that's going to happen since McLane doesn't seem to think there is anything wrong...
all great points; i think they're very comparable, value-wise, given all the conditions. sure, absolutely - i was one of 'em! any time an athlete, 30+, regresses for an extended period (and berkman did significantly last year), you have to red flag it, IMO. i also thought it came at a time when the astros were at a crossroads and had a choice to either maintain status quo or completely revamp; ie an opportune time to explore turning their few assets into multiple (read: younger and cheaper) assets. but that time has passed. with oswalt, though, we saw some of this regression last year - more anecdotal than anything substantive, but he just didn't, for long spells, look like the oswalt of old... it didn't seem as easy as it used to. that those observations have led to full-blown problems this year.... again, i would have pulled a billy beane and dealt him last winter, gambling that, over the next 4 years, he'll be ineffective more often than effective as he ages.
Interesting story in the Chronicle today. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5886347.html This is the second half of the article. The first part isnt anything too good. "No giving up "I don't like to give up," McLane said, "and I think it's too soon to give up on this season." Coming off their second losing season since 1991, the Astros endured perhaps their most tumultuous offseason last winter when they made a flurry of trades that drastically reshaped the roster. Only Berkman, Oswalt, Brad Ausmus, Brandon Backe and Wandy Rodriguez — remain from the World Series team. In the process, the Astros added veterans Tejada, Matsui and Jose Valverde with an eye on returning to the playoffs. The Astros got off to a roaring start behind an offense that hit .281 in May and a pitching staff that overachieved. Since posting a 30-23 record May 27, the Astros have won just 14 of 42 games to fall into last place in the National League Central. "I think we have the talent here to win," Wade said. "We just have to take it one game at a time at this point and get on a more consistent track than we've been on. Game-to-game and even inning-to-inning, we have to take advantage of opportunities. "We've had games where we score runs early and we haven't been able to get the add-on runs, and teams peck away at us. That's a difficult formula. You'd like to take advantage of opportunities, but we know we've got guys with track records who are capable of doing it. We have to persevere and move forward." The Astros' history of success in second halves is well-documented. They went 36-10 down the stretch in 2004 to win the NL wild card and shook off a 15-30 start in 2005 to repeat. What those teams possessed that this year's club doesn't is dominant pitching. Clemens, Oswalt and Andy Pettitte anchored a terrific rotation, and Brad Lidge was an elite closer. Now, Oswalt stands alone as the team's ace, but he has struggled for much of this season and has battled a left hip injury the past two weeks. The rest of the rotation has been largely inconsistent. The offense that was so productive in May has slumped, as Tejada and Hunter Pence couldn't match their early success, Matsui spent considerable time on the disabled list, and youngsters J.R. Towles and Michael Bourn faltered. "The Astros have been for several years a second-half team, and we're optimistic we can start playing much better baseball," McLane said. Blockbuster deal unlikely With the non-waiver trade deadline less than three weeks away, the Astros likely won't ship off any high-priced veterans, many of whom have no-trade clauses. Wade admits the shortcomings of the minor leagues but believes there is enough talent to make a trade to improve the club — this year or next. "We want to be as aggressive as we can and not leave any stone unturned," he said. "If there's an opportunity to improve the club short-term or long-term, we're going to try to take advantage of that. That hasn't changed since the offseason when everybody saw we were going to be aggressive." Of course, adding impact free agents in the offseason will cost the Astros some high draft picks and impede the growth of the minor league system. What about the future? "You have to start looking at the future at some point because myself, Roy and Carlos aren't getting any younger," Berkman said. "We're still pretty much in the prime of our careers, but that only lasts three or four years, and then you have to start looking at who's going to come up next, and you look down there and there's not a whole lot you can say will help us." As long as McLane is writing the checks, the Astros likely will plug their holes in an effort to be competitive and fill Minute Maid Park. "The peaks and the valleys and trying to find some measure of consistency is what it's all about," Wade said. "If I didn't believe we had some players here who were capable of keeping us out of the valleys, obviously we would take a different approach to things. I really think track records do prevail, and the track record of guys we have here have shown in the past what we're capable of doing." "
I'm optimistic about Oswalt. Despite the ERA, his peripherals are actual improved over the last few years. The walk rate has declined and the K/IP rate is the best it's been in 4 years. The only real difference is his dramatic increase in HRs. His is already at his career high only half way through the season. The good news is that after May, his HR/IP rate dropped back down to 1hr/20ip, which correlated with a sub-3 era over the same period. It also correlated with a return of his velocity which leads me to believe that his April and May may have just been an aberration caused by a "dead arm". He was sitting at 88-91 in the first month and a half of the season when he normally sits at 92-94. I don't know if you try to trade him or not, but I think he bounces back. If you do trade him, I think it's important not to sell low. He's signed to a reasonable contract and I think he has already began to bounce back.
We already discussed this in the off-season... but while Berkman did have months where he was clueless... he did end the second half on a very strong note, pointing towards indications that his struggles weren't simple "aging". Its pretty clear that his strong end to last season carried over into this season. Also, there was the precedent that Lance has set in the past for struggles that appeared to come out of nowhere (start of 2003), likely do to a hitch in mechanics. Oswalt, unlike Lance, has never had extended struggles until he did this year. Yes, some of his peripherals went down over the last few years... but you still can't dismiss the change in approach him and Ausmus went to in 2005(pitching more to contact, less strikeouts, quicker/more effecient innings). Maybe the league started catching up to that too, although I disagree with any assessment of a player struggling for "long spells", and still ending up with a low 3 ERA. Maybe him and Brad need to go back to the drawing board, as the approach this year may be resulting in more K's... but also in more HR's. Regardless, like Lance, the team will give him a chance to turn it around... and I wouldn't be suprised if he did. The difference between what Billy Beane does, and what the Astros (or most other teams) can do are that he KNOWS he can't resign anybody... thus he already has the "next ace" waiting in the wings before he even trades the current one. The Astros don't have that sort of turnover available to bridge the gap, should they trade Oswalt (if healthy). He also is one of the supreme talent evaluators in the game... as most of the young guys he covet do tend to pan out. That's another thing the Astros have severely been lacking on. No offense to Ed Wade, or Tal Smith, but I just don't trust them to get the best possible trade for Roy. If I was to trade him, it would have to be for an organization's best pitching prospect... unless you take a chance on getting another team's Buchholz (a quality arm, but not their best). Roy's salary, his status as an Astros legend, and the fact that he's still only 30 still make him just as attractive to KEEP him as it is to trade him... especially if you're factoring team's 2nd or 3rd choice prospects.
Its funny that the Astros came away with virtually NOTHING from last year's draft. We're talking about dollar values that are less than Shawn Chacon's contract, and what Carlos Lee makes per inning, that were the sticking points. Not funny "haha"... more funny "peculiar".
