It’s very subjective: Is Isaac Paredes “a guy who sucked in Wrigley”, or “an All-Star 3B with 3 seasons of control whose game is custom made for Houston”? Is Hayden Wesneski “a guy at the bottom of a crummy rotation”, or “another hidden gem the Astros will milk into a quality SP for a half decade”? Is Cam Smith “Chicago’s 4th best prospect”, or “one of the top 70 prospects in the league and easily Houston’s best prospect”? I think the Cam Smith description is intentionally misleading, because Chicago’s system is stacked at the top. Their 4th best prospect would be the best prospect for half the teams in the league. It’s reasonable to think that trading Tucker was a bad idea. But to say Dana Brown got a trash relative return is just stupid unless you can point to an example to support that opinion. I personally think it’s a good trade that cost Houston ~2 wins in 2025 to add 15-20 wins spread over ~2026-2032. Time will tell.
Dana Brown has a track record that is long and has been consistently successful - it isn't luck. He was largely responsible for the drafts that rebuilt the Braves and brough in the influx of talent that made the Jays competitive - and that includes his deep involvement in the bigger international signings. Even before the Blue Jays, he was the top scout for the Expos/Nats when they were producing talent. He was drafted guys like Ryan Zimmerman, Chad Cordero, Ian Desmond, Stephen Strassburg, Shea Langliers, Michael Harris, Vaughn Grissom, Spencer Strider, Bryce Elder, AJ Smith and many more... including the guts for that Nationals team that won the World Series. Do I know that Brown will replicate that success with the Astros? No - but his track record shows that his success hasn't been luck. Does that mean he will be a great GM? Nope - but when it comes to the draft and player development I will trust him until he proves that it just isn't working. He has ran the draft for 3 organizations and two of those organizations won World Series Championships with the players he drafted...... the third one was the Blue Jays, and they had plenty of talent from their farm system, they made poor free agent signings.
Just to be clear, I am not criticizing the GM - I don't think Dana did badly in terms of what I expected from a return. What I was commenting on was the idea that trading away Tucker while remaining competitive is a realistic goal. This trade was always going to make the team worse in the short term, and this wasn't a team with the ability to lose a MVP candidate and remain a title contender. Especially with also losing Bregman, Pressly, etc. in the same offseason. You make a lot of good points about there being variables we don't know, won't know, until the season is over. Paredes is a good addition - I like the player. He's a 3.1 WAR guy per 162. That's good. 3B is fine. I think he's a downgrade from Bregs, but I have no doubt his bat is made for the Crawford Boxes. There is definite value there in having that production club controlled for 3 years. He's better than 3 years of washed Arenado or whoever else we would have put at 3B. And I also wasn't saying Cam Smith is a bad prospect - he WAS ranked as their 4th best prospect when the trade was made in lists I've seen but it's all subjective. I think he may be great. He's slow and his swing angle is too low to hit many home runs currently, but he's got a good arm and has been very productive in his two seasons between college / minors. I have faith in Dana's reputation as a scout. But for every top-100 prospect that turns out to be a star, there are half a dozen that don't. He's almost sure to make the bigs, but he's no guarantee to succeed (because almost no prospect is). So this trade really like you said depends on Smith turning into a star player, or at least a quality starter. I think we know what Paredes brings. I think we also know what Tucker brings - he's a 5.9 WAR/162 guy over his career. He was on pace for 9.4 WAR last year, his age 27 season. Given health, he's likely to exceed 6 WAR again this year. He could go off again like he did last year. Gold glove defense, draws MVP votes every year, who wouldn't want that, even if it was for one season? It's my view that this lineup isn't deep enough to contend, even if the rotation works like we hope. I think a hypothetical Tucker-type bat would make it possible, even if it meant we got only like a 2 WAR guy in place of Paredes. I think this is a step back in a way that is impactful in 2025. I don't have faith that this team will be more competitive in 2026 than 2025. Maybe, if our top prospects develop. I don't know what we will do with our money in free agency (it won't be signing Tucker or anyone who wants a long-term or high dollar contract). I do know that whatever improvements we add, Altuve and Walker are likely to show some age regression in the upcoming seasons. This year was our best chance to get the best version of those guys. Framber may be gone, and we may not have an ace to replace him. Bird in the hand being worth two in the bush, I'm not sure we created a more realistic championship possibility in 2026, or 2027, or 2028, than we might have had in 2025. A hypothetical move from say 90 - 93 wins is more meaningful in my book than movement from 78 - 83 in a future season, even though 5 > 3, if the former means a team wins their division and the latter doesn't even put the team in the wild card. It's not just a mathematical trade of current WAR for future WAR, context is important.
All of your points I think are valid - and it is why the Astros plan was to keep Tucker and either resign Bregman or add a third baseman in trade. Honestly - unless the Astros were adding Walker and Arenado to Tucker, I wasn't so sure the team with Tucker was good enough to win a championship without a couple players making a major lead forward. It certainly could have happened, Chas could have rebounded and maybe Brown competes for the Cy Young but even then I had lots of questions. IMO Paredes isn't as good defensively as Bregman but there is a good chance he is a better hitter in than Bregman in 2025. Walker is a good hitter, but he doesn't have the same sort of hitting talent that Tucker has.
Really vague shades of grey. The ~2 wins worth of overall net 2025 production Houston gave up in their trade of Tucker reduced their chances of winning the World Series from what, 10% to 7%? And it increased the odds of them winning the World Series at some point from 2026-2032 from what, 25% to 33%? Those are really questionable numbers, but that’s really how the trade should be viewed.
I find it interesting that Fangraphs Roster Resource has updated their projections to Brendan Rodgers making the team and changes Taylor Trammell to the odd man out. They project Rodgers to start at 2b vs LHP and Gamel in LF vs RHP. They don't explain it but that would make Altuve the platoon partner for each.
To me it really depends on how strongly Brown likes Cam Smith. He isn't a higher prospect because he isn't a wizard with the glove or incredibly quick...... but I don't really care, he was traded for because of his bat. People judging prospects said the same thing about Yordan Alvarez. I had a 45 minute conversation with Keith Law, who told me that Alvarez wasn't a top 50 prospect because "I saw him and he isn't an outfielder, he moves weird"....... that was like 5 years ago and Yordan is an outfielder, and it doesn't matter anyway because of the stick. Smith is a bat first guy that should be adequate with the glove... lets just hope that Smith continues to play well.
Trade "should be viewed" makes it sound much more objective than it is. These 2026-2032 combined odds sound extremely subjective and (I don't mean this as a slight) like something you made up based on your personal views. I don't think Vegas has set that line. I don't know that there's any way to measure how this trade will impact the 2032 Astros. That's the year the asteroid hits the planet and ends civilization, right?
Yes, I pulled those 2026-2032 numbers out of my ass. And I definitely think it’s valid to assert that things become a lot less predictable the further into the future you go, meaning there’s less value in projected wins further into the future. But I think we can all agree the front office’s rationale in doing the trade was motivated by increasing their odds of winning a(nother) World Series at some point, whether because they think the players they got will be better than expected in 2025, or that the odds of winning beyond that got way higher. Like most things, for the fans I guess it boils down to how much you trust the front office.
I know WAR is a flawed and controversial metric to use for value but it's really the best we have. I don't think all WAR is created equal. A 6 WAR player is better than 2 3 WAR players. Pitching and position player WAR don't match up exactly. That really makes it tough to grade the Tucker trade. That's not even considering money. I will say, for me that if Kyle gets his typical 6 WAR, then the 3 players the Astros got would need to get to at least 8 WAR for this deal to be considered good for 2025. Overall the 3 need to combine for: At least 3 3+ WAR seasons 5+ WAR from at least 2 of them No seasons of negative WAR outside of a small sample cameo. Of course this is during current controllable years.
I'm thinking that the front office felt like Nook, which is skeptical of the chances in 2025 even with Tucker. A more pessimistic outlook on the 2025 title chances (or at least Tucker's potential role in said title) then the trade is easier (for them) to do. Plus, they do seem high on Cam Smith. I do think there's something to a GM wanting to win with "his guys". If they win with Cam, that's a guy Dana went out and got. He made that happen. Click didn't get much credit for the 2022 title or the work he did post-Luhnow.
Smith is the reason I am not happy with the return for Tucker. Parades is a credible replacement for Bregman. He will be the Astros third baseman for the next three years. I fully expect him to be extended for another three years and to be a big part of the Astros ongoing success. Wesneski will open the 25 season in the starting rotation and with any luck will stick there for a year or two. Those two players are a pretty good start on a return for a year of a starting right fielder but for one of the top outfielders in the league I expected a little more than a redundant, bat only third base prospect for the final piece. There are two bat only players on the team already (Alvarez and soon Altuve) and only one DH spot. If he is moved to right field and works his ass off to make the team as a corner outfielder a year or two from now I will be delighted. If he is left at third base or moved to first he will have no value to the Astros except as a possible trade toss in.
Best case scenario would be Smith wreck spring training and force a starting spot. Put him at 3B, Paredes at 2B and Altuve in LF.
A successful season depending on a bunch of “what ifs” is not encouraging. Maybe we’re due for some good luck. If Yordan has an MVP season… If Altuve doesn’t regress… If they can have a successful outfield platoon… If McCullers comes back… If Garcia comes back… if Javier comes back… (and perform at a competitive level) If a minor leaguer steps up… Idk man we’ll see. I kinda like people are counting us out because it always seems to push our guys. We’ll see…
Which is fair but this logic didn’t really have to apply to us for the past 7 seasons or so. Our lineup was just killer. Gonna have to adjust mentally to the fact that we were spoiled.
Hopefully he hits well enough and is able to defensively play RF. He's got the athletic ability to play RF.
I'm hoping Crane/Dana spends the difference in the money they were going to have to pay Tucker vs what they're paying Parades/Wesneski at the deadline to add another impact OF bat if one of the young guys doesn't come through for them at the beginning of the season.
Nah, they've probably got about 5 mil left over, depending on how they structured the contract. But say you're right, them I hope they spend the difference between Bregs 2024 money and Parades money.
