There seemed to be a general consensus in the Tim P era that the Jason Jennings trade was the worst in Astros history or at least, the worst in the last 20 years. Does the Lidge trade trump it? If you look at it from the perspective of performance, the disparity is not even close. The philies have gotten WAY WAY WAY more than the Astros. Lidge is 41 out of 41 in saves in the regular season with a 1.95 ERA. Bourn had a .229 BA, .288 OBP and to his credit 40 SB. In colorado, Hirsh had a .481 ERA in 07 as a starter (didn't play much in 08) Willy T had a .251 BA, .308 OBP this year. Now yes, Willy T and Hirsh are still young but then to be fair, so is Bourn. Not much needs to be said about Jason Jennings I think it is clear performance wise, Lidge was a horrible trade. Things get tricky though. It can be said that Lidge would not have done that in Houston. That he needed a change in scenery. Others might say that it was a mechanics issue that he seemed to work out before the season started which is irrelevant to the team he plays for. Fact is, he is the best closer in the game. Ed Wade has my vote for biggest bonehead. He could have gotten a player to be named later which then would have been a top prospect based on how Lidge performed. Then again, at least he didn't almost trade Roy Oswalt for Miguel Tejada.
It's not even close. The Jennings trade is by far worse. Lidge was done in Houston. He needed a new start. Bourne is very young and still has the potential to be a very good lead off man. Geary had a very nice season in the pen and is now one of the cornerstones in there.
Jennings didn't do anything for us... but Willy T just had another mediocre year, Hirsh was injured the entire year, and Buccholz is nothing more than a bullpen guy at best. Lidge, on the other hand, has converted 50 straight games for a team now in the World Series... and has looked every bit as dominant as when he was here. As far as what we ultimately "lost"... the Lidge trade hurts more. I know people will say we only made the Lidge trade in response to trying to get another Willy T-type player back... which I highly doubt. And if that's really the case, that's some terrible GM'ing right there (compounding one bad trade with an even worse one). Also, Ed Wade coveted Bourne tremendously (still likely does), thus him agreeing to a trade that seemed lopsided even when it was made (befoer Lidge started his tear).
Willy T actually had a .308 OBP this year... not .398.... and he was no longer the leadoff hitter for the majority of the season. Also, both he and Hirsh are turning 27 in the next coming months. Bourne is 25 with far fewer AB's or opportunities than Willy has had. That being said, if he doesn't show substantial improvement 2-3 months into this next season, he shouldn't be an everyday player. And like Willy, I'll be ready to trade/replace him as well.
I concur. The Jennings trade was disastrous. Jennings gave the Astros nothing. It cost the stros two young arms and a center fielder/ leadoff man. If it were not for this trade, the astros would not have been forced to deal Lidge for a center fielder/leadoff man.
So far, Geary>>>than what Hirsh/Buchholz have done, and may ever do. Also, neither Willy T or Bourn have proven to be competent leadoff men. The Astros weren't "forced" to deal Lidge... he was still under contract for one more year, and Bourn should never have been evaluated as a "for sure starting leadoff man everyday CF" when we got him. If all we wanted was an everyday CF who could bat near the top of the lineup, plenty of teams would have coughed up more proven (but less upside) players than Bourn. We traded Lidge thinking he was declining, and we wanted Bourn because we thought there was an upside. So far, wrong on both acoounts.
I don't like either, now. I really thought both were ok moves at the time...but that probably had to do with the fact that i'm not real objective when it comes to the stros.
MLB teams take note. For two years in a row the Astros have been on the losing end of a trade. The team on the winning side of the trade went to the World Series.
The Jennings trade was a really stupid because of the potential upside vs. downside, but it wasn't a horrible trade because the upside of the young players hasn't panned out yet. The Lidge trade wasn't necessarily a stupid trade because of the upside of Bourn, but again, that has panned out yet. The Jennings trade was the worse trade at the time it was made; the Lidge trade has proven to be the worse trade (so far) based on actual results.
I really don't know how to vote on this one. I, like Max, was OK with both moves the second they went down. Holy crap, I was wrong about Jennings. I knew Lidge would be great, but I thought it was good to get some value for him. Oh, well. Perhaps Bourn improves, and coupled with Geary the disparity won't be so large. Anyways, the real reason I hit reply was to say, "Worst trade in Astros history?? Are you kidding??" Rusty Staub, Joe Morgan, and Ken Caminiti all say "hi".
Lidge was too pricey for the production, but then the Astros went and got Valverde. I would have much rather have had Qualls as closer and spent money elsewhere. The Jennings trade to me made little sense without locking him up....the Astros got lucky they didn't.
If we hadn't traded away Willy, we wouldn't have been looking for a speedy CF in the Lidge deal and might have found some starting pitching.
This was the big problem with that trade. It essentially snowballed into another trade. We ended up with Valverde and Bourn. Without that, we'd have had Willy T (basically a Bourn close), Lidge, Qualls, Burke, Buchholz, and Hirsh - any of whom could have been traded away for other pieces as needed. The specifics weren't entirely predictable, but the minute we traded 3 club-controlled young major league players for a free-agent-to-be and didn't lock him up to a long-term deal, it was predictable that there would be long-term consequences.
