OrangeWhoopass.com Forums
General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: MusicMan on December 14, 2011, 10:38:35 am
-
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/12/astros-acquire-kyle-weiland.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
The Astros acquired starter Kyle Weiland from the Red Sox for a reliever, tweets ESPN's Jerry Crasnick.
Weiland, 25, struggled in 24 2/3 innings in his Red Sox debut this year. At Triple-A, he posted a 3.58 ERA, 8.8 K/9, 3.9 BB/9, and 0.7 HR/9 in 128 1/3 innings. A third-round pick in 2008, Baseball America ranked Weiland 20th among Red Sox prospects prior to the season. BA says the former Notre Dame closer "relishes pitching inside" and his "best pitch is a low-90s fastball that peaks at 95 but is most notable for its hard sink."
-
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/12/astros-acquire-kyle-weiland.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Rosenthal says Weiland and Lowrie for Melancon.
-
My initial impression is that I like it.
-
Shortstop + a closer type for Melancon? Works for me.
-
Shortstop + a closer type for Melancon? Works for me.
Looks like a SS with low range, didn't hit last year after hitting well the year before. If he is even MLB average though, it's a good deal.
-
Shortstop + a closer type for Melancon? Works for me.
He was starting for Boston.
-
Lowrie's wikipedia article has already been updated with the trade info, so it must be true!
-
As luck has it, he was on Sickels' Boston Top 20 yesterday:
16) Kyle Weiland, RHP, Grade C+: Got knocked around in major league trial, has the stuff to be a four/five starter if he improves his location. Like Wilson, he could end up in relief.
-
He was starting for Boston.
...and got his ass kicked, but he's only 24. Wild, too - almost 2:1 IP:BB.
-
...and got his ass kicked, but he's only 24. Wild, too - almost 2:1 IP:BB.
He wasn't nearly that wild in the minors, 3+ walks per 9 innings. But ~ a K per inning.
-
Looks like a SS with low range, didn't hit last year after hitting well the year before. If he is even MLB average though, it's a good deal.
I thought he was a decent fielder, better suited to utility guy though. He's under club control for 2-3 years. Seems like the Astros shortstop and 9-hole hitter for now.
-
Seems like the Astros shortstop and 9-hole hitter for now.
I hate you for saying it that way.
-
Interesting trade.
I remember seeing him pitch in Boston late in the year, and he was unimpressive, but it was his first time up, so maybe he'll figure it out.
-
i realize this is what Astros' life is these days, but i liked Melancon.
-
i realize this is what Astros' life is these days, but i liked Melancon.
I know, but someone had to play SS.
-
I thought he was a decent fielder, better suited to utility guy though. He's under club control for 2-3 years. Seems like the Astros shortstop and 9-hole hitter for now.
If 2011 was an anomaly and 2010 is the real deal, he'd be a fantastic get.
-
i realize this is what Astros' life is these days, but i liked Melancon.
I did too, but the Astros have been adding some high-speed arms lately.
-
I know, but someone had to play SS.
Is this guy actually any kind of upgrade over Sanchez or the other guy they got? If it was about the ss, couldn't they have just paid for an average (or below average) shortstop and kept the talent? I assume, or hope, they feel Weiland will amount to something; otherwise, this makes zero sense to me.
-
I did too, but the Astros have been adding some high-speed arms lately.
Can't wait to hear if Luhnow has Weiland as a starter or reliever.
-
Is this guy actually any kind of upgrade over Sanchez or the other guy they got? If it was about the ss, couldn't they have just paid for an average (or below average) shortstop and kept the talent? I assume, or hope, they feel Weiland will amount to something; otherwise, this makes zero sense to me.
I would think that Lowrie is also viewed as extra protection against Altuve failing and perhaps even Paredes.
-
BA says the former Notre Dame closer
The Astros have a good track record with those.
-
The Astros have a good track record with those.
Bad. He'll be in the same division as Pujols.
-
i realize this is what Astros' life is these days, but i liked Melancon.
+1 (re: methinks as the future closer, he was going to be more pricey and they already had Lyon coming back)
-
Random yahoos on the MLBTR comments seems to view this in the Astros' favor. So we've got that going for us.
-
Oh gosh, I hope BP approves of this...
-
Probably depends on how much they like Luhnow and like/dislike the new Boston GM.
Who is their GM anyway?
-
Can't wait to hear if Luhnow has Weiland as a starter or reliever.
The Astros plan to use Weiland as a starter in 2012, tweets Alex Speier of WEEI.com.
-
The Astros plan to use Weiland as a starter in 2012, tweets Alex Speier of WEEI.com.
A move prior to a move? (re: Wandy or Myer about to get traded?)
-
Who is their GM anyway?
Ben Cherington.
-
A move prior to a move? (re: Wandy or Myer about to get traded?)
I think both go.
Personally, I'd trade both, try to get Madson on a one-year deal to close, and flip him at the deadline.
-
A move prior to a move? (re: Wandy or Myer about to get traded?)
I wonder if this means they know they won't be getting a near-MLB-ready starter in return for either one.
-
Seems like a good move. There was jack shit available at SS in free agency.
-
If 2011 was an anomaly and 2010 is the real deal, he'd be a fantastic get.
Having not watched him nor knowing anything about his health last season, his splits for 2011 are not good. He started hot, like he was in 2010... the last 5 months were a downward spiral into a utility role type role.
He may be insurance in case the Rule 5 draftee doesn't pan out.
-
Having not watched him nor knowing anything about his health last season, his splits for 2011 are not good. He started hot, like he was in 2010... the last 5 months were a downward spiral into a utility role type role.
He may be insurance in case the Rule 5 draftee doesn't pan out.
Lots of chatter on that mlbtr comments about him being fragile, FWIW.
-
A move prior to a move? (re: Wandy or Myer about to get traded?)
Right this second the Astros have on their 40-man roster starting pitchers: Clemens, Happ, Harrell, Lyles, Myers, Norris, Rodriguez, and Weiland. 8 for 5 spots. ETA: Also Sosa which makes 9 for 5 spots.
Too they'll have to take 1 person off the 40-man.
-
Looks like a SS with low range, didn't hit last year after hitting well the year before. If he is even MLB average though, it's a good deal.
Did you forget where the team is going? Low range, hitting short stops are de rigueur in the AL. How's his pirouette throwing?
-
How's his pirouette throwing?
Forget that. What memorabilia does he give his one-night stands?
-
Sucks to give up Melancon with the bullpen already so weak, but I understand the trade. And it may end up working out well for the Astros. Mills will also be familiar with Lowrie from his big league time in '08 and '09.
-
Sucks to give up Melancon with the bullpen already so weak, but I understand the trade. And it may end up working out well for the Astros. Mills will also be familiar with Lowrie from his big league time in '08 and '09.
Total Devil's advocate here but a late inning reliever's value usually builds based on demonstrated success in tight situations. The odds of Houston having any significant opportunities to showcase Melancon, I would think, will be low. Lowrie and a AAA starter, with suspect results in the majors, is a pretty solid haul given Melancon's past performance.
-
So, the Astros have picked up Lowrie, Weiland, a year and a half of Melancon, and Paredes for Berkman.
-
So, the Astros have picked up Lowrie, Weiland, a year and a half of Melancon, and Paredes for Berkman.
Thanks a lot, Ed.
-
Total Devil's advocate here but a late inning reliever's value usually builds based on demonstrated success in tight situations. The odds of Houston having any significant opportunities to showcase Melancon, I would think, will be low. Lowrie and a AAA starter, with suspect results in the majors, is a pretty solid haul given Melancon's past performance.
I don't disagree with that, I think it seems like a pretty solid return for Melancon. I'm just a little bit terrified of what the bullpen's going to look like next season.
-
I don't disagree with that, I think it seems like a pretty solid return for Melancon. I'm just a little bit terrified of what the bullpen's going to look like next season.
I'm more than a little terrified of what the whole team will look like next season. Like, 62 Mets terrified.
-
I'm just a little bit terrified of what the bullpen's going to look like next season.
There's no reason to single out the bullpen.
-
I'm more than a little terrified of what the whole team will look like next season. Like, 62 Mets terrified.
Brett Wallace = Marv Throneberry.
-
I always appreciate Levine's sarcasm. (https://twitter.com/#!/zacharylevine/status/147016905759260672)
Lowrie's an acid, Weiland a base and adding them makes a salt and 2.5 wins. RT @ashtexas um, where is the "Science" in the Melancon trade?
-
I'm more than a little terrified of what the whole team will look like next season. Like, 62 Mets terrified.
There's no reason to single out the bullpen.
...goddammit. I was having a good day.
-
Brett Wallace = Marv Throneberry.
Marvelous Marv = Beautiful Brett?
-
If both Myers and Wandy are dealt, as the 40-man is currently configured, the 2012 starting rotation would be Norris, Happ, Lyles, Sosa, and Weiland. That leaves Clemens (who'd likely be at AAA anyway) and Harrell out.
-
I would have preferred the Astros bring back Keppinger at SS, but this is a decent trade.
Glad to know our new GM can get back value in a deal, as opposed to Wade.
-
I would have preferred the Astros bring back Keppinger at SS, but this is a decent trade.
Glad to know our new GM can get back value in a deal, as opposed to Wade.
I can't tell if either statement is sarcastic.
-
So does this mean we don't get to quiet the riot?
-
I can't tell if either statement is sarcastic.
No shit. With a negative bent, one could assert we gave up a solid, known quantity for a bunch of hope.
Like all trades, time will tell.
Jacksonian, you don't think Anuery has a shot at the rotation?
-
No shit. With a negative bent, one could assert we gave up a solid, known quantity for a bunch of hope.
Like all trades, time will tell.
Jacksonian, you don't think Anuery has a shot at the rotation?
With this crowd, anything's possible.
-
i realize this is what Astros' life is these days, but i liked Melancon.
I agree. I really liked Melancon's stuff. He could make bats miss. I'll miss him.
-
I agree. I really liked Melancon's stuff. He could make bats miss. I'll miss him.
Sooooo... Mr Happy = bats???
-
If both Myers and Wandy are dealt, as the 40-man is currently configured, the 2012 starting rotation would be Norris, Happ, Lyles, Sosa, and Weiland. That leaves Clemens (who'd likely be at AAA anyway) and Harrell out.
this is twice you said Clemens. is Roger back?
-
this is twice you said Clemens. is Roger back?
The guy we got in the Bourn trade.
-
The guy we got in the Bourn trade.
ah so. i was out of town then so it did not happen.
-
ah so. i was out of town then so it did not happen.
Would you mind heading out of town for 2012?
-
Would you mind heading out of town for 2012?
nothing i would like better. there is this money thing....
-
Lowrie is going to have to beat out Bill Hall.
-
Having not watched him nor knowing anything about his health last season, his splits for 2011 are not good. He started hot, like he was in 2010... the last 5 months were a downward spiral into a utility role type role.
Yeah, but it was an injury that kicked off the downward spiral...if memory serves me well. I'm thinking he's still a player with some upside if he can shake the injury bug. I'm definitely in the glass half full camp.
-
And Lowrie is a Stanford guy to boot. That should help out the team's crossword squad.
-
And Lowrie is a Stanford guy to boot. That should help out the team's crossword squad.
Sounds like the next Eric Bruntlett to me. Which is a good player to have on a team wanting to compete for a championship moreso than a rebuilding team. But juneberno.
-
Sounds like the next Eric Bruntlett to me. Which is a good player to have on a team wanting to compete for a championship moreso than a rebuilding team. But juneberno.
Does a team that is going to lose 120 games need a closer?
-
So does David Stern get to void this trade for "basket...errr, baseball reasons," or does Nolan get to call in from Arlington and voice his displeasure?
-
Sounds like the next Eric Bruntlett to me. Which is a good player to have on a team wanting to compete for a championship moreso than a rebuilding team. But juneberno.
I think he's a much better hitter than Bruntlett, but sounds like not as good a fielder.
In any case, if he manages to stay off the DL I wouldn't be surprised if they flip him for younger prospects at the deadline, or next winter.
-
Does a team that is going to lose 120 games need a closer?
Lowrie is a shortstop, but there is no telling if he'll need to close too.
-
I think he's a much better hitter than Bruntlett, but sounds like not as good a fielder.
In any case, if he manages to stay off the DL I wouldn't be surprised if they flip him for younger prospects at the deadline, or next winter.
Re: He's a great AL player. Done! Deal!
-
So does David Stern get to void this trade for "basket...errr, baseball reasons," or does Nolan get to call in from Arlington and voice his displeasure?
I'm going to judge Crane in large part on whether he continues the practice of a Ryan promotional item. If he doesn't and also shitcans the pinstripes and the red softball road jersey's, then capitulating to Selig will be made slightly better. Slightly.
-
Does a team that is going to lose 120 games need a closer?
I understand what you are saying, but it has sort of become a self-fulfilling phrophecy: "we are gonna suck, so let's unload everything of value, to insure we actually suck."
I don't get why this teardown idea needs to be taken to the extreme. You can keep decent players, and rebuild at the same time. In five years, the success of the Astros will have everything to do with whether Wade's/Luhnow's drafts and international signings are good, not whether they got marginal value out of one of their minor assets.
-
I understand what you are saying, but it has sort of become a self-fulfilling phrophecy: "we are gonna suck, so let's unload everything of value, to insure we actually suck."
Limey, does your firm underwrite actual suckage?
-
Bixler removed from the 40-man. Was he the last Wade signee?
-
First descent Astros news I've heard in a while and would bet Mills had a big say in this move too.
-
First descent Astros news I've heard in a while and would bet Mills had a big say in this move too.
Hopefully that's not some kind of prophetic Freudian slip.
By the way, while I'm not sure how I feel about the trade right now (I liked Melancon), for any who might be bemoaning the fact that the Astros are continuing the fire sale with little regard to winning games in 2012, keep in mind- they have actually added to their payroll with this move, as Lowrie is arb-eligible and will make more than Melancon this year.
-
Hopefully that's not some kind of prophetic Freudian slip.
Ha, and I was worried about getting Lowrie wrong.
-
Funnily enough, the Sox immediately signed Nick Punto to replace Lowrie. I had been sort of hoping the Astros could sign Punto to be their shortstop.
-
By the way, while I'm not sure how I feel about the trade right now (I liked Melancon), for any who might be bemoaning the fact that the Astros are continuing the fire sale with little regard to winning games in 2012, keep in mind- they have actually added to their payroll with this move, as Lowrie is arb-eligible and will make more than Melancon this year.
So put you down for "they will not trade Wandy and Myers"?
-
So put you down for "they will not trade Wandy and Myers"?
Just means that having Lowrie on the roster instead of Melancon adds a bit of payroll regardless of what happens with Wandy and Myers, at least the way I read it.
-
So put you down for "they will not trade Wandy and Myers"?
Right. The Astros will not trade Wandy, Myers, OR Carlos Lee, just like I will not hit "post" when I'm done writing this.
-
Hopefully that's not some kind of prophetic Freudian slip.
More like a Fredian slip.
-
So, the Astros have picked up Lowrie, Weiland, a year and a half of Melancon, and Paredes for Berkman.
... for Berkman and $6 million.
-
... for Berkman and $6 million.
1/2 a season of badly-slumping-Berkman and $6 million.
-
... for Berkman and $6 million.
$4 mil according to this article (http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5426304), which gets pretty specific:
He also has a $15 million club option for 2011 with a $2 million buyout. Of the slightly more than $7.15 million remaining on the contract, the Yankees will pay $3,150,273, while Houston will pay $4 million.
The article goes on to say that before going to the Yanks, Berkman had blocked a trade to the White Sox? Anybody know about that?
Also came across this article (http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5426946), which claims that:
After the 2006 season, when the Houston Astros went from World Series runners-up the year before to rapidly declining mediocrities ... Berkman marched into the GM's office and made the following announcement: "Trade me. I want to go to the Yankees."
Is that bullshit, or perhaps some writer (Justice?) picking up on Lance being goofy, and reporting it as serious fact?
Either way, as far as the trade itself goes, I think Wade did pretty well there.
-
Either way, as far as the trade itself goes, I think Wade did pretty well there.
Shows what you know. Wade is a moron. Common knowledge.
-
The article goes on to say that before going to the Yanks, Berkman had blocked a trade to the White Sox? Anybody know about that?
I asked Footer about that when it came out. She said it was utter BS.
-
"Luhnow pulled the trigger without really consulting with Mills, a former Red Sox bench coach who had some familiarity with Lowrie."
reported by Steve Campbell
http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastros/2011/12/14/its-the-thought-that-counts-luhnow-makes-first-trade-as-astros-gm-and-its-not-a-salary-dump/?gta=commentform#commentform
-
$4 mil according to this article (http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5426304), which gets pretty specific:
You're right. I double counted the $2 mil buyout. My bad.
-
"Luhnow pulled the trigger without really consulting with Mills, a former Red Sox bench coach who had some familiarity with Lowrie."
reported by Steve Campbell
http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastros/2011/12/14/its-the-thought-that-counts-luhnow-makes-first-trade-as-astros-gm-and-its-not-a-salary-dump/?gta=commentform#commentform
Thanks for the link. The last sentence says "Thinking Astros fans, then, can take heart for now at the concept behind the new GM’s first trade." Campbell also lauded due to filling the hole at SS.
I don't really get the concept. A valuable asset for a SS type that could have been purchased on the open market? That would have still left you with a valuable asset. Furthermore, the trade is at odds with the "we are shooting for five years" concept. Lowrie most likely won't be here in five years. Trading Meloncon for prospects would have at least made sense within the five year concept.
So, the concept seems to be best understood as a trade which will improve the club now. I certainly like that philosophy, and hope the trade does just that, but if that is the concept, why throw out reasons like "a shitty team doesn't need a closer." Just seems inconsistent.
-
Thanks for the link. The last sentence says "Thinking Astros fans, then, can take heart for now at the concept behind the new GM’s first trade." Campbell also lauded due to filling the hole at SS.
I don't really get the concept. A valuable asset for a SS type that could have been purchased on the open market? That would have still left you with a valuable asset. Furthermore, the trade is at odds with the "we are shooting for five years" concept. Lowrie most likely won't be here in five years. Trading Meloncon for prospects would have at least made sense within the five year concept.
So, the concept seems to be best understood as a trade which will improve the club now. I certainly like that philosophy, and hope the trade does just that, but if that is the concept, why throw out reasons like "a shitty team doesn't need a closer." Just seems inconsistent.
What's so hard to understand about a trade of talented pitcher with a little experience for an at least as talented but less experienced (and under club control 1 year longer) pitcher and a starting shortstop?
-
What's so hard to understand about a trade of talented pitcher with a little experience for an at least as talented but less experienced (and under club control 1 year longer) pitcher and a starting shortstop?
And Lowrie, especially, could always be traded for a bigger haul later if he rebuilds some more of his value. Another side to this is, if Lyon is healthy and pitching well, he's now the closer again, which would bump up his value for a potential mid-season trade, although those are big "ifs".
-
What's so hard to understand about a trade of talented pitcher with a little experience for an at least as talented but less experienced (and under club control 1 year longer) pitcher and a starting shortstop?
Devil's adocate position: a SS of Lowrie's probable caliber could have been easily purchased, so the question becomes "why trade a known quality young pitcher for an unknown pitcher?" Doesn't make a lot of sense.
My position: if the trade is made to improve the present club, it is certainly understandable. But if that is the reason, why do I keep hearing the rationale that it makes sense because a shitty club doesn't need a closer anyway. That rationale is counter to a desire to improve the present club. Besides that, it is sort of lacking anyway. One could take that logic and apply it to any position.
-
Devil's adocate position: a SS of Lowrie's probable caliber could have been easily purchased, so the question becomes "why trade a known quality young pitcher for an unknown pitcher?" Doesn't make a lot of sense.
Tell me which SS of this caliber was available. Clint Barmes got $10M, for crying out loud.
-
Devil's adocate position: a SS of Lowrie's probable caliber could have been easily purchased, so the question becomes "why trade a known quality young pitcher for an unknown pitcher?" Doesn't make a lot of sense.
FA shortstops are expensive for what the Astros want to pay. Lowrie is much cheaper.
My position: if the trade is made to improve the present club, it is certainly understandable. But if that is the reason, why do I keep hearing the rationale that it makes sense because a shitty club doesn't need a closer anyway. That rationale is counter to a desire to improve the present club. Besides that, it is sort of lacking anyway. One could take that logic and apply it to any position.
Is Luhnow saying the club doesn't need a closer? Lyon will close as he has when healthy. So they already had a closer and now have a young starter they didn't have before.
-
Devil's adocate position: a SS of Lowrie's probable caliber could have been easily purchased, so the question becomes "why trade a known quality young pitcher for an unknown pitcher?" Doesn't make a lot of sense.
My position: if the trade is made to improve the present club, it is certainly understandable. But if that is the reason, why do I keep hearing the rationale that it makes sense because a shitty club doesn't need a closer anyway. That rationale is counter to a desire to improve the present club. Besides that, it is sort of lacking anyway. One could take that logic and apply it to any position.
Who is your "replacement" shortstop?
Also, even shitty teams need a shortstop. A lot more than they need another bullpen arm.
-
Thanks for the link. The last sentence says "Thinking Astros fans, then, can take heart for now at the concept behind the new GM’s first trade." Campbell also lauded due to filling the hole at SS.
I don't really get the concept. A valuable asset for a SS type that could have been purchased on the open market? That would have still left you with a valuable asset. Furthermore, the trade is at odds with the "we are shooting for five years" concept. Lowrie most likely won't be here in five years. Trading Meloncon for prospects would have at least made sense within the five year concept.
So, the concept seems to be best understood as a trade which will improve the club now. I certainly like that philosophy, and hope the trade does just that, but if that is the concept, why throw out reasons like "a shitty team doesn't need a closer." Just seems inconsistent.
The SS market sucks and maybe Luhnow is trying to contend in the next 2-3 years instead of 5.
-
The SS market sucks and maybe Luhnow is trying to contend in the next 2-3 years instead of 5.
Or he's buying low on Lowrie (who's been injured) and Weiland (who was rushed) and selling high on Melancon. Would not surprise me at all if Lowrie is dealt at the deadline if they find the right suitor (and aren't in contention).
-
Or he's buying low on Lowrie (who's been injured) and Weiland (who was rushed) and selling high on Melancon. Would not surprise me at all if Lowrie is dealt at the deadline if they find the right suitor (and aren't in contention).
That too. I don't see how anyone can complain about this deal right now.
-
Who is your "replacement" shortstop?
Also, even shitty teams need a shortstop. A lot more than they need another bullpen arm.
+1
-
Or he's buying low on Lowrie (who's been injured) and Weiland (who was rushed) and selling high on Melancon. Would not surprise me at all if Lowrie is dealt at the deadline if they find the right suitor (and aren't in contention).
DING! DING! We have a WINNER!
With this understanding would anyone be surprised if one or both were used in a future trade, to build additional depth in talent, depending on the state of the organization?
-
Who is your "replacement" shortstop?
Also, even shitty teams need a shortstop. A lot more than they need another bullpen arm.
Meloncon wasn't just another bullpen arm, he helped tremendously last year, and all teams need all positions to compete. Admittedly, I have no idea who is the replacement SS, I'm just inferring that Lowrie is that level, as witnessed by how Boston had him as a backup behind non-bigtime players, and the reports that his glove is marginal. Others on here have already said they wouldn't be surprised if he was a utility guy. Maybe a slightly better Keppinger. In other words, a guy you could probably pay for, while keeping a good young arm.
Now I'm hearing this is a deal to obtain chips to later sell? That is folly. A long trail of mediocrity of trading known quality for unknown quantity. The freaking Pirate model.
-
That too. I don't see how anyone can complain about this deal right now.
I'm just playing devil's advocate and pointing out how inconsistent the concept of improving the present club is with the idea that they should jettison good young arms because they won't compete anyway.
Jacksonian, It wasn't Luhnow saying it, it was in Campbell's article, in other assessments I've read, and possibly posts here.
-
Meloncon wasn't just another bullpen arm, he helped tremendously last year, and all teams need all positions to compete. Admittedly, I have no idea who is the replacement SS, I'm just inferring that Lowrie is that level, as witnessed by how Boston had him as a backup behind non-bigtime players, and the reports that his glove is marginal. Others on here have already said they wouldn't be surprised if he was a utility guy. Maybe a slightly better Keppinger. In other words, a guy you could probably pay for, while keeping a good young arm.
Now I'm hearing this is a deal to obtain chips to later sell? That is folly. A long trail of mediocrity of trading known quality for unknown quantity. The freaking Pirate model.
Without this deal, Angel Sanchez is likely your everyday shortstop. Lowrie is an upgrade over him and has far more potential upside than anyone who is within a year of the majors in the org.
Melancon is a nice piece, but it's not like the Astros just traded (young) Mariano Rivera. They're gambling that Lyon can fill the closer role until they find something better.
-
Melancon is a nice piece, but it's not like the Astros just traded (young) Mariano Rivera.
Funny that you say that, given how often it's been reported that Melancon was once viewed as Rivera's heir apparent in NY.
-
Without this deal, Angel Sanchez is likely your everyday shortstop. Lowrie is an upgrade over him and has far more potential upside than anyone who is within a year of the majors in the org.
Melancon is a nice piece, but it's not like the Astros just traded (young) Mariano Rivera. They're gambling that Lyon can fill the closer role until they find something better.
I think the waters are being muddied a bit around here though. The best quess at what is going on is: They have a plan. Correct? So what they've done is according to their plan, which was understood to be a player development plan (re: five to ten year plan). That is all good and well (and in large part well accepted). However, when it's spun in here as an increase in payroll, it smacks a little like the expectation is that they want to be far more competitive quicker and the plan is actually this: Luhlow, wave that magic wand white boy! Get us some hidden talent that no one else sees and bring us back to life quickly!
So is that the "plan" or it the former still in vogue. Not that this move goes contrary to either plan, it's just that there seems to be an underlying current of "well, maybe this guy really *IS* a magic man!". IS this what TeamCrane means by "we have a plan"? Sounds a lot like Bill Murray's plan in Space Jam.
-
I think the waters are being muddied a bit around here though. The best quess at what is going on is: They have a plan. Correct? So what they've done is according to their plan, which was understood to be a player development plan (re: five to ten year plan). That is all good and well (and in large part well accepted). However, when it's spun in here as an increase in payroll, it smacks a little like the expectation is that they want to be far more competitive quicker and the plan is actually this: Luhlow, wave that magic wand white boy! Get us some hidden talent that no one else sees and bring us back to life quickly!
So is that the "plan" or it the former still in vogue. Not that this move goes contrary to either plan, it's just that there seems to be an underlying current of "well, maybe this guy really *IS* a magic man!". IS this what TeamCrane means by "we have a plan"? Sounds a lot like Bill Murray's plan in Space Jam.
Reducing the payroll is a goal, but only in that it allows resources to be focused on improving the farm system. I don't see how this move works counter to this goal. I see this move as nothing more than a buy low, sell high situation which was pointed out by someone else. Lowrie was no longer the Sox SS of the future. They signed Scutaro after one of the more recent injuries to Lowrie, making Lowrie expendable. Houston happened to have a piece Boston wanted, and Boston was willing to give Houston a AAA starter and Lowrie. Both pieces coming to Houston could improve their value in a situation such as the one Houston is in. Once that happens, they can be flipped (Lowrie) or become a part of the long term plans (Weiland). Neither was likely to get much of an opportunity in Boston.
I hope Luhnow can find some similar opportunities with other players who don't fit in to the long term plan (i.e. young and under club control for the next 5 yrs) as well as get a positive return for Lee, W-Rod, and Myers. Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Myers stick around.... but that's just my 2 cents.
If Luhnow keeps this up, I may find something of interest about the Astros (Bus Riding!!)....
-
Luhnow
Son, you need a nickname.
-
Son, you need a nickname.
I'm sure that after his first bad move some enterprising reporter will call him "Duh-now".
-
He's already got "Harry Potter." Not sure how it makes any sense that it was a pejorative nickname, but if he proves himself as a good GM, it's a label he can wear proudly (in the sense of "fuck the haters," if you will).
-
I think the waters are being muddied a bit around here though. The best quess at what is going on is: They have a plan. Correct? So what they've done is according to their plan, which was understood to be a player development plan (re: five to ten year plan). That is all good and well (and in large part well accepted). However, when it's spun in here as an increase in payroll, it smacks a little like the expectation is that they want to be far more competitive quicker and the plan is actually this: Luhlow, wave that magic wand white boy! Get us some hidden talent that no one else sees and bring us back to life quickly!
So is that the "plan" or it the former still in vogue. Not that this move goes contrary to either plan, it's just that there seems to be an underlying current of "well, maybe this guy really *IS* a magic man!". IS this what TeamCrane means by "we have a plan"? Sounds a lot like Bill Murray's plan in Space Jam.
I don't believe it's a 5-10 year plan. It may take that long, but no one would be around to see it.
-
Son, you need a nickname.
I call him "Fancy".
-
I don't believe it's a 5-10 year plan. It may take that long, but no one would be around to see it.
All I ask is not to be confused. That's it. I am willing to conceede it may not take long as 5-10, but we as fans have to accept that it may. I just don't want to hear that this was a move to improve the team for next year and that is because, indirectly, they plan to go for the NL Central title. Not that they shouldn't, but it's going to take a lot more than waving a magic wand or looking under rocks for gems everyone else forgot. I find it hard to really believe that this is what they are doing with this first move of many.
That would be a kinda strange plan if you ask me (and again, that's not what I understand from the organization, it's more what I understand from some posters in here).
-
I don't see it as them trying to go for it in 2012. There's a big difference between shooting for a division title and making a few moves to avoid losing 120 games (so long as they don't detract from their future plans, which this one obviously didn't). I see it as them trying to acquire assets that they believe will be more valuable long-term than the one they gave up, and in doing so they also addressed a need for 2012. Makes sense to me.
-
I don't see it as them trying to go for it in 2012. There's a big difference between shooting for a division title and making a few moves to avoid losing 120 games (so long as they don't detract from their future plans, which this one obviously didn't). I see it as them trying to acquire assets that they believe will be more valuable long-term than the one they gave up, and in doing so they also addressed a need for 2012. Makes sense to me.
Me too. Never said it didn't.
-
Some possibly-relevant trade news: the Reds just got Mat Latos from the Padres for a pretty big package (Yonder Alonso, Yasmani Grandal, Edinson Volquez, and Brad Boxberger). Latos is really going to help their rotation, and right now the Cardinals have to be feeling some pressure. Call 'em up, Jeff.
-
Some possibly-relevant trade news: the Reds just got Mat Latos from the Padres for a pretty big package (Yonder Alonso, Yasmani Grandal, Edinson Volquez, and Brad Boxberger). Latos is really going to help their rotation, and right now the Cardinals have to be feeling some pressure. Call 'em up, Jeff.
I doubt they feel the need to enter an arms race, with Wainwright coming back. But, if they want another *slugger who rarely strikes out, we do have a Spanish horse they may be interested in...
-
I doubt they feel the need to enter an arms race, with Wainwright coming back.
Ah, good point.
-
Some possibly-relevant trade news: the Reds just got Mat Latos from the Padres for a pretty big package (Yonder Alonso, Yasmani Grandal, Edinson Volquez, and Brad Boxberger). Latos is really going to help their rotation, and right now the Cardinals have to be feeling some pressure. Call 'em up, Jeff.
Not really relevant. The Padres are in the NL west.
-
Some possibly-relevant trade news: the Reds just got Mat Latos from the Padres for a pretty big package (Yonder Alonso, Yasmani Grandal, Edinson Volquez, and Brad Boxberger). Latos is really going to help their rotation, and right now the Cardinals have to be feeling some pressure. Call 'em up, Jeff.
It appears to raise Wandy's asking price.
-
It appears to raise Wandy's asking price.
But with the Astros as known sellers, how much would that be?
-
But with the Astros as known sellers, how much would that be?
Just takes two teams
-
Just takes two teams
True, Biz. Good old free market capitalism.
-
Some possibly-relevant trade news: the Reds just got Mat Latos from the Padres for a pretty big package (Yonder Alonso, Yasmani Grandal, Edinson Volquez, and Brad Boxberger). Latos is really going to help their rotation, and right now the Cardinals have to be feeling some pressure. Call 'em up, Jeff.
Brad Boxberger being the son of Rod, former 1st rounder, 11th overall pick, of the Astros in 1978.
-
. They're gambling that Lyon can fill the closer role until they find something better.
If Lyon can have a good first half, I say our farm gets even deeper.