Astros' Fire Sale 2008

A few days late and a few dollars short (does it work like that?), but it’s better than nothing. Saturday morning, I opened the Chronicle to find Steve Campbell’s piece gracing the bottom of the Sports section’s front page. I read the title, "Forsaking all to serve youth an empty answer" and I actually though it looked interesting and looked forward to it, foolishly.

I’ll start this off with a little quote from the article. It should be sufficient to demonstrate that it truly takes persistence, not talent to become a journalist.

“A 4-3 victory over the Rays on Friday won't stop the clamor to strip-mine the roster and start anew. Wouldn't it be invigorating and exhilarating to watch a young team grow up together the way the Rays have?
No. No. A thousand times no.
The Astros can — and should — restock their cupboard without giving up on the rest of the decade..”

My question (and I hope your question) is: How do they accomplish that task Steve? If he know’s that, then every owner in MLB should be clamoring for him to become their GM.

I’ll provide you another Steve Quote from this article, “Yes, the Astros look awful. No, it’s not time for a fire sale.”

“No, I don't see any impending signs of a miraculous turnaround this season. At the same time, I wouldn't be so eager to give up on 2009, 2010 and 2011. If McLane were to change his mind and decide to auction off his marketable players for prospects, the Astros would be doomed to some truly dark and dreary days.”

And what will the Astros be during those seasons if nothing is done? We’re not the second to last rated farm system because there are just 28 really, really good farm systems ahead of us -- it’s actually because it’s terrible. So Mr. Campbell is really saying this, “The Astros are totally screwed in 2008, the trades didn’t bring in enough offense to offset historically bad pitching. At the same time, I think if we just keep things they way they are: let Carlos Lee get a year older and at least 15 lbs. bigger, Lance’s legs a year older, Tejada a full THREE years older, and Roy’s arm a year more fatigued, then that way the supporting cast of characters can come around and we’ll be a play off contender.” Think about that, really. This team looks like it’s about a 72 - 90 team. Maybe it’ll be 75 - 87, what a thrill. If things improve next year (meaning we’re not using Brian Moheler as our number four starter) then who knows, we might break into the 80 win territory, but who cares. This team isn’t a play-off contention team for the next three years, nor is it a winning team. So the rest of the decade’s a wash anyway Steve-O.

Campbell notes that Bourn and Towles have yet to develop and that Roy just has been off (of course, readers of this blog know that, given our last look at Roy). Brilliant Steve. So if our Rookies didn’t need a learning curve and Roy didn’t get snake bit, we’d probably be better. It sounds very reasonable, here’s the thing though: when Roy was at his worst and so were Bourn and Towles, we were winning games. Even with Bourn doing much better, Roy getting over his luck or statistical noise, and Towles maybe hitting, we still have three other starters that offer not an ounce of consistency. Moheler is our fourth stater. Moehler is our fourth starter and injury has nothing to do with it. So, while it might be possible that the next two years could see improved offenses, there seems to be ZERO means of shoring up pitching enough to allow for us to field a winning team (see the Detroit Tigers).

We’re screwed if we sit with these guys and hope that something breaks our way in the next two years and allows us to salvage a good season out of our pieces. To do so, would require spending a lot more money on free agents (thus losing draft picks) or trading away what prospects this farm system might produce in the next year or so. The latter is very unlikely given that it would require either our entire first 10 rounds of this years draft or...nope just that, to land a player in a trade. We’re without a proven catching option for the next three years at least (but, in fairness I think Towles will come around), we have NO starting pitching and we’ll still have a walrus in left field making $20 million. This is what Steve Campbell doesn’t want us to forsake. Following Steve’s advice we’d hang onto Wandy Rodriguez, who’s inconsistent at times, but who’s talented left arm could net a bounty of prospects from a team like New York. He’d probably be up and arms about trading away Jose Valverde, who’s capabilities as a closer are both wasted by a team who’s bound to finish in the bottom half of their league and misused by a manager too dumb to know better, yet would command another beautiful bounty of young talent. If it were possible still, I’d trade Roy to any team that’d give us something of note. This is for two reasons:

1) We need the talent
2) It’d be a shame to let Roy’s career be forced to wither and die in the muck that will be the Houston Astros, when the man could chase a ring.

The Chronicle writers have, by in large, been obsessed with trading the trifecta of Roy, Carlos, and Lance, all of whom aren’t going anywhere. Maybe Roy, as he’s said he’d opt of his no trade clause if and only if he could get an extension to whomever he’s traded to. Carlos is fat, not hitting spectacularly, and owed $80 million over the next few years. This means that only the Yankees could possibly trade for him, as they’re the only team with money that I can think would possibly be stupid enough to trade for him. Lance, has said emphatically he’ll never leave the Astros and I believe that. So they’re all pretty much moot points. So I hope they stop. I also hope they stop using terrible logic to defend not trading anything we can to bring in young, viable talent. Next year, Miggy, Carlos, Lance, and Roy will command a combined $60 million, therefore we have to find a way to field a team in reasonable payroll parameters. Fans will turn away from this team if they're a 90 loss team no matter what the average age or payroll of the roster is.

Sphere: Related Content