1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Prospects sent to Tigers for Verlander are not very good

Discussion in 'Houston Astros' started by jayfree, Jul 14, 2019.

  1. jayfree

    jayfree Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2015
    Messages:
    7,399
    Likes Received:
    10,171
    Yes we won the trade already with the World Series ring, but to see how bad the players we sent over to the Tigers have been so far makes this an absolute lopsided trade. Perhaps Detroit was just trying to save some money on the deal but they still chipped in $10 mil for Verlander as well.

    Jake Rogers: (2019-AA/AAA) 243 avg, 12 HRs... (2018-AA) .219 avg, 17 HRs

    Daz Cameron (2019-AAA) .226 avg, 9 HRs

    Franklin Perez (2019- still in A ball)

    Now Jake might still turn into a decent hitter and eventually get called up (as he is a catcher) but I don't see anything close to star material in any of those players. It would be nice if we could get MadBum for a similar package this year.
     
  2. xcrunner51

    xcrunner51 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2002
    Messages:
    5,453
    Likes Received:
    2,281
    Yea most trades you hope one prospect pans out but it’s not uncommon for none to do so.

    All three of those guys will play in the majors. It’s just gonna be a while and their stock is definitely trending down.
     
    HTown2017Champs, Joe Joe and jayfree like this.
  3. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    Detroit did save something like $40 million with shedding Verlander's contract. That's more valuable than any of the prospects they acquired.
     
  4. Snake Diggit

    Snake Diggit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    10,923
    Likes Received:
    14,630
    You have to evaluate trades both by the ultimate outcome and by the value at the time of the trade. Verlander had faded a bit over the past year and had an overweight contract; he did pass thru waivers after all. Cameron and Rogers were fringe Top 100 prospects at the time, and Perez was a Top 50 prospect. None of those prospects has busted yet. Cameron is 22 and in AAA. Rogers is regarded as one of the top 3 defensive catching prospects in the game and one of the top 10 catching prospects overall. Perez had a serious injury but is still just 21.

    Obviously in hindsight so far it looks like a fantastic deal for Houston, and I’m sure the Tigers were hoping for a better outcome. But that’s the nature of prospects and baseball.
     
  5. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    This actually doesn’t make me feel better about the farm system development.

    Perez was at one point just as untouchable as Whitley.

    As much as people complain about the Gomez trade, having Hader pan out made me more optimistic about the guys we held on to.
     
    #5 Nick, Jul 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2019
  6. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    and yet he was traded near the high point of his value while Luhnow said F@<> off when someone asked about Whitley.
     
    jayfree likes this.
  7. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    Well, to be fair... they were just as adamant about standing pat with Perez during the true trade deadline.

    Luhnow has now seen the full spectrum of prospect jeopardy that can occur... trading peak value (Perez), trading a future all-star (Hader), holding on to a player past their value (A.J. Reed), holding on to a player who exceeds their already lofty expectations (Bregman).
     
    eliefor3 and raining threes like this.
  8. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    I doubt the Astros valuation of Perez changed significantly in a month. The Astros didn't trade him at the deadline as other teams decided to go with other offers.
     
    Snake Diggit likes this.
  9. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    We know they were working on the Verlander deal for awhile... wasn't just one month. But we also know that things changed enough in a month to make the deal.

    But back to the original point... its not a bad thing for traded prospects to do well after they're traded.

    I doubt they move Whitely... but if they do, not only would it be a total indictment about what they feel about his maturity level, but they'd also likely be selling him for a depreciated value.
     
  10. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    84,660
    Likes Received:
    82,852
    Jake Rogers is arguably the best defensive catcher in upper level baseball. That does carry just a tad bit of weight with some people.
     
  11. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    I don't disagree on it being bad that traded prospects do well after they are traded. I don't think Perez was offered for Verlander in July as he was likely offered for other pitchers. Verlander stopped walking guys like Framber, and other pitchers were traded and were definitely unavailable. That is what changed.

    On a side note, It is going to be very hard to match how successful the Verlander deal was. It is going to be hard to match the Cole deal. At the time of those trades, those guys weren't viewed as they are now by the rest of the league.
     
  12. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    That's a pretty big assumption... also presumes the trade being more "last second shift" vs. a well thought out/calculated decision, which would be more this front office's speed. And yes, he was deemed too valuable to trade for Verlander initially, which was what I was referring to.

    Hence the challenge with trading prospects. Don't want to get too attached to them, but don't want to trade guys destined for greatness as well.

    I don't think Luhnow is as attached to the farm as he once was. He's had time to grow as a GM. His recent pitching promotions, and other prospects callups being inconsistent (or just bad) has probably helped with that as well.

    The "Cardinal way" is now more than a decade ago... yes, they did have a run of guys coming in and making immediate lasting impact, and sticking with the MLB team. To expect that from every farm system is still a stretch.
     
  13. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    The Astros likely didn't make the decision to try to trade for Verlander at the last second even though it took that long to finalize, but considering Verlander passed through waivers, it says a lot about Verlander's perceived value on July 31. Not one team was willing to claim Verlander even if it was to block another contender from getting him. Only reason for this is if teams, including Astros, were scared Detroit may just give Verlander to them for nothing.

    Luhnow has shown no change in attachment to the farm as he once was other than being less involved in day to day operations from what I've seen. It is harder to draft as other teams are getting better, but I've not seen Luhnow trade a Top 25 hitting prospect or a Top 10 pitching prospect, yet. Luhnow keeps the guys most likely for greatness. Other guys, Luhnow may trade just like he always has, but he isn't giving those guys away just as he always has. Considering the bust potential of pitching prospects, I expect Luhnow is much more willing to trade them than position players.

    I'm totally okay with Astros having a few prospects busts when it means Astros get to keep guys like Bregman and Alvarez.
     
    Nick likes this.
  14. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    Out of the true contenders, only the Yankees would have been either looking for pitching... and willing to absorb his whole salary, and even then they had increased payroll concerns for that season.

    In the end, even with the improved August, I don't think the Astros were expecting him to be this good... and even better in the playoffs.

    That's inherently the definition of being "less attached"... and its only natural as he's now been a big league GM longer than he was a minor league guy.
     
  15. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,807
    Likes Received:
    13,867
    Definitely agree that Astros had no idea he would go from being back to being the best pitcher in baseball. On less attached on farm, I took it to mean he would be more willing to trade prospects based on context. He is less attached to the inner workings of the farm, but I still expect it will be like pulling teeth to get a great prospect from the Astros.
     
  16. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    84,660
    Likes Received:
    82,852
  17. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    Agreed. And some prospects deemed “not great” will go on to great things while others deemed “elite” will flop. And vice versa.
     
  18. SWTsig

    SWTsig Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,928
    Likes Received:
    3,515
    untouchable according to who exactly? we can certainly speculate that Perez was untouchable but at some point he clearly wasn't - who's to say he ever was. perhaps they knew all along that perez wasn't as great a prospect as we all believed and they were able to leverage that pervasive thought into unloading him for JV? maybe they thought that about all of the prospects they gave up. if that's the case then wouldn't you feel even better about their ability to unload middling talent for proven MLB players?

    none of us, and i mean none of us, have any idea what Lunhow and co. actually think... they aren't foolish enough to divulge actual intel. for all we know, they may think whitley will be a total bust and have simply carried on the chatter about him being untouchable to pump up his stock in order to land a true TOR starter.

    all of this is speculative. the only thing we do know is that we have one of the best run franchises in all of sports and our FO is largely responsible for it.
     
  19. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,897
    Likes Received:
    14,127
    When they didn't make a move at the initial trade deadline, there was enough chatter about which prospects they valued more than others... Perez was one of them. Of course "untouchable" doesn't mean a player can never be traded.... but at one point, his value did exceed what they were willing to part for a starting pitcher.

    No ****.... you don't say gif... welcome to a bbs discussion!
     
  20. juicystream

    juicystream Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2001
    Messages:
    29,237
    Likes Received:
    5,333
    I'd love to have Rogers back (obviously not giving back JV).

    Perez has been hurt and I never had high expectations for Daz.
     

Share This Page