Let's examine my post and the post I responded to. First the post I responded to says that Paulino is moving up the prospect list based on his performances. I said he has had one good start so I fail to see how you got that I made his first four starts sound bad. I just see absolutely nothing so far that has Paulino moving up prospect lists, especially considering he is the third ranked Astros prospect.
Yep, Santana/Hader/Phillips are really lighting it up. Meanwhile Fiers is helping keep the rotation afloat while 4/5ths of the rotation is on the DL, not to mention that the Stros wouldn't have made the playoffs without adding Fiers in 2015 and being able to take the Royals to the brink. Sure Gomez blew up in his face, but even he hit a HR in the Yankees playoff game. Was it a perfect trade? Nope, was it a trade that helped them almost reach the world series? Yes. So I would say it was a productive trade. As far as the LoseNow wisecrack. Luhnow has built the team with the best record in baseball. You might want to cut him some slack, it's not like we're talking about Rick Smith here. You're really going to be disappointed when Luhnow makes a deal at the trade deadline, so prepare yourself, Luhnow said to get the type of starter he wants it's going to be painful. But with the best record in baseball Luhnow would be crazy not to go for Houston's 1st WS title.
Astros have gotten 2.6 WAR out if the deal, but more importantly Astros made 2015 playoffs with significant contributions from those 2. Brewers have gotten about 1 WAR. Not sure how the Lose-Now moniker is applicable as Astros won the short term easily.
I guess my sarcasm didn't make it across the internet tubes between my keyboard and yours. I am a lifelong Astros fan and a Luhnow devotee. Even the best GMs make questionable trades - I supported that trade then, wish we didn't make it now. Such is baseball.
Your post made it seem like you believed the last sentence you just wrote. As you subsequently wrote the last sentence, my reading of your post was spot on. Considering he was on average the 68th prospect preseason, that would give him an expected value of about 3.4 WAR for club control with about a 50% chance to produce zero or less WAR based on what pitchers similarly ranked performed. BA who revised their Top 100 once in season dropped him 16 spots after his injury. I think there is a good chance that he not only restored his preseason expected value post injury, but that he's moved just inside the Top 50 prospects. I think the odds that he produces greater than zero WAR (technically -0.2 to counter his earned WAR this season) is much better than 50%. Based on his performance so far, do you think he has a greater than a 50% chance to produce at least one sliver of a positive for a team?
My point is, that I don't see anything in his 4 starts this year where he has "moved up the prospect list" (or moved down for that matter). Based on last night, he certainly has the opportunity to produce positive results, but isn't that expected of a team's major league ready #3 prospect? I am not saying anything negative about him. Just making a simple observation about not getting too excited about 1 quality start. So, in a nutshell, based on 4 appearances this year: 1. As of today, June 18, 2017, I don't see where he has moved up (or down) the prospect list as the post I responded to stated. It's fine if you do. I don't. 2. As long as Paulino remains healthy, he should improve and have a positive impact on whatever team he is on. But, that's based on expectations, not the results of his first 4 starts.
I don't mean to be attacking if it comes off that way. It is interesting to me when a person's viewpoint is so much different than my own. It seems you expected positive value from Paulino who was on average the 68th prospect in baseball in preseason AS a pitcher. This is odd to me as pitching prospects at that ranking provide nothing or less about half the time historically regardless of where they are on a team list. I would view this differently if he was a hitter who are much safer bets. Granted, when providing positive value, pitching prospects usually provide a lot. The old adage that it takes 10 pitching prospects to get 2 starters seems to have some merit to me. That said, striking out a batter an inning over 19 innings is tough to fake. While it doesn't mean that he'll he great or even average, it usually means positive value in the majors. To me that is huge as a lot of the worst potential outcomes (i.e. zero WAR or less) likely won't happen. I do know I typically value bad players that provide some positive value more than most here.
Unless you're getting a clear #2 starter, I don't see why we'd spend valuable assets on a SP. At the very least I'd wait to see how McHugh progresses. Keuchel/Lance/Morton/Colin/Fiers, Paulino, Musgrove is a nice starting 5. Are there are top tier relievers that we might be able to nab? A guy like Tony Watson & maybe 1 more late inning guy. Gregerson has been awful, and is likely gone next year, and replacing him as the 7th or 8th inning guy, giving you Watson + Devo + Harris + Giles is a fairly decent bullpen. At least for this year it also lets you essentially push guys like Hoyt & Feliz to blowout innings eaters. As talented as they are, relying on them in tough situations has hurt us (maybe a bit of recency bias....).
Sonny grey anyone? http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...edly-has-mutual-interest-for-athletics-astros
Tony Watson is not an upgrade. Gregerson has had one truly awful outing (he gave up 6 runs in 1/3 of an inning) - otherwise, he's been OK: 3.09 ERA with 31 Ks in 26.2 IP. Overall, he's appeared in 29 games and allowed an earned run in just six of them. Watson, otoh, has worse #s across the board (higher ERA and WHIP, fewer Ks) and in his 29 games, he's allowed an earned run in 10 of them.
As always, depends on what we give up. What would it take to get a guy like Gray on a down year where he's had injuries himself?
I don't like simple numerical lists, I like the way Matt Dorey does it, with tiers. I would rank them based on who the Astros would be likely to protect. I think the Astros would value Martes, Tucker, Alvarez, Perez, Whitley and Fisher well above Paulino off the top of my head. A lot of time the prospect lists are dated. I think Paulino has value, and could settle into a #3-4 starter if he is healthy and works hard, but I don't think the Astros would view him remotely close to the third best prospect in the system.
I really don't know. I usually hear something from within the Astros, from the people I know. I can tell you the Astros have tried to trade for Gray at least twice but the A's were not interested at the time. I think the Astros are in part interested in Gray because they think they can protect more of their elite prospects. The A's have shown more of an interest and willingness to trade for lesser scouted prospects or to take a larger package of prospects rather than the top 1-2 prospects. A trade for Quintana would almost be guaranteed to include Martes or Tucker. I wouldn't be shocked if the Astros find a way to send 4-5 guys that are not Martes and Tucker to Oakland. Also, the Astros love the spin rate that Gray has and seem to believe he is getting closer to being what they had before. Keep in mind that sometimes who we assume the Astros value isn't always the case. In the minors the Astros rely far more on their scouting than most most teams. The Astros don't care if a guy is putting up monster numbers, he will be promoted when the scouts are confident he is ready. So the Astros may very well value a young player with middling stats over someone in AA or AAA with better stats.
MArtes vs Gray; could they just switch teams? I'm starting to settle in that Martes, Paulino, and Teoscar will get this done and that Houston will be willing to make it happen.
1. Tucker (more valuable imo than Bregman) 2. Martes 3. Yordan 4. Bukauskas 5. F. Perez 6. Whitley 7. Moran 8. Paulino Is my list.
A's seem like a team that takes more chances on guys that are more productive prospects in AA and AAA with less regard for stuff, defense, and speed than most teams. Guys that fit that bill for Astros farm would be Armenteros, Fisher (though likely appealing to many teams), Davis, and to a lesser extent White and Moran. Not that these guys would be main guy the A's would want for Gray, but might be guys that would be in the package.
So a guy that plays a position we already have 5 starters in and is at least 2 years from coming up is more valuable than our untouchable prospect (as of last year) that plays infield and is a really solid defender? Sometimes you guys are impressive. I mean Bregman is what? 22? Just starting, he was literally the best prospect we had, flew through the minors, and for a while had the best BA with RISP in the league. But no, some 18 yr old thats killing it in A ball could be really good in 2 years. I can't wait til 2.5 years from now when Tucker starts 0-32 and we have a new first round pick in A ball that is worth more than him. IMO no one that has shown they can compete at the MLB level is worth less than a prospect. See AJ Reed or Tyler White.
