Every other team is fighting to make the postseason; the Astros literally have a 100% chance of making the playoffs, per FanGraphs. The exception is the Dodgers - but they also have, far and away, the largest payroll in baseball. Liriano was part of what sounds like a three-headed approach to improving the pen; I think it's unfair to judge that singularly. In terms of making competitive offers - I think it's a mistake to assume if the Astros had just offered so-and-so, they could have had so-and-so. Maybe. But trades are usually more complicated than that. Also, it appears the Astros were not overly serious about acquiring a starting pitcher. I think they kicked tires - but most of the reports are that they Astros didn't make competitive bids. I think their plan was: let's create a bullpen that can shut down innings 6-9; we have enough starter talent to get us through innings 1-5. So my guess is.... they made minimal offers for the available starters and if the teams took 'em, great! If not, eh.... wasn't a priority.
I agree mostly with your post and have thought the same in regards to dealing with the A's in the past (did before why didn't we now?)...BUT I think something can be said for the timing. The trades we have made in the past with Oakland did not hold the weight that this deadline held. What I mean is...it's one thing to trade with a division foe when they are "just making a push," and it's another thing for that team to be dominating the game and that one piece (your "ace" mind you) might be what puts them over the top. Seems elementary, but egos and emotions are also involved. So, yes it's possible we had a sort of "tax" imo. I think those emotions are even higher with the rangers...they can say all they want they would have dealt with us, but saying and doing are two different things.
I think the Rangers deal with us if we make the best offer; Darvish isn't young and if we keep him past this year, it's going to cost a lot. Gray, OTOH, IS young, cheap and has the potential to be an ace for the next several years. If Houston blew you away, I think the A's, espcially, would make a deal. But I have to imgine there were internal discussion about making a potential long-term, intra-division juggernaut that much better.
There is a comment under the Mlbtr article about Verlander being able to opt out if traded that say Buck Martinez (Blue Jays announcer) spoke with someone inside the Houston FO that told him Verlander would only agree to go to NY or Chicago.
LOL. So basically, if he holds on to guys, he's overrating them. If he trades them, he's overpaying. That's convenient. Who did he overpay for, by the way? Seems like he's mostly traded away assets that didn't do much while holding onto a ton of players that have become really valuable.
I think you are right mostly about the rangers...but maybe the emotions in that case are a little higher for us. It would really suck if we sent them martes just for darvish to walk back to Arlington next year and then we are facing martes and darvish 5 to 8 times out of 19 games a season for the next 5 seasons. I know we are going for it all...but man that's would have been a tough pill to swallow.
I think in the case of Darvish, the Astros would be willing to pay less because we are also strengthening our rival long-term for a rental, which has negative value for us. The Rangers might have been willing to sell to us for less in that it weakens their top rival, but not really sure teams think that way. In the A's case, different story. There, they are making it harder for them to compete within the division over the next 2 years as well. I'd think we'd have to pay a little bit of a premium for that.
We patently disagree on some of this, but I have appreciated and continue to appreciate your ability to voice the Botched Deadline side in a way that isn't b****made. And, likewise, your willingness to recognize the Not Botched Deadline viewpoint in a way that isn't scorched earth. Here's to civil disagreement.
Here's the quote: Heard a comment by Buck Martinez last night during the Toronto/NY game. He noted after talking to someone in Houston that JV was only willing to accept a deal to NY or Chicago. May be implied... but he does not specifically mention the Houston front office - only someone "in Houston" (which, frankly, is vague enough to be literally ANYBODY in Houston). May also be a reporting issue as he's not quoting Martinez. Still, it lends some dubiousness to the claim, IMO. But it's not entirely hard to imagine, given his fiancee (though, I'd assume she'd also have LA on the list, right?.... BTW, did not know she was from Michigan. Her mom is apparently from Texas - yes, I Googled Kate Upton. For research............)
Just FYI if anyone wants to know when I'm having a bad day at work, look at my posts from today and yesterday. Luckily, those are few and far between these days. Go Stros.
You're missing my point. I fully acknowledge that you can't "win" every deal. But I also don't think it's outrageous to criticize him for his performance over the last 2 trade deadlines. Should he be fired?? 100% NO. Should he be questioned on certain aspects of his job performance?? 100% YES.
How does the above come out of this: However, his negotiating skills are sub-par which has led to us either overpaying in assets, or overrating our assets. You can't make any projections about our current tradable assets based on the last two deadlines because they are still in the minor leagues. So you're either talking about earlier trades, or just arbitrarily deciding he overrated our assets. On the flipside, who exactly has he overpaid for? Liriano is the only one that I can think of, but we have no idea if anyone was valuing a AAAA outfielder very highly (we know no one valued Aoki, given that he passed through waivers in the offseason and no one claimed him).
Based on what Liriano has done this season, that was a clear overpay in my opinion. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on the other deals as I'm not in a position where I can look up what guys like Brett Phillips are doing nowadays. I also think, based on what other teams paid for Darvish and Gray, that we were holding onto prospects tighter than perhaps we should have. Obviously this is all speculation on my part, but it's speculation on all of our parts because none of us are privy to the negotiations. Anyways, ultimately I'm frustrated with how the last 6 weeks have gone, but the season is far from over, and I'll be in MMP screaming my head off every chance I get.
Since this was the deal we did do, and if its a overpay, it stands to reason the other deals that we didnt do were even worse on the overpay front, at least in Jeff L. eyes.
Very true, but given what other teams actually ended up paying for both starters and relievers, doesn't it stand to reason that maybe our evaluation of what's fair might need some tweaking?? Again, I understand this isn't in a vacuum, and relationships between different teams can affect negotiations.....but I deeply feel that Luhnow botched this deadline by his inability to close any meaningful deals. And, rightly or wrongly, the players in the clubhouse obviously feel the same way.
Absolutely. I agree with Nook, mostly...and neither one of us is suggesting that Luhnow is a bad GM or should be fired. He's a great GM. I just think they had to make a move, given the injuries piling up.
This team absolutely had to make a trade. They hadn't had a SP go 8 innings since May 5. That ate away at the bullpen. And it was as evident to the guys on the roster as it was to most of us. But trust the process. Next year, right?
Pretty sure what Jeff ultimately does isnt in a vacuum either meaning, several folks probably had input about what to do and not. I dont think the question was whether we could use some help or not. Its whether the price was right. Perhaps our brass as a whole over values our prospects. Perhaps many on this board over values how much any guy that was traded would have helped us also. Its also true that the trade that was vetoed at the top, had it not been, would have been the deal that made everyone in Houston happy.