Jump to content

Hank Chinaski

Legacy Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3435

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Hank Chinaski

  1. Hank Chinaski
    Generally, ones that bring back *likely* value commensurate with what you trade. (The exception would be something like the Randy Johnson trade. That was very likely going to be a big imbalance of future value at the time is was made. It was still a good move because it brought back a guy that could have been the most important piece of a WS title. It didn’t work out, therm’s the breaks.) With Ohtani off the market, there isn’t anyone like that. So I’d be fine with them standing pat and not chasing spare parts. Graveman is fine. I’d rather have Lee in the organization. Again, it’s not a disaster or anything, but it doesn’t seem like a particularly good move to me. I care more about keeping the club’s floor high over the long haul than I do about short-term patches. People see it differently; that’s fine.
  2. Hank Chinaski
    That’s true. I also don’t know if the sun is going to explode in the next 15 minutes, but I bet it doesn’t.
  3. Hank Chinaski
    You shouldn’t put that in writing.
  4. Hank Chinaski
    So we should make bad trades going forward?
  5. Hank Chinaski
    You know this is happening, and it’s part of why this trade sucks ass.
  6. Hank Chinaski
    I think you just like arguing with me.
  7. Hank Chinaski
    …without the guys that were successful, with a first-year GM with no track record and an owner who led a string of horrific signings in the most recent offseason.
  8. Hank Chinaski
    Problem is, these possibilities aren’t equally likely. Right - who cares about next year?!? We got Kendall Graveman! (This is exactly how losing franchises operate.)
  9. Hank Chinaski
    Trading away more future value for less future value is generally bad business, right? Repeatedly doing this has obvious long-term consequences and suggests that the front office may not be particularly sharp. Since we can’t be certain of any future events happening, we rely on probabilities. Lee probably has more future value to the Astros than Graveman, probably by quite a bit. That is the issue. Maybe the club thinks less of Lee than scouts/prospect folks. I hope that’s the case, because if they don’t, then this suggests that they’ll be bad at valuing players properly.
  10. Hank Chinaski
    Nothing is a sure thing, of course. But Lee projects as an average big league catcher based on scouting grades, performance to date, etc. Fangraphs, whose prospect writers are generally as good as anyone’s, has him graded as a 50 future value guy, equivalent of an average MLB starter. He has a high floor because he’s good defensively at a defense-first position. He better than Maldonado right now. He isn’t exciting, but a catching combo of Diaz-Lee for the next 6 years very likely puts the Astros near the top of the league in terms of positional value. Again, it’s not about Lee per se. It’s about not properly balancing who you trade against who you receive.
  11. Hank Chinaski
    Graveman is a decent relief pitcher. He’s been worth about 2/3 of a win per year over the last 3 years. So, maybe he’s worth a win or so over the next 1.5 years. Lee is a good defensive catcher with 6 years of team control. If he catches 35-45 games per year as a backup to Diaz, he’s probably worth about 1 win per year even if his bat never comes around. Maybe/probably more. Look, none of this is the end of the world or anything. But trading away more future value than you get in return isn’t generally a winning formula if you’re not adding real difference makers. And guys with 4.85 FIP aren’t real difference makers; they’re just guys.
  12. Hank Chinaski
    Not worried about losing Lee; worried about trading more value than you get in return for guys that don’t move the needle. That’s problematic.
  13. Hank Chinaski
    And 25 last year. He will almost certainly be far more valuable over the next 5 years than Graveman will over the next 1.5. Graveman is completely ordinary.
  14. Hank Chinaski
    Signing a decent one costs a lot more than Lee will for several years.
  15. Hank Chinaski
    They have to get rid of Maldy after the season. Nobody catches every day. Lee probably catches 40-50 games per year for the next 5/6 years if Diaz sticks. He’s a good defensive catcher with decent power. And he costs almost nothing. Graveman and his 4.85 FIP doesn’t match the value.
  16. Hank Chinaski
    Lee for Graveman is a fucking terrible deal for the Astros.
  17. Hank Chinaski
    Suffice to say I’d rather see Singleton at DH than Madris.
  18. Hank Chinaski
    I remember being giddy - when it seemed possible that we’d move to the PAC with the ags - at the idea of a swarm of aggie hayseeds descending on the Bay Area or Seattle en masse. Doing their midnight yelling thing in LA somewhere. Etcetera and so forth.
  19. Hank Chinaski
  20. Hank Chinaski
    Fuck you, Adams heiress. Rot in shit.
  21. Hank Chinaski
    I’m not sure it’s entirely willful.
  22. Hank Chinaski
    Good god…where the conference HQ is located, who gets the first home game, who’s the “real UT”, etc…does anyone actually give a flying fuck about any of the things that these guys obsess over? I can’t imagine caring about any of these things.
  23. Hank Chinaski
  24. Hank Chinaski
    Altuve Alvarez Bregman Tucker Abreu Chas Diaz Pena Dubon/Julks/Meyers 5-7 could be in any order.
  25. Hank Chinaski

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...