Originally Posted by traderumor
But you keep on telling us the cupboard was bare, so wouldn't it be intuitive when you add something to nothing that the something would now be the best you have? All that really proves is that they received prospects that were better than the duds they had. And the minor league systems rankings can be taken with a grain of salt anyhow. Talk about a wax nose area in the game. Since its national signing day for football, there is a good analogy when it comes to ranking minor league systems and recruiting classes. There is a lot more written about "prospects" compared to the actual fruit from those trees. I honestly think their plan to go 100% prospects or bust is flawed from the outset.
This is absolutely true. Some of the prospects they got in the early trades weren't really top shelf IMO...but from the Houston perspective they were much better than what they'd had. But the trades in the past year, those have generated legitimate top 10-20 prospects in most anybody's system.
But I don't think they're going 100% prospects. They've got some guys with MLB experience with legitimate upside who've struggled recently. Bedard comes to mind.
My main point was that they really didn't have many other viable options on a route to take. The FA market really wasn't very good, at least not good enough to make that dud of a franchise into a contender. And if you're going to spend a boatload of money in the FA market, if you're not shooting for a contender...what's the point? Spending money just to make your team stay above water without striving for a championship is kinda crazy IMO.
I can get behind the idea of signing FA's in order to keep from rushing prospects. But to just sign them to avoid looking like an embarrassment...nah.