The Rays got their man at the deadline. Arggggh!

[alarp33]

 

Maybe I  am mis-remembering but I thought there was a minority that didn't really want to trade anyone and give up on the season and then another group on top of that that didn't really want to trade Pressly.  Maybe there were more reluctant traders than I thought?

 

I think there were much more of the 1st group than the 2nd group. Really not many complaints about specifically trading Pressly, but a decent amount about selling in general. 

[Riverbrian]

With Pressly, I remember being surprised by it. I was in sell mode and Chief and others disagreed with being in sell mode but that's where I was. 

 

But... I was  expecting only the expiring assets to be dealt. I was not expecting Pressly who was under control the next season to be dealt. 

 

So I was surprised. 

 

Pressly has stuff... I wasn't too worried about his struggles. He could punch people out and I like people who can punch people out in the bullpen. I had always figured that Pressly would be a big part of the 2019 bullpen. So when he was dealt... I was surprised. 

 

However... I didn't worry about it much... I told myself that they (the front office) must have really liked the players they were getting back in return and I figured that they had a plan for building the bullpen back up in the off-season. 

 

Now... Well... I'm still telling myself that they (the front office) must have really liked the players they were getting back but... I was underwhelmed with their attempt to build the bullpen back up. 

 

But... I told myself... Well... it is there job to staff it... Let them sign who they want and let them execute their plan. 

 

Now... Well... We released 4 guys in July. 

 

So... I'm standing here and waiting for them to get bullpen serious and I don't believe that they have yet. 

 

Until the Astros trade chips get here to help us out. It's hard not to imagine what could have been.

 

Rogers, Pressly, Anderson in the bullpen. We still could have picked up Dyson and Romo, plus Duffey, May competing with Littell or even Harper for spots. 

 

I'm hoping these days are gone. I hope they have learned from this. 

 

Until the players we got back come up and contribute... We lost the trade because we are in contention right now. 

 

Anderson... We lost that deal immediately and it will never change. 

[terrydactyls]

Geez Doc. You got a lot of nerve trying to get this thread back to the original topic. It didn't last long but nice try. It would have been nice to trade Pressley for Correa, Altuve, and Springer, but I guess the FO really messed up on this deal???

[howieramone2]

 

I think you judge a transaction by the information known at the time.

 

If either Alcala or Celestino contribute at some point in the future, that does nothing to change the dynamics of what it did to the Twins in 2018 and 2019.

 

And for the record, neither Alcala or Celestino, as prospects, were worth Pressly. 

The Pressly trade will go down as one of the best in franchise history. At some at point in time, pitching becomes a numbers game. Alcala is the type of power reliever every team in baseball is looking for. In a few years, we will see Celestino first as a 4th outfielder. If Buxton walks at free agency, he is the heir apparent.

 

When you have foresight, you don't need hindsight.

[howieramone2]

Sound strategy to see what you have internally, before wasting money on the overpriced free agency market for relievers. You can clearly see this by looking at the highest priced free agency relievers the past 2 off seasons. At the trade deadline you can pick up relievers having good seasons, which is what we did.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

Sound strategy to see what you have internally, before wasting money on the overpriced free agency market for relievers. You can clearly see this by looking at the highest priced free agency relievers the past 2 off seasons. At the trade deadline you can pick up relievers having good seasons, which is what we did.

And yet, last year, they held onto old, bad, players and didn't test the successful AAA pitchers. That was a mistake, as you point out.

[stringer bell]

Now let me see, we're talking about a) Ryan Pressly who is 0-2 with a 6.75 ERA (and a stint on the Injured List) since the All-Star break and Nick Anderson who was 2-3 with a 4.10 ERA before that same break? Oh yeah, small sample size.

 

My point here is that relief pitching is pretty darn hard to project and predict. We do have metrics (BABIP, spin rate, velocity etc.) but relievers are very volatile. Both Ryan Pressly and Nick Anderson have shown they are currently valuable bullpen options for contending teams and there was reason to believe that both would before the Twins let them go. There was absolutely no guarantee that they would thrive for their new teams. 

 

Oh, it appears that Pressly might be done for the season. He is having knee surgery and was placed (again) on the IL. Out 4-6 weeks.

[Mike Sixel]

Now let me see, we're talking about a) Ryan Pressly who is 0-2 with a 6.75 ERA (and a stint on the Injured List) since the All-Star break and Nick Anderson who was 2-3 with a 4.10 ERA before that same break? Oh yeah, small sample size.

 

My point here is that relief pitching is pretty darn hard to project and predict. We do have metrics (BABIP, spin rate, velocity etc.) but relievers are very volatile. Both Ryan Pressly and Nick Anderson have shown they are currently valuable bullpen options for contending teams and there was reason to believe that both would before the Twins let them go. There was absolutely no guarantee that they would thrive for their new teams.

 

Oh, it appears that Pressly might be done for the season. He is having knee surgery and was placed (again) on the IL. Out 4-6 weeks.

You can't predict injuries, so I don't get your point. Unless never employ a pitcher is your point.

[stringer bell]

 

You can't predict injuries, so I don't get your point. Unless never employ a pitcher is your point.

I just added on that Pressly was out because it was just announced at Major League Trade Rumors. My point is and was that pitching, particularly relief pitching, is really hard to project and predict. I don't think any of us could clearly see that Pressly shouldn't have been traded for the return the Twins received, or that Anderson should have been let go. Yes, in hindsight, it is pretty obvious, but at last year's trading deadline (for Pressly) and in the off-season) for Anderson, it wasn't nearly so clear.

[yarnivek1972]

I just added on that Pressly was out because it was just announced at Major League Trade Rumors. My point is and was that pitching, particularly relief pitching, is really hard to project and predict. I don't think any of us could clearly see that Pressly shouldn't have been traded for the return the Twins received, or that Anderson should have been let go. Yes, in hindsight, it is pretty obvious, but at last year's trading deadline (for Pressly) and in the off-season) for Anderson, it wasn't nearly so clear.

 

The reason it “wasn’t nearly so clear” about Anderson is because he NEVER GOT A CHANCE at the MLB level because Falvine inexplicably brought in Matt Belisle and Oliver Drake to pitch for a team that was never seriously in contention. That isn’t hindsight. PLENTY of people were clamoring to give the milb guys a shot last year. Maybe Anderson comes up last year and stinks. But at least then the Twins got a look. But they didn’t do that. In a LOST season. That is EXACTLY when to do that. And THAT is the FAILURE of Falvine in this matter. And it is clear as a bell.

[70charger]

 

The reason it “wasn’t nearly so clear” about Anderson is because he NEVER GOT A CHANCE at the MLB level because Falvine inexplicably brought in Matt Belisle and Oliver Drake to pitch for a team that was never seriously in contention. That isn’t hindsight. PLENTY of people were clamoring to give the milb guys a shot last year. Maybe Anderson comes up last year and stinks. But at least then the Twins got a look. But they didn’t do that. In a LOST season. That is EXACTLY when to do that. And THAT is the FAILURE of Falvine in this matter. And it is clear as a bell.

 

I don't get it. Maybe more capital letters would help.

[Squirrel]

The reason it “wasn’t nearly so clear” about Anderson is because he NEVER GOT A CHANCE at the MLB level because Falvine inexplicably brought in Matt Belisle and Oliver Drake to pitch for a team that was never seriously in contention. That isn’t hindsight. PLENTY of people were clamoring to give the milb guys a shot last year. Maybe Anderson comes up last year and stinks. But at least then the Twins got a look. But they didn’t do that. In a LOST season. That is EXACTLY when to do that. And THAT is the FAILURE of Falvine in this matter. And it is clear as a bell.

Okay. I can agree that I would have liked to see Anderson get a shot. He didn’t. It’s almost a year later. I’m not sure I’d call it a failure but a missed call certainly and likely a mistake. And I get that maybe we’d be in a different spot with him, but exactly what spot that is is a lot of speculation. So, what’s the end here? Anderson is gone, he wasn’t given a shot, it was a missed call or mistake, take your pick, what now? Let’s hope it doesn’t happen again. But it might and probably will. For every GM out there. Again, what now? I guess we can hash it and rehash it and end up in the same place. For me it’s spilled milk, water under the bridge, and no amount of ‘ifs’ changes what was. Should we maybe write letters the the Twins to suggest they be removed them from their jobs because of this huge failure? I want to see more from them before I declare this an ineptness to the point they shouldn’t be managing the Twins. But hang on, this off-season I think will be rough finding enough spots for everyone. We are going to lose some to trade or guessing wrong and I think everyone knows it. Will it be a failure they just can’t keep everyone?

[Riverbrian]

 

I just added on that Pressly was out because it was just announced at Major League Trade Rumors. My point is and was that pitching, particularly relief pitching, is really hard to project and predict. I don't think any of us could clearly see that Pressly shouldn't have been traded for the return the Twins received, or that Anderson should have been let go. Yes, in hindsight, it is pretty obvious, but at last year's trading deadline (for Pressly) and in the off-season) for Anderson, it wasn't nearly so clear.

 

I agree with everything you are saying. 

 

That's why it is absolutely critical that they take a look at Anderson and others and more than just 6 innings. 

 

It wasn't clear what should be done with Anderson before the rule 5 draft because they opted to not even try and clarify the decision. 

 

You are right, bullpens are extremely volatile... that's why it is critical to not freeze (Morin, Belisle) on so-so performance and hold there. That's why it is critical to get a look at others, you need to constantly search for better. 

 

That's how you get bullpen serious. 

 

 

 

 

[Squirrel]

 

I agree with everything you are saying. 

 

That's why it is absolutely critical that they take a look at Anderson and others and more than just 6 innings. 

 

It wasn't clear what should be done with Anderson before the rule 5 draft because they opted to not even try and clarify the decision. 

 

You are right, bullpens are extremely volatile... that's why it is critical to not freeze (Morin, Belisle) on so-so performance and hold there. That's why it is critical to get a look at others, you need to constantly search for better. 

 

That's how you get bullpen serious. 

Great. Now ... where are we now? We are without Anderson. Who is next that we should be looking at so this doesn't happen again, before the next off-season and rule 5? That's where this goes now. We can talk about losing Anderson until we're blue in our collective faces, mistake or not ... to what end? I'd like to hear from you not what should have or could have happened, because that truly is hindsight, but what's next? How do you use this mistake and learn from it going forward. This off-season, who might we lose to rule 5 that we need to give a shot to now. And how would you go about doing that. I get that there were people on last year's roster that we could have removed in order to give Anderson his shot, but, that didn't happen so now that is in the past. Given this information, what is our next step to ensure that doesn't happen again, that we never lose someone who can help us, and apply it to this year, to this year's roster, and to this year's prospects who need to be added ... who would you remove in order to add, to try them out before we might potentially lose them? And this would not include the likes of Graterol because we will be adding him, likely soon, and not lose him. But who right now looks on that bubble, that we need to take a look at before season's end? Who comes off the 40-man to do that before the end of September so we can get these prospects up when rosters expand.

[Mr. Brooks]

Great. Now ... where are we now? We are without Anderson. Who is next that we should be looking at so this doesn't happen again, before the next off-season and rule 5? That's where this goes now. We can talk about losing Anderson until we're blue in our collective faces, mistake or not ... to what end? I'd like to hear from you not what should have or could have happened, because that truly is hindsight, but what's next? How do you use this mistake and learn from it going forward. This off-season, who might we lose to rule 5 that we need to give a shot to now. And how would you go about doing that. I get that there were people on last year's roster that we could have removed in order to give Anderson his shot, but, that didn't happen so now that is in the past. Given this information, what is our next step to ensure that doesn't happen again, that we never lose someone who can help us, and apply it to this year, to this year's roster, and to this year's prospects who need to be added ... who would you remove in order to add, to try them out before we might potentially lose them? And this would not include the likes of Graterol because we will be adding him, likely soon, and not lose him. But who right now looks on that bubble, that we need to take a look at before season's end? Who comes off the 40-man to do that before the end of September so we can get these prospects up when rosters expand.

Pssst... you forgot to switch accounts

[Squirrel]

 

Pssst... you forgot to switch accounts

Heh ... nope ... it's one account ... I just haven't switched the name back yet.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

I still put the Pressly trade as #1, with a bullet, Falvine's biggest mistake.

 

There is no way you can make that call yet. Pressley has been very good but he's hurt right now )potentially done for the season) and will get expensive next year.

 

The Twins didn't get nobody in that trade. Alcala is one of the best young arms in the Twins system and has a decent chance to be an impact bullpen arm down the stretch. The Twins control him for the next six years (at least). Celestino started out poorly but has been one of the hottest bats in the minors and just reached High A ball at age 20.

 

The early returns on the Pressley trade were bad for the Twins but they were always going to be. That's what happens when you trade established relievers for prospects. But the deal doesn't look so bad a year later and will potentially look like a steal for the Twins in two years.

[yarnivek1972]

Great. Now ... where are we now? We are without Anderson. Who is next that we should be looking at so this doesn't happen again, before the next off-season and rule 5? That's where this goes now. We can talk about losing Anderson until we're blue in our collective faces, mistake or not ... to what end? I'd like to hear from you not what should have or could have happened, because that truly is hindsight, but what's next? How do you use this mistake and learn from it going forward. This off-season, who might we lose to rule 5 that we need to give a shot to now. And how would you go about doing that. I get that there were people on last year's roster that we could have removed in order to give Anderson his shot, but, that didn't happen so now that is in the past. Given this information, what is our next step to ensure that doesn't happen again, that we never lose someone who can help us, and apply it to this year, to this year's roster, and to this year's prospects who need to be added ... who would you remove in order to add, to try them out before we might potentially lose them? And this would not include the likes of Graterol because we will be adding him, likely soon, and not lose him. But who right now looks on that bubble, that we need to take a look at before season's end? Who comes off the 40-man to do that before the end of September so we can get these prospects up when rosters expand.

This season is an entirely different situation. The Twins are contending. Roster decisions made from this point should be about winning games now. It’s unfortunate, but player evaluation cannot be a consideration.

 

But in years when they are not contending, the team absolutely needs to be giving tryouts to borderline prospects.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

its not hindsight.

There were many posters upset with the trade at the time it happened.

As for "the trade was great, it's not replacing him that's the mistake," that's a lot easier to say than do, not to mention what they REALLY should have done is kept Pressly AND added similar talent over the winter.

The Pressly trade was a clear mistake.

 

And many of those posters were also upset about other trades that turned out fine. "We were right about one trade" is about as small of a sample size as you can use. The Twins made a number of trades last year at the break and most of them were pretty solid on paper. We don't really know yet on any of them in person because it's early. 

 

The Pressley trade was not a clear mistake. You can't know that unless you know that Pressley will continue being the guy from the last year for the next two years and/or that Alcala and Celestino will be guys whose name we bandy about on a "remember this fallen prospect" thread in ten years. If Alcala becomes a serviceable relief arm and Celestino becomes a 4th OFer, the trade is probably pretty even. If either pops into a late inning guy/starting OFer, the Twins win. If neither makes more than a token appearance, then the Astros win.

 

Gotta give it time before calling something a "clear mistake".

[yarnivek1972]

And many of those posters were also upset about other trades that turned out fine. "We were right about one trade" is about as small of a sample size as you can use. The Twins made a number of trades last year at the break and most of them were pretty solid on paper. We don't really know yet on any of them in person because it's early.

 

The Pressley trade was not a clear mistake. You can't know that unless you know that Pressley will continue being the guy from the last year for the next two years and/or that Alcala and Celestino will be guys whose name we bandy about on a "remember this fallen prospect" thread in ten years. If Alcala becomes a serviceable relief arm and Celestino becomes a 4th OFer, the trade is probably pretty even. If either pops into a late inning guy/starting OFer, the Twins win. If neither makes more than a token appearance, then the Astros win.

 

Gotta give it time before calling something a "clear mistake".

The Pressly trade was the only trade made of a player that was under team control for this year.

 

That is what makes it different.

 

 

There has been almost no angst about trading Lance Lynn, a guy who could be top 5 in Cy Young voting. Why? Because he was a FA at the end of 2018.

[USAFChief]

And many of those posters were also upset about other trades that turned out fine. "We were right about one trade" is about as small of a sample size as you can use. The Twins made a number of trades last year at the break and most of them were pretty solid on paper. We don't really know yet on any of them in person because it's early.

 

The Pressley trade was not a clear mistake. You can't know that unless you know that Pressley will continue being the guy from the last year for the next two years and/or that Alcala and Celestino will be guys whose name we bandy about on a "remember this fallen prospect" thread in ten years. If Alcala becomes a serviceable relief arm and Celestino becomes a 4th OFer, the trade is probably pretty even. If either pops into a late inning guy/starting OFer, the Twins win. If neither makes more than a token appearance, then the Astros win.

 

Gotta give it time before calling something a "clear mistake".

I think you judge a trade by what's known at the time.

 

I dont care if Alcala wins a CYA. Still would call trading Pressly a clear mistake.

 

"Wait five years, then ask me"? Weak.

[Dman]

 

I agree with everything you are saying. 

 

That's why it is absolutely critical that they take a look at Anderson and others and more than just 6 innings. 

 

It wasn't clear what should be done with Anderson before the rule 5 draft because they opted to not even try and clarify the decision. 

 

You are right, bullpens are extremely volatile... that's why it is critical to not freeze (Morin, Belisle) on so-so performance and hold there. That's why it is critical to get a look at others, you need to constantly search for better. 

 

That's how you get bullpen serious. 

 

I wanted the Twins to try out more young guys than they did the end of 2018 as well.  They had Forsythe playing as well as other older guys and i just didn't understand why they wouldn't give the fringe 40 man guys more opportunity?  

 

I know adding guys to the 40 man has consequences as you can lose them if they don't perform well and you need to take them off.  There are service time and option considerations as well so I get that it is not always as easy as we (the fans) think it is.  I know they have to try and field a somewhat competitive team as well. But 2018 was a good time to take a look at guys especially after all the trades they made. I feel like they could have used those remaining games more wisely than they did.

 

 

[Dman]

 

I think you judge a trade by what's known at the time.

I dont care if Alcala wins a CYA. Still would call trading Pressly a clear mistake.

"Wait five years, then ask me"? Weak.

 

While I like how definitive your answer is and I can now better see where you are coming from I think that answer is short sighted.  Trades are generally about present value versus future value.  A team in contention needs present value more than future value and vice versa.  The risk is with the team getting the future value as it is possible non of those players work out thus it usually requires more potential value than what is given back.

 

The formula for winning teams has been proven with the Houston and Cubs model where you stack up on future value and once a core is in place then you can trade for more present value as needed.

 

So your theory of judging a trade by what is known seems pretty much debunked in today's game and if a FO is really on top of things a good mix of future and present value can keep a team competitive for a long time.  

 

I agree with you that the Pressly trade hurts because we lost present value when we really needed it but it can't be "clear" mistake because the players the team got in return will add value in the future.  That cannot just be discounted unless of course both players have no impact at MLB level.  Trades are risky that is their nature but both sides count until the players no longer play.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

The Pressly trade was the only trade made of a player that was under team control for this year.

That is what makes it different.


There has been almost no angst about trading Lance Lynn, a guy who could be top 5 in Cy Young voting. Why? Because he was a FA at the end of 2018.

 

And the Twins got a significantly higher package of prospects because of that year. That makes it different the other way. You have to give up value to get value. None of the other Twins trades were for players with the upside of Celestino and Alcala. Some of those players might contribute but its hard to see many with the star upside of the guys Houston traded.

 

I also think that if Lance Lynn had gone to the Yankees and done very well for them, there would've been some angst. He just was an okay pitcher. Also, highly doubt he ends up top 5 in Cy Young. Though he has had an excellent season.

[yarnivek1972]

And the Twins got a significantly higher package of prospects because of that year. That makes it different the other way. You have to give up value to get value. None of the other Twins trades were for players with the upside of Celestino and Alcala. Some of those players might contribute but its hard to see many with the star upside of the guys Houston traded.

 

I also think that if Lance Lynn had gone to the Yankees and done very well for them, there would've been some angst. He just was an okay pitcher. Also, highly doubt he ends up top 5 in Cy Young. Though he has had an excellent season.

The “higher package of prospects” includes zero players ranked among the Twins top 20 prospects.

 

Johan Duran, the return for two months of Eduardo Escobar ranks 9th.

 

 

Lynn ranks second in b-war for pitchers in the AL. I think a top 5 Cy Young finish is very likely.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

I think you judge a trade by what's known at the time.

I dont care if Alcala wins a CYA. Still would call trading Pressly a clear mistake.

"Wait five years, then ask me"? Weak.

 

But look how much your concept of a trade changes over time. When consummated, the Pressley trade seemed solid - a good-but-not-great reliever who we'd gotten in the Rule 5 for a young power arm and a toolsy outfielder. You'd miss Pressley and worry about replacing him but those were legit prospects. Then if you wait until the end of the 2018 season, it looked awful. Pressley takes a huge jump and Alcala and Celestino were nothing special. Same thing if you move to June 1st of this year. But look at it today, and it looks much better. Alcala and Celestino are looking like great prospects and Pressley is likely out for the season and about to cost seven times what he cost this year. And you can argue that Pressley will likely directly contribute to no World Series games while under team control.

 

You have to look at a trade in the long run or you're just reacting to the here and now. If I based my review of the Pressley trade on just right now, that would be incomplete. It wouldn't showcase all he did for the Astros over the past 12 months and it wouldn't include the potential for prospect burnout. Just like doing it right at the trade consummation wouldn't include the potential for the Astros to develop Pressley. Or how dismissing the Twins' ability to develop their new players from the equation or the potential for injury to any of the three guys might change our view of the trade. Your stance is basically equivalent to those terrible clickbait articles: Grade the 2018 NFL Draft! There can't possibly be anything to definitively learn from something that hasn't fully developed yet.

 

I'm not arguing that no one should discuss the merits of the trade. Just that any indication that the trade was clearly won by Houston or was clearly the worst move by the FO is incredibly premature. Its trafficking in hyperbole and reactionary hot takes.

 

Also, watch the namecalling. No reason to call people's opinions weak. Or so I've been told. I think by you.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

The “higher package of prospects” includes zero players ranked among the Twins top 20 prospects.

Johan Duran, the return for two months of Eduardo Escobar ranks 9th.

 

A bit of an arbitrary number since Celestino is #21 and Alcala is #23 and they're likely to move up since both are taking big second half jumps. Plus, #21 in the Twins loaded system is not perhaps indicative of their value. I think most people would look at those two as up-and-coming prospects -- and most reviews of the trade at the time indicated as such.

 

Good call on Duran. I knew the Escobar trade had someone important but stupid work kept me from doing a dive. That Escobar trade was really the cherry of last deadline. It's sad to not have him and too bad he never hit the open market as you would expect but for a 1/2 season of a guy they basically got a rich man's version of via a combination of Marwin Gonzalez and Arraez, they got a very nice prospect. Good point.

[yarnivek1972]

A bit of an arbitrary number since Celestino is #21 and Alcala is #23 and they're likely to move up since both are taking big second half jumps. Plus, #21 in the Twins loaded system is not perhaps indicative of their value. I think most people would look at those two as up-and-coming prospects -- and most reviews of the trade at the time indicated as such.

 

Good call on Duran. I knew the Escobar trade had someone important but stupid work kept me from doing a dive. That Escobar trade was really the cherry of last deadline. It's sad to not have him and too bad he never hit the open market as you would expect but for a 1/2 season of a guy they basically got a rich man's version of via a combination of Marwin Gonzalez and Arraez, they got a very nice prospect. Good point.

The point is that neither was a super highly regarded prospect when the trade was made.

 

The Twins gave up a guy who might be Miami’s starting first baseman by the middle of next year for two months of Romo.

 

The Twins got lotto tickets for 8 months of quality reliever.

 

That’s not what I calling winning trades.

[Mr. Brooks]

The point is that neither was a super highly regarded prospect when the trade was made.

 

The Twins gave up a guy who might be Miami’s starting first baseman by the middle of next year for two months of Romo.

 

The Twins got lotto tickets for 8 months of quality reliever.

 

That’s not what I calling winning trades.

Is there a reason you left out the prospect we got back from Miami in the Romo deal?

[Dman]

 

The Twins gave up a guy who might be Miami’s starting first baseman by the middle of next year for two months of Romo.

The Twins got lotto tickets for 8 months of quality reliever.

That’s not what I calling winning trades.

 

Don't forget the Twins got Vallimont along wth Romo for Diaz.  I agree Miami got a good deal with Diaz but we have a lot of good 1st baseman options.  Vallimont had a no hitter going a week or so ago and some see him as a potential mid rotation starter.  He compares to Balazovic in a lot of ways as they both have good K rates and really tough stuff to hit.  I think the Twins did OK there. Pitchers are more risky bets but that is a trade that could work out well for both teams.

 

The Pressly trade looks light right now given how much he improved.  At the time given his WHIP and ERA Houston was taking some risk there.  Even this year his Homer rate is a bit high but he is still an elite reliever.  The package looked fair at the time, hindsight makes it look more like a steal for Houston.