In news that should come as a surprise to no one, David Cameron and the crew at FanGraphs have deemed the Houston Astros worthy of the title "worst organization in baseball" for the second year in a row.
I do think there are a few arguments that a well-versed Astros fan could pick with this projection. For one thing, while the short-term financial resources rating looks to be about right, this is a Top 10 market and the Astros have never slashed payroll up until this season. That slash has more to do with Drayton McLane attempting to sell the club than any kind of economical backlash. Secondly, I think the Astros current talent on hand is a bit better than dead last in baseball. Now the players on a pure value standpoint? Maybe. The Astros don't have many young players that are good and pre-arbitration, exempting maybe Bud Norris and (if you're really stretching) Brett Wallace. But the Astros do employ more solid players at the current moment than say, the Indians.
Overall though, it's hard to quibble too much with the ranking. While I know David and Joshua aren't thrilled with it and will probably have their own rebuttals at some point, it's hard to look at what the Astros have done since 2005 and be confident that there's a long-term plan to compete in place. It all seems to be built on a bunch of best-case scenarios. While the Astros have done better with their drafts in the last few years, it's not like they're torching up the top prospects lists like the Royals. There's still a lot to be unhappy about if you're an Astros fan, and until new ownership comes aboard and retools the club drastically, the march towards semi-contention is likely to continue.â†µ