I find it difficult to criticize one of the most successful franchises over the last 15 years on player development. The Astros have been on of the best organizations as far as developing talent. The part people seem to be ignoring is that they have done such a good job of keeping the ML team successful that there is rarely the need to forcibly bring up new talent. Now theres a guy whos playing great in the minors, but doesnt have a position on the big league club. Thats a great problem to have.

Im sure that if Burke or Scott seriously struggle, management would be willing to pull the trigger on Pence, but wasnt this the same group arguing a year ago that those two needed a shot? Scott finally got his shot and he took off with it. He hasnt done anything to suggest he should lose his job. Ill admit Burke should be on a shorter leash since he hasnt taken advantage of his opportunity as much, but he has had moments where hes done very well. He started last season out great. Hes also one of the few players with legitimate speed.

More importantly, theres a MAJOR error in comparing the ages of players and how long theyve been in the league. Lets look at some numbers:

Jose Reyes: Drafted 1999, Debut 2003 4 Years
David Wright: Drafted 2001, Debut 2004 3 Years
Carlos Beltran: Drafted 1995, Debut 1998 3 Years
Brian McCann: Drafted 2002, Debut 2005 3 Years
Scott Thorman: Drafted 2000, Debut 2006 6 Years
Ryan Langerhans: Drafted 1998, Debut 2002 4 Years

Now, lets look at the Astros players commonly mentioned:

Jason Lane: Drafted 1999, Debut 2002 3 Years
Morgan Ensberg: Drafted 1998, Debut 2000 2 Years
Chris Burke: Drafted 2001, Debut 2004 3 Years
Hunter Pence: Drafted 2004, Debut 2007? 3 Years

So whats the difference? The difference is the University of Southern Cal, University of Tennessee, and University of Texas Arlington.

Thats right, all the Astros players listed above went to college, but none of the other players did. Its a hell of a lot easier to make your ML debut at 20 or 21 when youre not still hitting with aluminum bats and trying to write papers on American literature after a night of binge drinking. Looking at those numbers, are the Astros really that slow at developing players? You could perhaps make the argument that players out of college should advance faster, but thats kind of grasping at straws (in fact this very limited data suggest that they might). Id say there isnt much evidence right now that the Astros really hold on to players so much longer than everyone else.