[Official] Astros Off-Season Thread

The thing that makes Marisnick so damn tantalizing is how crazy high his defensive value is. He doesn't have to be a good hitter to be a solid starter, because that certainly feels like a pipe dream, he just has to be a tolerable hitter. If he could maintain an OPS is the high .600's low 700's, he would probably be a 3-4 WAR player. But regardless of how good he is, when he's putting up pitcher like production for months at a time, it's basically impossible to justify him playing much.

Hernandez has the arm to handle RF, and he has the plus speed to compensate for some poor reads. The eyeball test is very rarely a good barometer for judging an OF. That's not me saying he's a good OF, just that its's possible he may be solid already. We know for sure Marisnick is (has been) and awful hitter.

Ultimately, I would be shocked if Marisnick isn't on the opening day roster. but this may be the year he gets the hook if he can't handle himself in the box.

 

A little late regarding speeding up game, but here is an article about nearly 2 minutes between pitches on a playoff game last season. I tried to read it, but got bored/frustrated trying....

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/here-are-111-seconds-of-pedro-baez-not-pitching/

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...ob-manfred-offers-no-predictions-rule-changes

Nothing about baseball "needs to be fixed," Rob Manfred said Thursday. But the commissioner then emphatically defended a series of pace-of-game proposals, saying his sport does need to change "so that baseball means as much to the next generation as it does to our generation."

MLB is currently negotiating with the players' association over which, if any, of the proposals will go into effect for this season.

Among the ideas Manfred endorsed were raising the strike zone, eliminating the intentional walk and finding ways to streamline instant replay.

• On a proposal that would require managers to decide within 30 seconds whether to challenge a call, Manfred didn't specify an exact time but said, "I think field managers should have a time limit."

• He also would like to see "reasonable limits" on how long umpires in the replay center should study replay angles before making a decision on whether to overturn a call. While he conceded that "we don't have that many 4-minute replays," he said: "But at some point, you've been looking at it for 3½ minutes, you sort of come to the conclusion that maybe it was close enough to right in the first instance, and we ought to move on with the game."

• He admits that doing away with the intentional walk wouldn't save a lot of time, because intentional walks are at an all-time low point, "but it's dead time." And when it comes to every area of a game that carries built-in dead time, "there's probably not one" that he hasn't thought about ways to eliminate or limit, he said.

• He said baseball has compiled data that shows that raising the bottom of the strike zone a couple of inches, to the top of the knee, would create more offense, more balls in play and more action. He said the strike zone has been creeping downward in recent years even though the rulebook definition of a strike hasn't changed. So raising the zone would actually just be a way of "restoring the natural order, and getting [the zone] back to where it was for a very long time," he said.

• Asked if a few weeks of spring training would give players and umpires enough time to adjust to the new strike zone, the commissioner said: "I think spring training is sufficient in terms of the adjustment when you're talking about some of the best athletes in the world. ... And our umpires have shown an amazing ability, with proper feedback through technology, to call the strike zone as we ask them to call it." Sources have indicated, however, that the change in the strike zone is unlikely to be agreed to for this season.

• Manfred also defended the experimentation, in the minor leagues, with starting extra innings with a runner on second base, even though it's a change "we don't expect to ever apply at the major league level." But he said, "We may learn something that would be helpful moving forward."
  

"Whenever you change something, there's a risk," Manfred said. "We know that, even from the little rule changes that we've made ...There's a period of adjustment. But you know what? We get through those periods of adjustment. Modern civilization does not come to an end. And the game is better at the end of it.

"I think we need to continue to be willing to look at the game, be thoughtful and reasonable and respectful of the history and traditions of the game, but also be willing to do things, with respect to rules, that will make the game better for our fans."​

 

Glad extra inning experiment is not being considered for MLB.

 

To me, there are 2 instances of real dead time. The extended commercial breaks and when managers go into full Bo Porter mode and make constant pitching changes. I'd like to see the rule where a reliever has to face at least 2 batters or finish an inning.

 

So just play Beltran in Left every time we face a LHP, not that much, he can do it. And if you want, move Springer to Right and Marisnick to center, but I really don't want Marisnick in regularly.. Would rather have Gonzalez play for reddick or something.

 

Won't happen as can't force injured pitcher to pitch. If rule allows injury exception, it will be abused more than the DL. Getting pitchers to throw pitches more frequently seems the best way to speed up the game without affecting the game or owners pocket books (I.e. Commercials are here to stay). To me, it looks like pitchers are just stalling a lot to get into hitters heads,get hitters bodies to tense up more now than in the past.

 

Clearly if there is an injury, then the pitcher could be replaced. I suspect that managers and teams would be closely scrutinized and anyone caught seemingly abusing the system would be penalized.

I doubt the player's association would go for it as it might eliminate the LOOGY and that 38 year old specialist won't be able to find a job.

 

While the White Sox being better than expected early on might delay (or full-on cancel) any plans to deal Quintana, I don't believe, when it comes to players, that teams operate on a small sample size in which a month's worth of performance can alter a deal.

If the teams have been actively engaged in trade discussion, the White Sox almost certainly have a fair idea who's who, etc., and are not going to let a good/bad April undo the work they've put into scouting the Astros' talent.

 

MLBPA will not allow it for the reason you said, but would also not allow it if there is any scrutiny on pitcher injury status. MLBPA is not going to give MLB the power to decide a pitcher is healthy enough to pitch.

 

They are not going to decide, but if a team is consistently pulling pitchers after pitching to one batter and conveniently claiming an injury when an opposite handed batter comes to the plate and then the pitcher is throwing the next day, it is going to be scrutinized. It will become pretty obvious if teams are circumventing the rule.

 

I would agree when it comes to an established player like a Quintana. But prospects, by definition, have smaller sample sizes, so an extra month worth of data can be valuable. Prospects regularly shoot up or down rankings over the course of a year, so every month of data is changing people's views quite a bit. Bregman's hot start last year is what made him untouchable and took him from really really good to untouchable, as an example. Obviously 2 or 3 months of data is worth more than 1, but every bit will shape perceptions.

Maybe the Astros are in a better negotiating position 1 or 2 months into the season; my only point is that they can be in a worse one too. It's not like waiting has no risks.

 

Bregman's actually a great example - do you really think his 1-32 start would have scared off interested teams given his draft status and minor league track record? He was 1-22 at last year's deadline; he was still at the top of everyone's wish list when talking to the Astros.

And sure, waiting has risks - more teams, greater urgency, etc. No question. I wasn't arguing otherwise. I just don't think 100-130-ish MLB PAs (or 4-6 MLB starts) is going to invalidate a much longer track record of success for better prospects.

 

Anyone who watched Bregman's first 32 AB's didn't see a guy who was consistently being overmatched. If someone happened to scout the stat-line and re-evaluate solely on that would be an idiot.

AJ Reed....

 

I think he was looked at differently in terms of prospect quality in June than he was in March, and he likely fetches more in a trade as a result.

 

Similarly, even with established players, I think Keuchel gets less in a trade last year in June than he does in March. It's not just the stats - it's also the underlying fundamentals. If the pitcher's velocity is down or a batter's bat speed has slowed or whatever, that definitely changes their value.

 

Yeah, it's certainly possible Reed did damage to his status - but given his limited tool-set, I'm not sure he was ever viewed as an uber-elite prospect. I would wager minor league baseball has 10 AJ Reeds for everyone 1 Alex Bregman.

 

Good Lord its the USS Singleton. We missed the christening.

 

Wow.... any AJ Reed pics?

 

Are you suspecting foul play?