Each of their individual projections was better going into last year. Again, I was more optimistic last year. They were coming off a year as being the league leader in starters ERA. Regression was expected, but u got major regression plus injury. Martes coming up and dominating at some point this year would be great... but that's a lot of expectation and unknown. I just don't think they have enough arms as is to automatically presume they'll exceed what they were able to do the last two years.
As is, they won't be the worst. But as is, it's their biggest question mark/weakness heading into 2017.
[QUOTE="I was more optimistic last year."[/QUOTE] Of course you were more optimistic last year. Keuchel was coming off a cy young performance; McCullers wasn't coming off injury; our starting rotation didn't come off a major letdown, but a near ALCS appearance. Even Fiers was coming off a season with a no-hitter! This year we are leery of our rotation, but we have a lot of reason for optimism. We legitimately have 8 potential MLB-level starting pitchers that will be ready to go in Spring Training. While we don't have 2 aces like some teams do, we do have a lot of depth and a lot of talent. Keuchel--capable of returning to true ace form McCullers--capable of being a legitimate ace, floor is a SP3 when healthy Fiers--respectable SP5 Morton--capable of being an upside SP4 McHugh--ceiling SP2, floor SP4 Musgrove--capable of being a legit SP3 this season Peacock--likely to be cut, but could be a good depth piece/SP5 Devenski--if he has a good ST, he could earn a starting role and manage to be a legit SP3/SP4 If the above pieces sustain serious injury or do not maximize their potential, we can make a trade later. When you really look at it, compared to the start of 2016, we do have a lot more weaponry at hand. Last year, beyond Keuchel, McCullers, Fiers, Fister and McHugh, we only had Feldman to back things up at the start of the year.
[QUOTE="I just don't think they have enough arms as is to automatically presume they'll exceed what they were able to do the last two years."[/QUOTE] As I just stated, we actually have more arms this year at the ready than we did last year.
Not really... u just painted a "best case scenario" if every single arm you mentioned stays healthy and performs at an above average level. You even included two guys (peacock and Devenski) who were never expected to be part of a contending starting rotation. The rotation boils down to 3 guys who by your criteria could be an ace or sp2... and there are serious question marks with all three of them. (I think McHugh is in for the biggest regression of them all). Fiers, Morton, Peacock are depth and fill-ins. If the team honestly has to rely on them to pitch at an all-star caliber level (sorta like they tried to accomplish with Fister last year), they're going to be in trouble. Devenski also has to prove himself as a starter, however I would be just fine with keeping him as a solid/reliable weapon in the pen Musgrove/Martes are the wild cards. If they can somehow acclimate fully to big league life and pitch up to their potential, along with some luck/health from the arms that actually have plus stuff, things could be fine. But again, all best case scenarios. Reminds me of the white/Reed optimism going into last year (of which I was a part of). And if its never just as simple as "they can make a trade later..." Plenty more variables and limited no trade clauses that specifically include the Astros to get in the way of that.
On rookies last year, even with Reed and White putting up horrible numbers, the Astros rookies as a whole greatly exceeded projections. I see the pitching staff like that going forward. At least one of Keuchel, McHugh, and McCullers is going to have a horrible year, but someone between Musgrove, Morton, Martes, Paulino, Devenski, Feliz, and Rodgers is likely to give the Astros a boost to the back end of the rotation. While I'm not as optimistic as before last year about rotation as a whole (I'd prefer to have more certainty at top end) if Astros don't add Quintana, bullpen and offense looks a lot stronger such that I'm happier with team. Offense is usually easier to predict as position players get hurt less. I was not expecting Astros to add a TOR starter at the start of the offseason. With Astros basically filling every hole in the lineup without trading a significant prospect, I am much more optimistic Astros can make a reasonable trade for one before season or at deadline. Deadline still seems more likely to me as it doesn't seem like Astros want to trade guys they anticipate being in majors this year and Tucker. Astros have a bunch of low level prospects such that at least one or two of them should play well enough to headline a deal for a rental TOR.
I'm happy we aren't counting on the likes of Doug Fister and Fausto Carmona anymore. I have little doubt that Keuchel will ok (I'm more concerned how the new strike zone will affect him then his health). I don't expect LMJ to make 30 starts (even if healthy) and I do think we have to assume he is going to get hurt at some point. Morton is an injury waiting to happen, but when healthy, I think he'll be very good. McHugh I expect to go out there and make 30 plus starts and pitching well enough for us to win. Musgrove should be solid. Fiers, Devenski, & Martes figure to fill in for the starts missed by LMJ and Morton, which is hard to complain about. Fiers & Devenski are proven big league pitchers, and Martes has the potential. David Paulino will also mix in there, but I see him as a reliever. This isn't 1B, where we were depending 100% on 2 guys that had zero MLB experience (I have bigger concerns about 1B now, but the rest of the offense should be able to carry a mediocre 1B). Could it all go wrong? Sure it could, it basically did last year. I have a hard time believing that 4/5 of the rotation will under perform their FIP & xFIP for a 2nd straight season. Our rotation is deeper than it was the last 2 years. You don't have to optimistic to like our rotation (an optimist would love it). You have to be incredibly pessimistic to hate it. The rational person sees an okay rotation, that could use improvement, but doesn't have to happen unless everything goes wrong. I'm not concerned about another Cole Hamels situation. I think the organization is building a positive track record.
Switch out Morton for Fister and you had this exact same group of guys available last year. Sure, you didn't know what to expect from Musgrove or Devenski at the time, but you also didn't expect Keuchel to suck or McCullers to be injured all year. If everyone performs like last year, and Morton just replaces Fister, then you basically end up with the same mediocre rotation you had then. Last year, we were OK with some regression, but got a lot more than anticipated. This year, we need improvement to get to where we want to go. I'm not sure I'd say we're in better shape now in the rotation than we thought we were at the beginning of 2016.
I agree with the sentiment that expectations for 2017 shouldn't be what they were expected prior to 2016. Last year, the Astros rotation had a lot of bad things happen to them. Expectations for 2017 rotation should be higher than what actually happened in 2016. Odds are the Astros have more positive regression than negative regression. Astros also have Musgrove for a full year. Astros have a lot of likely better than Peacock options in the minors. Astros should be able to weather injuries well in 2017. Improved offense should reduce stress on starters as well.
I don't hate the rotation. I'm just not as optimistic as some of you are... and I tend to be more optimistic than not when I look at my teams. I see a lot of what-if's and question marks. I see a lot of best case scenarios based on health and bounce-back years (neither which are a likelihood). I see the rotation as this team's biggest weakness... in a sport where typically teams don't win with mediocre starting pitching. (whereas the converse is usually true... teams rarely are out of it when they have strong starting pitching). The track record may have nothing to do with it at that point. If the Astros are on a list, and they may have been put on that list years ago, the player is going to use that as leverage to try to get more for himself, regardless of whether he truly likes or dislikes Houston. Word is, Hamels wanted to leverage the no-trade clause to guarantee his option year... and when Houston balked, it made invoking it that much easier. Its also how the Rangers lucked into Lucroy. Additionally, at the deadline you will introduce a host of new variables that have yet to be determined. More teams may be in it. The current tradeable prospects with high upside will have a half-season to either improve their case (and now make them untradeable?), or worsen their value with either underperformance or injury. Luhnow historically has gotten more done in the off-season (trade wise) than at the deadline... and then there's the part of him that may be reluctant to trade anybody at the deadline if he feels this team isn't in the best position to cotend (like was the case last year), and then we're just basically looking to the 2018 off-season (many here glossed over the lack of activity at the 2016 deadline, looking towards making some strong starting pitching acquisitions in the off-season... now the same people are advancing that timeline to the trade deadline...etc., etc., etc.) The Astros were also blessed with a ton of position player health last year. Springer finally played a full season. Altuve/Correa were remarkably durable. Things could get a little less stable this season, where you could still see the likes of Marwin, Jake, White all getting significant playing time. I know its sounds overly pessimistic... but the realist in me sees a young/prime core of guys who need to have as much resources put next to them each/every year they are here under a cheap bargain of a contract. Adding Beltran/Reddick (and subtracting Rasmus/Castro/Valbuena) doesn't really move the needle much from a payroll side of things. I thought they would add more... they may still do so.
Tend to agree with this. Not sure if it's the same people, but there's always going to be a reason to wait. As an example, it's the reason some people here were opposed to getting Donaldson 2 years ago - we just weren't "ready" yet. Or why people didn't want to sign any high-priced free agents a while back (now, the argument is that we'll need that money in 3 years for our own guys). Basically, there's a consistent hesitancy to ever take risks. I will rarely advocate a rental when it involves giving up high level prospects because it's a boom-or-bust situation, and unless it's a miracle success where the rental is awesome and carries you (Beltran, Randy Johnson are great examples), it can backfire badly - and you only get 2 months out of them regardless. Having RJ and Beltran was awesome, but losing them really sucked. But someone like a Quintana (or Donaldson) is exactly the type of guy they should be consolidating prospects for because you have them for many years. We're now at the point where we want to start consolidating talent into fewer players to build a deep core to the team, and these are the perfect ways to do it. The trade deadline is always an option, but it leaves you vulnerable to a lot of factors out of your control. And if it doesn't work out, you just wasted another year of your core.
If a deal works out badly for you, you may waste years of your core. All it takes is one injury, and we'll have a hole someplace else. I'd rather wait until I know we need a starting pitcher before making a move that costs substantial assets. We may end up having a bigger need in the bullpen or on offense where there is always the possibility they end up flopping.
Off the top, I want Quintana. I am open for a reasonable deal. Teams trade MLB players for prospects because they think the prospects will provide more wins in the long run than the MLB players. CWS supposedly wanting Tucker, Martes, and Musgrove for Quintana should tell the win now people a great deal about the quality of those three prospects. I don't see spreading talent over many years as waiting as the Astros have a lot of resources devoted to 2017. 2 years ago, Astros made a ton of trades at the deadline. Last year, Astros sign Gurriel midseason. The Astros prospects other teams wanted like Bregman and Musgrove kicked butt after the deadline. Astros aren't waiting, they just don't believe in sending out significantly more expected value in prospect form for less expected value in MLB player form. I am against the win now "all in" strategy for one year as there is no telling when the injury bug strikes/fluke suckiness occurs. Quintana is signed for multiple years, but his advantage over guys that will be coming to the majors in 2017 and 2018 that CWS want will likely be 2017 only. Last year, someone on this board was clamoring for a Fernandez trade that would have crippled the Astros going forward. 2.5 years ago, people were against trading Cosart to acquire prospects. Not sure if it is the same people, but people want to use Martes from that trade as a big piece to acquire Quintana. Quintana is a lot more valuable than Cosart. Being patient and only making smart moves has got the Astros to the point that the CWS would be willing to trade Quintana to the Astros..
The white Sox are rebuilding. Trading for quality prospects is a viable way to do that. The Astros are not rebuilding. There's also a middle ground beteeen "win now" and "all in". Nobody is advocating for all in... but at the same time, if you aren't shoring up all possible weaknesses to try and win now, while you have a young/cheap core that's going to get more expensive each and every year, then you are potentially wasting valuable opportunities.
Neither Musgrove or Devenski were available at the start of the season for the startig rotation. That's a huge stretch to suggest that it's only a Morton for Fister swap.
It seems you want to take the negative approach (I'm sure you'd call it the realist approach). I think Devenski will have his chance to earn a starting place in ST; at least that's what Hinch has stated. It's very short-sited to say that Fiers, Morton and Peacock are only depth and fill-ins. All 3 of these players could start on any MLB team (given what they currently have available). These are not Fausto Carmona type players. I know Astros fans are used to minor-league level scrubs at the back-end of our rotation, but these 3 are not that (well maybe Peacock is--like I said I think he'll be cut). The suggestion that no-trade clauses will make a serious impact on future trades is silly. There just aren't that many of these players out there. Tons of pitching will be available given the current market.
Its far from being negative. Its as level-headed/non-homerish as I can possibly be when I'm not expecting Keuchel to come back and have a 2015 Cy Young season, and I do not expect LMJ to come close to being able to throw 200 innings. Devenski as a starter is still an unknown. But at least I know he can be a valuable piece in the pen if he flames out as a starter. Him moving into the rotation also makes this bullpen that much weaker. And if they're having to rely on Fiers/Morton/Peacock to throw heavy innings... that's not a good thing. No, its not... all three players have been in the league for some time now and have thrown a good amount of innings. They are who they are. If the Astros have to rely on any one of these to step up into a #1 or #2 roll (which is the risk when Keuchel and LMJ's health/performance are totally up in the air), they'll be in trouble. None of these three would be considered a vital piece of a contending-level rotation. Forget Carmona... these are all Fister/Feldman like moves. We know what the upper limit of that is. There won't be many club controlled pitchers like Hamels/Quintana on the market. There will be rentals. Astros have shown a reluctance to go after the latter. Deadline trades are extremely dependent on more variables than you're willing to acknowledge. A lot more can change regarding all possible trade pieces, and teams looking for starting pitching, between now and the deadline.
Might just be me, but i feel like you are back and forth.. you want Quintana, but you value the prospects and our patience
Nobody is asking Fiers/Morton/Peacock to be a #1/#2. Even if Keuchel and LMJ hit the DL, it's more likely that McHugh and Musgrove fill in as #1/#2. And yes, no team in MLB would want that scenario; if any team lost both of their top 2, they would be in danger. "vital piece" That depends on your definition here. Do they provide a vital piece in their role as back-end starters, absolutely. Can they take the role of Keuchel and LMJ? of course not. Astros reluctance is situational. We haven't been in the place we are now since the Bagwell/Biggio/Berkman/Clemens/Pettitte days. If we need an arm like the Cubs needed Chapman, you had better bet your bottom dollar we would go after that piece. Given the huge market of SP available in FA18, I'd say it's in our best interest to look for a rental that can give us a playoff push.
