Pretty sure the expectations for the respective teams are different. We (us Astros) overachieved greatly last season, should have beat the eventual Champs, and the expectations rose for this season where we took a step back (depending on your perspective).
You think he decided to suck for a full year and likely cost himself tens of millions of dollars as a free agent so he could get away from the Astros for a month?
According to the article, he's doing things he's *never* done in terms of his swing. It's not that the Rangers got him and simply fixed him back into what he was in Milwaukee. He is saying they changed his style to something completely new.
The Rangers are hardcore analytics people - it's what caused the rift between Daniels and Nolan Ryan. If you're saying that the Rangers figured out that good coaches and good players are better than bad ones, then congrats to them. I'm pretty sure everyone else in baseball knows that too.
This isn't football guys. Coaching is not that important. Not sure why Hinch is constantly painted as a scape-goat.
How did things work out? He's going to make tens of millions less money in FA this offseason than he would have had he just chosen to be good for the past year.
It's not uncommon for hitting struggles to become fielding struggles and it's not uncommon to fix one and have that boost in confidence improve the rest of his play. Carlos Gomez is a 30 year old former All-Star. Rock bottom effect? This is one of your unproveable Nick positions. It's not rock bottom until he proves it's rock bottom just like a prospect can't be ruined because if he was going to be great then he'll be great. Yeaup.
Funny because everyone on the Astros game threads wants Hinch fired You must not understand how the hive mind of MLB works. If Carlos go off in the playoffs or worse, goes off in the World Series he will make Beltran money
Yup, and I'm confused as to why. I have no idea about managing player's egos and motivation, but technically a lot of people I know with pretty good baseball understanding could do the strategical role just as well as most MLB managers (in some cases better, sans field shifts).
Tell that to Daniel Murphy. Beltran made Beltran money because he was outstanding for many years - not for a few weeks in the playoffs. I very well understand that if you are dominant for a season, you're going to a make a ton more money than if you suck for 5 months and then are great for 6 weeks of that season.
Yes, 100%. If Gomez hit this way for the whole season, he'd make far money than he will for sucking for 4.5 months and hitting this way for 1.5. This is pretty basic common sense.
Yes, a 30 year old former all-star who was DESIGNATED FOR ASSIGNMENT... in a FREE AGENT year. I'd say that's as rock bottom as it comes. Sure, there's some tweaking involved, but it's clear that Gomez was not right mentally as his struggles got worse. At times, he looked like a broken player. Sometimes, a fresh start/new location does wonders.
With the younger players (Grossman, Villar, probably Martinez), it's easier not to blame the Astros because those players were still unknown values when Houston needed their roster spot for a more proven or higher upside player. Villar's success was predictable IMHO. The difference with Gomez was that he was an established big league star, and really only sucked as an Astro before moving on and having success again. The sample size with the Rangers is still fairly small so it could be coincidence, but I don't think so. That's not to say for certain is was the hitting coach. But that's where I'm laying the blame.
