When playing the Rangers, thats not true. The only thing that can happen is losing the series. By how much and in what manner may vary though.
We will pass the rangers. They are going to falter at one point. Starting with seattle sweeping them this weekend.
Astros pretty much got owned last year by the Rangers, yet, were only a few outs from dethroning the AL Champs, and advancing the ALCS, with TEX eliminated. Maybe it's a mental block, but we should've split this series even with all our problems. Rangers are better on paper, and are producing. We could really improve with ONE bat upgraded. Gattis and Valbuena need to continue somewhat their recent production too. Keuchel needs to continue his recent trajectory. Lance needs to go 6 IP, minimum. Bullpen is great.
While sports organizations are generally not *that* knee jerk... I would have to think (hope), after watching this offense start and stop for a year and a half, that the Astros are contemplating some drastic changes. And I don't just mean promote Reed and/or Bregman. I'd be kicking some tires and seeing what shakes out on the trade market. I'd call the Braves about Freddie Freeman. Do the Diamondbacks want to pay Paul Goldschmidt that much money to be on a mediocre team? I'd call Milwaukee about Lucroy and Braun; The Braves about Markakis; the Rockies about CarGo; the A's about Valencia... They need to add at least 1, probably 2 certified bats. We've had a year-and-a-half of far too many Carter/Valbuena/Gattis/Rasmus-es - it's time to find more consistently productive offensive players. The Carlos Gomez experiment has failed; Tyler White needs to be demoted; Marwin Gonzalez & Jake Marisnick should be playing less. And then they have to address the starting rotation.........
^^THIS^^ Rangers have better starting pitching We have better bullpen Rangers have better, more consistent hitters We have guys that hit home runs every now and then We have no consistent hitting at all other than Altuve and when he goes in to a slump we have nothing but a few HRs every now and then. But HR's don't mean much when there's nobody on base and the other team already has more runs
In my mind, there are three things at work: 1) Money 2) The team today 3) The team of the future To illustrate my point, we could cash in farm assets to make the team of today better. But that would impact the team of the future. Spending more money now isn't a bad move unless it somehow resulted in being able to spend less later. Previously published articles would seem to indicate that there are some spending limits in place for now. Its unclear how much additional payroll we could add at this point.
My understanding is they are very apprehensive about making any deal for anything short of a front line player under team control of it involves their top prospects... More so than last year. Obviously that can change, and I could see a move or two but unless the owner changes his tune I will be skeptical. All names I have heard have been of the ilk of Valencia.
Well, Freddie Freeman would be my first call then - 26 and under contract through his age 31 season. Perfect. It's an exorbitant contract, yes. But - man: scavenging the grocery store isles the night before a hurricane hasn't worked. And as much as you want to prepare for an expensive future... Altuve and Springer are in their primes (in fact, may be enjoying their best seasons); Correa will get there very soon - they can't pretend the window is permanently open.
BTW, one more thing: I hope the Astros' plan doesn't ultimately amount to throwing a bunch of prospects at the problem. I mean, there are worse courses of action, of course - and Bregman and Reed might be *exactly* what this team needs. But I'm growing a little weary of "potential." We're watching one of the best prospects in this organization's history struggle with his second season. There are just soooooo many variables and obstacles standing between a prospect and ultimate, sustained success that I'd like to see them inject this line-up with some more known quantities. I don't sign the checks, of course - but give me Freddie Freeman's confirmed production over AJ Reed's potential production every day and Sunday. (As one example.)
In a sense, opening the window permanently is the design goal. That is, to be able to contend year after year in the future through smart drafting, trading, and maintaining a strong farm. That said, some players may slip past their primes before this plan takes full effect. It may even occur that the plan doesn't work (bad trades and drafts). Last year gave us a preview, perhaps a premature one, of how a good Astros team might look like. Its natural to want to see steady progress without regression. But these things happen as this season can be a testament to.
Right. You don't leave the system barren. At the same time, it's unrealistic to think every answer is in your system. You have to strike a balance. They've tried to find low-risk/high-reward pieces and it's not working (primarily because they seemed to find the *same* low-risk/high-reward piece over and over). I understand age and club-control being a factor - it's smart. But there's far more stability in building around a Freeman than a Reed, IMO - especially if you have your core (which they do). The have six below-average hitters in their line-up; they need to work on that.
Perceptions change month to month. In April, the offense was fine, it was the pitching that needed attention. Now the reverse.
Astros got lucky last year as other teams basically let the Astros build a flawed offense on the cheap while having a few great years from guys they drafted. Astros didn't have many good consistent hitters because other teams paid them more or drafted them. I don't think last year will be a good representation of how the Astros will look in a couple of years as it is more representative of what other teams were willing to throw away instead of the type of guys Luhnow has drafted (granted Luhnow has drafted some guys with K issues...but not nearly to the same extent current team has).
This makes me think of what the team offensive strategy is, or will become. Sure, last year was comprised of guys who were the best that were simply available. And I agree many of them didnt fit any particular strategy. But looking forward, you could: 1) Build a team of power hitters (probably high K's and lower OBP) 2) High OBP with only mild to moderate power 3) Some sort of balance between the two. 4) Just the best player available (overall) without a specific offensive philosophy. 4) may seem the most obvious, but could also lead to areas imbalance, excess, or glaring shortcomings. 3) Seems reasonable, but simply not being bad at anything may also lead to not being particularly good at anything also. 2) The K.C. approach? 1) Last years Astros ?
6? I only count 4 among the starters (5 with Correa out)...but 3 of those have been horrid considering their position (CF, DH, 1B). Bench has been atrocious.
Astros go for BPA with a hope for 3 if all things being equal (which they never are). That said, I think they value contact and defense more than most teams and then try to teach/develop power. On the flip side that will sound hypocritical, I think Astros are at the same time more willing to take a chance on flawed power hitters with high K rates. I guess I should say that most teams want a 3, Astros want to get 3s, but won't pass up a better 1 or 2 player (with a slant towards the 2).
Eh... we've known this was a boom-or-bust team since last year; many were advocating for a more balanced offensive attack throughout the winter. Very few - if any - sports teams will ever be as urgent as its fans - but... given how much admiration I have for the Astros' intelligence and approach, it's frankly a little baffling how befuddled/oblivious they seem to their own shortcomings. I thought their winter was terribly short-sighted. BTW, I don't fault them *as much* for the pitching issues. No way they could have predicted Keuchel's fall; that's what's killing them right now. Things are soooooo much easier if you have an ace at the top of your rotation. They did, right up until opening night. That's a tough blow.
