Wow, Rasmus. I knew he was having a great year as a reclamation project, but that's incredible production from a guy we picked up off the FA scrap heap.
the 'silver' lining is that the Yankees and Royals series is at home..and hopefully we can take 2/3 from the Angels. I'd be happy with 6-4 in this series.
Yep, $8MM to hit well and have the ability to play all three outfield positions is a steal. Hopefully we can extend him for another year or two (maybe a mutual option for the second year).
I was surprised Rasmus was available that cheaply on a one year deal. His LD% and hard hit % over the previous 2 seasons were the highest of his career. He had a big year in 2013, and hit into a little tough luck in 2014 given how hard he was hitting the ball. He is maintaining those hard hit and LD% this season. I imagine he had other offers, but decided to take a one year prove himself deal instead. He's probably gonna make a pretty penny in the offseason. We probably won't want to pay him, but depending on how this season plays out, maybe this is a good fit for both parties moving forward.
I like him for this season and think it was a great 1 year signing, but I'm hopeful the OF in the future will be Springer, a FA beast (i.e. annual batting All Star) in LF, and Marisnick/Tucker/Santana/Kemp/whoever works out from the minors. Instead of going the Nats' route with Werth (overpay a bit for a fringe All Star like Werth/Rasmus on a longer term deal), we have the opportunity to use a 1 year deal on a guy like that to parlay the reputation bump into a LT deal on a better FA.
there seriously isn't anyone on this roster you can be discontent at. Love all these guys, with the exception of villar and I still think he will get it together somewhere else. They all provide something unique to our winning ways. Ugh I hope houstonians don't sell there tickets to yankees "fans".
We dont need a LF from the FA, we have A LOT of those players in the minors or majors. Examples: 1. Tucker 2. Santana 3. At High A we have Phillip I dont believe LF is the spot for us to sign a BIG name player. Better to use that money on a STARTER
I mentioned this several weeks ago, another poster mentioned that Rasmus told the press that he is not planning on playing much longer, and wanted a one year deal so he could consider retirement after this year. Looks like we have the cupboard stocked at the minor league level, and should be able to replace Rasmus easily if he does move on or retire after this year.
Personally I don't, but understand I am naturally bearish. What do you think a serious contender is? Right now Vegas has the Astros at about 6% to ship. Could change with a deadline trade but as of right now I pretty much agree with the 15 or 16 to 1 odds. I don't/didn't really consider the Rockets serious contenders either.
I consider any team that has a realistic shot at making the playoffs a serious contender. Currently only 6 teams appear to have better odds than the Astros, plus, the Astros and Tigers are only behind the Royals in the AL. Seems that the Astros (according to the oddsmakers) are serious contenders to win the AL crown.
He said prior to the season he wanted to play 3 more years. It would not surprise me if he signed one-year deals until he retires. He was likely trying to get a deal as a CF. Once Fowler was traded to the Cubs, everyone with money had a CF. Also, he hates artificial turf so the Rays and Blue Jays are out for him.
I mean any team that makes the playoffs is of course a "contender" technically. There is more luck in baseball than basketball of course. But to actually go the distance, unless disaster strikes you'll see one of Royals Cards Nats Tigers Dodgers Win the WS IMO. Astros have a chance of course but this season it is minimal.
Like I said, IMO. I don't necesarrily agree with all vegas odds, as I indicated, 5-6% is about right for the Astros while I think the Tigers are a tad undervalued.
It is just curious to me why you use the odds to justify (in your opinion) why the Astros are not "serious" contenders, yet not with the Tigers. You stated the the Tigers were a "tad" undervalued, which still doesn't make them that much more of a favorite than the Astros unless your definition of "tad" is different than Webster's. Even with that, the Astros are the 3rd most likely team to reach the World Series from the AL - correct? That doesn't make them a serious contender?
The Tigers have a negative run differential and, not only are they 3rd in their division, but they are 6th in just the wild card race. The Nats and Tigers both have scored fewer runs that the Astros and given up more. It seems like you just go with big names and decide they are contenders. Performance on the field is irrelevant.
