honestly, i think the astros staying in contention has as much more more to do with St. Louis not running away with it. if they continue to play as they have over the last month and a half or so....and the Astros continue to play as they have over that same period....then i think it goes down to the wire. it will be interesting to see how the astros respond to that tough schedule right out of the break.
QFT. The Astros are the very definition of mediocre. Again. Any "contention" this year will be due to the rest of their division sinking to similar levels of mediocrity. But hey, it worked for the Cards back in '06.
Yes, and yes. Wouldn't you normally expect the majority to be average? It would seem numerically difficult for more than half of any group to better (or worse) than average.
They were 5th out of 16. Obviously 81-81 is the average record of all teams in the league, so last year their record was above average and in the top 31% of the league.
And I'm not going to complain. I don't care what the actual record is. I only care that they have a chance to win the division. Right now, they do. We'll check back in a month after they go through the toughest part of the schedule by far. They come back from the break @ LAD, vs. Stl, vs. NYM, @ ChC, @ Stl just to finish off July. August has them playing SF, Milwaukee, home and away w/ Fla, @ Stl & @ ChC again. If they survive and are still in range, September is still tough (Stl, Atl, Mil, Cin, and finish the season @ Philly). Personally, I think they feasted (somewhat) on inferior teams. They've only played a couple of teams with a winning record over the last 2 months. Maybe they can hang the rest of the way and stay in contention. I hope they do. Meaningful September baseball is always a blast.
31% isn't all that close to the top. It's not all that many games, but there is a vast gulf in quality between a 97-win team and an 86-win team. To me, anywhere between 40-80% is mediocre, as that's where the vast majority of folks are going to fit in.
Bryce Harper is the reason I would like the Astros to fall off their pace and out-lose the Nationals this year... http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/bi...rt-Bryce-Harper-s-decision-to-?urn=mlb,170270
To match the Nationals' current pace (0.299 win %), the Astros would have to go 4-70 the rest of the way...
So then by your own definition (40% - 80% is mediocre), they were not mediocre last season - correct?
I'm actually beginning to think that we're just a tad bit better team than originally projected. The reasoning being we have not just gone on one hot streak to get to where we are. This has been a steady climb to get back to .500. A solid 6-7 weeks of baseball, not just a streaky 8 game winning streak. In that span we've gotten good starting pitching, and our 2 key players who were either disgruntled or just slumping (oswalt, berkman), have really come on. The longevity of the streak (12 out of 15 series wins now?) is giving me hope. But like you said, its gonna be that stretch right after the break which should give us even a better idea.
69%. Yes, they were. By mediocre, I mean "fair-to-middlin" or "around average", as opposed to "holy crap they suck"--and that was a refreshing change from the earlier part of the year. IIRC they played outstanding the last couple months, but the whole 2008 body of work, at least to me, was uninspiring. Not horrible, just - mediocre.
They have looked pretty good. After the Reds series (if you count the now-complete Nats loss), they were 10 games under .500. So, since May 27 they've played 10 games over .500. Pretty good -- but against mostly pooh. Given the opportunity to face the Rangers and Giants, they didn't fare so well during this stretch. Here's hoping they outperform expectations!
I hear ya....but honestly, the Giants and Rangers may be better than any team we have on our remaining schedule. We talk about playing St. Louis and it being a big game against a good team....but that good team is only 3 games up on the .500 'stros. And I think we feel that way about Chicago, too...but they're only .5 up on us. It's just a really mediocre year for the NL, aside from LA.
Ya, but those 2 teams have always had our #. Its ST Luis and Milwaukee, and how we fare against them that'll matter. What I do like is that after some very tough losses (Texas, Wash on sat), we've bounced back decently.
Sorry, man, was away for the weekend. Couldn't disagree more. I'd ask as a rejoinder: what exactly does Cecil Cooper do well? Construct a lineup? Handle a bullpen? Make solid tactical decisions? Mentor young players? Deal with the media (especially dealing with his players vis a vis the media)? Communicate with his players (see previous)? Show any semblance of consistency? He is seriously deficient at every single one of these basic managerial tasks. I think it's very, very easy to argue - if one does not simply focus on the results of the games (success in spite of? clubhouse comes together against a common "foe"? It wouldn't be the first time) - that a competent manager could have this team performing as a more cohesive group. This is a wholly uninspired, fractured group of individuals, not a team. Leadership starts at the top, hell, you know that. Have you listened to any of the comments by the players, reported both verbatim and off-the-record? Seems that something comes out about every week (off the top of my head, there's about a dozen players who've mouthed off about Coop over the past 2 seasons). Terry Collins's teams had decent records too. Why didn't he ever manage again? Personality.
My bad, forgot he managed in Anaheim after that. IIRC, the players mutinied & got him fired there too, despite a couple of close pennant races.
