He didn't "win" a job out of spring training. Its foolish to ignore all of 2013, especially since he wasn't "unlucky" or suffering from any known injuries. He was consistently bad. Again, he's nowhere close to the pitcher he was in 2012. I would like this regime to do a better job of rewarding recent success (Peacock/Hoes), recognizing potential and moving on sooner on players that continue to regress and clearly aren't in the long-term plans. They did a decent job of cutting most of the dead weight this past off-season... but for some reason, Harrell remains. While they're charging major league prices, they still have a responsibility to play the best players on the roster... and I don't feel Harrell is one of them.
Okay, he lost a job out of spring training but he's noted as such a nice guy in the clubhouse that they gave him a spot. Lol Peacock had an ERA almost as bad as Harrell last year. Jesus.
Peacock sucked in his first stint, went to the minors for a few months, came back and was solid to great to finish the year. One would think that would afford him the chance to continue starting into the following season. From your posts, you make it sound like all the pitchers names should be thrown in a hat in the Spring, and blindly draw out your 5 starters to start the year, and it doesn't matter who you draw, since the cream will eventually rise to the top and it will sort itself out as the season progresses anyway.
He had 9 starts after coming back up last August, in those 9 starts he had a very respectable ERA of 3.64. Plus Peacock was a rookie last year, Harrell wasn't. A line of starting pitchers is forming in AAA, Owens, Wojo, Folty, Tropeano, Buchanan and Alex White could all be in line for a promotion this year, we can't be wasting innings on the likes of Harrell when we have so many young arms that are more deserving of look.
There was no real competition. Peacock was supposedly competing for a starting spot this spring, but didn't receive a start. He only had 2 appearances at the time even. 1 bad, 1 good. Harrell on the other hand received 5 starts before the decision was announced.
Yep, and these innings would be more useful going to see what we have in Peacock. I love the job the front office is doing, we are on the right track. Don't understand the whole Harrell situation though
We didn't really have much talent to replace him with. Buchholz, Astacio, & Hirsh all got their chance, but struggled badly.
Some past success + good arm + no option to send him down + time to work with new pitching coach + no pressure for team to win this year = longer leash than he deserves for now
Wasted innings that could/should be going to somebody else. I doubt he would have been claimed had he been DFA'd (like Wallace). Sure, there's no "pressure" for the team to win this year... doesn't mean they need to continue to play inferior players.
Yep. They sure do like the "Lets throw stuff against the wall and see if it sticks" mentality in their talent-evaluation process and reclamation projects. Just wish they would not consistently use the MLB team (that charges MLB-level prices to see MLB-level talent) to "try things out" at the expense of younger/talented players who deserve their fair shot. As far as Harrell goes, he's totally lost the ability to locate his pitches. And as a sinker ball pitcher that pitches to contact... certainly needs precise control, which he simply does not have anymore.
While its frustrating watching Harrell on the mound or Grossman bobble two catchable hits, I would rather the Astros look at these guys early and get certain to their forward worth than still have uncertainty about them come September or next year. We are still in the phase of the rebuild where nothing is expected in terms of winning much. But I view next year as the year where this assumption/expectation starts to change. I'd like to see us open 2015 spring training with guys who have proofed something, and be beyond experimentation. I am afraid that the combination of uncertainty about some players and the need for further growth in the minors for certain prospects makes this year another whereby we watch some guys crash and burn. Not that this doesn't happen even on veteran winning clubs, but this is the last (hopefully) rubber year and moving forward we will see less of the pains of the rebuild.
Peacock is 26 years old! There's a reason they're throwing Harrell out there. If they think they can get something for him they're going to keep throwing him out there. Folty will be here soon enough, hopefully, but most of these guys aren't great prospects you're talking about. Harrell isn't blocking anyone from anything.
They seem to be more wishing/hoping/experimenting at this point. If Harrell would have been cut before the season, pretty sure nobody would have picked him up. Likewise, if he puts together 2 or 3 good starts in a row, book-ended by bad ones, I don't see a contending team trading anything of real value for a sinker-ball pitcher with known/proven control issues. They used the same approach with Humber last year... and likely will get similar regressive results with Harrell. It does take away innings from others who are more deserving.
If you look at the ages that most all-star players make their debuts, the vast majority come up before age 22.
Wandy was terrible in his first two years - he had ERAs of 5.53 and 5.64, over a combined 250+ innings and 46 starts. His WHIPs were a wretched 1.46 and an astounding 1.60. He got worse in his 2nd year, and had shown no signs of improvement. He was universally despised by all of us and no one could figure out what anyone saw in him. Comparatively, Harrell has ERAs of 3.76 and 5.86 over a similar number of innings (WHIPs of 1.36 and 1.70). Wandy was pretty similar to Harrell, except he had the benefit of pitching in the NL so his numbers should have been better. Wandy was also pitching in seasons where we were competing for the playoffs (2005 was his first) and team had much less margin for error to be experimenting. At the end of the day, a regime that has a strong track record of identifying talent (both here and in STL) seems to see *something* in Harrell. What it is, who knows? And it may not - probably won't - pan out. But until they have a trend of failing at this, it seems they deserve the benefit of the doubt. There's not a lot to lose by giving him a month or two to see if he can figure out what he did successfully in 2012. If he still sucks after a few months, you jettison him. True - but after posting ERAs in the mid 5's for his first two years (46 total starts), he made 31 starts in his 3rd year, which is a full load for a #4 or #5 starter. So after two crappy years of showing nothing, he was given the job his whole 3rd season, during which he showed improvement, albeit still being relatively mediocre (ERA in the mid 4's). It wasn't until his 4th season that he became a legit good pitcher.
Yeah but he's not just an all-star and he's not just up playing. He's the best player in baseball. I can't see how he gets much better but if he does, whoa...
