0-21 to start the season done by the 1988 Baltimore Orioles. Worst losing streaks ever are 24 games in a row by the 1889 Cleveland Spiders, and 23 games by the 1961 Philadelphia Phillies. It would be tough though. Upcoming series are: @ Stl, @ ChC, Fla, Pit, Cin, & @ Atl. I just don't see how we could get swept by Pit and Cin back to back.
On the bright side, the pitching was pretty good today. Unfortunately, and it's been an issue for 6 freaking years, the offense still sucks.
Frustration builds... SeanCablinasian Anyone looking for Roy Oswalt's thoughts on today's game better have his cell #...he was "unavailable" to speak to the media after the game. SeanCablinasian Questions to not ask Geoff Blum (or any player on an 0-6 team) -- "Did you anticipate being 0-6?" Didn't really go well for that dude.
Seriously. 1 is infinitely better than 0, not with regards to quantity but in the respect that there at least be *something*, pathetic as it is, to quantify. 0 is so, well, *0*.
Why? He posted random stats about teams being 0-6, and then said this is why he's pissed. Assuming he accepted that we do suck, then he certainly shouldn't have been expecting 3-3, especially given the two teams we've played. That means 1-5 or 2-4 would somehow be OK, but 0-6 is just totally pathetic. For me, the point is that if you suck, it doesn't really matter if you really suck or sort of suck. I don't care if the team goes 70-92, or 60-102, or 30-132 or 0-162. It's all the same at the end of the day - the team next year is no better off if this team wins 70 games instead of 50. The only purpose of this season is to get the young guys experience and find out who we can build around or what holes need to be filled externally over the coming years.
it's macro v. micro Sure, looking at the big picture it doesn't matter if they win 30, 50, or 70 games. If the Astros don't make the playoffs (the world series?), then the year is meaningless. However, when watching/following the team on a day-to-day basis, a 70-win team is probably way more entertaining than a 30-win team. I mean, it was probably more enjoyable being a Rockets fan this past season than a Nets fan.
I'd go further and say that for a variety of reasons it would be better for the long term health of the franchise if they lose 100 games this year than go 74 and 88(or whatever).
Those weren't just random stats. they were historically embarrassing stats. If you assumed the season was lost in spring training then I imagine you aren't watching many games since the end result is irrelevant? I love this team and do not want them to be the laughing stock of baseball but sadly they are. We aren't building toward anything or developing young guys with the exception of Felipe and Bud but besides that...nothing. If I sound whiny then sorry but it's just VERY frustrating to watch your team get embarrassed on a regular basis.
damn we lost all 6 games at home too.... is goin' to be a looong yr. To bad Strasburg wont be in this yrs draft
The Astros are obviously not just out to get young guys experience or they wouldn't have made several of the moves they made this offseason. But anyway, I'll just say it definitely matters how much you suck not only in the draft but in attracting free agents. A franchise that competes every season and has an off 70 win season is more likely to get looks from free agents than a perennial 50 win team. It definitely matters. My big problem with the team isn't that it stinks, it's that it stinks with a bunch of bloated payroll and old ass players with no room for improvement. It's terrible management by this organization. It's almost as if ever since Drayton sold us out to play that game in Milwaukee and decided to bring on Ed Wade, consensus one of the worst GM's in baseball, that he's just going through the motions.
I disagree. First off, we're not talking about a perennial 50 win team - we're talking about a single 50 win transition season. But beyond that, can you name a single free agent ever who took less money to play for a 70 win team over a 50 win team? I would argue that there are two types of free agents. 90+% of them simply take the largest contract from whomever offers it, whether it be the Yankees or Royals. The other ~10% choose lifestyle - playing near home, signing onto a winner to get a ring, etc. I don't think there's anyone who picks "less of a loser" over "big loser" though. Certainly - but we knew all of this a week ago. None of that is anything new that we learned from going 0-6.
I say that the degree of suckitude matters. I never expected the Rockets to make the playoffs, even when it seemed like they'd give it a run. I still enjoyed watching the season. I'm still watching even though they've been eliminated. If they were hovering around 12 wins like New Jersey, I would be a lot less interested and a lot more upset. It's still early and everything can change, but while no one expected the 'Stros to be good, I don't think anyone expected them to be as bad as they've been so far. They have the potential to be the worst team in baseball. And unlike the Rockets, they are not fun to watch. For a team that still has a $100M payroll, that's pathetic.
Could someone tell me why JR Towles is in the majors? Just put the kid in there and let him get some experience.
Some would argue that coming up too soon and not spending time in AAA before coming to the majors is one of the things that ruined Towles. I doubt we want to repeat those mistakes with Castro.
I don't think it's just a distinction between 70 and 50 but anyone who is considerably better 80 vs 60 or 90 vs 70, etc. Scott Rolen did it and it looks like Beltre did it this year but here's a clip about the Nationals and Tigers intentionally overpaying for free agents, one an international fa, to give themselves credibility. Keep in mind a couple of things: It is quite possible the Nationals overpaid for Alvarez/González, even if he had been 16 at the time, and the original Sports Illustrated report said the next-highest bid was $700,000. (The Nats paid $1.4 million.) But even the point at the time -- one pushed by the Nationals, and one that makes sense -- is that they had to overpay to make a statement about their intention to be players in Latin America. Think of it as analogous to the Detroit Tigers, a few years ago, overpaying for Magglio Ordóñez and Pudge Rodríguez as free agents. To develop a legitimacy -- one they didn't have in the minds of free agents after losing 119 games -- they had to say, "We're willing to play, and we're serious." "This lets other teams know we are a player," Stan Kasten told me on July 2, 2006 -- the day they signed Alvarez/González. "We will take a back seat to no one -- repeat: no one -- when it comes to pursuing talent." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/19/AR2009021903359.html
