By most metrics the 18 Astros were one of the greatest teams ever. They dont measure greatness by metrics. The Sox won when it counted, the Astros didnt. Cant wait till spring training.
Really have a model franchise up there. 4 titles in 15 years, certainly impressive. They were the best team all season, can't say they didn't deserve this. We'll be right back in the mix to win it again next season, unbeatable teams don't exist in baseball, no matter how good they seemingly look.
Hey, guess what I just learned? Repeating is hard. Boston has a terrific team... I wouldn't trade their nucleus for ours under any circumstance. Further, I wouldn't trade their full 25, or even 40-man rosters for ours, either. If the Astros can successfully integrate Whitley and Tucker into the mix in '19, their core will continue to be the envy of 29 teams in baseball.
Losing three consecutive home games is hard. Three consecutive 100-loss seasons is hard. The Astros gave a great team too many extra chances and they lost. I'm not gonna blame some bs "repeating is hard" narrative. Astros didn't lose any significant players from last season like many championship teams do. In fact, they added pieces and increased their win total. Umps didn't help either.
Good call. It's purely coincidence we've only had two repeat champions in 40 years, and none in nearly 20. Totally. Didn't help?!? THE UMPS CLEARLY CHEATED!
Fair enough. I actually meant "since 1980" but lazily rounded up to 40, which would include '78 Yankees. Fact remains: repeating IS hard. The "repeating is hard" narrative doesn't really apply to the regular season; it's rooted in how razor-thin the difference between winning and losing often is in the postseason. One year, you get the bounce; the next you don't. The Red Sox were absolute maniacs at driving in runs with 2 outs this postseason. They had some absurd total of, like, 53% of their runs scored in the ALCS and WS were with 2 outs. That's not sustainable year-to-year.
Repeating is hard because of the luck factor in the playoffs. The best team in baseball is generally given a 30% chance or so of winning the World Series once the playoffs start. So even if you're the best team in baseball, you have a 30% chance of winning once and a 9% chance of winning twice in a row. On a side note, Red Sox and Astros are co-favorites to win the title next year - with a 14% chance right now. Seems weird to me given the Red Sox seem to have much less roster uncertainty than the Astros right now.
The Astros won 103 games with Altuve, Correa & Springer all battling injuries/under-performing 2017 levels. Assuming even a modest bounce back for Altuve & Springer and Correa gets healthy, the Astros' core is still the best in baseball.
Certainly - but the Astros have 60% of their rotation up in the air with Keuchel, Morton, and LMJ. Starting pitching is a big part of what carried them this year. Boston loses Eovaldi and Kimbrel, but they also have an endless supply of money to resign or replace them.
I'm maybe giving too much credit to Vegas insiders - but Keuchel and McCullers were roughly league-average & could conceivably be easily replaced by McHugh and Peacock, who, frankly, might be better than Boston's 3rd and 4th starters. And the Astros have a long list of promising arms who could nail down, at worst, the 5th rotation spot. Meanwhile, Boston's best pitcher is constantly hurt, their second-best pitcher is a free agent, as is their closer; Betts, like Altuve, probably isn't repeating his MVP season, and other than maybe Devers, there aren't any down-year/bounce-back candidates. And Vegas is not going to give a team any "credit" for money they haven't yet spent. If you were Jeff Luhnow, would you trade your guaranteed 2019 roster *right now* for Boston's? No way.
