moonslav59

I never said the rampant pessimism was baseless. My point, all along, was that this team (and every AL team) had been having incredible flips between looking real good and looking real bad. Even that long stretch of near .500 ball had some very nice runs, where we look as good or better than the early season Sox, and then suddenly such an awful stretch that no wonder people lost hope. I looked at the fact that we got Sale & Houck back and added Schwarber at the deadline. I knew he hadn't played 1B, and OF was not a high need area, but the guy was one of the best and hottest hitters of 2021. I felt like we were a better team, despite the worse record, but also that maybe the first 3 months was a bit of a fluke, especially with all the close and come from behind wins. I mostly asked the doubters why they felt a team that had "turned on a dime" a couple dozen times all year long, was all of a sudden, incapable of doing it one more time, despite adding 3 very good players and seeing guys like Robles, Iggy, Shaw and others making magic. In reality, we could turn on a dime again and get swept. Probably the bashers would come right back in force and say, "I knew we could never win," but to me, this year has been the perfect storm. No doubt, every single AL team had major flaws. That is one of the few things I got right about 2021. The Astros could just as easily get swept by us, too. I've never bought into the philosophy that says things like this, "If we can't even beat the O's, when we need a win, there is no way we deserve to make the playoffs." You know how many posters said that or similar or worse? (Too many to name.) No one series ever defines a team. No one week defines a team. No month, either. Teams change and morph of a long season, too. Sometimes, they can morph in just a few weeks or days. If this season doesn't convince people of the fickleness of baseball, I'm not sure anything can.

That's right! We're talking about... Chris Freakin' Sale!

Doesn't everybody? Seriously though, career... 5-3 2.20 (.498 OPS Against is one of his best) He hasn't faced them, this year. 0-1 3.97 in 2 starts in 2019

How about 2 IP every 3 days?

Nobody does anymore, right. I think 80-90 is about the most any get, these days, but some of those get a spot start here and there. Back in '82 and '83, Bob Stanley pitched 168 (48 Gms) and 145 IP (64 Gms) without any starts. Let's go retro! I know a hell of a lot used to do it.

Oh, I realize the risk, but signing a bunch or Garrett Richards and RP'ers don't do it for me. Sometimes, we have to bite the bullet. I had hoped we signed Scherzer way back when, but Price did look like the type of guy worth waiting for. (Wrong) I do feel pretty strongly Stroman is not "that guy" you wait for.

Nate would have been on normal rest. Maybe Cora doesn't want Sale having too much rest after a 1 inning game, last time.

I'm quite surprised. Starting Eovaldi game 1 gives him more options, later in the series and may set him up better for the WS, if we get there. Gutsy call and really putting the weight on Sale. No kiddie gloves, here.

Close enough. With team days off, it won't be 81 games in 162 days. Of course, if the team is up or down by 5 or more, they don't have to pitch every other day, but they could also go 3 IP, some days.

Perfect. We are ripe to blast this guy into orbit!

I'm not going to bring that up and jinx us, but sure, it is possible and maybe probable, but then again, the opps could flip to bad, too or at the same time. All teams still alive are, in theory, "hot." All AL teams have been up and down all year.

I'm talking a new way of closing and using the expertise of our two excellent "long men."

Umm, 2 innings x 81 games = 160+ IP.

Those were three very big injuries that very well might have tilted the balance to the opponents. Sad.

It sounded like some were hoping we'd lose to "put us out of our misery." The whole "this team has no chance to win," to me, really meant, if we keep playing like this, but when I pressed posters to explain about meaning "playing like this" or not, they spoke of no chance to turn things around. I tried pointing out how many turn arounds we had, all year. Good to bad- bad to good, starting with losing 3 @ BAL then winning 9 in a row, but some would have nothing of any hint of optimism. We were playing like s***, and there was no way that could change. If this season should have taught us anything, it was that turn-arounds were the norm- not the exception, and not just with the Sox. Almost the whole AL was wildly inconsistent.

I think they both do very well in that role, and having two is a real asset. Imagine alternating two- 2 inning closers, all year. That would be something new.

Me, too. Starters are more expensive, and you don't always "get it right" with them, either. (We spent $10M on Richards.) If I had to guess, I'd say Houck is the closer, Barnes the number 2 or 3. We sign one solid RP'er and a bunch of guys like Rios and Robles. We move Whitlock to the rotation- maybe our #3 or 4, depending on ERod's situation, but I still hope we sign a #2, at worst, even if ERod returns.

Of course. I'm talking about the type of pitcher we wait for and sign for large and long. It's something you just say, "Hey, we need an ace, and Stroman is the best guy on this year's market, so let's make a splash signing." Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Stroman, and we can sign two really good but not great starters, too, but my comment was directed only towards the next big and long deal we make, if we ever even do one, again..

I'd rather we stock up the rotation and keep Houck and Whitlock in the pen. I feel better about them than any los cost FA signings.

It's the elbow, per local reports. Yes, they are saying "out."

Even the mastermind genius, Bloom has had a very hard time finding RP'ers that can help on a consistent basis. If you want, I can provide a list of over 30 RP'ers Bloom tried over the last 2 years, most were acquired by him. He spent rather big on Ottavino, and just gave Barnes an extension. Andriese & Sawamura were a couple he signed for more than the min, this past winter. Looking at who we can trust going into 2022, I'm not seeing much, especially if we move Houck & Whitlock to the rotation. A lot of luck will be needed.

Exactly why spending a lot of resources (money and prospects in trade) for RP'ers is almost always a huge gamble.

This is the 5th straight ALCS appearance by the Astros, but it should be pointed out that this is not the same team. Sure, they added Tucker and other very good players, but there is no George Springer, and these were their best SP'ers in those 5 years: 2017: 1.06 Verlander (5 starts after the trade) 2.90 Keuchel 3.55 McHugh 3.62 Morton 4.25 McCullers 4.77 Musgrove 2018 2.52 Verlander 2.88 Cole 3.13 Morton 3.74 Keuchel 3.86 McCullers (2.19 F Valdez in 5 GS) 2019 2.58 Verlander 2.50 Cole 3.02 Greinke 3.98 Miley 4.12 Peacock 4.70 McHugh 2020 2.73 Urquidy (5 GS) 3.48 Javier 3.57 Valdez 3.93 McCullers 4.03 Greinke 2021 3.16 McCullers (uncertain health) 3.14 Valdez (27 yrs old) 3.30 L Garcia (rookie- 24 y/o) 3.62 Urquidy (26 yrs old) 4.16 Greinke (29GS but not expected to start, at all) While their starters' numbers look pretty good, there isn't a whole lot of experience there. I like our match-ups, especially without McCullers. The Astros pen had these numbers: 4.06 ERA 1.303 WHIP .700 OPS Against

Not even close. Would we have been better had we traded for Kimbrel, one of the best MLB RP'er before the deadline?

The hard part is assembling one. Even if you spend big money on RP'ers, it is a still a crap shoot. Remember when the Rockies signed like 3 big FA RP'ers? I think they all flopped. It's largely hit or miss. Getting quantity works, sometimes, as you hit or miss it until you find 4-6 that work out, but it can lead to a lot of early losses as you work through your long list. We used 37 pitchers, this year, and the make-up of our pen changed radically as did the roles of many of those who remained from day one. '