What does 1 start have to do with the trade/no-trade decision? You're basing our needs on 2 innings from Keuchel? What about all the other innings he's pitched?
He is clearly coming off a two month absence and he has come back rusty and scuffling. This is by far his worst outing this season. You can say it doesn't mean anything but it really does mean a lot. We need him to steady the rotation and be the number 1 guy. If he can't get his groove back yes we have to make a move. The pitching has been bad lately
Honestly, it shouldn't make a difference. Even if Keuchel threw a gem tonight, he should absolutely have traded for pitching anyway. But the one possible excuse I could have seen is that maybe he felt Keuchel was a guaranteed No. 1 ace and there were enough quality pitchers around him to justify not adding another quality starter. But if Keuchel is this shaky and McCullers is struggling, there is no ace in this rotation right now. He needs to go get somebody (preferably a starter and a left-handed reliever) before the deadline, or the Astros are going into the playoffs with a below average rotation and what will likely be an overused bullpen.
Keuchel is not "this shaky". He's pitched 3 innings after 2 months off. Why do we all believe he's not going to be the ace he was before taking time off? There's nothing to suggest that. He was fine before and after the first DL stint. But I agree that today shouldn't make a difference, whichever side of the argument you're on. I'd be ok with pitching help, but don't want overpayment or a bad contract for a SP, personally.
Come on, man, I'm not continuing the argument here, but why should I care what you think of me? Really. Alright, fine- slate wiped clean. Go 'Stros!!
I take nothing for granted when it comes to Houston sports. And as much as I love Keuchel, the guy has a history of being up and down in his career. He followed up his Cy Young season with a pretty mediocre season last year, and I'm pretty sure nobody expected him to start this year off as well as he did. One bad contract shouldn't deter Lunhow from getting a quality pitcher. In this game, you have a limited window with which to strike. If you can add a key piece to make a run at a World Series, you should do it. That being said, I'm not in love with Verlander's contract either. I'd prefer they target arms making more reasonable money.
Could have planned better. Keuchel coulda pitched against philly. That could've been a nice 1st game back confidence booster.
These bats need to get going. They're not supporting their pitchers when they need it most. I don't know if it has to do with the myriad changes Hinch has made to the lineup, but I feel like there's something to that. Reddick's dropped off since he moved to the third spot; His at-bats were much more quality when he was in the second spot. I don't know who should take Springer's spot, but I'm not sure the new guy is the best choice. McCann is black and white when hitting. Aoki has poor at-bats just trying to always slap those singles. Even without Correa and Springer, they're capable of hitting the ball, but they don't look quite as determined and comfortable as they did before.
The offense will not be as prolific without two MVP candidates.... its just not. This is where the WAR stat is literally applicable.... Correa's replacement will not produce as many runs (or save as many runs) and it will lead to less wins. Same goes for Springer's replacement.
The offense has been averaging 6 runs a game since the all star break. Even with the injuries they've only had 1 bad game vs the phillies and 1 vs Paxton. The game vs the Phillies the pitching allowed 9 runs, so you can't really blame the bats
For a brief second, I thought we could see a shot of Martes without hearin Blum's "Frankie Tuesday" gag. Nope.
I suppose it depends on how you felt about 2016. Many of us chalked it up to him being injured all season, and him returning to form now. Perhaps that isn't the case...but for now, I think it is. Agreed. I'm thinking much more about prospect cost when I say "overpay". That said, Verlander is on the wrong side of his career and in the midst of a down year. I don't see how he's a clear upgrade over Morton, Fiers, or Peacock...or McHugh if he comes back strong (which is TBD). Yes, he has experience and that matters, but giving up prospects for someone that isn't a clear upgrade purely for the experience factor? *And* thinking about how his contract affects the team longterm after that? Eh. --Lance working out of this funk is irrelevant to the statement. If he works out, he's the clear #1/2...if he doesn't, it's still a question of Verlander against the other 3 listed.
