2014 Batting Order

[Mr. Happy]

Today, Bo Porter just said that Fowler would lead off and play CF; Altuve would bat second; and Jason Castro would hit third.

[NeilT]

That's seems obvious once it's said, but it's very incomplete.  Who's batting 7th?  Who's the fifth outfielder.

[geezerdonk]

Dear Bo,
Not so fast.
Very Truly Yours,
George
P.S. Those 111 losses must have turned your brain to mush.

[juliogotay]

Odd to have your 3rd hitter be a guy that won't start 30% or more of the games.

[NeilT]

Odd to have your 3rd hitter be a guy that won't start 30% or more of the games.

That is so National League.

[MusicMan]

CF Fowler
2b Altuve
C/DH Castro
LF Carter
1b Singleton
RF Springer
3b Dominguez
DH/C
SS

[Reuben]

Please, no more Carter in the OF.

[jester9450]

CF Fowler
2b Altuve
C Castro
3b Dominguez
DH Carter
LF Krauss
1b singleton/wallace
ss Villar
RF Hoes

[jaklewein]

CF Fowler
2b Altuve
C Castro
3b Dominguez
DH Carter
LF Krauss
1b singleton/wallace
ss Villar
RF Hoes

No Grossman?  I thought the guy played pretty good down the stretch last year.

[pots]

CF Fowler
2b Altuve
C Castro
3b Dominguez
DH Carter
LF Krauss
1b singleton/wallace
ss Villar
RF Hoes

Barring injury or a real bad spring, Springer will be in the opening day lineup.  There is nobody blocking him.  There is nothing left to prove in the minors.  I believe the only reason we didn't see him up in September was for 40-man flexibility. 

[Texifornia]

CF Fowler
2b Altuve
C Castro
3b Dominguez
DH Carter
LF Krauss
1b singleton/wallace
ss Villar
RF Hoes

With a couple of career years, that could be a 60, maybe even a 63 win line-up!

[NeilT]

With a couple of career years, that could be a 60, maybe even a 63 win line-up!

That's getting close to .400!

[moriartp]

Barring injury or a real bad spring, Springer will be in the opening day lineup.  There is nobody blocking him.  There is nothing left to prove in the minors.  I believe the only reason we didn't see him up in September was for 40-man flexibility. 

Keeping him in OKC for a little while buys them an extra year of club control. I doubt they'll sacrifice that.

[pots]

Keeping him in OKC for a little while buys them an extra year of club control. I doubt they'll sacrifice that.

Super 2 only refers to first arbitration year.  They'd have to hold him in OKC for most of the year to keep him for an extra year

[Reuben]

No Grossman?  I thought the guy played pretty good down the stretch last year.

I think Porter agrees with you.

The benefit when you have guys that are extremely athletic, and that is one of the areas in which Jeff and I talked about getting more athletic in the outfield, I think it definitely saves you runs. It may go unnoticed sometimes from a standpoint, from a fan standpoint of if you have three guys in the outfield that all of have paid for playing centerfield, your defense instantly gets better. So having George Springer, Dexter Fowler, Robbie Grossman, three guys that have pretty much predominantly played centerfield most of their career and now you look out there and you have Grossman in left, Springer in right, and Fowler in center, your team just got better.

link

[Duder]

Super 2 only refers to first arbitration year.  They'd have to hold him in OKC for most of the year to keep him for an extra year

Here is a good article which explains the nuances of super 2 and gaining an extra year of club control.

There are many "cheats" to this process that teams use to maximize their control and limit the salaries of players. Since a player must have three years of service time (except in the super 2 case) to be eligible for arbitration, any amount that comes up just short of the three years of service time is not eligible. To have a year of service time, a player must be on the major league roster for 172 of the 183 days of the season. By holding a player who has never played in the major leagues down for 11 days, the team gains close to a full extra year.

If the Astros call up Springer sometime after the 11 days but before the super 2 cutoff, then the team would have an extra year of Springer at the expense of a fourth year of arbitration.

[pots]

Here is a good article which explains the nuances of super 2 and gaining an extra year of club control.

If the Astros call up Springer sometime after the 11 days but before the super 2 cutoff, then the team would have an extra year of Springer at the expense of a fourth year of arbitration.

okay then, so opening day is April 12th for Springer.  Wow what a stupid rule.   

[Mr. Happy]

okay then, so opening day is April 12th for Springer.  Wow what a stupid rule.   

I don't like it either. If Springer is the best RF option coming out of ST, then I expect him to come north with the team. If they don't do it that way, then I certainly will be pissed off because that would be another example of trying not to win.

[moriartp]

I don't like it either. If Springer is the best RF option coming out of ST, then I expect him to come north with the team. If they don't do it that way, then I certainly will be pissed off because that would be another example of trying not to win.

Two weeks of a rookie in a year you won't contend vs. a full year of a player in his prime right in the middle of your contention window (knock on wood). How do you not make that trade? I understand the urge to win as much as you can as fast as you can, but realistically, bringing him up out of ST is a perfect example of trying not to win.

It's all moot if he spends that length of time in the minors at some point anyway. I'm just not willing to bet a year of club control on the chance that he wouldn't stay up.

[jaklewein]

Two weeks of a rookie in a year you won't contend vs. a full year of a player in his prime right in the middle of your contention window (knock on wood). How do you not make that trade? I understand the urge to win as much as you can as fast as you can, but realistically, bringing him up out of ST is a perfect example of trying not to win.

It's all moot if he spends that length of time in the minors at some point anyway. I'm just not willing to bet a year of club control on the chance that he wouldn't stay up.

+1

[Mr. Happy]

Two weeks of a rookie in a year you won't contend vs. a full year of a player in his prime right in the middle of your contention window (knock on wood). How do you not make that trade? I understand the urge to win as much as you can as fast as you can, but realistically, bringing him up out of ST is a perfect example of trying not to win.

It's all moot if he spends that length of time in the minors at some point anyway. I'm just not willing to bet a year of club control on the chance that he wouldn't stay up.

How would it be trying not to win? Didn't you read my assumption, which was that Springer was the best RF or LF option coming out of ST? But you're right. The club probably will opt for another year of control.

[moriartp]

How would it be trying not to win?

Because they'll win more games by keeping him down for two weeks. The extra wins will come in the extra full season they have him.

Didn't you read my assumption, which was that Springer was the best RF or LF option coming out of ST?

Doesn't matter if it's George Springer or George Herman Ruth. They'll win more games by keeping him down.

But you're right. The club probably will opt for another year of control.

As any sensible club in their position would and should do.

[Mr. Happy]

Because they'll win more games by keeping him down for two weeks. The extra wins will come in the extra full season they have him.

Doesn't matter if it's George Springer or George Herman Ruth. They'll win more games by keeping him down.

As any sensible club in their position would and should do.

I guess that you are right. I just hate that though.

[homer]

I just hate that though.

Why? What will those 11 days matter to make you 'hate' it?

[Reuben]

Why? What will those 11 days matter to make you 'hate' it?

I understand what he means. Springer deserved to be called up this past September - arguably before then - and he'll probably deserve to be in the Opening Day lineup, but he won't be. And it will be completely obvious why, and completely understandable, just as it is with all clubs when they do this, but none of them can actually say "we're holding him back so his contract is cheaper down the road," they have to pay lip service to the player not quite being ready, or there not being space for him yet on the roster (yeah, he's being blocked by LJ Hoes), that kind of thing.

So in that sense, it sucks, and it sucked that they didn't bring him up back in September, but I completely understand why they're doing it, and I agree with it, because it means there's a better chance that he's helping the Astros win a championship in 2020, rather than helping them go 15-21 next April instead of 13-23 without him.

[moriartp]

I understand what he means. Springer deserved to be called up this past September - arguably before then - and he'll probably deserve to be in the Opening Day lineup, but he won't be. And it will be completely obvious why, and completely understandable, just as it is with all clubs when they do this, but none of them can actually say "we're holding him back so his contract is cheaper down the road," they have to pay lip service to the player not quite being ready, or there not being space for him yet on the roster (yeah, he's being blocked by LJ Hoes), that kind of thing.

So in that sense, it sucks, and it sucked that they didn't bring him up back in September, but I completely understand why they're doing it, and I agree with it, because it means there's a better chance that he's helping the Astros win a championship in 2020, rather than helping them go 15-21 next April instead of 13-23 without him.

Spot on.

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

I understand what he means. Springer deserved to be called up this past September - arguably before then - and he'll probably deserve to be in the Opening Day lineup, but he won't be. And it will be completely obvious why, and completely understandable, just as it is with all clubs when they do this, but none of them can actually say "we're holding him back so his contract is cheaper down the road," they have to pay lip service to the player not quite being ready, or there not being space for him yet on the roster (yeah, he's being blocked by LJ Hoes), that kind of thing.

So in that sense, it sucks, and it sucked that they didn't bring him up back in September, but I completely understand why they're doing it, and I agree with it, because it means there's a better chance that he's helping the Astros win a championship in 2020, rather than helping them go 15-21 next April instead of 13-23 without him.

I agree. Life's hard... Wait they're playing 36 games next April? 

[Reuben]

I agree. Life's hard... Wait they're playing 36 games next April? 

15... plus 21... ah, shit. I guess Math is hard too.

[chuck]

I don't understand why Porter doesn't want to stick Hoes in the two-hole.

[Mr. Happy]

I understand what he means. Springer deserved to be called up this past September - arguably before then - and he'll probably deserve to be in the Opening Day lineup, but he won't be. And it will be completely obvious why, and completely understandable, just as it is with all clubs when they do this, but none of them can actually say "we're holding him back so his contract is cheaper down the road," they have to pay lip service to the player not quite being ready, or there not being space for him yet on the roster (yeah, he's being blocked by LJ Hoes), that kind of thing.

So in that sense, it sucks, and it sucked that they didn't bring him up back in September, but I completely understand why they're doing it, and I agree with it, because it means there's a better chance that he's helping the Astros win a championship in 2020, rather than helping them go 15-21 next April instead of 13-23 without him.

+1 You said it with more eloquence that I would have mustered.

[Ty in Tampa]

I don't understand why Porter doesn't want to stick Hoes in the two-hole.

That's too easy.

[Bench]

I don't understand why Porter doesn't want to stick Hoes in the two-hole.

Especially considering expanding the payroll is not an issue this season. 

[chuck]

That's too easy.

But, I mean, come on.

[chuck]

I should say that I was hoping of course that Hap would chime in with some labyrinthine reasoning as to why Hoes should hit eighth or whatever. And he still might!

But still, come on.

[Ebby Calvin]

Especially considering expanding the payroll is not an issue this season. 

You know what I'd do with a million dollars?

[NeilT]

You know what I'd do with a million dollars?

Buy new socks?

[Mr. Happy]

I should say that I was hoping of course that Hap would chime in with some labyrinthine reasoning as to why Hoes should hit eighth or whatever. And he still might!

But still, come on.

Actually, Hoes could be a two hitter in this lineup. But he'll probably hit down in the seven or eight.

[Ty in Tampa]

You know what I'd do with a million dollars?

Two hoes at the same time, man.

[NeilT]

Actually, Hoes could be a two hitter in this lineup. But he'll probably hit down in the seven or eight.

You hittin' Hoes in the 2 hole?

This will never get old.

[moriartp]

Sorry guys, but you can't beat Kaz Matsui anal fissure jokes. Our two-hole hitter had two holes in his two-hole.

[das]

Sorry guys, but you can't beat Kaz Matsui anal fissure jokes. Our two-hole hitter had two holes in his two-hole.

omg, I just spit up water here at work.

[VirtualBob]

omg, I just spit up water here at work.

Washing your mouth out after a two-hole?

[jester9450]

Barring injury or a real bad spring, Springer will be in the opening day lineup.  There is nobody blocking him.  There is nothing left to prove in the minors.  I believe the only reason we didn't see him up in September was for 40-man flexibility. 

Thats a strong possiblity there going to want to keep him protected if he doesn't make the team out of spring training.

[jester9450]

No Grossman?  I thought the guy played pretty good down the stretch last year.

There may be a platoon system with him and Hoes they both bring speed off the bench late in the game.

[Mr. Happy]

Astros just acquired 1B/OF Jesus Guzman from SD in exchange for Ryan Jackson.

[Reuben]

Astros just acquired 1B/OF Jesus Guzman from SD in exchange for Ryan Jackson.

<crickets>

[Nate Colbert]

Astros just acquired 1B/OF Jesus Guzman from SD in exchange for Ryan Jackson.

Nor very exciting, but perhaps this it in terms of the 1B to be acquired? 29 year old who topped out at .312/.369/.478 in 2011 and its been downhill from there: .247/.319/.418 in 2012 and .226/.297/.378 in 2013. He is a righty and, if he makes this roster, could platoon with Wallace. Career .286/.358/.460 against LHP.

ETA:
Yes, this apparently is the 1B acquisition:

HOU GM Luhnow on Guzman: "He's a RH hitter and Wallace is a LH hitter. They can platoon at first or one can win the job with a good spring."

(Footer tweet)

ETA(2):
From the Footer(!) article:

With Chris Carter slotted in as the full-time designated hitter, Luhnow sought out another bat to add to the equation. Noting Guzman's success at the Major League level and decent numbers at pitcher-friendly Petco Park, he envisions Minute Maid Park working in Guzman's favor.

[Nate Colbert]

So:

• no high-priced 1B acquisition
• assuming no more significant adds to the bully (I'll be surprised if the Astros add another reliever unless something absolutely falls into their lap)
• currently at $23M add'l salary for 2014

 

Wherenow Crane, Luhnow & Co? Do you add a second starting pitcher? Or do you stretch the budget a tad and sign a certain FA bat whose name shall not be mentioned here?

[Jose Cruz III]

I don't understand why Porter doesn't want to stick Hoes in the two-hole.

Ask Phil Robertson.

[astrosfan76]

So:

• no high-priced 1B acquisition
• assuming no more significant adds to the bully (I'll be surprised if the Astros add another reliever unless something absolutely falls into their lap)
• currently at $23M add'l salary for 2014

 

Wherenow Crane, Luhnow & Co? Do you add a second starting pitcher? Or do you stretch the budget a tad and sign a certain FA bat whose name shall not be mentioned here?

I really don't think Guzman would prevent them from making a move (I see him and Wallace both as expendable placeholders for Singleton), but at this point, Morales is the only high-priced 1B in free agency.  Morales is a better hitter than our current options, but really just average for a 1B.  Throw in the salary required and giving up a draft pick and he doesn't make sense.  I don't know who else is available via trade, but there probably isn't much left.  Loney and Abreu were probably the best options we had. 

They could still add another reliever.  They apparently don't want to spend a lot, as Veras turned down our offer to sign for $4M with the Cubs.  So, if $30M is a magic number, it will take more than a reliever to reach it.  I think they'll make at least one more move.  Whether that is a starter, a reliever, or a bat, I don't know. 

[HudsonHawk]

Super 2 only refers to first arbitration year.  They'd have to hold him in OKC for most of the year to keep him for an extra year

Late to the discussion here...but don't conflate arbitration eligibility and free agency eligibility. The "Super 2" designation only applies to the former. Keeping him in OKC for 11 days applies to the latter. You can be one day short of 6 years of service, and still not be eligible for free agency.

[Fredia]

maybe duck dynasty should be referenced

[NeilT]

Astros just acquired 1B/OF Jesus Guzman from SD in exchange for Ryan Jackson.

There was probably a star in the west for Jesus.

[Lefty]

There was probably a star in the west for Jesus.

All the Jesuses I know followed the star north.