Colby Jacks are Coming Back

[Texifornia]

Colby Rasmus accepted the Qualifying Offer. I believe it may be the first time ever.

I loved Playoff Colby; how great would it be to have that production all season? I hope he has a great year!

[BlownRanger]

Colby Rasmus accepted the Qualifying Offer. I believe it may be the first time ever.

I loved Playoff Colby; how great would it be to have that production all season? I hope he has a great year!

Increased production would be great, but I'm fine with a repeat of 2015.  So many of his hits were in clutch situations.

[Fredia]

he is where he needs to be. keep as many of the pieces together as possible. the shirtless pic did not hurt either

[Reuben]

Colby Rasmus accepted the Qualifying Offer. I believe it may be the first time ever.

I loved Playoff Colby; how great would it be to have that production all season? I hope he has a great year!

You do know you were Cabrera'd by almost 6 hours, right? Not that I have a problem with ColbyJacks getting their own thread.

[David in Jackson]

Increased production would be great, but I'm fine with a repeat of 2015.  So many of his hits were in clutch situations.

I like Colby and he was huge, obviously, in the postseason.  He was a great pick up for 2015 at $8 m.

Still, I'm worried.  I was concerned about the Astros making that qualifying offer and saw it as a risk and hope for a draft pick in compensation.  Rasmus at $8 m?  Great.  Rasmus at $15.8 m?  Hmmm.  Do we expect a significantly better year in 2016 than in 2015 (or 2014)?  Some of his strong rate stats are based on the fact that he was not a 162 game starter in all situations.  Maybe, if pay roll increases significantly, it doesn't matter.

[das]

 Call me a Homer, I dunno, but I think Colby is going to have a big year this year. First few months of last year, he was getting used to his new team and new environment and did good then better. Next year, he will have an entire year in his new "home" and could do very well. He certainly has the talent.

[JimR]

I like Colby and he was huge, obviously, in the postseason.  He was a great pick up for 2015 at $8 m.

Still, I'm worried.  I was concerned about the Astros making that qualifying offer and saw it as a risk and hope for a draft pick in compensation.  Rasmus at $8 m?  Great.  Rasmus at $15.8 m?  Hmmm.  Do we expect a significantly better year in 2016 than in 2015 (or 2014)?  Some of his strong rate stats are based on the fact that he was not a 162 game starter in all situations.  Maybe, if pay roll increases significantly, it doesn't matter.

why post this? the deal is done, and it is not your money. trust the people who put this team together.

[David in Jackson]

why post this? the deal is done, and it is not your money. trust the people who put this team together.

I do (unlike the Wade era) but posting about moves, possible moves, etc., is why we're here during the void.  Talking baseball. 

[hostros7]

Call me a Homer, I dunno, but I think Colby is going to have a big year this year. First few months of last year, he was getting used to his new team and new environment and did good then better. Next year, he will have an entire year in his new "home" and could do very well. He certainly has the talent.

And, he's going to be playing for his next contract.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pots]

I like Colby and he was huge, obviously, in the postseason.  He was a great pick up for 2015 at $8 m.

Still, I'm worried.  I was concerned about the Astros making that qualifying offer and saw it as a risk and hope for a draft pick in compensation.  Rasmus at $8 m?  Great.  Rasmus at $15.8 m?  Hmmm.  Do we expect a significantly better year in 2016 than in 2015 (or 2014)?  Some of his strong rate stats are based on the fact that he was not a 162 game starter in all situations.  Maybe, if pay roll increases significantly, it doesn't matter.

All I know is they do not make the post season without Rasmus.  And they certainly do not fair nearly as well as they did in the post season without him.  Losing him would have created a hole.   One that no current rostered player could fill.   When Colby has been trouble free he's been real good.  I think his last couple of months are closer to reality then the first 3.   If Gomez bounces back in 2016.   When healthy is there a better outfield then Rasmus/Gomez/Springer?  Both defensively and offensively?  If they stay healthy, you could be looking at an outfield trio that average >5 WAR.  Okay now I'm being a homer.

[drew corleone]

I do (unlike the Wade era) but posting about moves, possible moves, etc., is why we're here during the void.  Talking baseball. 

Agree on that point, but also agree with Jim that it's not your money (or mine). $15.8M is not a sum that cripples the franchise for years and I doubt it prevents the club from making other moves this year either.

[Bench]

Rasmus taking the QO didn't affect the payroll as much as the roster flexibility Luhnow had to play with. That changed the dynamic for the folks that want to play GM. And of course the rare breed of fan that would rather have an extra draft pick than a proven but flawed major league player.

[pots]

And, he's going to be playing for his next contract.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My guess is they work out a 3 year contract before the season

[jbm]

My guess is they work out a 3 year contract before the season

While I think he's a good player and really enjoyed his play last year, I'd be surprised to see a long-term deal before the season.

[toddthebod]

I do like Rasmus and I'm happy about the signing.  But I was okay with Tucker as well.  And now I'm afraid that the Astros will trade Tucker and he will blossom for some other team. 

Or maybe the Astros decide that they are going to need two starters after 2016 so they hold onto Tucker.

[HudsonHawk]

I do like Rasmus and I'm happy about the signing.  But I was okay with Tucker as well.  And now I'm afraid that the Astros will trade Tucker and he will blossom for some other team. 

Or maybe the Astros decide that they are going to need two starters after 2016 so they hold onto Tucker.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to keep Tucker as well.  You need more than three outfielders, plus you need lefties off the bench. 

[pots]

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to keep Tucker as well.  You need more than three outfielders, plus you need lefties off the bench.

Doubt they would carry 5 outfielders.  Comes down to Marisnick or Tucker for the 4th. 

Tucker has value and is not starting.  I could see him being traded for that reason.  That being said I don't think they'll just give him away.  Likely have to be a fairly important piece in a trade to consider it.  He could always start the season in AAA till needed.

[HudsonHawk]

Doubt they would carry 5 outfielders.  Comes down to Marisnick or Tucker for the 4th. 

It may come down to Marisnick or Tucker, but I can't imagine they'd go with fewer than five.  Geez, most nights you have to start four of them. 

Tucker has value and is not starting.  I could see him being traded for that reason.  That being said I don't think they'll just give him away.  Likely have to be a fairly important piece in a trade to consider it.  He could always start the season in AAA till needed.

As someone said earlier...there are those who want to trade every player who they perceive to have value.  Why, I have no idea.  If this year showed anything, it's that you need players who can produce when a starter goes down, produce in spot starts, and produce off the bench.  This idea that you only need 8 quality position players is absurd, IMO.

[Jacksonian]

It may come down to Marisnick or Tucker, but I can't imagine they'd go with fewer than five.  Geez, most nights you have to start four of them. 

They've shown the propensity to go with 4 outfielders and an all fields back up.  With the DH you don't have that extra bench player as you would in the NL.
8 - Starters
1 - DH
1- back up catcher
1 - back up infielder
1 - back up outfielder
1- all around player
---
13 position players

[HudsonHawk]

They've shown the propensity to go with 4 outfielders and an all fields back up.  With the DH you don't have that extra bench player as you would in the NL.
8 - Starters
1 - DH
1- back up catcher
1 - back up infielder
1 - back up outfielder
1- all around player
---
13 position players

I'm counting the DH as an outfielder, as he usually is. 

[Reuben]

I'm counting the DH as an outfielder, as he usually is.

In which case you're back to either Marisnick or Tucker as the only other backup OF.

Regardless, I don't think anyone "wants" to trade Tucker. But as Pots said, other teams may be asking for him in trade talks. I don't know. What I do know is the Astros seem to prefer speed and range across the OF, so they may see Tucker's only long-term fit being as a DH and/or part-time OF. So in that sense, he may end up being more valued by a different club - although I'm not convinced he's there yet, having not gotten much love from scouts despite gaudy numbers in the minors.

[jbm]

If it is between Tucker and Gattis, I hope they keep Tucker and get what they can for the Caveman.  There is some uncertainty with Tucker, but he consistently put up better ABs than Gattis, IMO.  Of course, they might be able to find someone better than both of them.

[pots]

If it is between Tucker and Gattis, I hope they keep Tucker and get what they can for the Caveman.  There is some uncertainty with Tucker, but he consistently put up better ABs than Gattis, IMO.  Of course, they might be able to find someone better than both of them.

Yeah if White comes out swinging in spring training it's going to be hard to send him down

[pots]

Speaking of trade bait.  Do they have to try and move Villar now?  Options are one of the most confusing things to calculate, but I think he is out of them next year.  As a super utility player he has some value, but I can't envision him being able to break camp with the major league club.

[Duman]

8 - Starters
1 - DH
1- back up catcher
1 - back up infielder
1 - back up outfielder
1- all around player
---
13 position players

Using this formula:

Starters
C-Castro
1B- Carter
2B - Altuve
3B - Lowrie
SS - Correa
LF - Colby
CF - Gomez
RF - Springer

Bench:
C- Conger
IN - Valbuena
OF- Tucker
UT- Gonzalez

The bolded players are pretty have pretty much secured their spots (IMO).  The italicized ones are vulnerable. 

I have Tucker over Marisnick.  Yes Marisnick is great defensively but all the starters can play all three defensive OF positions.  Not as well as Marisnick but better than adequately.  Therefore I go with the better bat - Tucker. 

[HudsonHawk]

In which case you're back to either Marisnick or Tucker as the only other backup OF.

Unless you see Tucker and/or Rasmus and/or Gomez as a potential DH option from time to time.

Regardless, I don't think anyone "wants" to trade Tucker.

Then don't do it.  My point is, it takes all kinds at the Major League level.  You need guys like Tucker. 

[JimR]

Using this formula:

Starters
C-Castro
1B- Carter
2B - Altuve
3B - Lowrie
SS - Correa
LF - Colby
CF - Gomez
RF - Springer

Bench:
C- Conger
IN - Valbuena
OF- Tucker
UT- Gonzalez

The bolded players are pretty have pretty much secured their spots (IMO).  The italicized ones are vulnerable. 

I have Tucker over Marisnick.  Yes Marisnick is great defensively but all the starters can play all three defensive OF positions.  Not as well as Marisnick but better than adequately.  Therefore I go with the better bat - Tucker.

Tucker is barely adequate, imo. I would not take him over Marisnick under any scenario.

[Mr. Happy]

Tucker is barely adequate, imo. I would not take him over Marisnick under any scenario.

Although I again expose myself as an ass kisser, I agree with Coach. Marisnick is special in the outfield; Tucker is not.

[JimR]

Although I again expose myself as an ass kisser, I agree with Coach. Marisnick is special in the outfield; Tucker is not.

ain't it great when folks apologize for agreeing with me?

Marisnick also shows signs of hitting better. if he does, he truly will be special.

[Reuben]

ain't it great when folks apologize for agreeing with me?

Marisnick also shows signs of hitting better. if he does, he truly will be special.

Plus, Marisnick is a natural platoon-mate for Rasmus; Tucker is not.

It is funny though, that here it is only mid-November and we're already arguing about the 25th (or is it 24th?) man on the roster.

[Mr. Happy]

ain't it great when folks apologize for agreeing with me?

Marisnick also shows signs of hitting better. if he does, he truly will be special.

There was no apology, sir; I'm happy agreeing with you. I simply made a preemptive strike.

[Duman]

Although I again expose myself as an ass kisser, I agree with Coach. Marisnick is special in the outfield; Tucker is not.

I concede his OF prowess.  What about at the plate?  I would rather have Tucker coming up to pinch hit rather than Marisnick in a tight game.  He strikes out less, walks more and has more pop.

[pots]

Using this formula:

Starters
C-Castro
1B- Carter
2B - Altuve
3B - Lowrie
SS - Correa
LF - Colby
CF - Gomez
RF - Springer

Bench:
C- Conger
IN - Valbuena
OF- Tucker
UT- Gonzalez

The bolded players are pretty have pretty much secured their spots (IMO).  The italicized ones are vulnerable. 

I have Tucker over Marisnick.  Yes Marisnick is great defensively but all the starters can play all three defensive OF positions.  Not as well as Marisnick but better than adequately.  Therefore I go with the better bat - Tucker.

You forgot your DH. 

[Mr. Happy]

I concede his OF prowess.  What about at the plate?  I would rather have Tucker coming up to pinch hit rather than Marisnick in a tight game.  He strikes out less, walks more and has more pop.

I agree with you at present. However, I think that Marisnick will hit enough to stay on the roster. And he can run, which Tucker can't.

[jbm]

You forgot your DH.

yes, Tucker's spot is as a DH, not a fourth outfielder. 

[juliogotay]

yes, Tucker's spot is as a DH, not a fourth outfielder.

I agree with this.

[juliogotay]

I agree with you at present. However, I think that Marisnick will hit enough to stay on the roster. And he can run, which Tucker can't.

One of the savviest base runners on the team. (Jake)

[Duman]

You forgot your DH.

Gattis is likely the DH

[BlownRanger]

yes, Tucker's spot is as a DH, not a fourth outfielder.

I'm having a hard time envisioning any team ever looking at Preston Tucker and saying "there's my DH".

[jbm]

Sure, he might not reach that level, but if he makes as a regular in the bigs, it's not as an outfielder.  That was my point.

btw.  We disagree on his potential.  I think there is a real chance he becomes a solid batter.

[BlownRanger]

btw.  We disagree on his potential.  I think there is a real chance [Tucker] becomes a solid batter.

I hope you're right.  If so, then maybe he can eventually figure into Houston's (or someone's) DH plans.  But at this point, I think he'd be well served to improve his defense as much as possible, because I see his future as a reserve outfielder.

[juliogotay]

I hope you're right.  If so, then maybe he can eventually figure into Houston's (or someone's) DH plans.  But at this point, I think he'd be well served to improve his defense as much as possible, because I see his future as a reserve outfielder.

I doubt that he'll ever be more than a platoon type guy.