Purpura on 610 this morning

[Gizzmonic]

Purpura spoke with the 610 morning guys and Richard Justice this morning.  

Agreed that they are a little handcuffed in the free agent market now because of Clemens, Ausmus, Bagwell situations.

Said they would love to re-sign Ausmus, thinks Brad will decide based on a "family decision." (That doesn't sound too good to me).

They are preparing for next season with the assumption that Jeff Bagwell will be at 1B.  Said Bagwell hasn't been able to tell whether throwing will inflame the shoulder yet.

When asked about Burke's future, Purpura replied that they are trying to work him into the lineup every day.  Said they were pleased with his outfield play, and that he has worked on his arm strength.  Purp said he could play at SS "in case of injury."  Maybe this is a hint that they are parting ways with Viz?

Morning guys asked if they would have a special regimen for Clemens next year, Purp basically said they'd cross that bridge when they come to it, but had no doubts that Roger could contribute and that he would be a welcome member of the team next year.

[JimR]

he CANNOT play SS.

[Gizzmonic]

I was amazed to hear him say that.  Hunsicker and Purpura have both said multiple times in the past that they didn't consider him a big league SS.  He did qualify it with "in case of injury" so maybe that means he's the emergency shortstop?

[astro pete]

Quote:
I was amazed to hear him say that.  Hunsicker and Purpura have both said multiple times in the past that they didn't consider him a big league SS.  He did qualify it with "in case of injury" so maybe that means he's the emergency shortstop?

What else would it mean?

[BudGirl]

Quote:
he CANNOT play SS.

Play SS in case of injury.  Just like Biggio would be a backup catcher in case of injury.  That's the way I read taht.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

While I'm not one of these people, there are those that think Adam's offensive contribution constitutes an emergency.

[Gizzmonic]

The way he said it (trying to be exact, but can't exactly remember word for word.)
--
Q: Where can you play him (Burke)?

A: Well we liked him in the outfield, he showed his athleticism playing even center field-

Q: Second base?

A: Well, obviously when Biggio needs a day off, and shortstop...being in the outfield has helped his arm strength, where we think he could play there...he's done a lot of long-toss drills...so, he could be at shortstop.  (pause) If there was an injury.

--

Was Purpura just thinking out loud?  I don't think the Astros org ever projected Burke as an MLB shortstop.  

It's probably best not to make too much of this, but it
certainly raised my eyebrows to hear him say that.  Maybe he's shopping Burke as a shortstop, and those are some lines he's been feeding the other GMs at winter meetings?  Maybe he means (assuming Viz is gone) Burke is 3rd on the depth chart at SS, behind Everett and The Brunt?

[JimR]

they tried him at SS, and he was a bust.

[pravata]

"Obviously Burke was the number one guy and he is a shortstop, a legitimate shortstop. I don't see him having to move. ..."
The Link

The Link

[JimR]

may explain at least a part of why D. Lakey is gone.

[pravata]

Quote:
may explain at least a part of why D. Lakey is gone.

Noboby's perfect.  Eckstein has a weak arm and he scraps by at short.

[JimR]

not talking about Burke, really, although he failed at SS. the New Pissant has not.

Lakey's assessment of a first round choice no doubt was important to the GM. they had major conflicts a couple of years ago. i think that likely was part of it, but i do not know.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
he CANNOT play SS.

What was his biggest weakness? Feet? Hands? Arm?

[JimR]

arm. awful arm from SS.

[ASTROCREEP]

sssshhhhh! Burke is a fantastic SS, he can catch too!

You never know who is trolling.

[Bill McLuggage]

If Chamo can play 3 innings at 1st and Ausmus can turn a DP at short and Cangelosi can pitch an inning in relief, then I believe anyone can do anything.

[VirtualBob]

Quote:
he CANNOT play SS.

Amen to that ... if anything, that comment is a "hint" that Purp wants other clubs to pick up on as an additional incetive to trade for Burke.

[Reuben]

Thought this Hunsicker quote was pretty interesting, esp. in light of recent debates on this forum as to AE's irreplacability:
"There are certain positions -- shortstop certainly one of them -- that you can't sacrifice too much defense. When you get an opportunity to get a player that can play the position at least adequately defensively and has a chance to be a real special player offensively, it's a pretty potent package."

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:
Thought this Hunsicker quote was pretty interesting, esp. in light of recent debates on this forum as to AE's irreplacability:
"There are certain positions -- shortstop certainly one of them -- that you can't sacrifice too much defense. When you get an opportunity to get a player that can play the position at least adequately defensively and has a chance to be a real special player offensively, it's a pretty potent package."

No one on this forum has ever argued that Everett is irreplaceable.

[Dobro]

Quote:

Quote:
Thought this Hunsicker quote was pretty interesting, esp. in light of recent debates on this forum as to AE's irreplacability:
"There are certain positions -- shortstop certainly one of them -- that you can't sacrifice too much defense. When you get an opportunity to get a player that can play the position at least adequately defensively and has a chance to be a real special player offensively, it's a pretty potent package."

No one on this forum has ever argued that Everett is irreplaceable.

But you have argued that:
1. AE is the best SS in the league
2. "Offense NEVER makes up for lack of defense."

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

But you have argued that:
1. AE is the best SS in the league
2. "Offense NEVER makes up for lack of defense."

Yes.  You got a point?

[pravata]

Quote:
Thought this Hunsicker quote was pretty interesting, esp. in light of recent debates on this forum as to AE's irreplacability:
"There are certain positions -- shortstop certainly one of them -- that you can't sacrifice too much defense. When you get an opportunity to get a player that can play the position at least adequately defensively and has a chance to be a real special player offensively, it's a pretty potent package."

Hunsicker has said in the past the he "does not care", period, what offense he gets from the shortstop.  Replacing Lugo with Everett was one of his more visible actions employing this philosophy.  He was going to do it before the domestic abuse charges came out.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Thought this Hunsicker quote was pretty interesting, esp. in light of recent debates on this forum as to AE's irreplacability:
"There are certain positions -- shortstop certainly one of them -- that you can't sacrifice too much defense. When you get an opportunity to get a player that can play the position at least adequately defensively and has a chance to be a real special player offensively, it's a pretty potent package."

Hunsicker has said in the past the he "does not care", period, what offense he gets from the shortstop.  Replacing Lugo with Everett was one of his more visible actions employing this philosophy.  He was going to do it before the domestic abuse charges came out.

Because a smart baseball man like Hunsicker knows that if he is going to anchor his team with pitching, he better support them with defense at key positions like catcher and shortstop.

The one season he put Biggio in center (following a season of Berkman in center), he almost had a revolt on his hands by the pitching staff not seen around here since the days of F-Bomb Melooskey!  When they got Beltran, Roy Oswalt made the observation as a backhanded compliment/slam on Hunsicker that finally the pitcher knows he doesn't have to worry about a ball hit out to center or the gaps.  "That guy right there is good for an additional 10 team wins with his defense alone..." was along the lines of his pitcher influenced statement.

What, it is just now apparent to some that Houston's ten year run at success in baseball is keyed by solid pitching?  Want offense to key your success as a team?  Ahum... wrong Texas city, try a little further north.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
What, it is just now apparent to some that Houston's ten year run at success in baseball is keyed by solid pitching?  Want offense to key your success as a team?  Ahum... wrong Texas city, try a little further north.

Of course, this can be taken too far, e.g., if your team bats .203 in the World Series.

[JimR]

yeah, that sucks. losing in the WS.

[Andyzipp]

You wanna take something too far?  Morgan Ensberg's "performance" in the WS cost the Astros the series.  How's that for too far?

[JimR]

you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching. our hitting was pretty much the same, but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
What, it is just now apparent to some that Houston's ten year run at success in baseball is keyed by solid pitching?  Want offense to key your success as a team?  Ahum... wrong Texas city, try a little further north.

Of course, this can be taken too far, e.g., if your team bats .203 in the World Series.

How can anyone be surprised that one of the worst offensive teams in the NL didn't hit very well in the WS?

[pravata]

Quote:
you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching. our hitting was pretty much the same, but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

Wheeler loading the bases, and the Oswalt 5th.

[Astros Fan in Big D]

The last 15 innings of offensive futility seems to have skewed a lot of fans' thinking about the Astros post-season.  

You nailed the crux of the Series.  Bullpen in game 2, our pitcher with the biggest bag of knuckles in the 5th inning of game 3.

And as a resident of the greater DFW are for more than a decade, I can personally attest that offense is NOT the key to winning baseball.

[Andyzipp]

I was not being serious.

[Astros Fan in Big D]

I know you weren't serious, but there've been plenty of posts bemoaning the production of the # 8 man in the lineup as well as MoBerg.  

The truth is, if you laid out the setup for the key moments in Games 2,3 for me beforehand (4-2 and 4-0 leads) I'd have loved the Astros chances.  Still would.  Oh well.

[strosrays]

Quote:
If Chamo can play 3 innings at 1st and Ausmus can turn a DP at short and Cangelosi can pitch an inning in relief, then I believe anyone can do anything.

Don't forget...   Jim DeShaies, Pinch-Hitter

[Astros Fan in Big D]

Valenzuela finished the game at first.  Now the game winning hit may have gone past him, but I believe it also lends credence to the "anyone/anything" theory.

[shortstop]

Quote:
you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching.  our hitting was pretty much the same , but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

The same as what? Judged on what standards?

season: BA .256; OBP .322; SLG .408
W  S  : BA .203; OBP .307; SLG .336

And you call others clueless ... and BP fanatacrap?

[DVauthrin]

Quote:

Quote:
you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching.  our hitting was pretty much the same , but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

The same as what? Judged on what standards?

season: BA .256; OBP .322; SLG .408
W  S  : BA .203; OBP .307; SLG .336

And you call others clueless ... and BP fanatacrap?

Those stats are skewed by the last 15 innings of the series.  Plus you would expect the stats to be down a little bit as the Whitesox are a strong pitching team and there aren't anymore patsy pitchers to beat up on like in the regular season.   Anyways, Game 1:  3 runs, game 2: 6 runs, game 3: 5 runs.   That seems like reasonable run production for a team playing another solid pitching club in the WS.  Plus, game 1 as much as they failed to drive Willy in, Roger's injury/ineffectiveness played a huge role in that loss.  

To me, the two huge innings in game 2 and 3 is what hurt.   I bet I could count on my hand the amount of times that the big 3 in either the pen or the rotation had allowed 4 or more runs in an inning.  And it happened twice in the WS.  Win those 2 games and the series is vastly different.   You can lament about the offense not bailing the pitchers out when they struggled for their standards, but the pivotal game 2 and game 3 losses were due to two big innings off of the Astros elite pitchers.  

That is what changed the series, not the lack of offense late in games 3/4.   The pitching carried this team all year, and it picked a bad time to have its worst two outings of the year.

[shortstop]

 

Quote:
Those stats are skewed by the last 15 innings of the series. Plus you would expect the stats to be down a little bit as the Whitesox are a strong pitching team and there aren't anymore patsy pitchers to beat up on like in the regular season. Anyways, Game 1: 3 runs, game 2: 6 runs, game 3: 5 runs. That seems like reasonable run production for a team playing another solid pitching club in the WS. Plus, game 1 as much as they failed to drive Willy in, Roger's injury/ineffectiveness played a huge role in that loss.

To me, the two huge innings in game 2 and 3 is what hurt. I bet I could count on my hand the amount of times that the big 3 in either the pen or the rotation had allowed 4 or more runs in an inning. And it happened twice in the WS. Win those 2 games and the series is vastly different. You can lament about the offense not bailing the pitchers out when they struggled for their standards, but the pivotal game 2 and game 3 losses were due to two big innings off of the Astros elite pitchers.

That is what changed the series, not the lack of offense late in games 3/4. The pitching carried this team all year, and it picked a bad time to have its worst two outings of the year.  

I think what you say about the pitching is fair, it was the wrong time for sub par outings from a couple of key arms. But we scored only 1 run in the last 19 innings of the series. Not only were the batting stats down over the whole series, but we did not get hits in clutch situations in games 1-4. Additionally, our guys failed to bring in runners from third with "quality outs" with less than 2 outs in the late innings of all games. That is something that we did well most of the year. I agree the Sox pitching had something to do with that and they were the better team for those 4 games. However, saying that our hitting was the same is not accurate. Just as the pitchers picked the wrong time to have sub par outings, our batters slumped at a bad time.

[DVauthrin]

Quote:

Quote:
Those stats are skewed by the last 15 innings of the series. Plus you would expect the stats to be down a little bit as the Whitesox are a strong pitching team and there aren't anymore patsy pitchers to beat up on like in the regular season. Anyways, Game 1: 3 runs, game 2: 6 runs, game 3: 5 runs. That seems like reasonable run production for a team playing another solid pitching club in the WS. Plus, game 1 as much as they failed to drive Willy in, Roger's injury/ineffectiveness played a huge role in that loss.

To me, the two huge innings in game 2 and 3 is what hurt. I bet I could count on my hand the amount of times that the big 3 in either the pen or the rotation had allowed 4 or more runs in an inning. And it happened twice in the WS. Win those 2 games and the series is vastly different. You can lament about the offense not bailing the pitchers out when they struggled for their standards, but the pivotal game 2 and game 3 losses were due to two big innings off of the Astros elite pitchers.

That is what changed the series, not the lack of offense late in games 3/4. The pitching carried this team all year, and it picked a bad time to have its worst two outings of the year.  

I think what you say about the pitching is fair, it was the wrong time for sub par outings from a couple of key arms. But we scored only 1 run in the last 19 innings of the series. Not only were the batting stats down over the whole series, but we did not get hits in clutch situations in games 1-4. Additionally, our guys failed to bring in runners from third with "quality outs" with less than 2 outs in the late innings of all games. That is something that we did well most of the year. I agree the Sox pitching had something to do with that and they were the better team for those 4 games. However, saying that our hitting was the same is not accurate. Just as the pitchers picked the wrong time to have sub par outings, our batters slumped at a bad time.

To be fair, they didn't exactly light up the scoreboard in the NLCS either.  They scored 22 runs in those 6 games.  They scored 14 in 4 WS games, despite a game 4 shutout.   In fact, if you take that average to 6 games, it comes out to 21 runs in a 6 game series, factoring in a shutout as well.
   
Furthermore, as an Andy illustrated above, Morgan Ensberg was the big reason for the offensive ineptitude in that regard.   He squandered the most chances of anyone.   But to me the offense was performing at a similar level to that of the NLCS and if the pitching just performs like it had all year, the series would have been 2-1 houston going into backe's game 4 start.

[Frobie]

Hey DVauthrin and shortshop... what the hell are you doing?!  It looks like... dialogue!  

[cue psycho violin shrieks]

One of you two needs to tell the other to fuck off, and fast.

[MikeyBoy]

Quote:
Additionally, our guys failed to bring in runners from third with "quality outs" with less than 2 outs in the late innings of all games. That is something that we did well most of the year.

Bullshit. During the season, Garner complained about the team's inability to bring runners home from third with less than two outs. This is something he complained about more than once. Again, this Astros team was not good offensively, their pitching and defense led them to the WS, so when the strength of your team weakens, the offense that got shut out 17 times in 2005 can't be expected to carry the load.

[jasonact]

Quote:

Quote:
Those stats are skewed by the last 15 innings of the series. Plus you would expect the stats to be down a little bit as the Whitesox are a strong pitching team and there aren't anymore patsy pitchers to beat up on like in the regular season. Anyways, Game 1: 3 runs, game 2: 6 runs, game 3: 5 runs. That seems like reasonable run production for a team playing another solid pitching club in the WS. Plus, game 1 as much as they failed to drive Willy in, Roger's injury/ineffectiveness played a huge role in that loss.

To me, the two huge innings in game 2 and 3 is what hurt. I bet I could count on my hand the amount of times that the big 3 in either the pen or the rotation had allowed 4 or more runs in an inning. And it happened twice in the WS. Win those 2 games and the series is vastly different. You can lament about the offense not bailing the pitchers out when they struggled for their standards, but the pivotal game 2 and game 3 losses were due to two big innings off of the Astros elite pitchers.

That is what changed the series, not the lack of offense late in games 3/4. The pitching carried this team all year, and it picked a bad time to have its worst two outings of the year.  

I think what you say about the pitching is fair, it was the wrong time for sub par outings from a couple of key arms. But we scored only 1 run in the last 19 innings of the series. Not only were the batting stats down over the whole series, but we did not get hits in clutch situations in games 1-4. Additionally, our guys failed to bring in runners from third with "quality outs" with less than 2 outs in the late innings of all games. That is something that we did well most of the year. I agree the Sox pitching had something to do with that and they were the better team for those 4 games. However, saying that our hitting was the same is not accurate. Just as the pitchers picked the wrong time to have sub par outings, our batters slumped at a bad time.

I don't think it was quite a slump. Their offensive output in the World Series wasn't too far off from the regular season or the NLCS. The ONLY difference was that the pitching didn't pick the offense up the way it had before.

[JimR]

i'll take it: fuck off, shortstop.

and, yes, Baseball Prospectus is fantacrap. anyone who reads it for more than great comic writing is beyond help.

the pitching in the WS:
#1--Clemens goes 2 innings and gets rocked. we have to use Wandy, who pitches pretty well but gives up the go ahead HR.
#2--Pettitte can go only 6, and Wheeler/Qualls cough up the lead. after we tie it, Lidge gives up a game winning HR
#3--Roy gives up 5 with a 4-0 lead in the 5th. Astacio gives up a game winning HR after a tie.
#4--Lidge enters a tie game, gives up a leadoff single to a rookie and a game winner to Dye.

i agree that the last however many scoreless innings skewed the hitting stats. with regular season pitching, we would have been no worse than 2-2 after 4.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
I was not being serious.

Nor was I denegrating the achievement of the Astros reaching the World Series -- particularly getting as far as they did with an offense that accomplished a lot with smoke and mirrors this season.

Suprisingly, the White Sox were not as different from the Astros as the World Series sweep might suggest. They were ninth of 14 in runs scored and second of 14 in ERA. The Astros were 11th of 16 in runs scored and second of 16 in ERA.

Hey, at least the Astros hit better in the WS than the Cardinals did in the LCS:

LDS      Avg   OBP   Slg
------------------------
Astros  .265  .348  .419
Braves  .255  .253  .429

LCS      Avg   OBP   Slg
------------------------
Astros  .278  .329  .409
Cards   .209  .276  .289

WS       Avg   OBP   Slg
------------------------
Astros  .203  .307  .336
Sox     .286  .360  .487

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
i agree that the last however many scoreless innings skewed the hitting stats. with regular season pitching, we would have been no worse than 2-2 after 4.

Without a doubt.  The pitching did not weave its magic as it had in the first two rounds and off and on throughout the last two-thirds of the season.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
However, saying that our hitting was the same is not accurate. Just as the pitchers picked the wrong time to have sub par outings, our batters slumped at a bad time.

Well, the offense wasn't so hot to begin with, so slump though it may have been, it wasn't entirely unexpected (although the futility at driving home runners on base was pretty extreme -- but that can happen anytime).

The team prospered all year on the pitchers succeeding with a razor-thin margin of error.  They were unable to do that in the World Series and, hence, a sweep, despite being outscored by only six runs over the four games.

Lamenting that it happened when it did is almost irrelevant. Having won the wild card by one game, the division series with one game to spare, and the LCS with one game to spare, a four-game losing streak at any other time from April to October would've meant not winning the pennant at all.

In going 96-80 on the season plus playoffs, the Astros got as far as they possibly could on that record.

[MikeyBoy]

Quote:
Hey, at least the Astros hit better in the WS than the Cardinals did in the LCS:

And better than the Cardinals did in the 2004 World Series:


 Code:

WS       Avg   OBP   Slg
------------------------
Astros  .203  .307  .336
STL     .190  .261  .302  

[Bill McLuggage]

Quote:

Quote:
If Chamo can play 3 innings at 1st and Ausmus can turn a DP at short and Cangelosi can pitch an inning in relief, then I believe anyone can do anything.

Don't forget...   Jim DeShaies, Pinch-Hitter

LA - Shelby, CF  0-10

Is he available?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching.  our hitting was pretty much the same , but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

The same as what? Judged on what standards?

season: BA .256; OBP .322; SLG .408
W  S  : BA .203; OBP .307; SLG .336

And you call others clueless ... and BP fanatacrap?

On the standard of sample size being relative.  Use a small sample size to compare to a more robust sample size, you get rolled up newspaper over the snooz-ola (thank you Milo Hamilton... I hate you!).

I bet we could find a small sample size of offensive output by the 2005 Houston Astros that says they were performing *better* than the 1927 Yankees too.

But back to the point, *relatively* speaking, Jim is pretty much spot on.  Again.

[jasonact]

Quote:

Quote:
you know what i think cost us the WS? pitching.  our hitting was pretty much the same , but the pitching slipped ever so slightly. that and the fact that CWS played just a little bit better. i hate it when that happens, don't you?

The same as what? Judged on what standards?

season: BA .256; OBP .322; SLG .408
W  S  : BA .203; OBP .307; SLG .336

And you call others clueless ... and BP fanatacrap?

Yeah, um... I don't think the Astros had the opportunity to feast on Reds pitching in the WS. Look at most offensive stats for WS teams. They typically are worse than the regular season. (I would guess that the Sox didn't hit as well in the WS as in the regular season, but I don't know that for sure.)

Pitching cost the Astros the series. The offense was just doing what they do. Don't forget the numerous 1-0 games they lost this season.

[Limey]

Quote:
Pitching cost the Astros the series. The offense was just doing what they do. Don't forget the numerous 1-0 games they lost this season.

During the regular season, the Astros were shut out more times than John Poppa at the Playboy Mansion.  I give the bulk of the "blame" (for want of a softer word) for the WS loss to the pitching staff as well as a hard-earned pat on the rump for getting the team there in the first place.

Morgan Ensberg gets a noogie, a Budweiser and a "we'll get 'em next year" for being the stand-out victim in the series, but for carrying the offense for much of the year.  How many walk-off hits did that guy have?