texasaggie2015 said:

---

I also think we haven't put Chas in the best position to succeed. I think he would do best in a platoon facing lefties 90% of the time. There's been countless times we face a lefty and he's not in the lineup which is inexcusable.

His career splits against lefties: .293/ .366/ .539/ .905

I do agree that we know what Chas is. He's a fine player but doesn't have a high ceiling. That's why I think Jake has more value on the trade market. I think he hasn't hit his ceiling yet.. and frankly I think there's quite a bit more potential there.

---

Do we really want to trade away the guy that we think is the best? Wouldnt we want to keep him and play him...or is that just me

tjack16 said:

---

Marvin said:

---

Of the guys not injured (thinking Altuve, Brantley, LMJ, Garcia, Urquidy), I find myself most disappointed in McCormick and Tucker. I expected both to take the next step in their careers, and so far they have held serve at best. Lots of time left, though. I look forward to them getting hot and creating some protection for Alvarez.

And, yes, I did not mention Abreu. He's sort of in a class of his own, but showing signs of approaching some version of his prior self.

---

I think McCormick has a ceiling that we've pretty much already seen. .250 type of hitter with about 20 HR and 70ish RBI would be his best IMO.

Tucker will still end up with about 30 HR this year but I have to agree this year has been a disappointment with him so far. I and many others assumed the shift ban would help him ALOT but it hasn't seemed to make a difference in his production. His average and OPS are still relatively the same or lower than previous years

---

Tucker has hit 4 homers in his last 52 games played. No doubt he can get hot and pile up the numbers, but he will need a good summer to reach 30.

And I thought he was an absolute lock for 30/30 based on all of the new rules.

Lonestar_Ag09 said:

---

texasaggie2015 said:

---

I also think we haven't put Chas in the best position to succeed. I think he would do best in a platoon facing lefties 90% of the time. There's been countless times we face a lefty and he's not in the lineup which is inexcusable.

His career splits against lefties: .293/ .366/ .539/ .905

I do agree that we know what Chas is. He's a fine player but doesn't have a high ceiling. That's why I think Jake has more value on the trade market. I think he hasn't hit his ceiling yet.. and frankly I think there's quite a bit more potential there.

---

Do we really want to trade away the guy that we think is the best? Wouldnt we want to keep him and play him...or is that just me

---

In my eyes it's really simple if we have Chas, Jake, & Julks then eliminate one. If we have to decide who is the "best" there are solid arguments for both Chas & Jake. If the Astros value them somewhat equally but a trade partner values one much more than the others, then it makes sense to trade who have the most value.

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

According to Fangraphs, Yainer is up to 102 wRC+
Jake and Chas are sitting at 109 and 108, respectivley
Julks is sitting at 86.

Let's see who starts in LF next time out with a lefty on the mound

---

To be fair to Julks, since Chas returned to action on May 8 these are the slash lines

Chas - .200/.273/.386, 3 HR, 5 BB, 21 K (77 PA)
Julks - .250/.292/.405, 3 HR, 5 BB, 25 K (89 PA)

---

In June:

Chas - 7 games, .292/.393/.458 1 HR, 2 BB, 7 K (28 PA)
Julks - 10 games, .235/.278/.441, 2 HR, 2 BB, 11 K (36 PA)

---

These samples are so small and you're looking at results only. I don't think this is how the team should be judging the players if they're looking to keep one for the next 5-6 years and trade the other.

---

I get what you're saying, and I agree. I'm not making any arguments for one player over the other, at this point, and I'm not really doing this with regards on who to trade or keep.

Although, baseball is still kind of results oriented, isn't it? And even doing small samples is a way to look at trends, and just see what's happening. For example, sometimes it feels like one player is getting shafted on playing time, but it's really not all that drastic. Maybe it could swing +/- 1 game for Julks or Chas.

redline248 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

According to Fangraphs, Yainer is up to 102 wRC+
Jake and Chas are sitting at 109 and 108, respectivley
Julks is sitting at 86.

Let's see who starts in LF next time out with a lefty on the mound

---

To be fair to Julks, since Chas returned to action on May 8 these are the slash lines

Chas - .200/.273/.386, 3 HR, 5 BB, 21 K (77 PA)
Julks - .250/.292/.405, 3 HR, 5 BB, 25 K (89 PA)

---

In June:

Chas - 7 games, .292/.393/.458 1 HR, 2 BB, 7 K (28 PA)
Julks - 10 games, .235/.278/.441, 2 HR, 2 BB, 11 K (36 PA)

---

These samples are so small and you're looking at results only. I don't think this is how the team should be judging the players if they're looking to keep one for the next 5-6 years and trade the other.

---

I get what you're saying, and I agree. I'm not making any arguments for one player over the other, at this point, and I'm not really doing this with regards on who to trade or keep.

Although, baseball is still kind of results oriented, isn't it? And even doing small samples is a way to look at trends, and just see what's happening. For example, sometimes it feels like one player is getting shafted on playing time, but it's really not all that drastic. Maybe it could swing +/- 1 game for Julks or Chas.

---

If player one plays a week where he goes 12/35 with 5 infield hits and a misplayed double for an OPS around .800 while the other goes 7/30 but is blistering the ball at people but only has an OPS of .675.

Who are you taking the rest of the season?

The smaller the sample size the less reliable it is. I bet I can find a week where Maldy has outplayed Yordan. It's baseball. Wild variation happens.

Harry Dunne said:

---

tjack16 said:

---

Marvin said:

---

Of the guys not injured (thinking Altuve, Brantley, LMJ, Garcia, Urquidy), I find myself most disappointed in McCormick and Tucker. I expected both to take the next step in their careers, and so far they have held serve at best. Lots of time left, though. I look forward to them getting hot and creating some protection for Alvarez.

And, yes, I did not mention Abreu. He's sort of in a class of his own, but showing signs of approaching some version of his prior self.

---

I think McCormick has a ceiling that we've pretty much already seen. .250 type of hitter with about 20 HR and 70ish RBI would be his best IMO.

Tucker will still end up with about 30 HR this year but I have to agree this year has been a disappointment with him so far. I and many others assumed the shift ban would help him ALOT but it hasn't seemed to make a difference in his production. His average and OPS are still relatively the same or lower than previous years

---

First of all he's already on pace for that as a part-time guy getting totally mismanaged, so his best is probably a bit better than that.

Secondly, how many .800 OPS CF that play good defense do you know of? There are maybe 5 guys a year in baseball that you can say that about. Certainly no more than 10.

Because you're making him sound like some sort of Tony Kemp, just wanted to clarify that if he played full-time he'd be a no-doubt top 10 MLB CF and his ceiling is top 5.

---

He's never been an .800 OPS player. But yes I agree he's very good. I was just saying I don't think he's going to get that much better. What we have gotten the last two years is probably his prime, which is still pretty good and I'd take that gladly for the next few years.

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

According to Fangraphs, Yainer is up to 102 wRC+
Jake and Chas are sitting at 109 and 108, respectivley
Julks is sitting at 86.

Let's see who starts in LF next time out with a lefty on the mound

---

To be fair to Julks, since Chas returned to action on May 8 these are the slash lines

Chas - .200/.273/.386, 3 HR, 5 BB, 21 K (77 PA)
Julks - .250/.292/.405, 3 HR, 5 BB, 25 K (89 PA)

---

In June:

Chas - 7 games, .292/.393/.458 1 HR, 2 BB, 7 K (28 PA)
Julks - 10 games, .235/.278/.441, 2 HR, 2 BB, 11 K (36 PA)

---

These samples are so small and you're looking at results only. I don't think this is how the team should be judging the players if they're looking to keep one for the next 5-6 years and trade the other.

---

I get what you're saying, and I agree. I'm not making any arguments for one player over the other, at this point, and I'm not really doing this with regards on who to trade or keep.

Although, baseball is still kind of results oriented, isn't it? And even doing small samples is a way to look at trends, and just see what's happening. For example, sometimes it feels like one player is getting shafted on playing time, but it's really not all that drastic. Maybe it could swing +/- 1 game for Julks or Chas.

---

If player one plays a week where he goes 12/35 with 5 infield hits and a misplayed double for an OPS around .800 while the other goes 7/30 but is blistering the ball at people but only has an OPS of .675.

Who are you taking the rest of the season?

The smaller the sample size the less reliable it is. I bet I can find a week where Maldy has outplayed Yordan. It's baseball. Wild variation happens.

---

But even looking at contact isn't enough, imo. Did some of the infield singles come with a runner on 2nd or 3rd and moved him over or got an RBI by slapping through the shift? Or with 2 strikes when the team needs a runner? Situational ball also matters. At least to me.

Again, I agree a window of stats doesn't tell the whole story. But, unfortunately, I don't have the stuff that does tell the whole story and it's not my job anyway. We're just talking and having a good time.

I'll add this. Julks has been about the same average to below average player consistently, this season. Chas is having some wild swings in production.

Harry Dunne said:

---

His career OPS is .750

You don't think he'd OPS .800 with regular playing time instead of the idiotic sporadic play he currently gets?

---

I was just simply going off his baseball reference 162 game averages for season which is the stat line on the very bottom or the graphic

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

Yeah, give me a few. I'm using baseball reference. If you go to game logs, you can click the game number for where you want to start and end and it calculates it over the range.

---

Full Season & Since May 1
Try fangraphs customer leaderboard. You can input the 3 players you want a start and end dates.

---

Harry Dunne said:

---

Fine. Let's assume that he is what he is.

Like I said, only 6 qualified CF in baseball better than that last season. Two of the were Judge and Springer, who are really just corner guys pretending to be CF at this point.

---

Okay. I'm not sure where I said in any of my posts that he wasn't good or didn't want to keep him?

I was trying to be nice by giving him a range

The fact jake started so slow and Chad started pretty hot before his back issues taints those sample a bit. But the fact jake has moved to the top despite his start I believe explains why he's seeing the PT he is.

The issue to be discussed is Julks getting more time than Chaz, no excuse there besides "Dusty"

Farmer1906 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

redline248 said:

---

Yeah, give me a few. I'm using baseball reference. If you go to game logs, you can click the game number for where you want to start and end and it calculates it over the range.

---

Full Season & Since May 1
Try fangraphs customer leaderboard. You can input the 3 players you want a start and end dates.

---

---

June:

Yes, very small sample

Lonestar_Ag09 said:

---

The fact jake started so slow and Chad started pretty hot before his back issues taints those sample a bit. But the fact jake has moved to the top despite his start I believe explains why he's seeing the PT he is.

The issue to be discussed is Julks getting more time than Chaz, no excuse there besides "Dusty"

---

I think we can all agree on that last part.

Harry Dunne said:

---

tjack16 said:

---

Harry Dunne said:

---

Fine. Let's assume that he is what he is.

Like I said, only 6 qualified CF in baseball better than that last season. Two of the were Judge and Springer, who are really just corner guys pretending to be CF at this point.

---

Okay. I'm not sure where I said in any of my posts that he wasn't good or didn't want to keep him?

---

When you say "we've seen a guy's ceiling", the implication is that he's nothing special.

I just think most people don't realize how rare it is to have a CF that can play defense and hit (even .750 OPS). There are very few of them.

Hot take: Play Chas 150 games a year and he's ranked higher among CF than Pena is among SS.

---

I had to disagree with the first sentence. I think we have seen plenty of guys ceiling, I don't think Bregman will ever be better than he was in 2019 and I would say last year Aaron Judge I don't see how he gets much better than that. To me that is Bregman and Judge's "ceiling".

Just because somebody has a ceiling doesn't mean they're not special, I just think that a full season of his 2022 production (about .250 AVG, .750 OPS and 20ish home runs) is probably the type of season we can expect from Chas when he's at his best. And that's a very good season IMO. I'd love for him to be our full time CF.

But I think we are going to have to just agree to disagree on the saying of a guy has a ceiling

Just seems like without Brantley, our everyday outfield should be Chaz, Jake, Tucker with Yordan DH and Julks giving days off as needed.

Personally I would do the following if Maldy was "everyday" catcher (don't want to argue batting order):
Yordan DH
Maldy 2
Abreu 3
Altuve 4
Bregman 5
Peña 6
McCormick 7
Meyers 8
Tucker 9

Julks plays 3 times per week spelling each outfielder (all 3 starts at LF with Chaz sliding around for Meyers/Tucker days off)
Diaz catches 2 times per week, 1st base 1 day/wk, DH 1 day/wk
Dubon plays 3 days per week for Altuve, Peña, Bregman.
Salazar on bench in case of emergency when Diaz is covering 1st/DH

I would prefer Dubon to actually spell all 3 outfielders as well giving him 6 starts per week, but giving Julks those 3 starts is not a hill I would die on.

Since Tucker wants to be a free agent in a few years, I wonder what it would take to move him in a trade, if he's even a potential option at this point.

Harry Dunne said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Harry Dunne said:

---

Fine. Let's assume that he is what he is.

Like I said, only 6 qualified CF in baseball better than .750 last season. Two of them were Judge and Springer, who are really just corner guys playing bad CF at this point.

Newsflash: Chas is elite at his position. Dusty is tricking you to believe otherwise.

---

Don't swing too far in the other direction.

Chas is probably 10-15% better than league average offensively. He plays a key position well (not great). Combine those two and he's probably top 15 at his position and top 80-100ish position player.

---

Disagree.

Name 15 better full-time CF and post their stats.

---

Firstly Chas isn't a full time CFer.

I said he's top 15 so if I named 15 better then I'd be proving myself wrong.

Take the 10 last from the offseason from MLBN (Chas at 10). Then throw in guys like Carroll, Siri, Meyers, Greene, Belli, Taveras, and maybe some I am missing and arguments could be made back and forth. I think he's safely 10-20 and probably right around 15.

cc10106 said:

---

Since Tucker wants to be a free agent in a few years, I wonder what it would take to move him in a trade, if he's even a potential option at this point.

---

There are levels to this game. You can't trade a guy like TED unless you're the Rays and constantly playing the low budget game and not ever going all in.