Beau Holder said:

---

Was just having this convo with a friend: If you're already trying to conserve Brown/France innings anyway, will there be any thought given to giving Arrighetti a September look? Is he "ready enough" to find out what you may have for next year while serving the dual purpose of protecting your rookies' arms?

---

Maybe you give him a call up, idk.

As far as "for next year..." we still will have JV, Framber, Brown, Urquidy and Javier. Possibly LMJ (big if, I guess). I suppose you could decide who you like better between France and Spencer, but there doesn't appear to be a need to fit him into 2024.

07ag said:

---

EastCoastAgNc said:

---

FYI, weather looks real bad tomorrow in Baltimore, so very likely tomorrow is a rainout. Wonder when they would make that one up...

Edit, both teams have some shared off days:
- 17th of August (astros coming off a series in Miami, playing at home against the Mariners the next day)
- 31st of August (astros coming off a series in Boston, going home to face the yankees the next day)

---

baltimore on tour of west coast before and after the 17th,, doubt they have night game in san diego, fly cross country for a single game on 17th, then back to oakland for the 18th

---

yea, fair point, i didn't realize where they were at the time.

Thanks, that's what I figured. Can't hurt if limiting Brown and France innings is the immediate need, was just my thinking. Two birds one stone and all.

redline248 said:

---

Beau Holder said:

---

Was just having this convo with a friend: If you're already trying to conserve Brown/France innings anyway, will there be any thought given to giving Arrighetti a September look? Is he "ready enough" to find out what you may have for next year while serving the dual purpose of protecting your rookies' arms?

---

Maybe you give him a call up, idk.

As far as "for next year..." we still will have JV, Framber, Brown, Urquidy and Javier. Possibly LMJ (big if, I guess). I suppose you could decide who you like better between France and Spencer, but there doesn't appear to be a need to fit him into 2024.

---

No disagreement, wouldn't call it a need, but I think this year proves the utility of having injury contingencies as well as trade chips. What if he's ready and Urquidy becomes expendable for a bat? Or one of the five you mentioned gets nicked up or flat sucks? Just ruminating.

Beau Holder said:

---

Was just having this convo with a friend: If you're already trying to conserve Brown/France innings anyway, will there be any thought given to giving Arrighetti a September look? Is he "ready enough" to find out what you may have for next year while serving the dual purpose of protecting your rookies' arms?

---

The thing is, you wouldn't want to send down either guy. Send the wrong message even if it has the best intentions.

So who do you send down instead?

When France relieved Urquidy, the comment was made that he was most able since he came up through the tandem system in our minors. But our other young arms did as well.

What I am wondering is why Javier and Brown do not tandem. They could go 3-4 innings each and you would save their innings as well as conserve bullpen.

What if you went:
Framber
JV
Javier/Brown
Urquidy
France/Arrighetti?

I was talking about in September when rosters expand.

Get to late September with load managed starters and a fresh bullpen.

Gotcha.

When you said take innings off their arms, I thought you meant now in the heat of August. Which would make more sense to me in that situation instead of waiting another month.

Jack Flaherty starts tonight for Baltimore. My St Louis buddy says he's had control issues all season and his walk numbers support that as he's on pace for the most walks in his career.

Anybody been to the Budweiser Brew House on Saturday at Minute Maid for a friend's 50th? Anyone been there? What's it like?

If they think he's ready yeah call him up but if he's not then it's a no.

We don't need to be sacrificing wins in an effort to save arms. So IMO ready enough isn't gonna hack it.

Depends on the ump.

texasaggie2015 said:

---

Source texted me back and said it's just GM speak and there's still a very long way to go

---

I'm not doubting y'all. But my take on it would be more in the vein of…before we were extremely wide aprt and unwilling to budge. We're now further along through the year, Dana and crane have seen some light and while still far away in talks now willing to make a real run at it.

Where we stand today really doesn't matter, what matters is being willing to open the purse and go all in.

Think about it, it's been said Crane doesn't do more than 6-7 yrs. It you look at it as buying out arb and then a 6-7 yr extension it still works in theory with that thought process. Plus he would only be 35ish at the end

Nvm that's a football line

Ag_07 said:

---

If they think he's ready yeah call him up but if he's not then it's a no.

---

Seems obvious

linkdude said:

---

IMO Crane just looks like a fool if he will give 36 yrs old Abreu three years but not open the pocketbook for Tuck...

---

Bingo.
Plus what he was willing to give JV last off season or what he would now be willing to give Altuve so he retires an Astro

I don't think the problem is will Tuck be worth it. Because honestly if you're gonna do it Tuck is the perfect guy to do it with.

I think the issue is more of how will a contract that large hamper the team's ability to insert other pieces over the length of that contract.

Ag_07 said:

---

I don't think the problem is will Tuck be worth it. Because honestly if you're gonna do it Tuck is the perfect guy to do it with.

I think the issue is more of how will a contract that large hamper the team's ability to insert other pieces over the length of that contract.

---

That also depends on how much Crane cares about the luxury threshold

I'd assume. If you sign that contract but you're able to win 2 or more rings between 2023-2030 ish the tax issues are null and void.

That's 4+ World Series in a 15yr span with numerous extra appearances

Ag_07 said:

---

I don't think the problem is will Tuck be worth it. Because honestly if you're gonna do it Tuck is the perfect guy to do it with.

I think the issue is more of how will a contract that large hamper the team's ability to insert other pieces over the length of that contract.

---

Regardless of whether you sign Tucker or not, you're going to need to produce/graduate some prospects at league min. to keep this thing going anyway. If you don't sign Tuck then it's a question of how cheap we are going to run the operation to his profit. If that's what Crane cares about, then that's his choice I guess.

Ag_07 said:

---

I don't think the problem is will Tuck be worth it. Because honestly if you're gonna do it Tuck is the perfect guy to do it with.

I think the issue is more of how will a contract that large hamper the team's ability to insert other pieces over the length of that contract.

---

Keep winning the world series and money won't be an issue. But seriously, I also think Tuck probably took his arbitration loss pretty personally and wants to test the market to prove to the Astros what he is really worth. If the Astros are willing to come in with a competitive offer in that market, he probably would be willing to stay. But unless they can sooth the feathers they ruffled in arbitration, I doubt he signs a long term deal.

I think the Astros also need to point out how the last few guys who left the stros for bigger money have turned out. Springer and Correa have not done nearly as well with their new teams as they did while surrounded by other good bats with the astros, and both are finding it is a different world trying to be "the guy" on their middle of the pack (or worse) teams instead of one of the key pieces on a perennial contender. Verlander didn't even last a full season with the Mets. I can't really think of anybody who has really flourished elsewhere after leaving the stros, beyond maybe Cole, but he was just a short term hired gun here anyway.

If they don't sign Tucker that doesn't mean they're folding it up and running as cheaply as possible.

Who's to say they don't sign another FA or two that's cheaper? Or trade for a quality OFer? it's hard to imagine what this team will look like 5, 8, 10 years from now.

FWIW I'm not arguing against signing Tucker. I'm just saying if they don't it's not the end of the window all of a sudden.

I swear we had this exact convo when they let Springer walk.