March 6, 2001
The Daily Prospectus
Houston, We Have an Offense
Monday morning, I spent about 15 minutes on the the air in College Station, Tex., discussing the Houston Astros. Last year, of course, the Astros were perhaps the most disappointing team in the game, stumbling from a three-year run atop the NL Central to a 72-90 record and a fourth-place finish.
The team wasn't quite that bad; they scored just six fewer runs than they allowed, which should have made them a .500 team. Of course, the performance seemed worse, thanks to a brutal first few months, a terrible record in close games, and a handful of key injuries that contributed to the collapse. It was a painful 72-90.
The move from the Astrodome to Enron Field got a significant amount of the blame, but in reality, the Astros were a good offensive and poor defensive team everywhere. They finished fourth in the league in runs scored on the road, and 12th in runs allowed on the road. Their .271 EqA was good for second in the league. Even had they stayed in the Eighth Wonder of the World, they would have had an off-year; it just would have been shaped differently.
In the offseason, the 'Stros made perhaps the most polarizing trade of the winter, sending Mitch Meluskey, Roger Cedeno and Chris Holt to the Tigers for Brad Ausmus, Doug Brocail and Nelson Cruz. Most analysts, including our staff, saw this as an overreaction to Meluskey's reported problems with defense and attitude, as well as a waste of the team's primary resource, extra quality outfielders. The people who defended the trade leaned heavily on the idea that the gap between Meluskey's defense and that of Ausmus would make up the difference between their production, as well as the notion that Meluskey had to be dealt to appease the team's veterans.
I won't rehash those debates, except to say that even if trading Meluskey for Ausmus doesn't hurt the team, the rest of the deal is a big loss; middle relievers are fungible commodities, while .380-OBP outfielders with speed aren't. But even with that deal, spending a few minutes discussing the Astros made me extremely bullish on the team.
Here's a look at the Astros' projected starting lineup, along with the Wilton forecasts from Baseball Prospectus 2001:
Player AB BA OBP SLG EqA EqR Craig Biggio 422 .287 .383 .431 .273 60 Julio Lugo 476 .307 .368 .477 .277 69 Jeff Bagwell 539 .317 .437 .603 .330 117 Richard Hidalgo 460 .317 .390 .613 .313 87 Moises Alou 317 .344 .421 .599 .324 62 Lance Berkman 407 .312 .409 .545 .309 75 Chris Truby 462 .279 .325 .459 .253 54 Brad Ausmus 442 .285 .368 .394 .255 53
Wilton is far from a perfect tool, but if you add up the projected EqRs there, you get 577, which is a pretty good base to an offense, especially when you consider how many players in that list are projected to play less than a full season. The list doesn't include good bench players like Daryle Ward (projected 54 EqR in 330 AB) and Bill Spiers (40 projected EqR in 346 AB) or the Astros' duo of infield prospects who can hit, Morgan Ensberg and Keith Ginter.
This excellent offense comes at a price. An outfield with Moises Alou and Lance Berkman on the corners is going to give up a lot of extra hits, many for extra bases. The middle-infield defense is a problem as well, with an erratic Julio Lugo and a rehabbing Craig Biggio. Only Jeff Bagwell and Richard Hidalgo are good defenders, so the Astros' pitching staff faces a problem.
That staff is no sure thing, either. Scott Elarton appeared to have a breakout season in 2000, but his translated peripheral numbers were the worst of his career, and he threw a ton of pitches for someone coming off rotator-cuff surgery. Jose Lima was something of a national joke last year, and Shane Reynolds missed four months with a knee injury. The Astros have some good young pitchers, but seem more interested in letting Kent Bottenfield prove beyond a doubt that he's not very good, rather than putting Tony McKnight in the rotation. Save Octavio Dotel, none of the projected Astros starters have a great strikeout rate, so they will all be subject to the effects of Enron Field and the so-so defense.
If you combine the rotation full of questions with a defense full of, well, pretty good hitters, you have a team that is going to allow more runs than average, and that's before the park inflates that total.
Making up for this is that the Astros' pen will be better in 2000. Doug Brocail and Nelson Cruz cost too much to acquire, but they should provide 140 innings of above-average relief; Billy Wagner should be effective again, if not his 1999 self, and Mike Jackson is a good gamble who has always been effective when healthy.
None of that may matter, because the team in baseball with the best shot at 1,000 runs this year is the Astros, and that could be enough to cover any amount of pitching problems. Look for the Astros to bounce back to 88-92 wins and challenge the Cardinals for the NL Central title.
Joe Sheehan is an author of Baseball Prospectus. Contact him by clicking here.