The Astros Are In Trouble

Let’s take a look at what we’re dealing with, here. This is a simple plot of AL West division playoff odds over time, beginning with the start of the season, through, I don’t know, right now? About an hour ago, I guess.

odds

The calendar on my wall tells me it’s still April, and the much smaller calendar on my computer agrees, so this early you don’t expect many big huge shifts in playoff probabilities. Long ways to go, and all that. Looking at the image above, you see teams kind of holding steady. The Rangers are close to where they started. The Angels are down a little bit. The A’s are up a little bit. The Mariners are up even more. All of those teams are bunched together — they’re separated by just 1.5 games. But then you have the Astros. Based on our own math, the Astros opened as overwhelming division favorites. They’ve already coughed that up, and then some. Odds are based on projections, and projections are imperfect. I get that. So here’s a fact: At 6-15, the Astros presently have the worst record in the American League. It doesn’t mean they’re a bad team, but it does mean they’re a team in real trouble.

This table will give you greater context. Who’s had the most meaningful starts, in either direction? These are changes in playoff odds so far, in terms of percentage points, broken up by league. So we’re back to factoring in projections again, but if anything, the projections like the Astros. Anyway:

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.
Changes In Playoff Odds So Far
AL Team Change in Odds NL Team Change in Odds
White Sox 30% Nationals 12%
Royals 14% Mets 7%
Orioles 14% Pirates 4%
Mariners 11% Cubs 3%
Athletics 9% Rockies 0%
Rays 4% Cardinals 0%
Red Sox 2% Phillies 0%
Rangers -4% Braves 0%
Blue Jays -6% Brewers -1%
Tigers -6% Diamondbacks -1%
Angels -6% Reds -1%
Indians -7% Dodgers -2%
Twins -8% Padres -2%
Yankees -9% Marlins -8%
Astros -37% Giants -11%

Owen just wrote about the White Sox. The White Sox have had the biggest increase, by far. By record, they’re atop the AL. The Astros are the complete opposite of the White Sox. Look at this — since the start of the year, the Astros’ odds are down 37 points. No one else is down more than 11 points. The Astros’ odds are still decent, all things considered, but the start has been a train wreck, with little to celebrate. Last year was supposed to be when the Astros arrived. Their play makes it seem like they’ve already left.

Just last season, the Astros were a surprise, before late struggles threatened to keep them out of the playoffs. Because they still nearly reached the ALCS, the Astros came in this time as the favorite, but these playoff-threatening struggles have started early. I’ve seen a few people openly wonder if the Astros misread their standing. If they misidentified this as their window, leading to trades for guys like Carlos Gomez and Ken Giles. I don’t think that’s valid; though you can question the details of the moves, the Astros are definitely ready to be good. They just…aren’t…good…right now. It happens, but they didn’t push the Royals to the brink by accident.

There are all kinds of things to be aware of. Here’s one: 6-15 looks bad, but fans could probably tolerate 9-12. That’s still a lousy record, but it’s not worst-in-the-league lousy, and that’s the Astros’ current record by BaseRuns. They’ve under-performed in general, and they’ve under-performed with their timing. Take a look at that page and focus on the Astros’ line. So far, they’ve deserved their runs allowed. But offensively, they’re short about 13 expected runs. This is easy to explain. With the bases empty, the Astros have had the fourth-best offense in baseball. With runners in scoring position, the Astros have had the fourth-worst offense in baseball. You know how this stuff works. Over time, those splits tend to meet in the middle.

So the Astros are going to score more, and they’re going to do that without even really improving. I mean, they might improve, but they don’t have to. The Astros as a team have a .321 wOBA. They’re projected out for a .324 wOBA. Basically equal. They are what they should be, with individual over-achievers balanced out by individual under-achievers. The league is figuring out Tyler White, but Jose Altuve is on another level, and A.J. Reed is on the way. Much of that picture looks acceptable.

The big concern is Gomez. The Astros paid a high price to get him, because up to that point in his career, Gomez had been worth a high price of acquisition. Gomez isn’t a make-or-break player by himself, but his slow start is troubling, because it follows up a slow finish, after arriving from Milwaukee. He’s not hitting the ball as hard as he used to, and, plain and simple, you can’t ignore that a trade to the Mets was scuttled by injury concerns. At the time those were interpreted as an indication of the Mets being cheap, but the Mets got worried, and since then, Gomez hasn’t performed. As an Astro, he’s been worth 0.7 WAR, and that’s okay, but it isn’t good. I don’t know if anything is actually the matter, but I haven’t been reassured early on.

So as position players go, Gomez is on my watch list. Yet on the team level, it’s really been pitching that’s let the Astros down. Pitching and maybe some defense, but the arms need to be a lot better. And here, there are more questions. The Astros might well have a pitching problem. They tried to prepare for that in the offseason by searching for a co-ace, but they never got one, and the staff has had a rough month.

Here’s some consolation! The Astros rank 11th in adjusted xFIP. That beats the hell out of ranking 30th in adjusted ERA. Too many hits and home runs have been there, and that stuff will slow down. Like, I’m not particularly concerned about Giles — maybe something is up, I don’t know, but he reminds me of last year’s Craig Kimbrel, who was weirdly hittable until he wasn’t. Giles still has his weapons. His weapons are good. Giles should be good. He’ll come around.

But, okay. I mentioned the idea of a co-ace. Dallas Keuchel was supposed to be the existing ace, but he hasn’t been quite himself. At a glance, he’s the same pitcher, but compared to last April, his velocity is down more than a tick. Historically, velocity drops like Keuchel’s have led to a double-digit increase in ERA-. I don’t know if it’s that Keuchel is hurt, but he at least isn’t mechanically sound, and to support that you can look at either the velocity or the location. On the left, Keuchel’s pitches from 2015. On the right, 2016.

keuchel-pitches

Keuchel has been up more than he was in the past, and too many sinkers have leaked over the plate. The best version of Dallas Keuchel is extremely precise, which he needs to be, given that he seldom threatens 90 miles per hour. If he stays like this, Keuchel can be effective, but he isn’t a No. 1. Something is off.

And that makes the rest of the picture look worse. Collin McHugh is probably a No. 3, but he’s also down a tick, which changes his hittability. Lance McCullers is outstanding, but he won’t be available for at least a few more weeks, as he tries to get over worrisome shoulder discomfort. Mike Fiers has always thrown strikes, but no one is surprised when one or two of them get blasted over the wall. And Doug Fister hasn’t shown any sort of velocity rebound, after promising spring reports. I was ready to buy into Fister a month ago, but now he has as many walks as strikeouts. According to Brooks Baseball, he’s where he was last April. Which is down a few miles from the season before. Fister hasn’t been quite right either, and though he could still find himself, this gamble might not pay off.

The Astros are in trouble because of their record, and they’re in trouble because of some of their indicators. The offense should turn out fine, but you wonder about Gomez. And there are so many questions about the rotation, questions which might not be easily resolved. It would be wonderful if Keuchel had another strong start, and if McCullers shows up healthy. Then the picture looks plenty more clear. But, last year’s Astros never went 6-15 over a 21-game stretch. And if they want to get back to 86 wins, which just barely got them into last year’s playoffs, they’ll need to play out at a 92-win pace. It’s nothing they can’t do. It’s just not so likely they’ll do it. Better to try to get to 86 wins at an 86-win pace, but that ship has sailed.





Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.

46 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Antonio BananasMember since 2026
10 years ago

Astros had a 10 game win streak last year and were a game under .500 from June on. Maybe they just aren’t actually a 90 win team?

JS7
10 years ago

Disastros!

Dick Monfort
10 years ago
Reply to  JS7

Ruh-roh!

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Dick Monfort

ROOBY ROO!

(Would log in with a different name but can’t no mo. Essentially 2-3 trolls = why we can’t have nice things.)

CousinNicky
10 years ago

If we are removing their 10 game win streak, can I remove their 1-8 streak at the beginning of June and say how they were 7 games above .500 from June on. This is confirmation bias BTW.

Pirates HurdlesMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  CousinNicky

Its not really confirmation bias, its just being intellectually lazy. If you take away when team/player X was really good, they weren’t all that good last year.

RonnieDobbs
10 years ago

While you are discrediting last season (and I am right there with you), we can also mention that they did not even win a very poor division – which further inflates that win total. We may as well mention that they were dispatched in round one of the playoffs.

Even last year, I found it comical that they are cited as the model of a re-build. They essentially scraped into the last wildcard spot one time. Hardly an exemplary franchise.

rosen380
10 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

If you reversed the order of every game played [ie game 162 was game 1 and game 160 was game 3, etc], then:

DATE OVER500 REV-OVER500
04/30 +08 -2
05/31 +11 -1
06/30 +12 -4
07/31 +12 +0
08/31 +14 +2
10/04 +10 +10

Those are cumulative wins over .500;

So one had a hot start and leveled off and managed to make the post-season by the hair on their chinny-chin-chin, and the other hung around .500 basically until September and made an incredible run to beat out a couple of teams for the final post-season spot.

IMO, there is an illusion on the former that the team was really good all year because all year they were a whole bunch of games above .500 at any point and that the latter wasn’t because they weren’t.

JS7
10 years ago

Lastros.

SubmarineSailor
10 years ago

I thought the projections for this year were a little generous, mostly because I had doubts about the back end of the rotation (the three F’s) and didn’t know what they were going to get out of 1st base offensively. White has been better than I expected, the starting rotation has not. Gomez has been awful.

I thought going into the year that Texas was the best team in the division and Houston had a good shot at another WC spot.

For having the AL Player of the Week for all three weeks of the season so far, they sure aren’t looking like a playoff team.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago

Fiers, Fister, and FMcHugh?

SoxWatcher
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Fister, Fiers, and F***ifIKnow?

Raidas77
10 years ago
Reply to  SoxWatcher

F’ing Feldman

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Oof. That is not just an F, it’s an F-minus.

JoserMember since 2021
10 years ago

I’m not sure if their pitching has let them down or their defense has. There was only one error recorded against them yesterday but watching the series of mis-cues and wild throws that led to the M’s blowing them out, there could have been a lot more. That game was almost back to the clown-shoes DisAstros Circus we fondly remember.

SubmarineSailor
10 years ago
Reply to  Joser

A little of both, but probably moreso the pitching. Infield has had a couple of really rough games the last week or so. Altuve made 2 errors and Correa had one against the Red Sox that accounted for 2 or 3 unearned runs in a game they lost in extras. White abandoning a rundown (with 2 out) to try and throw out Marte at home last night was absurd.

They’ve also been bit by guys hitting against the shift a lot more frequently than last year, from what I’ve seen. I would guess that will even out a little more going forward. But yeah, they have a lot of room for improvement in a bunch of different areas if they want to make the playoffs

LHPSU
10 years ago

Remember last year when White Sox were pegged as potential contenders while Astros would be lucky to finish out of the cellar?

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

No one really bought the White Sox last year.

WARrior
10 years ago

The good news for Astro fans is the team plays in a weak division. Even with that huge drop in playoff odds, they are favored more than any other team in the division except Seattle. And their current odds are about what the Mariners were projected for at the beginning of the season.

AdvantageSchneiderMember since 2018
10 years ago

The Braves’ playoff odds haven’t changed since the start of the season? Were their odds always zero?

LHPSU
10 years ago

Yes. (Rounded down, at least)

Johnston
10 years ago

Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.

David
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

see also Phillies

Goldsteins_Tool_Fedora
10 years ago

theyll be aight

Ryan DCMember since 2016
10 years ago

2013 Nats all over again

Bread n Mustard
10 years ago

What I don’t understand is how could the Astros trade 5 players for a closer they don’t even use? Giles only has 16 career saves. Teams find closers all the time for a much cheaper price. The Mariners got Steve Sichek, A’s got Ryan Madson, Blue Jays got Drew Storen. All came at a much cheaper price than what the Astros paid for Giles.

ShauncoreMember since 2019
10 years ago

I’m also not convinced that if they were so desperate for a closer they could have just moved Velasquez there and kept all the other guys in the trade.

Do we think the difference between Giles and Velasquez (who would in theory be more effective out of the bullpen) is greater than Oberholtzer, Eshelman, Appel, and Arauz?

Why not keep all them, stick VV in the pen, and call it a day.

playingwithfire
10 years ago

All of them, especially Cishek, look worse coming into the season?

They were not paying for a closer. They were paying for maybe a top 5 reliever in baseball.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago

If they thought they were paying for/getting a top-5 reliever, he needs to be used in all of their “close and late” high leverage situations.

If he’s going to be a dime-a-dozen setup guy, it was ridiculous to give up anything of value for him.

balancedman178
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Has anyone seen a in-depth Giles article on Fangraphs recently? I would love the FG staff to help explain that guy. He was tremendous in Philly. Something is wrong because he’s just not doing the same things he had been doing that made it even close to justifiable for acquiring him at what it cost. I think that no closer would have been worth that ransom, but the ROI right now is horrible and I’d love to get more insight as to what’s going on.

playingwithfire
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

That might be front office/manager disconnect. Or they are working him in as a traditional role and transitioning him. Either way the rough start isn’t helping.

Huron
10 years ago

So, can we now question the projections?

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Huron

Yes. Anytime any team deviates from the projections in any way, we need to complain, and LOUDLY! How dare these projections not be 100.00% correct, 100.00% of the time. Harumph.

Toffer Peak
10 years ago
Reply to  Huron

What were your projections?

RonnieDobbs
10 years ago
Reply to  Huron

Why would anyone take projections seriously in the first place? They are a fun statistical exercise – nothing more. The only thing to question is why anyone gets terribly excited about them in the first place. The predictive models are a work in progress and even if they were perfect(completely ridiculous premise), they would still be wrong as reality takes place.

Questioning the predictions is an equally valuable exercise when compared to analyzing them. I am pretty sure the majority does not recognize this aspect of the exercise. Without questioning the process, it will not improve.

troybrunoMember since 2016
10 years ago

In fairness, the FanGraphs playoffs odds are terrible at taking into account tail risk. To assume that the Astros had a ~70% chance of winning the division on Opening Day was ridiculous. Note that all 6 divisions had one team with a +50% chance of winning… that’s a model that doesn’t understand tail risk / parity / variance.

rosen380
10 years ago
Reply to  troybruno

Or it is just how the numbers worked out. Last year only two teams started out at 50%+ for winning their divisions and one of the two did win.

In 2014 it was four of six and all four of those ultimately won their division.

In 2013 and earlier it was coolstandings.com, which doesn’t seem to be captured as nicely as Fangraphs.com, so, still trying to get some pre-season divisional odds for those years.

troybrunoMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  rosen380

average division win prob of the #1 team on Opening Day was 57.2% in 2015 and they predicted only 2/6 — that’s a large underperformance.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  troybruno

In a one-year sample of six.

BradeMember since 2019
10 years ago

Confused why the Rangers are projected so poorly.

carterMember since 2020
10 years ago
Reply to  Brade

Also while I do not think the Rangers are very good, with Darvish coming back I would think they are at least a top 2 team in the division.

LHPSU
10 years ago
Reply to  carter

Did you see who they have in the rotation behind Darvish and Hamels?

You didn’t, because they don’t have any.

sneakyflute
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

If only they had the vaunted rotation of any other team in the division.

rosen380
10 years ago
Reply to  Brade

http://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=ALL&teamid=13

They were projected to be roughly tied for the worst offensive team in the division and not far from the worst pitching.

carterMember since 2020
10 years ago

What I take from this is that the Cubs are actually UNDER-PERFORMING their baserun expectation.

Goldsteins_Tool_Fedora
10 years ago

One could make an argument about playing the Tigers, Redsox, Royals….. in such a small sample can effect some pitching stats.