Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/26/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Really - who cares whether it’s a firing or a non-renewal. Effectively it’s the same thing in this case.
  2. 2 points
    Look at my post history, I'm not a negative guy. I give the benefit of the doubt. I don't think Angelos is cheap, I do think he's a bad owner but I don't hate him as some do. i can acknowledge the Orioles pitching development is not the best but can recognize Wade Miley's luck driven ERA is not worth getting upset about. I generally just don't post negative stuff, sports are a fun escape, if it's not fun I don't watch. I definitely don't get upset...with all that said. I have no hope for this team. They had a key opportunity to jump-start a rebuild of their farm system and they've totally botched it. No Mesa(s), No Gaston which in turn makes the Gausman trade look horrible. You could squint, look at the international slot money and convince yourself if they signed the Mesa(s), Gaston, and maybe Bonilla it would be worth it. They didn't\haven't but the cherry on top is sending 750k to the Phillies for Zoellner. Why? Gausman's context neutral\peripherals, age, and control should have fetched someone(s) of significance from a stacked farm system. The Machado trade was fine considering he was a pending free agent. Though how they let it get to that point is beyond me. The Schoop trade looks fine but I don't think Ortiz is a future SP Britton trade is okay. How do the Orioles compete moving forward? The Blue Jays farm system is stacked. The Rays have a limited payroll but have an extremely cheap and talented roster. The Yankees and Red Sox not only can outspend everyone but they have over the last 5-7 years placed a greater emphasis on analytics and player development. The Orioles...have a middling farm system even after the fire sale. While I do think it may be better than it is given credit for. It's not even close to the Blue Jays, Rays, or Yankees. Player development is questionable at best. Their analytics department seems antiquated from the outside looking in. Regardless of who the owner is, I'm a bit concerned about payroll moving forward. Quite frankly attendance was pretty garbage when they were contending, now it just looks sad. Closing in on the end of the WS and no GM or manager -- aside from that why did they even let Duquette trade anyone that wasn't a pending free agent if their intentions were to fire him. I've watched them botch the handling of a generational\HOF talent, put a historically bad team on the field, they are not smarter, better at developing talent, nor can they outspend their competition.... I have no hope for this team...I think this team will be bad for a very long time...I do hope I'm wrong. Oh...and Chris Davis...enough said.
  3. 2 points
    Also, finally someone other than me timed him home to first. https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-chat-10-25-18/ 2:52 AngelusNovus: Ryan McKenna a 45? 2:52 Eric A Longenhagen: Yes, with some helium. legit 8 runner
  4. 2 points
  5. 2 points
    I’m torn If you swap Nick for Trumbo in 2016, we don’t make the playoffs. We needed all of those Trumbo homers. He was barely “worth” the contract and that was with him turning into iron man in Atlanta. I’d look at it like this, 2015- We’re a better team than what we trotted out in RF. Plus we’d have Davies. 2016- We needed all those Trumbo homers. Maybe we don’t sign Gallardo because we have Davies. 2017- Nick was better than Trumbo. 2018- We won like 12 games, does it really matter???? You can make the argument that we also traded away Davies, Brault, and Tarpley to fill RF. If we have Davies then we don’t sign Gallardo. We get the pick we lost for Gallardo. Not torn. We should’ve kept Nick and Cruz. Instead we paid O’day, Gallardo, Trumbo, Davis, Cobb, and Cashner.
  6. 2 points
    Here is some video of McKenna absolutely raking. He's 4th in the AFL in OPS with a 1.113 currently and has 4 doubles and 3 triples in just 9 games.
  7. 2 points
    I just voted that we would not resign Nick. Feels good to be right.
  8. 2 points
    NYY - International Scouts = 33 BOS - International Scouts = 28 TOR - International Scouts = 15 BAL - International Scouts = 3 (Apparently, per jsbearr, does not include associate scouts (bird dogs?) (Does not include Directors/Assistant Directors)
  9. 2 points
    A competent owner of an MLB franchise (and John and Lou Angelos appear to be acting as the owners, though I have my suspicions that their father somehow is continuing to contribute to screwing things up) should understood the importance of not having the position of the organization's top baseball person vacant for a significant amount of time. And a competent owner who intends to change the direction of a team should understand the only-slightly-more-subtle disadvantages of having that spot occupied by a lame duck who is not going to be around for the rebuild, or by promoting a holdover employee to serve in that position on an interim basis. One of the reasons for avoiding a vacancy, or keeping it as brief as possible, wasn't obvious to me. Much of the baseball calendar is predictable: trade deadlines, amateur draft, signing period for international free agents, winter meetings. But some things pop up independent of that calendar. A trade opportunity, or a shot at a significant international signing, might come up unexpectedly, and the time to act may be short. You really want to have the leader of your front office, your future decision-maker, in place in case something like that comes up. A competent owner would have seen by the end of 2017 that this team was going to have to undergo a rebuild of some sort. (I hope we're in agreement that the term "competent owner" does not include Peter Angelos.) I'm not clear when John and Lou Angelos acquired the power to make decisions on the direction of the Orioles, but some time no later than, say, June of this year, they should have been planning for the team's future, meaning a rebuild of some kind. At that point the Angeloses had a few options: They could have decided to stick with Duquette for a few years, either by renewing his contract or by promoting him and bringing in a new GM to serve under him, and staying out of his or their way. They could have fired Duquette and replaced him in mid-season, before the heavy trading of their few valuable assets began. Or they could have decided not to renew Duquette and started identifying potential replacements, so that the process could be concluded and a new leadership team in place promptly after the season ended. (Slight digression: if the Angeloses want to keep control of the team after their father's death, in looking toward gaining approval for a transfer they would be wise to have been consulting, and following suggestions by, Mighty Manfred and other MLB officers. Maybe they've done that.) It looks like the Angeloses did none of these things. Instead, they appear to have deferred the decision on Duquette almost to the expiration of his contractle and to be moving slowly as well as belatedly in bringing in new leadership. I don't know that to be the case, but that's the way it looks. I find that disappointing, to put it mildly, for four reasons. First, it's just sound management to avoid, or minimize the duration of, a vacancy in leadership and uncertainty about future leadership. We'll never know whether the Orioles might have signed one or more of the Three Amigos if they had a President and/or GM in place, but it sure wouldn't have hurt to have had someone who could tell them and their people, "I'm going to be running this team for the next few years. I'm going to build a winner, and here's how I see _______ fitting in." Second, there's an awful lot of of work for a person coming from outside the organization. Front office, scouting, playing and coaching/instructing personnel to evaluate and make hiring/firing/promotion/salary decisions on. Planning for the 40-man roster and whom to non-tender. Organizational elements to study and retain, alter or discard. Budgets to prepare. An analytics group to augment, orient and expand. I just assume that all those decisions will be made better, and improvement will come sooner, if there's more time to make them. Third, according to everything I've read, one of Peter Angelos's many shortcomings was a chronic inability to make prompt decisions. When his sons seem to display the same inability, as well as to continue Peter's frustrating unwillingness to talk to the media or directly to the team's fans about what is going on, that fuels my fears that the new bosses may turn out to be the same as the old boss in important and destructive ways. (A related but separate point. One of the Orioles' problems in recent years has been the lack of clarity, to other teams with which they might make deals and to their own disillusioned fans, as to who was in charge -- Peter? Duquette? Brady? Brady and Buck? Peter and John? Brady and Peter? That situation has changed, but it remains as murky as ever. Part of the problem is the consistent suggestion that John and Lou are in control. How does that work if they disagree? That division of authority won't fly under the MLB Constitution and practices, and MLB reportedly has told the Angeloses to vest final authority in a single person.) Fourth, and I hadn't realized this until this week, I retain enough optimism that I look to the signing of a President (and, to a lesser extent, a GM) for reassurance that the Angeloses are honest and credible when they say the new hire(s) will have full authority for the rebuild, without their meddling, and that the Orioles are going to invest significantly more resources in international free agents, scouting and analytics. I believe the Angeloses are telling candidates that, but I have concerns, to put it mildly, that those candidates will take their word for it. Given the Orioles' history, and John and Lou's lack of a track record of spending on those things or deferring to baseball experts (other than complicity in and silence about their father's quarter-century of meddling), why should they? I'm hoping, maybe naively, for the hiring of a President and/or GM with a sterling reputation, who should have other current or near-term options to run an MLB team, as a sign that the Angeloses have convinced at least one or two discerning people that they intend to, and are likely to, live up to the promises of non-interference and investment in international talent, scouting and analytics. On the other hand, the slow progress that's being made makes me concerned that some very strong candidates aren't buying those promises, or that they're being made half-heartedly. Not a good sign. I hope I'm wrong about almost all of this. Maybe there will be a great hire(s) announced tomorrow (a World Series travel day), and he or she will start re-making the Orioles right away. And maybe Chris Davis will make a big comeback in 2019.
  10. 1 point
    ..and it would be even better if his mom sells sea shells by the sea shore ; )
  11. 1 point
    To the surprise of nobody, the O’s got no Gold Glove nominations in 2018. I believe it’s the first time since Rawlings started announcing three nominees per position that we failed to have at least one. Nick Markakis was a nominee in RF in the NL.
  12. 1 point
    I think he has been told to get serious about his conditioning by two other organizations for years.
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    That offseason was the worst in Orioles history. The failure to add absolutely anything to a division, ALDS winning team is the biggest fail in Orioles management history, imho. I was in favor of retaining Nick and Nelson Cruz even at four years for both. But the larger problem for me was not improving the team at all that winter when our window was open widest. I would love to have seen Nick and Adam finish their careers as Orioles...we are losing anyway, so it would at least be good as a fan to have them as Orioles.
  15. 1 point
    Don't worry, the Orioles are the most likely team to buck the trend!
  16. 1 point
    o I like these often-maligned uniforms. I'm not sure that they are necessarily my favorite, but I like 'em. o
  17. 1 point
    >implying that Davis and Trumbo never get picked on
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
    I think there is a huge difference between 17 and 19.
  20. 1 point
    Probably not many, but two were 17 and the Cuban OF’er is 18, so younger that Álvarez or Urrutia.
  21. 1 point
    RF and OBP have been a joke for the Orioles since he left. They had no replacement plan and he was a fan favorite. Typical.
  22. 1 point
    This is an exchange I’ve been thinking about for years, and decided I would dredge up once Nick Markakis completed his contract with the Braves. Nick ended up being valued at 6.7 rWAR, 5.6 fWAR in his four years with the Braves. By Fangraphs’ methodology, he was worth $46.1 mm, compared to the $44 mm he was paid. I was not in favor of giving Nick a four-year deal, but in hindsight, I wish we’d matched the Braves’ offer. Yes, he did play 155 games a year — in fact, he played 156, 158, 160 and 162. Would I have preferred that to the merry-go-round we witnessed in RF the last four years? You’re damned right I would!
  23. 1 point
    One thing to remember, without saying how useful this approach is, the Orioles do a whole lot of scouting with associate scouts. My understanding is their use of associate scouts is a bit heavier than other teams. I would assume this will change, but generally makes sense if your international program is more about finding failures in other organizations than actually going out and working relationships. For instance, I am aware of four scouts who are not listed here who are associate scouts who get paid a couple grand a month to funnel players towards guys like Koo and others. During MacPhail's time, people I know in the DR and Venezuela said that the Orioles appeared to often lack representation at any local event. Now, they have one or two guys at everything. They simply never make big plays on the players.
  24. 1 point
    TBF - men were MEN back in the day and this was the norm, IMO! 😇 (Is that "politically" incorrect? If so I own it and apologize, but I was kidding).
  25. 1 point
    I hate the Orioles right now. Loved them before, probably will love them in the future but right now I'm just full of disgust, hate and contempt towards them.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00

Rumors and News