Jump to content

FanSince88

Limited Posting Member
  • Content Count

    1,236
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

114 High-A

About FanSince88

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The fact that he has such a minus glove is way more disappointing than his sub-.500 OPS. I tip my cap to the A's for foreseeing this and leaving him unprotected in the Rule 5. It might not be too early to say that we could have had better results giving someone else a chance -- perhaps even Drew Jackson. Super-frustrating when a putative glove-first guy can't even field well.
  2. What's interesting and a bit ironic is that shortstop is probably the deepest it's ever been across the MLB today. Total OPS for all MLB shortstops is now .770, higher than 2B, CF, and C, only 15 points behind 3B, and only 10 points behind DH (!). The silver lining is that there should be a supply of young SS on other teams who are blocked and/or post-hype prospects that would be an upgrade over Martin both short and long term. I'm thinking about guys like Jorge Mateo on the A's, Myles Straw on the Astros (who's also a CF), or Garrett Hampson on the Rox. Can we pry away any of these guys with a trade package? Probably doubtful, but maybe if their teams get desperate enough. And there should be others hitting the waiver wire who may have more upside and/or a higher floor than Martin. Whether or not we keep Martin, makes sense to explore pre-arb, MLB-ready SS from other sources for next season and beyond, while at the same time trying to stock our low minors with high upside talent. At this point, only 6 weeks from roster expansion, we probably keep Martin and it's probably the right move. Atomic's suggestion of kicking the tires on what it would take to persuade the a's to give him up so we can send him to AAA makes sense, but the terms would probably be too demanding for Elias' liking.
  3. Oh, I didn't know that, thanks for the correction. Then this move from Elias make a lot more sense. Still would have waited a couple weeks to see who gets hurt, but that's a bit of a nitpick I suppose.
  4. I would have waited this out until the end of July or maybe even end of August. Never know who might get hurt between now and then. The guys we got are hardly "can't miss" and hard to believe we wanted them so bad that we couldn't risk losing them to another team or whatever. The biggest thing that bugs me is Cashner made it very clear he didn't want to be traded and we did anyway for next to nothing in return. That's not a great look, and future free agents could use that against us. However, this is hardly a major blunder by Elias, in my opinion. It was a no-brainer to try to move a rental like Cashner, and if this is the best he thinks he could get, so be it. Not a great fan of the return, but castigating Elias for this trade is not going to be my hill to die on.
  5. Unless a contending team is extremely desperate (as we were in 2013), I can't see Bundy having much trade value. He's probably more valuable to the Orioles than he is to other teams. At least he can provide innings so that our bullpens' arms don't fall off, and we don't have to call up prospects who aren't ready. He's basically cannon fodder, he's out there to throw soft, throw strikes, get barreled, but also get the games over with and put everyone out of their misery for the night. That's not attractive to contending teams but it is useful to rebuilding teams. There's 1,458 innings in a season, and someone's gotta pitch them for us. Might as well be Bundy for 10% of them. If we somehow have 5 other competent starters by the end of 2020, he can be non-tendered.
  6. I'd really hope that Elias sat Cashner down shortly after this came out and told him, "look, Cash, I'm super-flattered that you like our city and organization so much. But right now the best thing you can do for us is let us cash in on your value to help our rebuild. If you're willing to take a team-friendly deal next offseason to come back to Baltimore, I'm open to it!"
  7. Yeah, good point there Drungo, especially since it's pretty clear there were PEDs involved. Nevertheless, I don't believe it's out of the realm of possibility for Trey to follow Raffy's trajectory into his mid 30s (33 or 34). After that, there will almost certainly be a decline in production.
  8. If we're on the topic of comps, and want to be on the very optimistic side, how about....Rafael Palmeiro? Palmeiro had a strong hit and power tool. He tried to play outfield early in his career and wasn't good defensively, then moved to first and was just okay. Mancini's defensive metrics at first base only are fairly similar (in a small sample size!) to Raffy's a the same age. Way too early to declare Mancini another Palmeiro, but perhaps Palmeiro represents the ceiling of Manicini's value? It will all depend of course on how Mancini's bat ages. If it ages gracefully, and he's willing and able to adjust as the league adjusts to him, he's certainly got a great shot at providing similar career-wide value. That's a big "if" right now, but the potential is probably there.
  9. https://www.pressboxonline.com/2019/06/21/jim-henneman-heres-why-trey-mancini-wont-be-dealt-by-orioles?fbclid=IwAR0XubZ5Woo9IcXI40ncYc07FS0UPA2ViHdGQARawR-RwMmmFmGfQXgkUPE Essentially, compared to others at his position on contending teams, he's actually not all that special, despite being easily the best hitter on the Orioles. This is a pretty strong argument. O's might be better off trying to see if he'd take a super team-friendly extension deal instead of trading him. I'm talking about maybe something like 5/50, to lock him in a fixed value during arbitration and get a few extra years after that of team control at a reasonable price. Mancini would get predictability and guaranteed money and avoid the risk of non-tender if he falls off.
  10. I'm inclined to cut the guy a bit of slack. He's never had a single AAA at bat. He'll never hit for power. It took him until last year to have an OPS over .725 in the minors. If he can push his OBP over .300, and play up to his potential on defense, he'll have value. That probably won't happen this season, but it could in late 2020 or 2021.
  11. I guess the question around Martin is can the Orioles find a SS on the WW with as good or better long-term upside as Martin? My understanding is there's not really anyone in our minor leagues who is equipped to play SS in the ML right now. If we can find a SS on the WW who has more upside than Martin to replace him, then sure, cut him. But if not, there's not really any point. He's here for his glove in the short term, and then long term the hope is he figures things out with his bat after a year at Norfolk in 2020. We'll need Martin's glove even more if we trade Villar this season.
  12. If you're going to be mad about teams that tank, look at some of the teams in the incredibly soft AL Central (minus the Twins). Nobody except the Twins seemed to show any interest in making the playoffs out of that division the past offseason, even though it was right there for the taking. The Orioles are one of the few teams in the MLB that has a legitimate excuse for being bad -- in general, their players across the entire high minors and the MLB roster are awful, with a handful of exceptions. There's not much you can do to fix that situation in the short term. Even if they broke the bank on FA signings last offseason you're still looking at a ceiling of 70-72 wins.
  13. Yeah this makes sense. It should be similar to what the NFL does. MLB has teams playing roughly 46-47% of their regular season games against division opponents. In the NFL it's only 37.5%. MLB needs to reduce number of divisional games and then give bad teams an easier schedule in the non-division games and good teams a harder schedule.
  14. If you think "Dillon Tate" is going to do much better in 2019 than Dan Straily -- who did have a track record of modest MLB accomplishment spanning years -- in the big leagues, and make that your hill to die on, vaya con dios, I guess. It's rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as far as I'm concerned. Certainly not an indication that the team is trying to lose, either way. It is just a reflection of how bereft of talent the MLB team and upper minors currently is. What's next, are folks going to start clamoring for Grayson Rodriguez to play in the MLB next month?
  15. How exactly would this team avoid "tanking" with the current personnel in our system? Sure, we could promote Mountcastle now and DFA Davis. That might be worth a couple wins the rest of the season, maybe. Who else are these incredible can't-miss prospects that we're holding back and would be sure to help us win 70 games instead of 50? Because I don't really see a lot of that right now. I wouldn't have minded if we'd signed Keuchel, honestly, but we'd have had to offer him a lot more than the Braves gave him, and he might help us win 2-3 games a year over the next guy in our system, I guess. That's not going to make the kind of impact we need to contend.
×
×
  • Create New...