Jump to content

Mondo Trasho

Limited Posting Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Mondo Trasho last won the day on November 2 2012

Mondo Trasho had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

48 Short Season A-Ball

About Mondo Trasho

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 3/19/1988

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Hence, why I wrote "probably very low". Yes, it hasn't happened in the MLB for quite some time (outside of the Expos to DC) but it's happened in other sports.
  2. I think the likelihood of the team moving to Las Vegas or anywhere else is low. Probably very low. But not zero. Lots of teams move, lots of teams who appear very likely to move, don't (I'm old enough to remember when the Sacramento Kings moving to Virginia Beach was viewed as "very likely"). The future is hard to predict sometimes. I wish Mr. Angelos good health of course, but no one lives forever, and as others have stated it's not a given that the sons will own the team, whether that's due to MLB interference, tax issues, or just disinterest in doing so. The MASN case, the continued competition with the Nationals for the hearts and minds of area fans, and dwindling attendance are all issues to keep in mind down the road. Even if they don't result in the team moving, they could still impact the team's ability to compete. I don't see anything wrong with 105.7 having a lawyer appear on a talk show saying he heard of or knows of an offer to move the team to Vegas. Maybe someone did offer to buy the team but Angelos turned it down. Who knows.
  3. It's certainly not evidence that they want to be players in the international scene. I'm suspicious. If I'm wrong, great. If not, well then that's not so great.
  4. I'm not ready to hit the panic button at the moment, but I'm certainly not sold on Elias being the savior. I have to see proof. So, for now at least, I'm on the hill with you.
  5. Could be. I live in Virginia so I certainly have no inside sources (nor outside ones at that) connected to the O's that could let me in on what's going on. And I don't listen to any local radio stations. I used to be able to get 98 rock in my Cavalier, but in my new car no such luck. So it's just a shot in the dark.
  6. And yet there was a lot of talk about the O's trying to make a big play in the international market. Pure speculation with no basis in fact? Maybe. Probably. I don't know. It sure looks like there isn't a lot of strategic planning going on. I actually don't think they owe anyone an explanation right now. But if they haven't hired anyone by this time next year, I think that would be a very bad sign.
  7. Obviously no one is going to outright say it, but when trades are made most of the time it's clear what's going on. Especially when it's a team needing to rebuild and they trade two players away with high salary numbers. In this case, it was indicated that the intent was to make a fairly big play for the international players available this year. It does not appear that they did so. Which is fine in and of itself, but it is not akin to not winning out on some free agent. They traded an asset (Gausman) that could have netted a better return, and they spent valuable scouting time and money (probably) on looking at the Mesas and Gaston. Those are all costs that didn't have to be incurred. Now, will they use the money before the deadline next year? Maybe. I don't know. I'm neutral on that question. What I will say is that this franchise does not appear to be big on strategic thinking. Been that way for most of my life.
  8. Difference being that they specifically traded for the slot money (supposedly), and it's money that has an expiration date (unlike spending money on free agents). Now, if they had just been honest and said they didn't want to pay Gausman and O'day those big salaries and needed to dump the contracts, I'd have been ok with that.
  9. Eh, I think you can measure each free agent separately and each has their own level of risk (which of course is non-zero). That said, the Orioles are not a team with a substantial amount of room for error when it comes to free agents. They have to be more cautious than say the Yankees or Red Sox, or the Dodgers or a handful of other teams. Being wrong on Cruz would be crippling. This is exactly why signing Trumbo and Davis were bad moves as well. Cruz had only once prior to 2014 played at least 150 games and in 2014 put up arguably his best statistical season, at age 34. It's not out of the question to think that signing a guy out to his 38th birthday has a higher chance of ending in disaster. That it didn't is pure luck, and Seattle should thank its lucky stars. The problem coming out of 2014 was that the team had no infrastructure for long term success. I see no reason why "going for it" in 2015 would have ended any other way than it did. It's hard to accept, but the window closed after 2014, managing the aftermath was crucial, and obviously whoever was in charge didn't manage that task right. There's this myth that if only they had gone all in after 2014 they'd have won something. The team went wire to wire in 1997, and went all in for 1998. How did that turn out? When the window closes, it closes. The best you can do is begin a new window.
  10. So...a guy approaching his mid 30s, with a history of injury (and positive PED tests) was a good bet for a big contract? I mean come on. The only way anyone would have known he was going to play like he did in Seattle was if they had a crystal ball. The O's cannot afford to bet on players like Cruz with anything more than a one year flyer deal.
  11. I disagree on Cruz. Cruz was a 34 year old corner outfielder/DH coming off a career year (in his walk year no less) with a history of positive PED tests. It was a trap signing that any good GM would avoid like the plague. Seattle took a big gamble on signing him (and it paid off for them) but that's not a gamble I want the O's to be making on the regular. There's was zero good reason to think he was going to continue being as productive as he was in 2014.
  12. Not to mention they (presumably) paid these 5 people to be there. That's time and money that could have been used elsewhere if they weren't serious about being players for the prime talent. The O's would have been better off dumping Gausman and O'day for C and D level prospects and not getting the slot money at all.
  13. But they could, in theory, sign people outside the top 50? Or top 100? Or top 500? RIght?
  • Create New...