Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Frobby

Will Roch actually ask his questions?

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Rene88 said:

I am disappointed the OH is taking jabs at Roch who works very hard at his job. How about some more criticism of Jim Hunter who literally makes watching a game torture with his homerism?

I will say this, I think we will see sooner than later how much power Elias has with all hires throughout the org. Do we have more Joe Angel types (talented and unbiased) or more Jim Hunter and Bordick types. A good GM would have influence on those things even if they don't hire them directly. 

No one is saying Roch doesn't work hard.  I like Roch.  I think everyone likes Roch.  It's not a question about how hard he works, it's that he's only given so much information and/or only allowed to reveal so much.  He AND Jim Hunter are both paid to be positive, etc.  Roch and Hunter will never ask hard hitting questions because...well, Jon Miller can tell you all about being paid by the team and being critical of them.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Frobby said:

I don’t really want to single Roch out.    But it seems fair to ask, if he’s going to write a blog identifying the pertinent questions, shouldn’t he then be asking those questions?

Of course Meoli, Ghiroli and whoever else is at the “introduction” should be asking these questions too.    

I think we need to stop expecting Roch to be asking the hard questions. He is a blogger for MASN. That role inherently does not allow him the freedom to be a tough journalist. We should look to The Sun, 105.7, national reporters, and basically anyone else for that.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ScGO's said:

I wonder if Elias could use analytics to figure out how to fix Davis?  I'm sure it doesn't always work like that though...

I'm very interested in seeing how he handles scouting.  Hopefully tons of hires.  How do I apply?

My next big interest is what he thinks of our 40 man roster and our current milb system.  

Another question I would ask too, does he have any ideas on how to use the current intl money?

You can warp the Davis question up in as many fancy analytics as you'd like, it'll come down to the old baseball adage, Hit 'em where they aint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CosVT said:

You can warp the Davis question up in as many fancy analytics as you'd like, it'll come down to the old baseball adage, Hit 'em where they aint

Hit ‘em at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Rene88 said:

I am disappointed the OH is taking jabs at Roch who works very hard at his job. How about some more criticism of Jim Hunter who literally makes watching a game torture with his homerism?

I will say this, I think we will see sooner than later how much power Elias has with all hires throughout the org. Do we have more Joe Angel types (talented and unbiased) or more Jim Hunter and Bordick types. A good GM would have influence on those things even if they don't hire them directly. 

The problem I have with Roch is that I feel like he presents himself as a reporter, but he's really just a PR man in disguise for the team. And the only reason that we and the rest of the media even pay him any attention is because the Angelos family has such a contentious relationship with the Baltimore Sun that no one else seems to have access to them. So we're left with trying to dissect the morsels that Roch shares on behalf of the propaganda machine. 

And the difference between Roch and Jim Hunter is that I can see the game with my own eyes and make my own informed decision (regardless of what Hunter says). We can't do the same with Roch. I personally don't read his blog or follow him at all and I think everyone else would be wise to the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, theocean said:

I think we need to stop expecting Roch to be asking the hard questions. He is a blogger for MASN. That role inherently does not allow him the freedom to be a tough journalist. We should look to The Sun, 105.7, national reporters, and basically anyone else for that.

The problem is stations like 105.7 present Roch as their "Orioles Expert". And the Orioles are so insignificant on the national level that they don't seem to get much attention. Certainly not as much as the winning and/or big market teams. So we're left to get our news from a glorified PR man. It's a great situation for the team, because they can have Roch spew whatever propaganda they want and hardly anyone will question. It's a shame we don't have a legitimate local beat writer who follows the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

The problem I have with Roch is that I feel like he presents himself as a reporter, but he's really just a PR man in disguise for the team. And the only reason that we and the rest of the media even pay him any attention is because the Angelos family has such a contentious relationship with the Baltimore Sun that no one else seems to have access to them. So we're left with trying to dissect the morsels that Roch shares on behalf of the propaganda machine. 

And the difference between Roch and Jim Hunter is that I can see the game with my own eyes and make my own informed decision (regardless of what Hunter says). We can't do the same with Roch. I personally don't read his blog or follow him at all and I think everyone else would be wise to the same. 

I think they could replace Roch with a social media savvy recent journalism graduate and things would continue to move along just fine.  Might even be an improvement if their Twitter game is on point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll ask again, how do you guys think Elias would respond to those questions? There's a 99.9% probability that he would be very positive and fairly circumspect. It would be really stupid to say anything contentious or negative at the introductory press conference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the questions did get asked.    Kudos to the media members who attended, they did their job.   

I thought of another question today — will the way in which the O’s conduct medical evaluations change?    Is that within Elias’ purview?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I thought of another question today — will the way in which the O’s conduct medical evaluations change?    Is that within Elias’ purview?

My understanding is these three are still in charge
eaiGsa0.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Spring Training Stats

Baseball Savant Stats

Minor League Stats







  • Posts

    • I'd be genuinely thrilled to see Bleier at the ASG
    • You're just cherry picking the stats to prove your point.   
    • They're paying more-or-less Harper money for a player of similar age but who has Harper's one peak year almost every year.  Trout is #1 on the all time bb-ref WAR list through his age.  You can go down 50 or 75 spots below Trout and you have 80% of the players there as clear HOFers.   Trout's peers are Cobb, Mantle, Hornsby, ARod, Foxx, Ott, Griffey Jr, Speaker, Vaughn, Aaron, Frank... If you're not willing to pay going rates for Mike Trout, you would have also been willing to let any of those players walk because they were too risky.   Here's a list of players whose entire careers were worth less than Trout has been so far: Winfield, Ashburn, Billy Williams, Sliding Billy Hamilton, Lou Boudreau, Home Run Baker, Jesse Burkett, Harmon Killebrew, Mike Piazza, Vlad, Yogi, Hank Greenberg, Willie Stargell, Bill Dickey, Joe Medwick, Willie Keeler, George Sisler, Jimmy Collins, Elmer Flick.  There are nine Hall of Famers whose entire careers were worth less than half of Mike Trout's first eight seasons.
    • I love all the information available, especially on prospects. There's a great wealth of knowledge among everyone who contributes, and I appreciate that.
    • I agree with you that Beane and Moneyball was really influential...but it only sorta', kinda' worked.  2002 Stats: Hudson 238 IP ERA+145 Zito 229 IP ERA+ 158 Mulder 207 IP ERA+125 Lidle 192IP ERA+112 Zito and Mulder were first round draft picks. I didn't read the book, but I loved the movie. But I think the truth is that analytics had way, way, way less to do with the success of those teams than the hype would lead some to believe. If so, then the influence of the book on the spread of analytics may be more to do with hype and spin than an actual analysis of the effects of analytics. I find that fun.  It will be interesting to see how analytics are viewed in ten to fifteen years. I think in some cases the "success" of analytics on team wins could be luck much like how some scouts back in the day made a name for themselves by signing a player that turned out to be a great player. A big part of that is getting lucky with injuries, etc. I wonder if the same thing might be happening with some of the models that supposedly said pick player A over player B in a draft, etc. Only time will tell and maybe not even then (pretty soon everybody will be doing pretty much the same thing with analytics and there may be no relative advantages as it becomes part of the status quo).   
    • At least. The NFL cap is also complicated in that signing bonuses are prorated for each year of the contract (e.g. $20M bonus on a 4 year contract counts for $5M each year) and those prorated things come due right away when a player is traded or cut. So for example Joe Flacco was traded and the Ravens aren't paying him anything this year but he still counts $16M against the Ravens' cap this year. But also they just signed Earl Thomas, he'll get a $20M signing bonus and a $2M salary this year but he only counts $7M against the cap. Maybe it all sort of evens out but who knows.
    • No one cares.  Except us.  And we're not surprised.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...