Jump to content

JTrea81

Banned by Moderators
  • Content Count

    17,314
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    33

Posts posted by JTrea81


  1. He also had issues in low leverage situations. And medium leverage situations...

    Arrieta's problem was that he overthought things, and having 4 pitches to try to throw for strikes didn't help. Take away two of his pitches - the curve and change, have him just focus on his fastball and slider, and he could dominate IMO.


  2. You wanna put a guy, Arrieta, who melts under the pressure of having to pitch with a runner on base into the closers role? Put him in the MOST stressful situations and expect him to be able to succeed?

    Of all the stupid ideas you've had, this by FAR exceeds them all!

    Arrieta had dominant stuff early and fell apart the second time through the order. Career wise, pitches 1-25 he had a .236/.294/.368/.662 line against.


  3. Remember saves are a useless stat. But we are gonna use nine blown saves as a reason to run him out of town and throw an already shaky pen into even more flux.

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

    It's not running him out of town because he's terrible, it's about allocating 10% of your payroll to a guy that has been worth 1 win over replacement this season when you can get that 1 WAR a heck of a lot cheaper.


  4. A couple of other names to think about for the closer role - Steve Johnson and Miguel Gonzalez. Johnson would get a ton of K's and I think Gonzalez could be a lights out type of guy as he's shown when he's on. His problem has always been stamina.


  5. O'Day's platoon splits probably make him more of a matchup guy. The problem with a few of our relievers. From what I've seen, I wouldn't doubt Stinson could do it though.

    George Sherrill was a matchup guy too that we converted into a closer. Had we kept Jake Arrieta, that is the role I thought he was perfect for.


  6. The question isn't if Wieters is irreplaceable, though you have no way of establishing his true value to the team. The question is what team needs an upgrade in C enough to take on his salary, give up good prospects, as well as a pick? If as you say C is so easily replaceable why would any team want to give up much for him? Which team did you have in mind? I love these nebulous trade proposals that don't take into consideration the potential market and return. :rolleyestf:

    Plenty of teams still overvalue catchers, so Wieters would have plenty of suitors. Wieters would be cheaper than McCann, so the Braves could be interested.


  7. Just to be clear. You think, a guy who was a throw-in in a roster dump of two players should be the starting catcher on a playoff contending team?

    I like Clevenger but you are extremely over-valuing him. And assuming that Buck would put up with his poor defense.

    I think Duquette targeted Clevenger. And I'd platoon him with a veteran backup anyway but Buck wouldn't have many other options so he'd be forced to play him.


  8. Do you understand the game of baseball, and the value of having a great defensive catcher behind the plate?

    This is essential position in baseball!

    The Orioles went to the ALCS twice with probably the worst defensive catchers in baseball. The catcher position is valuable, but Wieters is not irreplaceable.


  9. If you replace Wieters will a AAA catcher, that will cost you ball games for sure.

    I thought you want to build a winning team?

    The drop off wouldn't be as large as you would think as other teams with catchers not named Matt Wieters are in the playoffs. You make up the value elsewhere.


  10. You can't clear salary, unless you find a willing dance partner to dance with you, and if they do trade, you will be bringing back salary.

    Just unrealistic.

    You make it sound so simple.

    You don't bring back much salary as you look for pre-arb guys with upside that have options. And if we can't find a dance partner for the relievers, I just non-tender them. I'm sure we can find a taker for Wieters without eating salary.


  11. 24 M saved; Butler 8 M, Burnet 14, Choo 16 M, Lewis 4 M Bedard 1 M, total 45 M. So the payroll is now at 115 M and you are going to have to pay for all the prospects you got back in the Wieters and JJ trade. They aren't free. And who are you trading for Butler? KC doesn't need Wieters or JJ.

    Keep in mind we are getting rid of Roberts, Betemit, McLouth as well so there are savings there I'm not sure you accounted for. As for Butler, Ed Rodriguez is a price I'm more than willing to pay. And maybe they'd want somebody like Hunter or Matusz.


  12. I guess I have to remind you, of your own words:

    Nick Markakis (trade - eat all but $4 million) ($4 million)

    Matt Wieters (trade) ($7 million)

    Jim Johnson (trade/DFA) ($7 million)

    Tommy Hunter (trade/DFA) ($2 million)

    Troy Patton (trade/DFA) ($1 million)

    Brian Matusz (trade/DFA) ($2 million)

    Nolan Reimold (DFA) ($1 million)

    For all those you want to trade for under performing, what exactly do expect to get back for?

    Minor leaguers with upside, some bullpen help perhaps maybe even a draft pick in the case of Wieters. The point is to clear salary to spend on more important areas.


  13. Keep in mind I'm working under a budget and the talent dropped may seem like names but go look at the value of that talent. 4 relievers combined for 2.5 fWAR and we spent close to 10 million on them. Wieters was worth 2.4 fWAR and Markakis was at 0.2. That value is replaceable and you gain it back with Choo, Butler and SP.

    Now if I could increase payroll a bit, I'd keep Wieters and maybe Matusz, but on a budget with the additions in pitching and OBP, that's not where I would spend the money.


  14. I would be looking to do the following:

    Replace hitting coach Jim Presley

    Let all our impending FAs walk.

    Look to jettison the following:

    Nick Markakis (trade - eat all but $4 million) ($4 million)

    Matt Wieters (trade) ($7 million)

    Jim Johnson (trade/DFA) ($7 million)

    Tommy Hunter (trade/DFA) ($2 million)

    Troy Patton (trade/DFA) ($1 million)

    Brian Matusz (trade/DFA) ($2 million)

    Nolan Reimold (DFA) ($1 million)

    That saves $24 million right there and all of those guys aren't worth that money for the production they give and can be replaced internally.

    Urrutia replaces Markakis

    Clevenger is part of a platoon that replaces Wieters

    O'Day replaces Johnson as closer

    Steve Johnson replaces Patton

    Britton/McFarland replaces Matusz

    Miguel Gonzalez replaces Hunter

    Next you go out and go after Choo, making him a 5 year $80 million offer with an expiration date of the end of the Winter Meetings. He's the big splash if you can land him. A backup plan for LF would be a trade for Norichika Aoki from the Brewers.

    You lure Burnett back to Baltimore with a 2 year 26 million dollar contract. He is your ace. If I can't get Burnett, Arroyo would be a second choice for around the same $. The Orioles need to find a guy that will definitely give them close 200 innings and 15-20 quality starts.

    I also sign Colby Lewis to a 1 year deal for $4 million with incentives for IP to take it to $10 because if healthy he could be one of those guys.

    There are plenty of SPs out there as well that will be available so I look to sign 1 or 2 of them to a minor league deal like we've done with Garcia and Jurrjens.

    For the bullpen, I'd do some minor league signings - Erik Bedard being a prime candidate if he doesn't want to retire.

    For DH, I'm looking to trade for Billy Butler first, as with the money owed on his contract KC may be looking to dump him and the Orioles can afford him. Second choice would be a trade for Josh Willingham from the Twins.

    I'd sign one of the many catchers out there to platoon with Clevenger. Suzuki/Soto - somebody like that.

    I'd bring back Dickerson on a minor league deal and I'd look to bring in another Conor Jackson type - Grady Sizemore would be worth taking a flyer on. But I would also look for a strong UTI type like maybe a Michael Young.

    Now I'd also approach Davis with an extension, after I've made all these moves. ST or just before is probably when that happens. I'm looking at a 5/80-85 type of deal.

    Schoop becomes my 2B man by default. Time to see what he's got.

    I think I can get some bullpen arms back in some of those trades so I'll put one of those in the bullpen. Josh Stinson seems to be a decent MR guy so I'll keep him in there for now.

    Lineup:

    LF Choo/Aoki

    3B Machado

    DH Butler

    1B Davis

    CF Jones

    RF Urrutia

    SS Hardy

    C Clevenger/platoon

    2B Schoop

    Bench:

    UTI Young

    UTI Flaherty

    OF Dickerson

    Backup C

    Rotation

    Burnett/Arroyo

    Tillman

    Norris

    Lewis

    Chen

    Bullpen:

    LR Bedard

    RP via trade

    MR Stinson

    MR McFarland/Britton

    MR Gonzalez

    MR Johnson

    CL O'Day

    The names in the bench are interchangeable as are the bullpen, but the overall main theme of the offseason is to find guys that can give you innings and QS to shore up the rotation and find guys that have the OBP that can be driven in by the guys that have your power namely - Jones and Davis. Spend your money there, and let your internal guys take care of the rest.


  15. How much can they really improve at this point?

    Bingo, at this point, save for Machado, Gausman and Schoop, your guys with less that 2 years of service, these guys are who they are. They've been in the majors for several years now and most are at their prime meaning the only place to go is down. And what we have certainly is a good core, but a good core is not enough as we've seen this season.


  16. THAT is the point. You do it all the time, so you know the answer to this question. You obviously have some sick need to piss everybody off, which you have proceeded to do in this thread, and in almost every Orioles Talk section thread that you start or enter.

    You are intentionally obstinate, you get some type of warped satisfaction out of having countless posters trying their damnedest to get through to you, and therefore you are not a nice guy.

    Your "goal" of expressing and informing is about as genuine as that of The Star or The National Inquirer in their quest to express and inform.

    This is entirely false and that's all I will say because you've already made up your mind based on who you think I am and that's unfortunate.

    • Upvote 1

  17. During an interview with Bob Haynie and Mark Zinno of 105.7 The Fan this afternoon, the Orioles manager said: "It's not just about the playoffs. You're trying to win a world championship. You're trying to be the last team standing. Crazier things have happened in people's minds, so why not?"

    Trea - Buck's statement directly contradicts your contention that no one in the organization is "talking about a World Series as a goal directly." Why are you ignoring Buck's statement. I don't have the answer which is why I ask the question.

    I missed that post. So you have Buck saying it once. When was that exactly? Curious.


  18. You tell us Trea/Brickwall - why do they purposely not want to win it all? What is the grand design behind all of this? Pull back the curtain for us mere mortals. Let us know what the front office's true objectives are... all based from a single post game interview given by the manager after being eliminated from the post season.
    I don't gave the answer which is why I ask the question. Doesn't it seem strange to anybody else that the organization has avoided talking about the World Series as a goal directly? That there has been no mention of ending a 30 year drought?
×
×
  • Create New...