Jump to content

Frobby

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    56,031
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    479

Posts posted by Frobby


  1. The six players we traded in 2000 in no way constituted a rebuild. We traded the likes of Will Clark, BJ Surhoff, Harold Baines, Charles Johnson, Mike Timlin and Mike Bordick. These guys were all either in the latter stages of their careers, or in the last year of their contracts, or in the case of Timlin, wasn't pitching very well. None of these guys was close in value to a Miguel Tejada now.

    I agree none of these guys had the value of a Tejada, but I don't see how you can say that wasn't a rebuild. We traded our starting C, 1B, SS, LF and DH and our closer. The return we got was pitiful. What I remember most is that we didn't due good due diligence and ended up with an Atlanta pitching prospect with a torn labrum and a Mets pitcher who was 5 years older than we thought.


  2. How do you guys compare him to the 4 guys we just signed? I think he could easily have a season comparable to any of the 4, but he only got 1 year and 3.5M. Is this more evidence of the O's over-paying to redo the bullpen?

    Obvioulsy the orioles didn't think he was comparable to the guys we signed, or they would have tried to sign him. I agree with their judgment.


  3. I think the Orioles are just waiting for Luis Gonzalez not to get offered arbitration. I like Jones better but factoring in the cost, I might even lean towards Gonzalez in that case. His declining numbers scare me though.

    I think it would be nice, just once, to go into a season with nobody over 35 on the roster. No Raffy/Sosa/Surhoff/Conine/Segui/Reed/Groom/Grimsley.


  4. Well, GMAt shouldn't have either and Pierre shouldn't have required 9 million but it happened.

    GMat is coming off a career year. Pierre is coming off a pretty typical year for him and you know what you are getting from one year to the next. If CPat waits until next year, he takes the risk of a drastic downturn such as he had in 2005.


  5. Bad analogy. I think I'd still take her.

    You have odd taste in women. Other than her "assets" she is not that appealing. Of course, if her bank account comes with the deal that's another story.

    But since you didn't like the analogy, Patterson without speed is like Tim Wakefield without a knuckleball.


  6. I'd be fine with trading him at the deadline or taking the draft pick for him after next season. I don't wanna throw $10M a year at Patterson.

    CPat shouldn't require $10 mm/yr right now. If he repeats his 2006 performance in 2007, then he might. But remember that in next winter's CF market, he is the 4th option at best. So he is gambling quite a bit if he decides not to sign an extension this winter.

    Therefore, I'd like the O's to try to extend him this winter. For tactical reasons, I'd try to sign Roberts and Bedard first. I realize those guys are further away from FA, but whatever deal Patterson gets, Roberts will feel he is enititled to more.


  7. No talk about Manny. Cubs may be asking for too much for Jones. RLo for Mench will happen if the Brewers want him. Floyd or Gonzo will most likely be out left fielder unless something comes up at the winter meetings. Good chance we get Mulder.

    Very interesting that there's a good chance we get Mulder. And then what? There's a lot of upside there, but how can you know whether to trade one of the incumbent starters until you get to March and see where he is physically?

    If the Orioles were to sign Mulder and he returned to his old form, that is exaclty the kind of thing that could galvanize this team into a contender. Flanny & Duq would be executives of the year candidates if that happened.


  8. I think the expectations have shrunk. Hopefully, nobody here has fooled themselves into thinking that they even Can put together a championship type team next season.

    The difference this season is aggressiveness from the gitgo and a plan. On pitching, they realized they weren't going to get an ace, so they determined they needed to overhaul the pen. You can question the inteligence of the plan, but at least it was a plan, and they went at it very aggressively. There's no longer the feeling that their feet are stuck in the mud, and that Angelos is going to interfere in every move - so there is a light at the end of the sewage. And we'll see what they do with the rest of the roster.

    You put it very well. And as badly as I wanted Soriano or Lee, their contracts are just insane. You have to draw the line somewhere, and the Orioles are on the right side of that line.

    it is still November. There is plenty of time to address other needs. I want to see what they do in terms of LF and some lefty-mashing depth on the bench/DH. If they find a good solution there, I won't sweat the fact that they didn't go get a no. 3 starter. That always was the lowest priority in my book.


  9. OK, let me put this this way: What is the absolute best outcome for this trade?

    Best case scenario is that Britton eats 20 cheeseburgers a day and sucks in about 20 innings as a Yankee before being sent down or outrighted. And for us, Wright regains form and pitches to a 3.80-4.00 ERA and wins 13-16 games in front of a weak offense then becomes a UFA.

    Then what? It's not like it really changes the balance of power in the AL East. We're playing small ball, bunting for base hits when we're down 11-2 in the 7th inning.

    If this was the biggest move we made all offseason, then I would agree with you. But it's just an early move at the outset of the FA/trade season. It's more like bunitng for a base hit in the first inning. Like you, I'm not a big fan of this trade, but I think we'll need to see what else happens before leveling the small ball charge.


  10. That's a valid argument. I guess I just wasn't overly impressed by Britton's stuff and find him easily replaceable by an equally cheap alternative like Hoey or even possibly Liz or Salas.

    If he was so easy to replace, how come practically every guy we trotted out of the bullpen last year got bombed?

    Moreover, it's not like we have only one hole in our bullpen to fill now,and can just plug in whoever is the best of Hoey, Liz or Salas. We need to fill every spot but Chris Ray's. This is just one more hole.


  11. They might have other guys like Hoey, Keefer, Salas, Liz, and Rakers but I'm not sure any of them can be counted on for OD.

    It seems to me that this trade makes sense only if you believe that Chris Britton is unlikely to repeat (or improve on) his 2006 performance. Personally, I was impressed by Britton all year and had expected him to be one of the anchors of the pen next season. When you break it down he was only scored upon in 10 of 52 appearances all year. He also allowed only 4 of 20 inherited runners to score, which is a very good ratio. It would be asking a lot for any of the relievers mentioned above to duplicate Britton's numbers next year.


  12. If our next trade brings back enough of an upgrade (talent/performance-wise) over Britton that we show a net-gain then it would seem to me that a "bad" trade CAN not only set-up but become a good trade.

    If Wright + acquisition > player traded away + Britton...

    ...then how is this not a positive?

    It seems to me that if Jaret Wright at $3 mm (net of Yankees' payment) will only net you Chris Britton, then you aren't going to get something much more valuable than that for Rodrigo Lopez at $3.75 mm (estimated). After all, the Yankees are not fools.

    To me the trade (and a possible further trade of Rodrigo or Benson) seems a litle bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. I'm not sure how we catch the Yankees by inserting their rejects into our rotation.

    The only way this works is if Mazzone can get more out of Wright than the Yankees' pitching coaches did. He did once, so maybe he can again. I'll hopre for that, but I'm not too confident.


  13. Let me fill you in a bit. Apparently this move is the first of at least one other move we are going to make for a big bat.

    The general consensus (I believe) is that this move by itself isn't really all that great, but it depends on what we do after this.

    They don't want to do what you and I would like (trading off any tradeable commodity for young players) to do. They want to build a contender right now.

    I'm holding out my opinion of this deal until I see what happens next!;)

    I don't see how a bad move sets you up to make a good move. I will wait and see, but count me as skeptical.


  14. I don't like this move much, partly because I like Chris Britton. If the O's assessment of him is correct then they may get some temporary benefit from this trade. If they are worng, we've given up a young, cheap effectivle reliever for a starter who is probably no better than the guy he will replace, and who will be a free agent next year.

    Oh well, I will now root for Wright to be lights out and for Britton to be terrible.


  15. A 1st ballot HOFer has no impact on a young pitching staff ?

    I don't know -- if Mike Piazza was catching a young pitching staff, would it help them that he's a 1st ballot HOFer?

    Obviously, the fact that Pudge is one of the best defensive catchers who ever lived helps his pitchers quite a lot. If you can separate out his defense, the question of whether he is an above average handler of young pitchers is open to debate and not easily susceptible to empirical testing. I happen to agree with you on the issue, but it is by no means something that can easily be proved/disproved.

    Was the White Sox pitching last year great because of A.J. Pierzynski's brilliant handling of pitchers? The team's ERA dropped by 1.30 runs/game after he arrived. So what happened this year -- did he forget how to do it?

    Is it not true that the Oriole brass felt that Javy Lopez was a better handler of pitchers than Pudge, and that's one reason why they considered the two to be equal despite Pudge's better defensive stats?


  16. I agree that it definately helps, but how much? I don't think there would be that much difference between IRod and Ramon who is pretty good at slowing down a running game. What I do know is that the Marlins pitching just as good the year after IRod as it was w/IRod.

    Ramon is very good at slowing the running game, but he's not in Pudge's league.

    Ramon 2006: 1094 innings, 55 SB, 42 CS (43.3 CS%)

    Pudge 2006: 1054 innings, 25 SB, 26 CS (51.0 CS%)

    Look how few guys even tried to run on Pudge.

    You are right that the Marlins pitching was very good in 2003 after Pudge left.


  17. I agree his defense cannot be ignored, but the Marlins young pitching has done quite well without him, I think the Tigers pitchers would be too. Maybe not as good, but still very good. I also don't recall the Rangers pitching excelling often during Pudge's longe tenure there.

    Here is what I have noticed with Pudge ever since he was on the Marlins. Not only does he throw out a lot of runners, but he intimidates them from running or even taking a big lead. That is a huge boon to a pitcher. Suddenly it's harder for a runner to score from 2B on a single, or from 1B on a double, because they weren't far off the bag when the play started. Dave Campbell pointed this out when I was listening to a Marlins-Cubs game on the radio, after some runner failed to score from 2nd on a single. I've noticed it ever since.

    It's true the Rangers' pitching never really thrived while Pudge was there, but it hasn't since then, either.


  18. How about we win 84 games with several short-term deals instead? Or would that not "excite the fan base" enough?

    I guarantee you that if this team plays well again next year, people will come back, Soriano or no. It's about putting a good team on the field that is sustainable. Forget all this "the fans want to see money spent" stuff. The fans want to see a winner, period. The question is how do we get there. I do not think Soriano is the answer.

    I agree with you that the fans mostly just want to see a better team, and they really don't care how they get there.

    Whether the O's should chase Soriano depends in part on how much they will be allowed to spend to improve the team. If getting him means we won't have enough money left to improve in other areas, then I have to agree with you. But if we could get Soriano AND improve some other spots, I'd be for it even if Soriano will be grossly overpaid in the back end of his deal.


  19. Sorry I had to clean my monitor after I spit my drink out on it. I agree with Miggy, but Irod is the best catcher EVER, and a sure 1st ballot HOFer. The only advantage Ramon has over IRod is youth. You are really missing the boat if you don't think Irod had anything to do with that young pitching staff or Roger's resurgence.

    Before you tell me that I have no "merit" or that I'm "absurd" you can read the Tigers pitcher's comments about what Pudge has done to help them develop

    Your point is irrelevant to what mweb8 was saying. He was only talking about offense, and he was only talking about during the period covered by the players' current contracts. Pudge's offense has slipped badly the least 2 years and I think it is fair to say Ramon is the better offensive player, just as Miggy is a better offensive player than Ordonez now.

    I happen to agree with you, however, that Pudge's defense cannot be ignored when analyzing the imapct of that acquisition. He's awesome. And his history with both the Marlins and the Tigers shows he's very adept at handling young pitchers.


  20. [Guillen's] situation sounds a whole lot like Durazo at this time last year. People kept saying he'd be back in time to begin this season or that he'd be on a MLB team by May or June. He had a grand total of 192 minor league ABs - and showed very little power in the process.

    Yes, and at this point I'd rather look at Durazo than Guillen.


  21. I disagree. One of the reporters is the same person who was roundly attacked on this board as not being very credible not long ago. Why does he suddenly have so much credibility?

    If the Orioles official used the word "floored" it would have appeared with quote marks. If not, it is the reporter's interpretation. Also, note that there was no quote in the article at all, "floored" or otherwise. Therefore, you don't know what was said to Soriano. Obviously nothing was said that the reporters were free to quote. I think you, and a few others on this thread, are way over-reacting to a reporter's off-hand remark.

    Frobby, I have a lot of respect for you. You are about the most consistently rational and reasonable person on this board. But I think you missed it here.

    Maybe, who knows. As far as Arangure Jr. goes, I read his stuff regularly and I think he generally is a very good reporter, despite his unfair "chat room" comments about the Hangout. On the whole, I consider his reports --especially about the hot stove league -- to have been more accurate than his counterparts' at the Sun over the last 2 years. Which is not to say that he hasn't made some mistakes, because he has.

×
×
  • Create New...