Jump to content


Plus Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Frobby

  1. 3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

    Joe Altobelli was 51 when the Orioles won the 1983 Series.  I always assumed he was about 68 then.  He looked like he could be someone's grandpa, which I guess you can be at 51.  My grandparents were all in their 40s or early 50s when I was born.  For whatever reason I think of grandpas as being around 70. So I was surprised today when I looked up Altobelli and found he's still alive.

    I'm not being vain or bragging here, I'm nothing great to look at, but I think I look at least 10, maybe 15 or more years younger than Joe Altobelli did in '83, and I'm 49.  I know this is a weird aside, maybe because I just saw that meme where Paul Rudd is now about the same age as Wilfred Brimley was when they filmed The Natural and Cocoon.  Maybe @Frobby can help us out here... is 50 the age where people diverge?  Some look the same as they did at 30, some look like they're 80?

    Hmmm, why would you be asking me that, you young whippersnapper?

    I am forever watching people on TV who I assume are older than me, only to find out they’re 5/10 years younger.   That’s not because I look young, it’s because I don’t really stop to notice how old I look.   And when I do, it’s depressing.  But at least I have kind eyes.    

    • Upvote 1

  2. 5 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

    So the Padres offered 12/400.  Tatis' agent counters at, what...  15/600?

    I don’t believe this source.  The first four years of the twelve, he’s under team control.   Offering that kind of money would be insane.  

  3. 33 minutes ago, Philip said:

    Isn't it pretty common for a guy to go from AA to the bigs? Or at least not unusual?

    I would not say it’s unusual, but it rarely happens in Baltimore.   Let’s look at the last 10 O’s starters who spent significant time in our MiL organization and started at least 10 games for the Orioles:

    Means 19 AAA starts before Os debut

    Hess 24 

    Bundy 0 

    Wilson 29

    Wright 26

    Gausman 0

    Britton 12

    Arrieta 28

    Tillman 18

    Matusz 0

    Bottom line, if you were drafted no. 4 overall, you’re considered talented enough to skip AAA.   Otherwise, serve your apprenticeship.    And in Bundy’s case, the O’s had no choice because he was out of options before pitching in AAA due to all his injuries.

    • Upvote 1
    • Thanks 1

  4. 11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

    I'm not good at this game.

    I do think Acuna signed a deal that was considered team friendly before the ink was dry.


    Acuna’s salary maxes out at $17 mm and includes two team options at that price, so it’s 8/$100 mm without the options (includes a $10 mm buyout if Option 1 isn’t exercised), or 10/$124 mm if the two options are exercised and the buyout isn’t paid.   The first two years of the deal are pre-Arb, the next four are Arb (super-2), the final two are FA, plus the two option years.   That’s extremely team friendly IMO.    He also signed it when he had 0.159 years of service under his belt, whereas Tatis has 2.000.    

  5. 36 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

    We don't know, maybe he would have resented it and been less likely to deal?  😝

    I agree that Tatis is going to cost more than Acuna, he's just the most similar recent player.

    The Braves, of course, did game Acuna’s service clock.    He entered this season 13 days shy of two years of service.   If he resented it, he didn’t resent it enough to not give the Braves a very good deal on his contract.   

    I see that Tatis is using the same agency Manny uses.    My guess is they will drive a much harder bargain than Acuna’s agent did, but I doubt they’ll try to play Boras-like games.    8/$150 mm?

    • Upvote 1

  6. 5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:


    Acuna is mentioned as a possible comp.

    I always figured an extension was the plan for SD given that they didn't game his service clock.


    They’d have better leverage if they had gamed his service clock.  😉

    One huge difference between Tatis and Acuna is that the former is the son of a major league player who made almost $18 mm during his career.    Hence, he’s less likely to give a big discount in order to secure his family’s financial security; they’re pretty secure already.    That wasn’t the case with Acuna.   

  7. 14 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

    I would just like to say that the way MLbTR is put on a pedestal for their arb numbers is hilarious to me. (This isn’t directed at the original post, just a separate thought). The Villar number last year is exhibit A of this.

    That being said, I think a lot of these cases are going to be settled fairly early this year. , across the league.

    Players know they need to take what they can get coming off of a season where so much revenue was lost.  I would suspect that a lot of players take less to make sure they get something.  The exceptions to this will be the top flight guys but those players are few and far between.

    I agree with your first point and have said so many times.   Saying that, my initial reaction to these predictions is that they are not far off.   I note that wildcard and others have guessed $3 mm for Alberto and Nunez, and at first blush I think MLBTR is correct that they’ll both be lower than that.  I also agree with you that players will be cautious this year if made a decent offer before the nontender date.   They’ll want to lock something in IMO.

  8. 9 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

    Typical Roch - "You hate homers?  Orioles relievers allowed fewer than one per game after leading the league in homers surrendered with 126 in 2019."  

    The 2019 Os played 162 games with no complete games per Baseball Reference.  That means the 2019 relievers also allowed fewer than one HR per game - 126 HRs in 162 games.

    If there was improvement in 2020 from 2019 in HRs allowed by the relievers, one wouldn't know it from what Roch provided.  

    Said it before, will say it again, Roch is thoroughly mediocre at what he does.  Os fans deserve better.

    I think he means fewer than one homer per 9 IP.    0.93, to be exact. That compares to 1.73 HR/9 for our bullpen last year.   Agree he could have expressed it better.   

  9. 8 minutes ago, Philip said:

    Tony is still skeptical about Akin, less so about Kremer. He also thinks Diaz is heading towards 4th OF status. So Kremer goes ahead of Akin and Diaz which leaves Kremer-Lowther as the choice.

    Also, Lowther should have made his debut this summer, I don’t recall why he didn’t? Injury, I guess?

    Lowther didn’t pitch AAA last year, while Akin (full season at Norfolk), Zimmermann (7 starts) and Kremer (4 starts) all did.    It’s not that surprising he wasn’t jumped to the majors this year.   In fact, he wasn’t even pitching at the Bowie alternate site until September 4, only 3+ weeks before the season ended.    

    • Thanks 1

  10. 46 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

    Kind of surprised to see Westburg here, especially with a lukewarm write-up. I guess I'll have to wait and see what you say about Diaz, who I thought would be here


    40 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

    It's clear he is here on draft position alone. Personally, I would have Diaz, Kremer, and Akin all ahead of him at this point. 

    Me too.   That write-up did nothing to make me think Westburg deserves to be this high at this stage.   But, hopefully he’ll prove us wrong.  

  11. Last year:

    Diaz 6

    Lowther 8

    Kremer 11

    Akin 12

    I liked what I saw from both Akin and Kremer, but I liked Kremer a little better and Tony has said Akin could still end up as a reliever.   So, I’m rejecting all the options that put Akin ahead of Kremer.   That leaves the two Lowther/Kremer options.   Since nobody here saw Lowther pitch this year, it’s tough to judge which order to put them in.   Tony had Kremer at no. 4 in 2018 and downgraded him in 2019 due to some lost velocity.    He regained some velocity this season, added a cutter and I’ll guess that’s enough for Tony to jump him back over Lowther.   

    • Upvote 1

  12. 33 minutes ago, wildcard said:

    Tony,  I think the write up for Baumann and the ranking is confusing.

    Tony, you are setting the rankings.  Why should Baumann be undervalued?  If you think he is better than Hall shouldn't you rank him ahead of Hall.

    But the forecast is the opposite.  Hall as a middle of rotation starter with a ceiling of top of the rotation.  Baumann as a 4th or 5th starter with a ceiling of middle of the rotation.

    Kind of confusing.

    Glad you are high on Baumann!!

    I agree that was confusing.   But we know Tony vacillated on who to rank higher, so I’ll just consider them more or less equivalent with Hall having the greater upside but greater risk.   

  13. 7 hours ago, murph said:

    Saw this post and went to look at see when Zack is a free agent again and saw the Yankees have a decision to make after the world series:

    $1m assignment bonus if traded. Club must decide on 2022 option following 2020 WS; if club declines 2022 option, then Britton may opt out of contract immediately.



    Pretty easy decision if you ask me.   They’ll pay him.  

  14. 1 hour ago, wildcard said:

    I have to figure Baumann season ending injury into his placement.  The O's have said its not serious but an elbow injury is an elbow  injury even if it is not structural.   No way to know if Baumann or Akin end up as relievers.    Westburgs all out style makes it more likely that is reaches his potential over Diaz inconsistent play.  I go Westburg/Diaz.    I am grading on future ceiling more than who reaches the major first.

    I am influenced by the fact that Fangraphs has Vavra several spots above Westburg.    Of course, they also have both above Diaz by several spots.   But I liked some of the reports on Diaz from camp.   So, I went with him.   Won’t be shocked if Tony didn’t.  

  15. 16 minutes ago, wildcard said:

    The description of Hall here reminds me of Arrieta.  Great stuff but can't control it.   Hopefully with all the analytics and advanced coaching he will learn to find control while he is still an Oriole.

    It’s sort of interesting to compare Arrieta and Hall in the Carolina League.

    Arrieta (age 22): 20 games, 113 IP, 2.87 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 6.4 H/9, 4.1 BB/9, 9.6 K/9.

    Hall (age 20): 19 games (17 starts), 80.2 IP,  3.46 ERA, 1.33 WHIP, 5.9 H/9, 6.0 BB/9, 12.6 K/9.

    Pretty tough to compare them considering the 2 year age difference, but I’d say Hall has even better stuff than Arrieta but his control problems are significantly worse too.    

  16. 29 minutes ago, wildcard said:

    Thanks for the correction.

    All that was before Baumann's season ending injury.

    I’m not downgrading him at all for his injury, unless and until we hear that it’s something serious.   The initial report was:  

    The strain is not a long-term concern and it should improve with continued rest and rehab, the source said. Surgery is not a consideration.


    Roch later reported:

    Pitching prospect Michael Baumann was shut down a few weeks ago with a flexor mass strain, but he’s expected to be full-go in spring training. There’s no ligament damage. It’s muscular, which is good news.


    So, I’m not saying there’s nothing to worry about, but there’s not enough evidence of a significant problem to warrant downgrading Baumann at this point.  

    (Sorry for the varying font sizes, it’s from cutting and pasting and difficult to fix on my phone.)

  17. 16 hours ago, wildcard said:

    You must have read or heard about Baumann from some place else because I just listen to the Matt Blood interview on Inside the Yard and he doesn't talk about Baumann other than to say that the Norfolk rotation could be special with  Lowther, Wells, Baumann and Bradish.   Blood was very impressed with Bradish.

    My mistake, it was the Kennie Steenstra interview on “Inside the Yard” I was thinking of.    Here’s how I paraphrased it after listening to that interview:

    “Said Baumann is ‘an animal’ on the mound with great velocity that carries through the zone.    Said he developed a very good curve ball over thewinter to complement his fastball/slider.”

    I am very interested to see where Bradish is going to appear on this list.


  18. 5 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

    One thing to keep in mind, I value starters and every day 1st division players over guys who carry reliever or 4th outfield/utility risk. If a pitcher has a better chance of sticking as a starter they have a good chance of being ranked over a guy I think is heading to the pen, unless the ceiling of that plater still remains high and they still have a chance at sticking in a starter's role (Hall).

    I will be honest, I had #7 over Hall at one point before deciding that Hall's overall stuff, and the development of the change this year in camp, were worthy of keeping at #6 despite the concerns over control.

    Another thing to take into consideration is that it's a tough year to ding too much for a lack of experience due to the minor league season being cancelled and the amateur seasons cut short.

    I'm taking some educated "guesses" on the new draft picks this year and trying to not dock them as much as I would if they didn't have any pro time. It's not the easiest year to do rankings for sure.

    For the players who were at the alternate site, I’ve really been appreciating the intel you’ve been able to glean and report from that. Some of it echoes what Matt Blood and others have said publicly, but there’s more detail in these reports such as the analysis of Hall’s curve and change-up.

    Pretty soon you’ll be dealing mostly with players who weren’t in the majors or at the Bowie camp.   Really hard to see how you can shuffle the order of those guys compared to where they ranked in relation to each other last year.   But we do have a fair number of new players to plug into the list, so that will be interesting.   

  19. 34 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

    I did not read much about Diaz at the Bowie camp this year but if it was very positive then I guess I could see him here.

    Matt Blood had very positive things to say about his talent, but reinforced the impression that he isn’t consistent in his focus.    

  20. Well, this series of combos is very interesting.   I’m pretty sure Baumann is at 7 based on him being included in the 5/6 polls and Tony’s statement that 5, 6 and 7 are all really close.   I like Akin but I don’t think he’s that close to the 5/6 guys.   Westburg shows up in three of the pairings but I haven’t seen him ranked that high elsewhere.    So, I’m going with Baumann/Diaz.    

  • Create New...