Jump to content


Plus Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

197 High-A

About jerios55

  • Rank
    Plus Member Since December 2008
  • Birthday April 23

Personal Information

  • Location
    Durham, NC

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I do think most probably agree that it won't happen. For me, if they don't, I hope it's more that they don't see a massively different assessment from Drungo's and decide it doesn't make sense. Of course if they don't try (or no articles mention at least interest) we'll never know why they didn't go after him.
  2. With mention of 4th outfielder potential and some glowing remarks for others, I went Lowther/Vavra. The drop overall is interesting. (FWIW I've been wrong pretty much every time, so what do I know...haha)
  3. Was curious for myself, but will post if others are. https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/mlb-raising-minimum-salary-minor-leaguers-2021/story?id=68993778 "The major league minimum is $563,500 this year" I had heard a few say Armstrong may not be back because of arbitration. Even if they settle at 800k, that's not a big difference from the minimum. Although $237k is similar to several of the PTBNL values for international players. So I can at least see someone making a fair argument the O's would consider that difference as important. IDK. If cases are settled early, I do think with slightly lower salaries than above we'll see at least half of these guys back. Santander and Mancini are the ones I most want to watch play another year here. https://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2020/10/light-free-agent-winter-workload-for-orioles.html "Shawn Armstrong could become too expensive in Baltimore, which doesn’t throw cash at relievers, but he was outstanding when healthy. " Ok, well there is another potential vote against Armstrong.
  4. Hall and Mountcastle for me. Without video this year I don't see Kjerstad beating these 2, but expect in the 5/6 bucket.
  5. I literally told you I only really don't want the Yankees to win. I want to know what PTBNL from Braves and Astros and assume we'll find out sooner if those teams lose. Otherwise, it doesn't really matter to me.
  6. So usually the easy answer is not the Yankees. But this year, the Astros and Braves can lose sooner. We may as well talk about some really far away players no one really knows.
  7. 9 of 18 outs were K's. As I watched there were several deeper counts and felt like there was more work than the no hitter suggested. Still looked good, but no quick innings based on pitch counts.
  8. Hopefully they were predetermined and we just have to wait. If performance based, we will be more than our usually ornery and sad.
  9. https://dknation.draftkings.com/mlb/2020/6/23/21300692/mlb-season-2020-length-standings-through-60-games-2019-last-year https://www.espn.com/mlb/standings/_/group/overall Using the first link to get first 60 and overall, I took the difference to get the last 102 from last season. (With Detroit there is still the 2 game gap, but they were so terrible over this time they were the worst team either way even if they are given 2 wins in that place...) Boston 53-49 over last 102, combined with this year they would be 77-85. Baltimore 35-67, combined 60-102 Detroit 24-77, 47-112 Arizona 55-47, 80-82 Texas 46-56, 68-94 Pittsburgh 40-62, 59-103 Order based on 2020 only (if rules same as historically): #1. Pittsburgh, #2. Texas, #3 Detroit, #4 Boston, #5 Baltimore, #6 Arizona Order based on last 162 games (only doing these 6, Kansas others may move up otherwise...I need to work at some point today, feel free to go deeper). #1. Detroit, #2 Pittsburgh, #3 Baltimore, #4 Texas, #5 Boston, #6 Arizona. edit: feel free to check my math as well, should all be 162 other than Detroit as I mentioned).
  10. As a fan with no more than internet at my disposal (and that hasn't been used to announce anything official), I can offer no more than the positioning based on historical reference. If last year is considered, #5 would be worst case (unless we start talking lottery...).
  11. If rules follow previous years, our 2019 record being worse gives us 5th and them 6th.
  12. Fair, still think probability points to 5th. But nice to have a 3-4 option still.
  13. They are losing now and if that holds they'd be the same 24-35 as us. If we win tomorrow (25-35) and they lose (24-36), they would pick before us. Unless I'm missing something (again) our range is still 3-6.
  • Create New...