Jump to content


Plus Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


UMDTerrapins last won the day on December 20 2014

UMDTerrapins had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

295 Double-A

About UMDTerrapins

  • Rank
    Plus Member Since 12/07
  • Birthday 3/12/1970

Personal Information

  • Location
    Alexandria, VA
  • Favorite All Time Oriole
    Eddie Murray

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That all looks good, but it’s really about our best hitters all slumping simultaneously. Getting Hays back will help. I’m curious if the league is pitching Mountcastle/Santander differently or if they’re just in a short term rut.
  2. Fair enough. I was thinking of four games in three days, 11 relief outings in that span. Not a ton of innings, but a lot of guys used to try and fill the Saturday start from the bullpen.
  3. Bullpen is already tired, so gotta figure someone is getting the call, right?
  4. Depends on the standard being applied. In any year, is the #1 overall pick likely to be better than each of the 1200 or so picked after him? If I’m waging money, that’s an easy choice. AR is as safe a bet as any in that draft class to have a very good ML career at a prime position. I’ll take that. Generally speaking, I’m not big on using a #1 overall on a pitcher or catcher. But I’m not worried about AR being a good pick (yet).
  5. No kidding, I’m looking forward to Tuesday May 4th more than any other day this season. I’m really tired of only seeing the iceberg that’s above water. No minor league baseball for a year and a half during a rebuild is infuriating.
  6. As much as I hate losing, a 2021 season where we secure one last high draft slot and develop a number of guys into productive ML regulars would be fine with me. 2021 isn’t going to provide a playoff push, so winning isn’t the metric I care about. I care about player development, ML and MiL. And I want to replenish our system with presumably a decent number of our top prospects moving out of the minors. Losing 2-1 games actually is completely five with me. After this season, they’ll drive me mad again. Strange things, these rebuilds.
  7. Any mention of Hays getting activated for the road trip?
  8. I was thinking free agent contracts. ML minimum contracts don’t carry any real financial risks.
  9. You’re a smart guy.....you know I’m not talking about one player, in one particular year, with one team. Anyhow, I enjoy playing devil’s advocate every now and then.
  10. One last thought. When the reserve clause died in court and all players could become free agents every year, the players union was smart and agreed to a service requirement. It was good for salaries and good for the sport to control supply/demand, even if it seemed like a giveaway by the players. If there was a non-performance clause built into free agent contracts that gave some level of relief to owners, it would benefit salaries and the sport. Small to mid size teams would have more ability to chase top talent because the affect of a bad contract would be less calamitous to their limited payroll means if it was discounted by some percentage for non-performance. Ask Scott Boras if he’d rather have three teams bidding for his client or six. Our very own Albert Belle contract made insuring contracts fairly cost prohibitive (though it kinda seems like we’re keeping Davis on the roster for some reason other than insanity). But that practice of insuring contracts showed that there’s more money to spend on players if you give owners some level of protection from disaster contracts like Davis. Owners used to pay huge amounts to insure contracts before they became cost prohibitive. So if it’s good for competitiveness by allowing smaller teams to be more aggressive, and it’s good for player salaries, and it’s good for owners by protecting their investments, by what principle is a player entitled to the full value of a contract that they have essentially defaulted on for non-performance?
  11. By the way, I agree that Davis’ contract was insanely stupid long before he showed us how stupid it was by his performance. Angeles victimized himself. But I’m talking more generally about non-performance of contracts. I think the top earners would fare even better if not for the associated risks by ownership. They aren’t playing with Monopoly money. The risk builds a discounting into what owners will spend. And smaller market teams are less able to take risks because the affect of one Davis-like contract on their smaller payroll is huge. On what principle should players receive the full value of a contract they unable to satisfy competently? We’re rained out tonight....I wouldn’t be asking otherwise. Wait, did you call me noob?
  12. “Congratulations Mr. O’Corn, I’m thrilled to hire you as my new GM. I’ve always had a real respect, I mean that most sincerely. Obviously we all want to win, I want to win a championship. And I know you want a long career in baseball. and you’d like to keep your kids in school here in Baltimore. Now tell me, should I give you $123 million to work with or $100 million? Which is going to give you a better shot at delivering me a World Series champion?”
  13. Right now it seems the O’s wouldn’t be spending even if there was relief from his full contract, but I’m talking more generally. Unless you’re a big market team, having a disaster contract clearly does put you at a competitive disadvantage. Doesn’t mean you can’t still compete, but it makes it more difficult. What % of our payroll is currently going to one player, contracted for his ability to hit a thrown ball who is no longer able to hit a thrown ball? (I honestly don’t know what my point is).
  14. Hard to imagine the players union ever conceding on this, but it is a pretty bizarre reality to me. You contract an individual on a personal services contract for their unique skill set, and then that player is not able to passably perform the services for which they were contracted. There should be a non-performance mechanism. Players often receive performance incentives, but owners never receive performance minimums. I imagine players could receive higher value contracts if owners didn’t have to solely carry the risk of total loss contracts. Anyhow, Davis has become the standard for disaster contracts. I wouldn’t much care except it adversely affects the ability of the team to remain competitive, which very much affects the fans of that team, and not just the owners.
  15. As an alternative, might I suggest the “Davis Clause”. Every contract should have a minimum performance standard.
  • Create New...