Jump to content

big_sparxx

Members
  • Content Count

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

44 Short Season A-Ball

About big_sparxx

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 11/28/1964

Personal Information

  • Location
    Bermuda
  • Interests
    Good Food, Good Friends, Good Music and the O's of course!
  • Occupation
    I count bottles...
  • Favorite Current Oriole
    Adam Jones
  • Favorite All Time Oriole
    Eddie Murray

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The reason for optimism is simple... this is the ONLY way we are working now. No big spending in the FA market, and the investment in developing as much lower level talent as possible. History has taught us one thing... that we're in it for the long haul, that there are no get rich quick schemes, and that while it'll probably take a lot longer than any of us imagined... we can live in hope while we are pontificating the vales of those that are in the system. You really can't ask for any more than that.
  2. As I said in a previous thread. I think traditional starters are doomed. As Fangraphs notes the average innings per start has been getting lower and lower over the past several years. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/starting-pitcher-workloads-have-been-significantly-reduced-in-2020/ The nature of the game I believe is based on pitch counts now. Sure it's great to have guys who can throw 100 pitches over 7 or 8 innings, but I think there aren't that many guys who can do that any more. We're gonna move to 3 innings per pitcher and hopefully the effective guys won't get through the oppo lineup more than once.
  3. Just imagine... if he hits 50 points higher he could be in the reckoning for "comeback player of the year" That would mean he'd be hitting above the mendoza line at around .215 Something to shoot for.
  4. 2 Words... Trey Mancini. Our season is a success the minute he takes the field.
  5. and that idea has given us Chris Davis... sorry... but home runs are great... but if I can get disciplined guys who can drive a pitch, get on base more and hit the occasional home run... I'll go with that 9 times out of 10.
  6. The idea actually came from the non designated starter idea that has popped up in recent times. I'd rather have 5 or 6 guys who can pitch 3 innings than a guy who can only come in against left handed hitters.
  7. I disagree... I think for the game to improve we need less specialist pitchers, more hitters who can hit to the opposite field (defeats the shift), and more chances to get guys chances to improve in all aspects of the game. The game is so.... meh nowadays.
  8. The reality is that a game where a team gets blown out really does 2 things: 1) Fans leave the park or if watching on TV change the channel. 2) By the 7th inning what are you achieving in a blowout? In basketball or football (pro) tv stations will change to a more competitive game.
  9. Why cant we have better pitchers overall? Shouldn't that be the goal?
  10. This is the point. The more pitchers you have, the less hitters you have. You are more inclined to allow a struggling hitter to exist without having any real competition for the position. If you have a starter that can go 5 or 6, and can divvy up the rest between 2 guys, you have a better game overall.
  11. I don't think guys should be rewarded for hitting foul balls. I remember Keith Hernandez saying one time that you only get one real good chance per ab. Not that I necessarily agree with that idea... but with variable strike zones, I'd like to see pitchers get an out and keep their PCs down. Mercy rules are dumb... but getting down 5+ runs is also dumb..
  12. re-define relievers... We have, for far too long had to keep specialists, setup men, 7th inning guys... it's truly madness... and it all takes time away from the game. If you have pitchers who can't deal with 3 innings work...
  13. A couple of suggestions. 1) Three pitchers a game (unless one gets injured during the game). 2) Mercy rule - a team up by 5 or more after 7... ballgame. 3) Allow sign stealing. (It happens anyway so why not just make it a part of the game?) 4) 5 foul balls = out (no matter if the fouls happen on strike 1 or strike 3).
  14. A complete organizational rebuild... on a timetable? Why are we asking this question exactly? I apologize for asking this... but who are we to expect anything by any certain period of time? I get it... we want a competitive organization, filled with up and coming studs that will set the mothership right for years to come. Irony is that this vision was never important to any other GM... nor to the owner who abused his role. So now that there is a culture shift, we are expecting magic to happen as if it has always been the case? Apologies, but the concept of unrealistic expectations is stuff of Yankees/Red Sox lore. 1983 was our last championship. Lest we forget, aside from the Rays, every other team in the division has won at least 1 world title since We can sit back and reminisce of the past decade (how many WS appearances did we have?) and the questions still exist... 1) Where was the foundation of top minor league talent breaking down the walls to get into the ML team? 2) Why do we expect Elias to be more than what the owners will let him be? 3) Why can't we just be pleased to have a GM that is doing what he can to rebuild an organization after years (YEARS) of neglect? Sorry folks. We have a GM and a structure in place to do something different. I don't know squat about the nature of what he's had to do here. I'm not sure many... even the die-hards do, but to assert an idea that you need to see results in 2,3,4,5 or 10 years is your problem... not his. I wonder if other teams have this conversation about their GMs.
×
×
  • Create New...