Jump to content

MachoMachadoMan

Members
  • Content Count

    429
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

97 Low A-Ball

About MachoMachadoMan

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 3/19/1984

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Good point. Let's pack 'em up and ship off the team. Heard Montreal might be looking for another franchise. Elias made a minor move that you admit yourself you have no problem with and was actually smart. You said it was a good move. Then say it proves he doesn't have control. So if he had control... he would've made a dumb move?
  2. Agreed with this. The big dollar, top of the line international free agents are already signed up. He has no scouting department. He likely has no confidence in the shell of an operation the O's had in place and looking at a pile of international spending money and nowhere to spend it. May as well get a potential cheap utility infielder for the next few years.
  3. Grenier was interviewed at the Winter Meetings and raved about Rutschman. It's what you would expect from a friend and a teammate, but it is nice to hear a personal side to all of the statistical analysis
  4. Even if Hyde ends up being the pick, that doesn't mean Elias was obfuscating. It just means there wasn't a finalize agreement and he doesn't want to confirm anything until agreement is final.
  5. Yes, this is exaggerating, but I do wonder what the mindset is for many of the guys carrying over when it comes to analytics. We heard Britton rave about what he received in New York, but that was a winning club. It's easier to buy in to a new way of doing your job when the team around you is winning. Even with great data next year, the team is going to stink. I don't think there is any assurance that Davis or any other player leftover is going to immediately embrace analytics. If they don't, they'll be gone quickly. But it still takes time to move them out.
  6. I've seen both Riley Greene and Andrew Vaughn called out on here as alternatives to the obvious Rutchsman/Witt Jr debate, and I don't understand (at least based on the MLB Pipeline write ups.) Both are all-bat prospects who at best profile as an average LF (Greene) or first baseman (Vaughn). Now that we're all-in on analytics super thinking, these don't seem to be the best value. The Ringer has a fascinating read today on the Seattle Mariners 15-year headache in drafting and player development that anyone on this board would find familiar. The Mariners have repeatedly valued low-floor, polished, near ML-ready players at the top of the draft (Hultzen, Ackley, Zunino) and have been left without much success.
  7. I don't think we have any idea what "we" look for anymore now that we have changed at the top. Fans can have preferences, but it will be very difficult to get into the prediction business with the Elias Administration until we have something to go on other than decisions made by a front office he was part of. That said, there appear to be lots of interesting pieces, we have the first pick, and there are no dreams of a pennant chase, so no stress in using a roster spot.
  8. I'm going 3: Harvey, Hays, Mullins. All three will be cheap with upsides of major contributors and floors of solid, inexpensive pieces. Harvey is the wild card here. I think a new regime comes in and switches him to a reliever where he has potential to be an asset. Pretty confident Hays and Mullins will be pieces at minimum. Of course... if Harvey turns into a solid BP arm he could be tradebait. I'm sticking with 3.
  9. Looks like the Mariners are trying to race us to the bottom of next summer's standings. Is there a Ken Griffey III in the 2020 class?
  10. Whether he's a leader or not, the attitude of the highest paid player and veteran in the clubhouse matters. If he stinks, but embraces the changes, then I think they can keep him around and see if he makes a turn. If he pouts because Buck isn't around the shield him anymore, then they need to get him out ASAP.
  11. If Davis' struggles continue, his performance would be only one part of a decision to move on. Davis is a veteran and likely looked to as a leader in this clubhouse. Buck covered for him a lot in the media. Buck was likely a reason Davis was brought over in the first place due to Bucks' familiarity with the Rangers' system. If things go south and so does Davis' attitude, that would be my breaking point. You don't need a veteran malcontent in the locker room when trying to turn the corner and rebuild. This is going to be the biggest challenge for any new manager. Buck was beloved by many of his players. Many of the long-time nuggets may be gone, but there will be a significant culture shift at OPACY and those players will need to adjust.
  12. Tony - I know comps can be dangerous, but it seems really difficult to get our heads around what major-league-contributor Ryan Mountcastle could look like. I've been thinking (and may be totally wrong here)... Ceiling: Matt Holiday (plays left field and rakes) Floor: Right-handed Logan Morrison (enticing power but never puts it together) Most Likely: Mark Trumbo (big power, low OBP, no real positional value)
  13. I'd welcome back Schoop on a 1-2 year deal. It's a low-risk move that could help bring some fans out to the ballpark. He's a fan favorite and can offer the locker room leadership now that Jonesy is gone. I don't think his presence really holds back any up and comers.
×
×
  • Create New...