Jump to content

ThomasTomasz

Limited Posting Member
  • Content Count

    537
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ThomasTomasz


  1. 7 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

    Well it’s your opinion that it’s less than his value.  His value is what teams will pay for it.

    If your argument is that you wouldn’t deal him for what I think his value, that’s fine. It’s a fair stance to take.  I just don’t agree with you. 
     

    Personally, I think your idea of what a trade should bring us means you would never make a trade.  At the time of any trade, if you trade an established player, you will never receive more than their value. 
     

    The Rays traded Archer for Baz, Glasnow and Meadows.  At the time of the trade, they gave up a high value, CY type arm and got 3 prospects.  By your definition, they shouldn’t have made that trade.  
     

    The Orioles traded Bedard for Jones, Tillman and 3 others.  Bedard was worth more at the time of the trade.  Are you glad they made that move or was that a mistake?

    In regards to the bolded, while this is true, the same is true for other offers we were rumored to have received. One was from the Dodgers for Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp. Another was from the Reds for Joey Votto and our choice of Johnny Cueto or Homer Bailey. 


  2. 3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

    Yea, I think this is a huge reach.  He just didn’t believe in spending money this way. All of this other stuff is window dressing and searching for an excuse.  If that was such an issue, they wouldn’t be doing it now and they would have never signed anyone in the past and he would have come out and made this known.

    A lot of these guys were given money to sign that they could only dream of having and they were put in better environments to succeed than anything they would have faced at home.  

    He was just a terrible owner and didn’t do things the right way.  It’s that simple.

    You're going to believe what you believe, just like the folks who believe this rebuild should be taking less time.  And hey, on this you could be right.  But I remember reading these stories around the time that Duquette came in, but the chances of finding those right now is slim-to-none.  I'm sure that he didn't believe in spending money that way, but again, ask yourself why.  If Angelos was willing to lose his franchise to stick up for the players in 1994, it is not far-fetched to believe that he would not be getting into the Latin American market which is still pretty cutthroat and dealing with 14 year olds like commodities.  Honestly, we need an international draft in the worst way, and not have these guys able to go until the same age as high school seniors.  

    • Upvote 1

  3. 1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

    How do you understand it?  It’s one of the best resources in the sport and there are a ton of Intl players in the majors and you understand him not using one of the best resources to improve his organization, especially at the minimal cost associated with it?

    It ranks at or near the top of the worst things he did as an owner and that’s saying a lot, since he was probably the worst owner in the sport for a 15-20 year span.

    As someone who employs minors at work, there are a lot of specific laws we have to follow, especially here in Maryland.  They are limited with what they can do, they are limited to the hours they can work, they have to have a certain length of "break" after a certain amount of hours, etc.  It's even worse with someone who is 15 years old, so as an organization, we do not hire anyone who is 15 and unless they are a family member of someone who works with us already, we tell them to reapply when they turn 16.  

    Now, I am probably presuming things, but knowing what we do about Angelos, it is safe to say that he didn't believe in hiring child labor in this sport.  By setting up an academy in Latin America, that means you are training and negotiating contracts with 12-14 year olds.  We have to remember, Angelos was willing to lose his franchise sticking up for the players in 1994.  We have never seen an owner in the four major sports who is as pro-labor as Peter Angelos, and once he passes away, I don't think we will ever see it again.  

    So yes, if I take my fan glasses off, and look at it from the perspective of a businessman who is seeing a labor attorney here, I completely understand why Angelos was not in that market.  As a fan, I don't agree with it, because you have to do what you have to do to keep up with everyone else and win.  By not going into the Latin American market, we essentially tied both arms behind our back trying to compete, and we are still operating with one arm tied behind our backs now.  

    • Upvote 1

  4. 3 hours ago, Frobby said:

    How to put this?    Having a solid international system in Year 1 probably begins to help your major league team in Year 5 or 6.    By then the 16-year olds you invested in are 21-22 and maybe some of them reach the majors.    (Yes, I realize that every so often a 19-20 year old slips in there, but we’re not banking on that.)

    The players you draft start helping the team in 3-4 years if they were high school guys, 1-2 years if they were college guys.   

    In all cases above, that’s pretty aggressive.   We know the median major leaguer debuts at 24.   Most, not all, of the high impact guys debut younger than that.   

    I think given this scenario it makes some sense to continue aiming for high picks for another year.    But I don’t want to overemphasize reliance on top 4-5 picks.    Good overall drafts that contribute good major league players.    

     

    Juan Soto signed with the Nationals in July 2015, and made his debut in May 2018.  So less than three years for someone that was the equivalent of Adley as far as a prospect goes.  

    A better example of a mid-range top 100 prospect is Keibert Ruiz.  He signed with the Dodgers in July 2014, and was called up in August 2020, so six years, and being 22 years old.  Using our own Jonathan Schoop, he signed un July 2008, and debuted in September 2013.  So 5-6 years is probably a good timeframe to work with, unless you are a top of the game talent. 

    Also, this is why Angelos hardly ever dipped a toe in this water, being the labor guy that he is.  Ruiz signed at age 16, Soto at age 17, even Schoop was 17.  I can't say that I agree with his stance, but I understand it.  


  5. 8 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

    The O's don't have analytics?  What is Sig doing here?  Or are we supposed to buy that it takes four years or more to ramp that up as well?

    I was referring to the state of the franchise when Elias was hired.  And no, it doesn't take four years to ramp up analytics as far as purchasing equipment and hiring the team goes, but it's certainly not done overnight, and organizationally, you have to have buy-in to believe in that department and begin using the data.  I believe after 2019 ended and we saw quite a few people released or reassigned, those were the guys who weren't buying into the new vision.  

    You want this thing to be turned around as quick as possible so we can start winning again.  I get it.  But that's not how the blueprint works.  You have to have an abundance of talent in the pipeline, and the franchises who have done this also didn't have to rebuild the development systems, as well as build the infrastructure for the pipeline itself.  


  6. 32 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

    The Padres?  They have had one top four pick (#3) in the last decade.

    Might not have been the best example to use.

     

    I mean, the Astros did it, as well as the Cubs and Nationals.  If it gets us a World Series title, why not do it?  The point is, we have to be patient while the organization is essentially rebuilt from the ground up, because Elias was not given much.  A lot had to be implemented, and a lot was changed.  All of it for the better.  


  7. 6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

    I do not think you need 4 years of top 4 draft picks to compete.   You do need several very good overall drafts and other steps to acquire prospects in exchange for veterans.   

    I believe one thing the Padres always had was a decent international program.  The MLB.com March 2020 top 30 for the Padres contained 11 international players, including their no. 3 & 4 prospects, ranked 25 and 27 in all of MLB.   The lack of an established international program puts a lot more pressure on the draft for the O’s.   I expect the O’s to be fully competitive in the international market in the class that follows the Jan. 21 class (which, by the way, will include a couple of potential O’s top 30 guys), but what hurts us right now is the the lack of the 20-23 year old Latin players that could have been signed 4-7 years ago.   That’s the reason our farm system is top 10 but not top 5.    

    Bingo.  No amateurs, and no analytics to help turn around a player like Charlie Morton really puts a lot into hitting via the draft.  

    Great organizations invest in every area.  We're on our way there, but we can't cash out now.  


  8. 7 hours ago, OrioleDog said:

    Obviously that one was my over-reaction favorite.   I'm sure it's just not to shade the Westburg, Servideo, Ortiz, Hernaiz type guys.

    Versatility in general, I think I think shifts mostly dig into 3B/2B as pure positions, and that SS remains mostly special.   If last postseason was a leading indicator, more 4 OF is coming, and that does mean you probably want a few guys practicing for that role, probably whoever between your 2B and 3B is less of an established star.

    Look at the Dodgers and how versatile some of their guys are.  Chris Taylor played at 2B, SS, LF and CF last year.  Edwin Rios plays 1B and 3B.  Kike Hernandez played everywhere but C and 3B.  Bellinger even plays 1B and CF.  

    The more teams are digging into analytics and seeing data on certain splits, the more versatile they want their players to be so they can create the best lineup to go after certain pitchers.  


  9. 3 hours ago, OrioleDog said:

    Eh, I think this is the Padres basically cutting Zach Davies, but I'm sure they appreciate his good performance.  He and Hendricks may not serve each other well as rotation mates, but they also might not be that before the offseason is over.

    I was surprised by the anonymity of the prospect group, but am positive those guys all showed well behind the 2020 curtain, with probably an A-ball All-Star or two if those leagues played.  

    The deep depth aspect of it reminded me of the Bundy trade, and I think a fun can to kick given Oriole exuberance would be is Bradish the most valuable in this basket of eight, enough so that we might not give our ex-Angels for their ex-Padres.

    Darvish is an oft-injured pitcher who is 34, and has $60 million left on his contract.  This is a salary dump with some lottery tickets added for the Cubs.  

    • Upvote 1

  10. 9 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

    You don't need 4+ years of top 4 draft picks to rebuild.

    When you factor in what exactly needed to be rebuilt in Baltimore, yes, you do.  Consistently one of the worst farm systems out there.  A complete lack of ability to develop a "top of the rotation" starting pitcher- the only ones in my lifetime are Mike Mussina and Erik Bedard, and really, Bedard is stretching that definition a bit.  Hardly any analytics department to speak of, and a lack of infrastructure in Latin America.  

    If you want a two year rebuild, you might get what we had from 2012-2016.  But look at the Padres and what they were able to do with their collection of talent- some of it came up the ranks.  They signed Machado and Hosmer.  They are now trading Wave 2 prospects for legitimate players and going all-in. Our teams in 2012-16 didn't have that kind of prospect capital to trade, and those that we did trade away ended up biting us.  

    Considering the state of the Orioles when Elias took over, he deserves all of the time in the world to get this right.  We're making inroads in Latin America, something Duquette promised to do but never could.  Elias has revamped the development system, including firing/reassigning some long-term guys who I have to think were solely employed because they were "former Orioles."  We've seen investments into the analytics department.  All of that goes into rebuilding the talent pipeline which is now breaking into top 10 rankings from anyone not named Keith Law.

    I want the Orioles to get the kind of pipeline that the Dodgers have.  I want to be able to always have the next guy up in the minors and have extension roots in Latin America.  I want a deep analytics department like Elias and Mejdal built in Houston.  But that doesn't happen overnight, and we need to be patient while this whole process plays out.  

    • Upvote 1

  11. 1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

    Let’s hope they are setting the team up to sell because the rebuilding plan has gone too far at this point.

    Look at how the Cubs, Astros and Nationals were built. With that kind of plan, we are right where we need to be. 

    • Upvote 2

  12. 6 hours ago, rudyrooster said:

    It's sorta "stadiums be damned".  MLB obviously gave us the "middle finger" a couple years ago when it was our time to host the All-Star game.  It seems to me as though MLB and the Orioles ownership don't have a very good relationship.  Just my opinion.

    It’s been that way with Peter Angelos since he broke from the owners in the 1994 labor dispute. MLB and the owners tried to get him removed from the stories you can find. 
     

    fault Angelos for a lot of things over the years, but he’s likely the only owner in the four major sports who is pro-labor, and to the detriment of his own club in many cases. 

    • Upvote 3

  13. On 12/13/2020 at 10:52 PM, MCO'sFan said:

    I like the summer music series and T-shirt days. I agree that they should do sime retro bobbleheads

    See, I view the summer music series as more of an event than a giveaway or promotion.  It doesn't move the needle for me at all, but I can see where it appeals to people.  

    I just hate that they got rid of the social media days.  Those were pretty fun. 


  14. 21 hours ago, jamalshw said:

    I'm really surprised they are announcing anything. The purposes of promotions are to get fans in the stands. If fans aren't allowed in the stands or if the capacity is capped at like 25%, I'm not sure what good such an event will have.

     

    They usually wait until February to announce the giveaways, even in a normal year, so I am surprised as well


  15. 11 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

    Most casual fans would struggle to name 7 or 8 players on the O's.  What about the Mullins "Bunting Bobblehead"

    The idea that I gave them in my STH survey was do one for the five players whose numbers are retired, and have an augmented reality program set up at the monument park.  That would cover five.  Or do bobbleheads for the players that they decide to celebrate for an anniversary team.  In 2019, they celebrated the "why not" team.  Instead of giving them one day, celebrate the whole season.  Do bobbleheads for Cal (ASG), Frank Robinson (Mgr of the year), Gregg Olson (ROY) and then pick a couple others (I would've picked Mickey Tettleton and Elrod Hendricks personally.). We have such a rich history that we don't need to rely on current player bobbleheads.  

    • Upvote 1

  16. 48 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

    Our starting OF seems to be set with Mountcastle, Hays, and Santander, while Mullins, Stewart, and maybe Shaw and/or Mancini will also get some playing time out there, plus McKenna and/or Diaz will likely be up at some point during the 2021 season. I don't really see any point to adding yet another OF to an already pretty crowded OF picture.

    If we're spending anything in free agency, it should be for IFs and SPs.

    Yeah, I'd say OF is set.  Obviously SS is something they are going to look to add, and a couple SPers in the vein of Milone and Leblanc.  Maybe someone at 3B to challenge Ruiz.  I was disappointed when he went so cold last year.  

    • Like 1

  17. Look, I used to think this back in the day with guys like Teixiera.  When I started viewing things in the lens of "what is the team going to do?" rather than "what should they do?" I accepted my fanhood more for the Orioles, as well as the Washington Football Team.  

    So in the vein of "what is the team going to do?", what does this mean for Kris Bryant?  We have some models to follow, namely how the Cubs, Nationals, Astros and even the Padres have built themselves recently.  The Orioles are still in the "talent gathering" stage, meaning we won't be spending much money.  We are pairing down the payroll, to hopefully save some for the future, as well as invest it into other departments.  The goal is to teach and develop, not to win.  

    At some point, we will need to spend money.  This comes in two forms- the first is retaining your own players.  I would love to see the Orioles in a few years start buying out arbitration years with long-term deals.  With younger prospects, this sets us up to retain them through their prime years, and not pay as much on the back-end of their careers.  

    The second is the spend free agents.  For the Nationals, they signed Jayson Werth.  Werth gave them a veteran presence, and introduced to MLB that the Nationals were ready to compete.  For the Cubs, they went out and secured Jon Lester, a legitimate "top of the rotation" pitcher, since they invested heavily on the bats in their minor league system.  As a fan of this team, even though we have done much better with Chris Holt in developing our pitchers organizationally, we have only developed two legit TORP's over the past 30 years.  I would love to see us make a Lester-type signing when we are ready to begin our run.  

    Going back to prospects here for a second........the pipeline needs to be secure, and have depth.  Not all of the prospects we have are going to play for us.  Some are used as trade chips.  All of the franchises I mentioned earlier used their farm systems to trade for players who added to their core to make their run.  I would rather wait an extra year or so and continue to build up that depth so we have a chance of extending our window as much as possible.  Ideally, I'd love to see us have the development chops of the Dodgers, but that might be a pipe dream.  


  18. On 12/11/2020 at 10:52 AM, MurphDogg said:

    Last year there were 5 bobbleheads on the schedule. The Palmer and Bird Hall of Fame ones that are on this year's schedule, plus a Boog Powell, John Means and Cal Ripken bobblehead. In fact all of the 2021 promotions were originally scheduled for 2020, but several promotions are missing. Besides the bobbleheads, there was a knit hat, a soccer jersey, a 1970 Brooks Robinson Jersey,  and a travel pillow that appeared on the 2020 promotional schedule but not the 2021 schedule.

     I don't anticipate fans in the stands for the entirety of this season, perhaps not any fans until the All-Star Break, so I somewhat understand the diminished promotional schedule. Hopefully in 2022 the promotional schedule is beefed back up.

    I forgot about some of those from last year- maybe because pictures were not posted.  I am fine with five, but having two is a bit of a joke.  I'm not asking for 11-12 like the Dodgers have, but 5-6 is an acceptable amount.  

    In any case, anything they do is better than the absurd amount of t-shirts they did for a time.  I think over half of them at one point were t-shirts.  


  19. I use Prospects1500 for dynasty leagues, and according to them, Stallings is the Angels 19th prospect, and Pina their 21st.  It looks like Stallings profiles as a low ceiling/high floor back of rotation starter who controls pitchers well, and Pina may be a high leverage reliever if he can't develop a third pitch.  Not a bad return, but nothing to write home about either.

    • Upvote 1

  20. Really disappointed in this. For one, Chris Davis is on the roster still. You can’t tell me that this decision is motivated by finances more than performance, because if so, Nunez blows Davis out of the water. Chances are that we could even turn Nunez into something at the deadline but we are giving up on him, well before we’ve given up on inferior players before. 
     

    also, while I don’t want to give up on prospects, most teams have a Rylan Bannon (utility guy with a decent bat) or Alex Wells (BOR control lefty) if not multiple of those guys.  Nunez is a proven power bat at the majors. I just don’t get it unless it’s financially motivated.....which it clearly is and that’s a true shame


  21. On 10/30/2020 at 1:18 PM, DrungoHazewood said:

    Is it just me, or is this an exceptionally weak class?  The #8 on the whole list is a KBO import that we're not even sure is going to translate to a MLB player. Kevin Gausman is #14, 60 innings removed from a 5.72 ERA in 2019.

    During the past year or so there was an uptick in younger players signing contract extensions, due to uncertainty around a new labor agreement coming up. Not sure how many guys that impacts as far as who was going to initially be free agents however 


  22. On 10/2/2020 at 10:01 AM, Philip said:

    Could Gunnar really be that good? After so many first round duds, getting a legit guy in the second round would be great.

    He has a mid first talent grade, there were signability questions and I believe we went way overslot to get him to sign.

×
×
  • Create New...