Jump to content

Mr. Chewbacca Jr.

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Mr. Chewbacca Jr.

  1. 4 hours ago, waroriole said:

    How is this a new source of revenue? Wouldn’t it be a new expense?


    It's marketing. It seems like they intend to use the athletes as local celebrities in promotions. Basically the same as if the O's signed the Towson Tigers QB to make appearances at games and produce some social media videos about how fun a night at Camden Yards is. 

    In the article, it says they're paying the student athletes with a $500 stipend, free tickets, and merch. Pretty cheap marketing if you ask me.

    Not sure that would really move the needle much in a city like Baltimore that doesn't really have a big athletics school - but I could see this approach working well in the South where high school football and college sports are a big deal.

  2. 3 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

    I don't believe Elias expected the team to be this bad this year, I don't think any of us did.  But I also wouldn't expect Elias to start hopping around and switching up his plan based on how bad this season has been, either. 

    Just based on the roster and talent level, anyone looking at this team at the beginning of the season had to know this was a last place team in the AL East.  Everyone can agree on that.  Elias wouldn't ever admit to that, but he's been around the game long enough to know.  

    So if we were expected to finish in last place to start the season and are in last place this late into August, what are we wringing our hands about?  The degree of severity of being in last place that we find ourselves in?  If we were looking at 53 wins, would we be freaking out as much?  If we came in at 99 losses, dodging the hideous 100 loss season, yet still in last place, would we be complaining as much?  What if we lost 102 games instead?  Where's the demarcation point between being comfortable in last place and being outraged by it?

    You bring up good points - but I don't think the concern is that the O's are in last place. They were certainly expected to be a bad team.

    The issue is that Elias & Co. haven't really shown any ability to find talent outside of marquee draft picks. Add that to a MLB team that is struggling with basic fundamentals, young pitchers universally showing no progress or success under Chris Holt, and a farm system that quite frankly isn't a deep or good as the #2 Ranking suggests. The results of this rebuild so far do not justify the tanking Elias has put the team, the franchise, and what's left of the fanbase through. 

    This team is absolutely terrible, and the last few years have been historically terrible - which is saying something for a team that had fourteen losing seasons in a row. The "plan" may be the "plan," but ultimately - the O's can't suck forever, they will need to draw fans again. Elias will need to figure out a way to show improvement in 2022 - otherwise he's going to be out of the job.

  3. 1 hour ago, glenn__davis said:

    Haha, was thinking the same thing. Martin definitely has his share of fans on here, and I'm certainly not gonna tell them that they're wrong, but I just don't get it.  He can't hit and never has. He can play SS ok but not exceptionally so.  I agree, I'd have no issues if he were released tomorrow.  He's no consideration for me for the future. 

    But to each their own. 

    I agree. He makes consistent mistakes on easy plays. Today - a grounder is hit hard right at him, he hesitates, and can't turn a double-play. That's just basic, fundamentals baseball.

  4. 8 minutes ago, Aglets said:

    Another Outfielder?!?!

    Great, just what this team needs.  How will we make room for him over Mullins, Kjerstad, Cowser, and Diaz??!?!

    Kjerstad still hasn't played his first professional game. Diaz needs to be able to hit above his weight at AA. Mullins could be having a Schoop-like, one-year-wonder season for all we know. Hays has struggled to stay healthy and produce. DJ Stewart is DJ Stewart.

    If anything, they need more.

    • Upvote 2
  5. 1 hour ago, Philip said:

    Jonathan Villar is an excellent example of who the best of our guys are. He was a good-and cheap-player on the Astros when they sucked. When they got better he wasn’t good enough so they shipped him to Milwaukee. He was adequate-and still cheap- for the Brewers, but when they got better they dumped him on us and he was no longer cheap.

    these players will never be part of a good team because they aren’t good.

    I don't think that's fair to say. Villar isn't the greatest player in the world - but he's versatile, has speed, decent with the bat, and doesn't break the bank. He moves around so much because teams are interested in him. The Jays traded for him last year during their playoff push. The Mets signed him this year and had every intention of being contenders.

  6. 1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

    Or will the writers acknowledge the Orioles have limited funds to build their team. Pouring money into free agents and perhaps winning 78 games does nothing to build a winning team. At best the Orioles are continuously treading water with no plans for the future. 

    Or instead of making a futile attempt to win now, why not build a sustainable player development model that will consistently develop players over the long term. The problem the 2012-16 Orioles had was once they burned through that core of players there were no reinforcements ready to step up. 

    If the Orioles want to compete in the AL East they need to be more like the Rays to have a chance. Because outspending the Evil Empire and Pink Hat nation isn't viable. 

    Elias could very well fail, but at least there is a long term plan now unlike most of the 1998 to 2011 run. 

    I don't really understand this take. There is a middle ground between trying to "win" and being a historically awful team. Building a player development pipeline or having a decent MLB team don't need to be exclusive. Nobody is suggesting they sign Jay Paytons and Kevin Millars in hopes of putting together a few extra wins. They should be trying to find young, affordable MLB-capable talent that helps them win now and later. There's no reason to keep rolling Cesar Valdez, Maikel Franco, and the like every night.

  7. 5 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

    Agreed. I know it's easy for some to get defensive, but let's face it, no one is lying in these articles. 

    The jury is out on Elias and his crew. Are there things that look promising when it comes to using the technologies to help our player develop, sure, but until we see a player make a breakthrough in the minors and then perform well at the major league level, it doesn't mean anything.

    We have no idea whether he's able to field a good major league team yet because he hasn't even tried. I don't know what his timeline is, but I can say this, this team is going to need a major, and mean major influx of free agency or trade talent to compete anytime in the next 3-years.


    I couldn't agree more. Adley and GrayRod look great, but as you mentioned, there are lots of question-marks and there is a serious lack of depth on the pitching side. I don't really see how they compete without adding lots of talent via free agency.

    I think this speaks to what the national writers are arguing - are this many 100+ loss seasons really necessary to accomplish the results thus far?

  8. I don't really take a lot of stock in Farm System rankings. They're pretty arbitrary and depend a lot on the methodology of the publication.

    The O's moved up because other teams promoted their guys - the Rays would probably still be #1 if Wander Franco, Arozarena, Luis Patiño, etc still counted as prospects. The O's will drop when GrayRod and Adley are promoted. It's all kind of silly.

    Personally, I still think the O's Farm System is pretty top-heavy and isn't nearly as deep as it needs to be.


    • Upvote 3
  9. 2 hours ago, Frobby said:

    Is it really better in the NFL, where they have a salary cap and floor, etc.?  I count 8 teams who won 5 games or less last year - that’s the equivalent of 50 games or less in baseball.  Another three won 6 games.   How many of those teams were realistically “in it” halfway through the season?

    Basketball, which has salary restrictions on both ends, had five teams playing below the winning percentage that gets you to 50 wins in baseball.   The worst team went 17-55, the equivalent of a 55-game season.   

    In other words, I’m not sure a salary floor fixes the problem.   I realize that every sport is different and just by the nature of the sport itself it’s more likely that a bad team can beat a good one on any given day, compared to football and basketball.  

    The NFL is a totally different animal. Teams that constantly lose do have difficulty pulling in fans, for example Jacksonville. But, two crappy teams playing on MNF in a meaningless game will draw more viewers than the World Series, NBA Finals, etc. The NFL and College Football is just a magical beast.

    I agree with you though - I'm not sure a salary floor fixes the problem, either. Teams still need to be well run and it doesn't really stop teams from stinking in sports that have salary floors.

    I think a comparison between MLB and English Soccer might provide an answer. I'd argue that the Premier League has a bigger problem with mega-rich teams dominating the standings than MLB. But with Premier League - they also have so many other side-competitions that you can be in last place and your team still has something to play for. They have two knock-out tournament cups, relegation, Champions League, Europa League.

    Perhaps what MLB's problem is they only have one competition and one trophy. Obviously, relegation will never happen - but I think more creative ideas could help. I think the Field of Dreams game and the national interest that came with it really shows that fans out there are interested in new and different things. Just for starters, what if there was a single-game, knock-out tournament that happened throughout the season? And, rosters could expand for this tournament to include a team's top prospects and maybe recently-retired veterans, so that the regular 26-roster doesn't have to be used up?

    • Upvote 1
  10. 12 minutes ago, Frobby said:

    His salary isn’t $17 mm, it’s $23 mm with $6 mm of that deferred.   And I will repeat for the zillionth year time: the O’s are putting a bit less than $6 mm into escrow every year to fund the future payments to Davis.  They aren’t spending only $17 mm on him each year.   That was only true in 2016 and 2017, before the escrow obligations kicked in (18 months after it’s earned).  

    You can’t have it both ways.   You can’t say the O’s are paying him only $17 mm now, and then say they have $0 committed to 2023.    You either count the escrowed money as paid now (which for cash flow purposes is accurate), or count it when paid to Davis in the future.   

    Where are you getting the information about money being put into escrow every year? I searched online, on Twitter - and the highest results are actually your posts on the Hangout. I know you know your stuff - so legit curious to learn more. 

    Either way, we're talking about less than $6m in both 2021 and 2022, $3.5m from 2023-2032, or a combination of the two. That's relatively little for a major league team and quite frankly, should be a non-factor in free agency. We don't factor the $500k they pay to Bobby Bonilla every year, either.

    To my original point, the Orioles can certainly pay free agents this offseason. The contract terms for Davis, Cobb, and all the other deferred contracts are already set in stone. The O's can structure free agent contracts accordingly. They don't need to wait for Davis' contract to expire to suddenly be freed of some financial restraints that are holding them back from spending money.

  11. 21 minutes ago, ScGO's said:

    F Olney. After experiencing 1998-2011, I am no where near panic mode after the first three years of Elias.  If we can be winning by 2023, that will have been 6 straight losing seasons, nothing compared to the 14 we had prior to 2012.

    I believe 2022 will also be a wash, but it will be extremely important for our minor league system as '22 will be the year we should hopefully collect a good pocket of talent at AAA (Adley, DHall, GrayRod, Westburg, Henderson, Baumann, etc). Going into 2023, we will finally be clear of Chris Davis' contract and I believe that's when we should sign a couple quality free agents, especially a pitcher. 

    The winning we could do through the mid-late 2020's, early 2030's could put Olney to shame, but we have to go through this more probably one more season.

    They don't need to wait to be clear of Chris Davis' contract. The terms are already agreed upon. They have $0 committed to 2023. They could absolutely sign someone this offseason and structure the deal as needed.

    Keep in mind that Chris Davis is only being paid approximately $17m per year, with much of it deferred. That is not an earth-shattering number for a major league club in 2021.

    Also - I don't think Olney is saying the this process won't work. He's arguing that it is completely unnecessary. Other teams with smaller resources are having far better and more consistent results without consecutive 100+ loss seasons.

  12. 25 minutes ago, Frobby said:

    Apparently I’m the only person in the world who believes that if you don’t spend $23 mm today, you have $23 mm available to spend tomorrow.   Most people seem to believe it just goes into the Angelos family’s pockets never to be seen again.  I don’t think that.  

    I think it's a lot more complicated than that, Frobby. You're assuming that revenue, cash flow, taxes, and profit are the same in both scenarios. Take away the Angelos-Scrooge-McDuck conspiracies -- I think it is pretty naive to think that money is being saved in some vault for later.

    • Upvote 2
  13. Just now, wildcard said:

    Few Owners or GMs have the patience to tank the way the O's are doing it.  They may start down the path but after a while the fan, media, friends of the owner..... it gets pretty difficult to stay the course.

    For good reason. Baseball teams are ultimately an entertainment product and at a certain point - they need to sell entertainment.

    You could maybe argue a team could balance poor play from the team with other entertaining experiences for fans at the ballpark. But, the O's have banned outside food and haven't really added anything to the Camden Yards experience. The stadium gets louder during the dang hot dog race than the actual game.

  14. 24 minutes ago, Pickles said:

    Of course.  Don't forget: Stewart isn't just a bad hitter; he's deeply negative in the field and on the bases.  So you can find good teams with 550 OPS utility infielders.  Or .625 OPS backup catchers.

    But those guys are still better than Stewart.

    My point remains: In a healthier organization, Stewart doesn't see as much ML time as he has in this one.

    He's been consistent enough in his poor play since 2018 that it's pretty clear what he is. He's only getting playtime because he's on a terrible team.

  15. 8 minutes ago, interloper said:

    I guess what I'm saying is, which positions are you spending money on in the offseason to fill? For me, the options are 3B, SP, and RP. Everywhere else is kind of set with homegrown guys. I don't think signing another Galvis for SS improves the team. But in re: to SP, it's going to be tough getting someone signed here who would be a vast improvement. Obviously they should try, it's just a really tough market to be in if you're a 100-loss team. You're the last place people want to go to. 

    I don't think the O's have a true SS in the system. Jordan Westburg has been better at SS than I expected, but I think he ultimately ends up at 3B. It's a loaded SS FA Class this year  - it makes sense to add someone there. 

    As for pitching - they need lots of it. I don't expect them to drop big money on a 30-something pitcher, but I would hope they try to cast a wider net to get a few Taijuan Walkers of the world to see what sticks. This season they went with Matt Harvey and Felix Hernandez - just completely ridiculous.

  16. 49 minutes ago, SteveA said:

    What San Francisco has done has been amazing.   But I don't know that it can be duplicated, nor that anyone should try, most especially a building team.

    The Giants have:
       -- a 34 year old starting C
       -- a 33 year old starting 1B
       -- a 33 year old starting 2B
       -- a 34 year old starting SS
       -- a 35 year old starting 3B
       -- starting OF:  31, 27, 30

    They did get younger by acquiring 29 year old Kris Bryant.  They have key bench guys Ruf (34), Casali (32), LaStella (32), Flores (29), Slater (28).   They have one guy under 28 with more than 76 ABs (26 year old Mauricio Dubon).

    Their rotation is 30, 31, 35, 30, 24.

    Their most used relievers are 30, 34, 32, 28, 25, 29, 28, 27.

    It has worked, that is amazing and a tribute to what Zahidi has done.

    But its relevance to the Orioles is absolutely ZERO.   If we tried to assemble a team that old and put it on the field, we would be the laughing stock of baseball.   The position we were in and where we are trying to go are completely antithetical to that kind of strategy.   Putting them side by side an an article as some kind of comparison is a complete joke.

    It's unfair to really compare the Giants and the Orioles due to their spending power, but I get the concept behind the article. Zahidi is getting major production out of some savvy moves and is beating out the juggernaut Dodgers and talented Padres. The Orioles are a dead deer on the side of the road.

    If you look at their team - Zahidi retained Gausman for a qualifying offer. Anthony DeSclafani was signed for 1/$6m. Darin Ruf was signed for 1/$1.3m. That's three of their top five WAR performers this year. 

    Elias has shown no ability to find major leaguers who can outperform their expectations/contract. I'm not an Elias hater, but you can't look at the results for the past few years and not recognize its a major, concerning issue.

  17. 58 minutes ago, interloper said:

    I sympathize with this sentiment, but I also don't know that the O's can do all that much in the offseason. Their best bet is to make a savvy trade or two for some impact MLers, but they aren't going to have much success in free agency until the core proves it's close and the team looks more attractive. 

    I agree the time for the Franco's of the world are about done, I just don't know if Elias is going to have many avenues to improve the team this offseason. I'm pretty interested to find out. Gun to my head though? I'd say Elias is going to do almost the exact same thing he did last offseason. 

    The O's have $0 committed in 2023. He also inherited Cedric Mullins, Grayson Rodriguez, DL Hall, Ryan Mountcastle, Austin Hays, John Means, and the first overall pick in a draft with a no-brainer potential star from the previous regime. He's been here since 2018 and has traded away lots of talent since then.

    There have been plenty of avenues to improve the team; there will be even more avenues to improve the team this offseason. I could put together a winning team too if I was able to tank for years and hoard top draft picks. Elias needs to start putting together a winning team - otherwise any GM could do what he is doing.

    • Upvote 1
  18. 10 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

    Why does Correa make sense?  I mean, I get the Elias connection but there has to be more to it  than that.

    I'm doubtful about Correa too - but if there is any FA that the O's make a splash for, it'll be him. 

    I guess it depends on how close you think the O's are. If you're optimistic - you're probably looking at 2023 as a year where Adley, Mountcastle, Mullins, Hays, Mancini, and Correa are a pretty solid lineup behind GrayRod, DL Hall, Means. They have $0 committed to payroll in 2023. They have money.

  19. 14 hours ago, Jagwar said:

    I'll say nobody. I don't want the O's to spend money until they start trending upward in competitiveness. 

    I think the O's are in a place to lock up a young, free-agent position player that will still be productive by the time the O's are competitive. They have to start trying to win sometime.

    In this FA class, the only players that I see fitting that qualification though are Correa, Story, Bryant, and Seager. Will they sign any of them - I'm doubtful. But Correa makes a lot of sense.

    • Upvote 1
  20. 1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

    The trades were just as much about reducing payroll as acquiring prospects. Any return for Gausman got reduced by including O'Day and his contract in the trade. 

    Britton was getting paid $12M in 2018, when he wasn't putting up elite closer numbers and on an Orioles team where having a closer didn't matter much. 

    I remember at the time, ownership was pretty pleased with how DD handled the trade deadline and reduced payroll. There was even speculation they might keep him around. 

    It would have been nice to get more for Gausman - but if that saved money helped pay for the Dominican complex, it's money well spent.

  21. 33 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

    An example is this...I wanted Lux and May for Manny.  At that time, neither player was a top 100 guy.  Lux was a first round pick(I believe) the year before, so the organization obviously liked him and May was an ascending player in their system.  Both appeared to be on the path to be top 100 guys by the offseason.  Now, I have no idea if the Os could have had those players.  There were rumors they were interested in May but who knows.  My question is, if they could have had those guys, does DD take that deal or does he take the deal with 5 players, one of which was a top 50 guy?  

    That's my problem with Top 100 Lists - they're pretty arbitrary and more about who is "close" to the majors. You are correct - they weren't Top 100 guys per the prospect lists. But, I think everyone in the know had them pegged as super valuable guys at the time.

    I remembering hearing the O's wanted Dustin May and Josiah Gray at the time - but that the Dodgers were super high on them and wouldn't move them. Teams are working with far more data and information than whatever blogger is putting together MLB.com's prospect list.

    DD didn't really have much to trade; there is a reason that team only won 47 games. Looking back, the Machado return admittedly has been disappointing - but also I think it is a pipe dream to think that they could have gotten substantially more. The Nats just had to trade a HOF pitcher, still in peak form, just started the All-Star game -- and a super-versatile, perennial all-star with team control to get the Dodgers top two prospects. The O's weren't getting that for a couple months of Manny.

  22. In MLB history, there have only been 180 players who have played at least 10 MLB seasons and spent their entire MLB career with one franchise. It's always been pretty rare. Here's the list.

    I don't think its too important that a player spends their entire career with a team. But, as far as a fan/entertainment/sell-tickets perspective, I do agree its important to keep some guys around for a while so fans can establish a connection with them.

    I think that's pretty common today - you have Miguel Cabrera in Detroit, Joey Votto in Cincinnati, Christian Yelich in Milwaukee, Tatis Jr and Machado in San Diego, Salvador Perez in Kansas City. The Rays/A's are just weird. The O's are doing a scorched earth thing currently - but as of recently, the Orioles had Adam Jones, Hardy, Markakis, and Chris Davis was "supposed" to be that guy.

    Watching the All-Star Game last night, MLB has some really entertaining players. I mean Ohtani and Tatis Jr, you can't ask for more than that. I think MLB's biggest problem is 1) marketing 2) three-true-outcomes. The game can just be flat-out boring to watch now.

    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...