Jump to content
RZNJ

A reason for negatism?

Recommended Posts

I think the Orioles are just waiting for Luis Gonzalez not to get offered arbitration. I like Jones better but factoring in the cost, I might even lean towards Gonzalez in that case. His declining numbers scare me though.

I think it would be nice, just once, to go into a season with nobody over 35 on the roster. No Raffy/Sosa/Surhoff/Conine/Segui/Reed/Groom/Grimsley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For Jacque Jones?

Come on, Dave. You're usually pretty realistic about stuff and bring an objective perspective to the board.

But for Jacque Jones - you can't get much.

How am I being unrealistic?

I've acknowledged that Jones alone won't get either of the guys at the top of my wishlist.

A high-upside but somewhat raw pitcher that's at least a year away from the bigs and having some issues with AA hitters isn't "laughable" for an established, productive, relatively inexpensive, 32 year old everyday OF.

And a couple of down-the-list A-ball prospects is what you guys gave us for Corey Patterson. How's it unrealistic to ask the same for Jones, who's not coming off one of the worst years in all of baseball like CPat was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How am I being unrealistic?

I've acknowledged that Jones alone won't get either of the guys at the top of my wishlist.

A high-upside but somewhat raw pitcher that's at least a year away from the bigs and having some issues with AA hitters isn't "laughable" for an established, productive, relatively inexpensive, 32 year old everyday OF.

And a couple of down-the-list A-ball prospects is what you guys gave us for Corey Patterson. How's it unrealistic to ask the same for Jones, who's not coming off one of the worst years in all of baseball like CPat was?

Ok, so you will accept a 24 y/o single A player going no where and a guy who is, at best, a UTI guy? Fine, you can have that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, so you will accept a 24 y/o single A player going no where and a guy who is, at best, a UTI guy? Fine, you can have that.

Paco Figueroa and Jeff Moore/Marino Salas??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another 2B! You know what the Cubbies like. :D

Ronny Cedeno

Ryan Theriot

Mike Fontenot

Eric Patterson

Gary Cates

Richard Lewis

They seem to collect them. Six 2B between the ML, AAA and AA clubs. One more won't hurt, right? ;) If they liked Hairston, Fontenot and Spears, I'm sure they'll be intrigued by Paco's "upside". :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it took you 500,000 words to say, "I agree with you".

The O's could land one or more YPPWP/YSPWP. They just have to be willing to pay the price (Tejada, Roberts, Hernandez, and/or Bedard).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said in my response that I don't agree that Angelos prefers name players. I just said I have never actually heard that from him, the FO, or the columnists/sportscasters that cover the team. I actually do think he now prefers names, but I don't actually think it was always this way. When Thrift did the great purge in 2000, he traded lots of "name" players for unknown minor leaguers. Angelos let him make all those trades so he obviously didn't always feel this way. Unfortunately, Thrift was seriously over his head by this point and got completely fleeced.

Everyone wonders aloud why the Orioles are so reluctant to blow it up and start over. I wonder why everyone wonders. We made six trades involving players on our ML roster in three days in July 2000 and the only player we got out of those trades who contributed at all was Melvin Mora. http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BAL/2000_trans.shtml

Angelos is probably gun shy to blow it up like that again because this experience was so bad. Before anyone shoots me, I agree that the current FO is much better than Thrift and it is unlikely that it would go that badly again. BTW, we also made what should have been a good trade several years ago when we sent Ponson to the Giants for Moss, Ainsworth, and another minor leaguer, but it turned out terribly for us. I'm sure that also didn't help with Angelos' mind set.

Regardless of his reasons, he needs to trust his FO people or replace them with people he does trust.

I have been all for us blowing it up and starting over with younger players, but wow, I forgot what a bad job Thrift did the last time we did this. There is a chance that we trade Roberts, Bedard, Gibbons and Tejada and get nothing in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone wonders aloud why the Orioles are so reluctant to blow it up and start over. I wonder why everyone wonders. We made six trades involving players on our ML roster in three days in July 2000 and the only player we got out of those trades who contributed at all was Melvin Mora. http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BAL/2000_trans.shtml

The six players we traded in 2000 in no way constituted a rebuild. We traded the likes of Will Clark, BJ Surhoff, Harold Baines, Charles Johnson, Mike Timlin and Mike Bordick. These guys were all either in the latter stages of their careers, or in the last year of their contracts, or in the case of Timlin, wasn't pitching very well. None of these guys was close in value to a Miguel Tejada now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No need to get snippy with me just because I pointed out two horrible Cubs' trades. :D

IMHO, there is no possible way we can trade Bedard unless we can get two-three positional can't miss players in return.

I'm not sure how dealing Roberts or Hernandez could help us. We would weaken ourselves in the very area we need to strengthen ourselves (positional players) and it is unlikely we would come out ahead. We could get more if we traded them for players at A+ or below, but I wouldn't do it. Regardless of how good the prospect looks at that level, he isn't a sure thing. These guys make reasonable money and give good production.

Now, we're back to Tejada. If they want to trade him for a big return, I'm not going to argue. I was OK with the Angels trade last year (although I would have preferred Wood to Aybar even if it meant throwing in more on our side).

You trade BRob if you can't extend him...You can probably get alot for him.

If you can extend him to a solid, reasonable contract, go for it, that's fine with me.

But if you can't extend him, trade him.

Tejada and CPat should also be dealt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been all for us blowing it up and starting over with younger players, but wow, I forgot what a bad job Thrift did the last time we did this. There is a chance that we trade Roberts, Bedard, Gibbons and Tejada and get nothing in return.

I would say a good 1 in 10 chance. Even top ten prospects have a 1 in 7 chance to stick and a 1 in 10 t be an impact player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure what you call trading 6 players, who are receiving substantial playing time at the ML level, in 3 days if you don't call it a re-build. The fact that the results were terrible would make it a bad re-build but it was designed to be a re-build none-the-less.

Clark had an 886 OPS in 313 PAs at the time of the trade.

Johnson an 934 OPS in 318 PAs

Surhoff 794 OPS in 440

Baines 786 OPS in 251

Bordick 831 OPS in 425

Obviously, we shouldn't have gotten back as much for any one of these guys as we would for Tejada because most of them were close to the ends of their contracts. However, we traded a large percentage of the value of the 25 man roster and got virtually nothing in return. That was my point and it is valid.

Everyone wonders aloud why the Orioles are so reluctant to blow it up and start over. I wonder why everyone wonders. We made six trades involving players on our ML roster in three days in July 2000 and the only player we got out of those trades who contributed at all was Melvin Mora

For the comprehending challenged such as myself, it seemed as though your point was that the O's would be shy about rebuilding or that we should be shy about rebuilding because of the poor return last time. I think Nadecir correctly points out that the value we traded last time would pale in comparison to guys like Tejada, Roberts, Hernandez, etc. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure what you call trading 6 players, who are receiving substantial playing time at the ML level, in 3 days if you don't call it a re-build.
I wouldn't consider anyone traded at the trade deadline with an expiring contract as part of a rebuild. If you're going to rebuild, trade players with decent trade values, like Delino DeShields or Brady Anderson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charles Johnson (pending FA) vs. Ramond Hernandez (3 years left on reasonable contract).

B.J. Surhoff - We got one good prospect (Luis Rivera) Too bad he was broken down.

Mike Bordick - pending FA. We got nothing back. Just got lucky with Mora.

Mike Timlin - salary dump. No good prospects in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The six players we traded in 2000 in no way constituted a rebuild. We traded the likes of Will Clark, BJ Surhoff, Harold Baines, Charles Johnson, Mike Timlin and Mike Bordick. These guys were all either in the latter stages of their careers, or in the last year of their contracts, or in the case of Timlin, wasn't pitching very well. None of these guys was close in value to a Miguel Tejada now.

I agree none of these guys had the value of a Tejada, but I don't see how you can say that wasn't a rebuild. We traded our starting C, 1B, SS, LF and DH and our closer. The return we got was pitiful. What I remember most is that we didn't due good due diligence and ended up with an Atlanta pitching prospect with a torn labrum and a Mets pitcher who was 5 years older than we thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • While Lamar did play better than RG3, keep in mind the league context.  He had a 121 Rating+ (basically OPS+ for passer rating, adjusted for that season's averages. Over 100 is good, less is bad.)  Lamar's 2019 was 128.  So Lamar is still better, but that was RG3 as a rookie.  Who knows how he would have done if he didn't get hurt/if he was drafted by an org not owned by Dan Snyder.   That said, I don't think it's reasonable to use RG3's injury problems as a reason not to sign Lamar long term.  I think that they were specific to RG3 and the team he played for. (I think the Football Team horribly mismanaged him.)   In general running QBs havent had high injury risk, any more than regular QBs.  Look at Steve Young, Randall Cunningham, Russell Wilson, Newton, Culpeper, VIck.  All have been fairly durable, certainly no bigger an injury risk than any other QB.  There is some risk that some injuries are going to be more damaging to Lamar's career because of his reliance on his athleticism, but given that many running QBs have stayed productive into their 30s I think this risk is relatively low. I don't think Vick is a great comp because he didn't really figure out how to be a passer until after he came back from his jail sentence.  Vick's best Rating+ pre-jail/suspension is 104, which is worse than Lamar's 2020.  And that's taking 6 Vick seasons compared to 3 Lamar seasons. I think Deshaun Watson checks off more boxes as a good comp, because of the recency of his contract, his performance, his playoff (lack of) success, and his playing style. If we're being realistic, Lamar has no real comparables.  There isn't a QB in NFL history that generates as much true dual-threat value as Lamar.  I think this actually is a problem when trying to figure out how much to pay him.  He's got the intangibles, sure (at least when it comes to regular season play) but with no real comps, it's kind of impossible to project his development/future performance. We know that the Ravens don't really throw the ball much, but in 2019 they were pretty damn efficient at it, and in 2020 they were middle-of-the-pack.  But when you can run the ball for 6-10 yards a carry, it kind of eliminates the need to throw the ball.  Imagine how good you'd have to be throwing the ball to make it a better proposition than running in most game situations.  And we also don't know how much his running ability affects his passing game.  And there's no way to know that until he can't run anymore.  Which isn't happening for 4-5 years barring injury. Even if it's risky, I think you really have no choice but to pay him, especially if you can get a contract with an out after his age-28 or 29 season.  It's easy to point to our mistake with thinking Flacco was worth an extension, but that's no reason to deny Lamar his extension, especially given that he's already shown the ability to singlehandedly carry us into the playoffs, even if he has struggled once there.  Flacco never carried this team in the regular season the way Lamar does.  In fact it was our multiple HOFers on the other side of the ball that carried Flacco into the postseason so he could be the hero for a couple games.  Credit to him for stepping up in January, but someone has to get us there, and we don't have anyone else who can do that.  The chance that we find someone in the draft that can do that is not that great.  Certainly lower than the chance that Jackson is going to take us to the SB.  I guess we could talk swapping him for someone like Deshaun Watson, but I just don't know how plausible that really is.
    • Lol, you gotta wait until spring training for those gems.
    • Well, now we know why Jim Hunter became redundant.
    • Brob was one of those let go.  I will miss him!  But he  remains as an "ambassador" as does Demper.  
    • I must have missed it, but I haven't seen anyone mention B-rob. Is he gone? I thought I heard him on some broadcasts last summer.
    • Mike Vick, six years into his career (going into the dogfighting arrest) had a 71/52 TD/INT ratio, for a 75.7 QB rating. RG3, three years in, had a 40/23 TD/INT ratio, for a 90.6 QB rating. He then got hurt and was never the same again. Lamar, three years in, has a 68/18 TD/INT ratio, for a 102.6 QB rating. Lamar is head and shoulders above both of those players.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...