-
Who's Online 35 Members, 0 Anonymous, 285 Guests (See full list)
- El Gordo
- Frobby
- beardbr
- Legend_Of_Joey
- John Welch
- birdwatcher55
- MurphDogg
- Redskins Rick
- baltimoreO's22
- oriolesfan97
- makoman
- jamalshw
- Going Underground
- esmd
- Big Mac
- TekWWFan
- OsFanSinceThe80s
- Whammer
- Larry18
- nbets
- Aristotelian
- mdbdotcom
- HbgOsFan
- Ohfan67
- Spy Fox
- sdmarkakis
- StottyByNature
- MongoBoy
- Pat Kelly
- MDtransplant757
- wildcard
- DrungoHazewood
- waroriole
- Nite
- pstroms333
Orioles Information
Orioles News and Information |
Daily Organizational Boxscores
|
Orioles Prospect Information |
Statistics |
-
Posts
-
By OsFanSinceThe80s · Posted
Just don't give away tomatoes to the fans. -
I use cbd on occasion. It does seem to help me fall asleep, but doesn’t help with waking up wide awake a few hours later. -
I voted Mancini but I could have gone with Villar as well. I think Villar's lack of effort occasionally and base paths blunders is what shaded me towards Mancini for MVO. Saying that, if Villar did receive it I would not be upset as he clearly has the best WAR despite being forced to play out of position at SS a lot this year. -
I think when he team is ready to win again if Davis is not preforming in a helpful manner then he needs to go. I don't see the O's being at that point yet. Maybe in another year. Players get hurt all the time. As a bench player Davis can step in for them. Also there are a lot of unproven players that the league may adjust to and they will may be sent down. (see Mullins, not for Davis but because he is a example of an unproven player that needed to go down) Davis may find playing time for those players also. The 26th man makes it easier to keep Davis on the 26 man roster. -
By DrungoHazewood · Posted
I have a lot of disconnected, disorganized thoughts on this subject. I like Tony's suggestions, or at least the acknowledgment of the idea that there are alternate ways of developing players that might be more efficient or at least more cost-effective. A few points: - I've never thought that the current setup was optimal, but rather formed by a series of events more related to economics than player development. In the beginning all minor league teams were just like major league teams except in small cities. Only in the 1920s, and then accelerating in the 30s because of the Depression, did the majors start buying up the minors and turning them into development squads instead of teams trying to draw fans and win their pennant. For 50+ years MLB teams didn't have any full-time affiliates. That was probably less successful at wringing out all the talent, but MLB got along just fine. The majors wanted to own the minors to keeps costs down. They got tired of having to pay $100k for Lefty Grove after a protracted negotiation with Oriole owner Jack Dunn. Much easier if they just owned Jack Dunn and all the rest of the Orioles. - I think one reason for the sprawling system we have today is MLB contracts, options, and related issues. I think most good prospects would do just fine as part-time major league players at 20 or 22. They spend that time in the minors because nobody wants to burn service time. We've convinced ourselves that prospects would stall if they were utility infielders or relievers at 18 or 20. But we don't know that, in fact we know many successful MLB players did just that in the pre-draft era, and some even became MLB stars as teenagers. If service time wasn't a thing (for example, if everyone became a free agent at 28), I think lots of players would shoot through the minors in record time. And there would be much less need for eight levels of affiliates. - Japan has one level of minors. I don't know that this is seen as any kind of impediment to development. Ichiro was in the NPB as a teenager. They do have more teenagers in the NBP than we see in the US. But they also don't get to free agency until something like eight or nine years in, so they don't care as much about service time. - Mexico, Korea, Taiwan, the rest of the world... no minors at all. At least in any cases I know of. Of course they top out at the equivalent of A or AA levels, so not quite the same. But nobody else has the resources to have huge, sprawling development systems. Maybe not optimal, but the world doesn't end when you regularly have 18-year-olds playing alongside 36-year-olds. -
Obviously we are all hyper sensitive to any kind of soreness with Harvey. I do think this thing is bothering him still an the team wants to be ultra careful with him. At 75.2 IP, he is at twice the amount of innings that he threw in 2018 so he may be near the limit that they wanted to get him this year as well. Honestly, I wouldn't be upset if they just came out and said they were going to shut him down this year. I have him penciled in as the closer next year and only an injury would get in the way of him having success in that role.
-
One, it's against board rules to call people including players and coaches idiots, so consider this your warning. Secondly, you do know that Harvey was a starter at the beginning of the year and had 10 games with 40 or more pitches. After converting to a reliever, he had two minor league innings where he threw 33 pitches in an inning and one in an inning and a third. Harvey is almost 25-years old. While I don't think anyone, including Hyde preferred that he stayed out there that long in one inning, I don't think Hyde was reckless or an idiot for doing so. If he's incapable of throwing a 30 pitch inning when things aren't going great, what is he then? I think your dislike for Hyde is clouding your judgement here. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion of not liking Hyde, you are not entitled to call him an idiot while doing so here on the Hangout.
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
