Jump to content
interloper

Dan Straily 2019

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, jabba72 said:

They dont have a Machado or Britton or Gausman to trade this year. The return will be minimal, so I almost dont see the point unless they want the top draft pick. 

If they traded Cobb midseason, then they could avoid paying him 2.5 more years. That's some serious chump change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Philip said:

There’s a balance between being frugal and destructive. The 2012 Astros were literally unwatchable. I went to a game between the Rangers andAstros and in front of us were two families of Astro fans. By the fourth inning the Rangers were plowing through Astros pitching like a Panzer through tall grass, and both families left dejectedly with the score about 11-2. I felt so sad for them.

Elias has an obligation to be mindful of the fans. Last year was supposedly the result of incompetence-and idiocy- and not desire. Yet a plethora of pitchforks and torches abounded. How much worse would it be to do it on purpose?

It's a process and there are no shortcuts.

There isn't anything Elias can do to make this season more abhorrent than last season. Nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Philip said:

There’s a balance between being frugal and destructive. The 2012 Astros were literally unwatchable. I went to a game between the Rangers andAstros and in front of us were two families of Astro fans. By the fourth inning the Rangers were plowing through Astros pitching like a Panzer through tall grass, and both families left dejectedly with the score about 11-2. I felt so sad for them.

Elias has an obligation to be mindful of the fans. Last year was supposedly the result of incompetence-and idiocy- and not desire. Yet a plethora of pitchforks and torches abounded. How much worse would it be to do it on purpose?

I saw the Orioles play those Astros in Houston. I had a blast!! But of course the Astros fans were in a living hell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I don’t think they’ll make trades just to find a way to lose more games.    

I think you're right. I think the acquisition of Straily, giving Jackson back, etc., suggests that they don't want to be in the historically bad neighborhood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

I think you're right. I think the acquisition of Straily, giving Jackson back, etc., suggests that they don't want to be in the historically bad neighborhood. 

But those are all also very small moves from a money standpoint.

You don't see Elias even giving up a 3M contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But those are all also very small moves from a money standpoint.

You don't see Elias even giving up a 3M contract.

Definitely. But I was surprised they got rid of Jackson. It just feels to me like they may not want to totally tank. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Definitely. But I was surprised they got rid of Jackson. It just feels to me like they may not want to totally tank. 

I agree that he's trying to win within the restraints he dealing with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frobby said:

They may very well want to cut payroll.    I was just saying I don’t think they’ll make trades for the purpose of trying to lose more games, which is what wildcard seems to be implying in his response to jabba72:

 

 

So you are trying to assign intent to why the O's will  get a high draft choice?   I would say its Elias team building philosophy to trade away veteran players the first year of his rebuild.  Losing big is a side effect as is getting in high draft choice.  It all part of the rebuild plan.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wildcard said:

So you are trying to assign intent to why the O's will  get a high draft choice?   I would say its Elias team building philosophy to trade away veteran players the first year of his rebuild.  Losing big is a side effect as is getting in high draft choice.  It all part of the rebuild plan.

I guess we will see what his philosophy is.    He wasn’t the guy trading players in Houston, though he certainly had a front row seat.

My only point is that there are at least three possible reasons why Elias might trade players who are playing well:

1.   He likes the younger players we get in return.  

2.    He saves payroll.

3.    The team gets worse and he gets a higher draft pick.    

I don’t think 3 will be the reason he makes any trades.    It may be the result but not the objective IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Definitely. But I was surprised they got rid of Jackson. It just feels to me like they may not want to totally tank. 

I don't think that is what Elias did.  I think he feels a starting pitcher, even a mediocre one, has more trade value in July than a utility infielder has in a rebuild.  Elias can either trade to get Jackson back or find another UIF on the cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wildcard said:

I don't think that is what Elias did.  I think he feels a starting pitcher, even a mediocre one, has more trade value in July than a utility infielder has in a rebuild.  Elias can either trade to get Jackson back or find another UIF on the cheap.

I think he feels our team needs more pitching, and here’s a cheap alternative.    

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ohfan67 said:

Definitely. But I was surprised they got rid of Jackson. It just feels to me like they may not want to totally tank. 

It could be that Jackson just isn’t the player they want him to be.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jackson was not a pitcher, and that sealed it. The need for BP relief trumped his presence. It is in no way any indication of what the team thought of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Yachtsman said:

Jackson was not a pitcher, and that sealed it. The need for BP relief trumped his presence. It is in no way any indication of what the team thought of him.

Especially seeing how Wright, Bundy, and Castro have faltered so far and the pressure on Givens. (Fry and Means have been OK though.)

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

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • I think the NBA and NHL are handling this better as we aren't hearing this public bickering.  Really it doesn't help the players or the owners to argue about more on this.  It makes them look both greedy and harms the sports image in this time where most everyone is suffering in some way.  I don't really care how they divide up the money.  Just go in a room and get it done.    Both sides would lose with a shutdown with NBA and NHL starting in the middle of summer.   I am sure cable subscription numbers will be down due to thie economic reality of the situation.   They already have the shame of the cheating scandal. They want to back that up by not playing because of money?
    • I listened to Nick Sundberg on a podcast.  He is the player rep for the Redskins.  He shared a detail of the negotiations for the NFL.  He said that the owners proposed that if a player tests positive for COVID-19 they would go on a non football related injury list for a minimum of 14 days.  The problem is that, unlike injured reserve, the player doesn’t get paid when on the non football related injury list.  I’m curious as to how the MLB proposal handles this.
    • Just saw this little tidbit.    I didn’t know Bill Gates was an Orioles fan!  🤣
    • Look 8 straight 7+ WAR seasons may be good for you but it’s pretty thin from where I stand.
    • There are lots of ways to look at this situation. Here's mine. Most of the owners are highly successful business people (or their children), many of them entrepreneurs who build businesses from the ground up. Quite a few of them have MBAs, law degrees, or business degrees. I'm sure many of them have lots of passion for baseball; I know that at least a few go to a lot of their teams' games. But I think that whatever emotional attachment they feel to the sport has little if any effect on the way they approach decisions like the one they now confront -- it's a financial matter, to be analyzed pretty much like other major business decisions. These guys look at their teams predominantly, if not exclusively, from a financial point of view, just as they would if they owned a business that makes computer chips or sells office supplies or owns vacation resorts or whatever. Aside from wanting to build a winning team (which I think is pretty much irrelevant to the 2020 situation), they have two related objectives: making money from their investments in MLB, and maximizing the price they (or their heirs) will get when they decide to sell the team. From their financial perspective, both those goals require creating for MLB (and their individual teams) a business model that enables them to make money under a wide variety of foreseeable circumstances. And that's what they've done. The Forbes numbers, and the information about the sales of teams, says most teams are doing well. I've seen it said in a couple of places, though I can't remember where, that the owners have been on a roll. So here comes the pandemic, and it presents circumstances that won't allow teams operating under the regular business model to succeed. Many teams, maybe virtually all of them, are not going to make money if they have to pay the players their pro rata salaries, bear their normal expenses plus those of creating Covid test capacity and other safety measures, and don't sell tickets. The pandemic has put, and will continue to put, many businesses in a similar position: each owner of a restaurant or department store or theater has the right to decide whether to operate under less-than-optimal circumstances, stay closed while waiting things out, or fold 'em.  The same is true of MLB's owners (except that they aren't about to go out of business). From their point of view, there are two viable options: restructure things so that most of them can make some money, or forget it. The owners undoubtedly have in mind an amount of MLB payroll (maybe it's 60 percent of players' pro rata salaries) that will enable them to accomplish the first under conservative assumptions about other costs and revenues. If they can't get payroll down to that amount, or close to it, they won't open for business. Maybe that will harm baseball in the long run, but I don't think they care much about that, or that has much impact on their negotiating position.  I guess it's fair to say that the owners should feel an obligation to give us baseball this summer as a measure of their patriotism, even if that involves some financial sacrifice, or that the widespread public support of stadium construction for the benefit of many MLB teams imbues them with a some responsibility to serve the public, or that a league that enjoys protection from the antitrust laws shouldn't deprive the country of the only top-flight baseball in the country. I don't think the owners look at it that way. Their obligations are to themselves (and their stockholders or partners), just like in their other businesses. The barrier on the players' side is history. Over the past 50 years, they have accomplished impressive gains in salary and benefits. But the owners have never made it easy for them. They have forced the union and the players to make those gains slowly, over time, by litigating everything they could litigate. They have cheated and colluded to lower salaries whenever they could. Anyone can feel differently, but I can't say the players should agree to be paid less for 2020 (OK, maybe a little less) than what their contracts or the CBA calls for, much less agree to a completely different compensation system whose outcome will be unknowable for a while. Calling on the players to give up their legal rights in order to bail out the owners, because the owners might lose money for a change, has little appeal to me. The fundamental fact is that Major League Baseball operates on a highly structured, heavily negotiated arrangement between parties who don't trust each other. (Well, the union and players certainly don't trust the owners. I assume but don't know that the owners don't trust the union. I suppose the owners trust the players, but I bet more than a few of them resent the fact that they pay so much money to guys who, they assume, would never make it in the business world. (Some of them can't even speak English!)) I don't blame either side for the fact that the pandemic demolished baseball's financial arrangement for 2020. I'm saving my anger and name-calling it for the 2022 strike or lockout or work stoppage.
    • I agree. See Christian Laettner as another example at Duke. But he had to shut up and sit the bench on the Dream Team...lol Remains to be seen just how far he takes it, but I doubt it is anywhere near those two. That would be something the area scout would have to do his homework on. Elias will have that diagnosed. If you win, you're a leader. If you lose, you are a malcontent or ego maniacal because you hate losing. Martin has been a baseball player for along time, so I am sure his fire is tempered some. Its a game of failure, and that is what Jordan learned as a Birmingham Baron. It's very humbling. From what I have seen, Martin has the respect of his Vandy teammates. You have to have some Alphas on a winning team. Whether anyone likes them or not. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...