Tony-OH

I do think that's a reasonable estimation and probably something Elias would not be too interested in due to the injury risk factor with pitcher's entering their 30s. Saying that, Burnes has stayed pretty healthy during his career and he doesn't really have a ton of innings on him, so maybe he is the guy Elias thinks can anchor this rotation, especially since Bradish and Rodriquez will be relatively cheap over at least 3-5 years of that contract. I'm so used to the Orioles being under the Angelos-led budget limitations that I've never really thought about it for the Orioles. But I do drool at the thoughts of a Burnes, Bradish, GRod top three for next 4-5 years. We're just in uncharted territory and while I do think Rubenstein is going to spend money, we do know that the market limitations most likely will keep him from spending like a drunken sailor. I'm a big believer in Burnes stuff and think of him as a TOR. Bradish and GRod may turn into them, but Burnes is already one and without a ton of innings on him, who's to say he can't be very effective deep into his 30's?

I would be ok going up to 4 years extension, to include a bump this year which would make it a five year deal. I would not be interested in 7-year deal after the season.

I don't think he told Elias to make a trade, but I do wonder if Elias thinks he might be able to extend him with the new owners and was more willing to deal Ortiz and Hall for him because of that.

I'm certainly not going comfortable signing a 30 year old pitcher to a 7 year contract, so if that's what the market brings him, I will thank him for his service and move on, especially since the Orioles have the prospect to still get his replacement if GRod or Bradish hasn't turned into him by then. But if he would sign a 4-year extension, I think the Orioles have to consider it if he looks like the same guy this season.

I voted for the price was fair but could have voted for given up more depending on what players. If we were talking a Hudson Haskin-type guy, I would have packed his bags along with the others.

Yikes. I mean, you're entitled to your opinion, but to say he Elias should be embarrassed for acquiring one of the best starting pitchers on a contending team that needed a TOR, and only gave up his 6th best prospect, a talented left-hander reliever with a long injury history, and a draft pick is pretty harsh. If the Orioles win the World Series and Burnes leaves, should Elias still be embarrassed? You have to trade talent to get talent and this is the kind of talent you give up at the trading deadline for a Burnes-type rental. Elias got him for a whole year at least. Burnes gets to be an Orioles, hopefully likes it here, and the new owner is willing to extend him before he hits free agency. But if the Orioles win the World Series, it doesn't matter what becomes of Ortiz, Hall and the draft pick, and I like Ortiz and Hall (as a reliever) a lot.

I think we all preferred Burnes over Cease, but most thought Burnes would cost too much. If I thought Burnes was available for what we got him for, he certainly would have been at the top of the list, even with just one season left. I think Elias thinks he has a chance of extending Burnes now that he has a new owner and pulled the trigger.

Right, but I think the term "red flags" is too aggressive.

These are not "red flags." His Pitching run value was 96th percentile. Even if he's "fallen" a bit since being the best pitcher in baseball for a few seasons, he was still one of teh best. Look at these numbers: If these are red flags, sign me up for some more red flags!

I highly doubt an extra year of control of Ortiz made the difference in acquiring Burnes.

The expectation was that he would make the team but the Orioles are still fine without him. possible scenarios: 3B: Westburg SS: Gunnar 2B: Urias UTL: Mateo 3B: Mayo SS: Gunnar 2B: Westburg UTL: Mateo 3B: Westburg SS: Gunnar 2B: Holliday Utl: Mateo 3B: Westburg SS: Gunnar 2B: Norby Utl: Mateo

I think you only go for Cease still if you don't think Means will be ready to go or he really reinjured it worse than we thought at the end of the seaosn.

Dammit.. I missed that too... Well, Perez and Coulombe will still be in the pen. I don't think Elias is done now that the gloves have been taken off.

Yep, you're right. I saw 2025 but it meant at the start of 2025. Either way, I like the move. Burnes is a legitimate ace and the Orioles didn't hurt their 2024 team much. They can go and sign Chapman to replace Hall if they want to.

What a couple of days. It's almost like the sports Gods decided that the Ravens loss must have been the offering they needed. Corbin Burnes without giving up one of the top five prospects? Yes please!!! Corrected: One year not two. Still love it.

Maybe, or maybe he really does need to take a vacation before the upcoming season and with all the change, just decided, "Why not?"

They very well may be, I don't know. I just know that when you build a group to problem solve, that building it from a diversity of thoughts and experiences only helps build better solutions. My response was more about the comment that diversity in ownership did not matter.

Following my rule for no politics....Is.....very......hard......when......this....explains...so...much...about....what....happens...in....cities....across... this... country!!! But I agree. I do think some of the stands that Peter took early on as owner were because he thought he was doing something good. Like his refusal to feed into the whole Buscone system in the DR because it took advantage of young talented boys and uneducated families while enriching rich men. Was he wrong in that assessment, probably not, but when everyone else plays in that system you can't just stand on principle without consequences for your baseball operations. The consequences for the Orioles is they basically ignored an entire talent pipeline.

From a JA standpoint, absolutely. Elias is JA's legacy as an owner.

I'm not sure any of us can know that for sure. Just because he gave money to charity or helped people out here and there, does not necessarily make him a good man. There are plenty of stories that would indicate he was a shallow, spiteful man at times who at the slightest bit of "unloyal behavior" would ensure that they were fired. There have been other stories written about him at times where some of his charity donations were politically motivated or virtue signaling vs doing amazing things for the people of the city. At the same time, I don't know him personally so I can't say that he's not a good guy. What we can all say is that he was a terrible, terrible owner.

Now this is how you appreciate someone like Angelos! lol

STOP WITH THE POLITICS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't keep up with hiding crap and I'm about to give some people time off to chill because you know our rules!

I don't want to get too far into this because we can go down into a rabbit hole that I do not want to get into here, but diversity of thought and ideas from people with different backgrounds certainly should be something an ownership group should look for. This isn't diversity for the sake of diversity so you can check a box or virtue signal, but truly bringing in people from different backgrounds certainly could bring in fresh ideas or enable the team to overcome a unique challenge at the business level. As long as that doesn't get forced into the baseball operations where I want the best people regardless of any box that they check, I don't see why this would be a bad thing.

Roch was certainly not happy about something Frobby posted here and called me while I was in Costco and "explained" that he was not happy. At the end of the day, he didn't talk to me for like 8-10 years until I ran into him at a bar and we basically put it behind us I guess. I think Roch takes a lot of unnecessary heat for his blog. He worked for a very difficult boss and saw what the Angelos' did to people they consider "not loyal." The man had/has a good gig for a local guy who got to cover his favorite team for a long time. Was it his fault that they kept Steve Melweski around and then never dictated roles between them which meant Melewski would blur into Orioles major league coverage too? Melewski always did a good job with his minor league coverage, but had they just set clear roles and responsibilities it probably would have been more seamless coverage. But that's not how any of that worked. So sometimes Melewski beat him to the news and he had to write about something, so we the readers ended up getting some fluff at times. Roch is certainly not a bad guy overall. Hopefully the new owners of MASN will keep him around.

I think part of that is because everything has been written already about how poor Peter Angelos was as owner. What we've seen, especially over the last year or two as the Orioles have gotten good, is that John Angelos wants to adulation of the common folk (peasants/fans to him) and most importantly the attention of the media. At the end of the day, once the sale is final, and I think that's just a formality, this will be a glorious, glorious day in Baltimore sports history.