99ct
-
Posts
282 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by 99ct
-
-
Just now, Redskins Rick said:
believe what you want.
DD did say it, and they knew about Manny getting big dollars at his renewal time in the future, so its not like it was a surprise.
Maybe just maybe, and I hate to play the race card, but maybe that was Peter's hangup about Manny. He spent money on Belle, with no issues.
Maybe the dreds, cap turned a bit off center, just didnt sit right with him?????
Obviously that’s a theoretical possibility, but you have nothing beyond speculation to support it. Not giving Manny the contract he wanted does not make Angelos racist. There’s a bunch of teams that could have afforded him but chose not to, are they also all racist? What about Harpers struggle to get the contract he wanted? Same with Arietta who ended up signing for only three years. All victims of racism?
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, ORIOLE33 said:
The reason I ask is because after we drafted Rutschman, you’re already hearing the old and tired “in five years he’ll be in pinstripes.” You get sick and tired of hearing that, but you really can’t argue against it because it’s a very real possibility.
So since there’s no salary cap in baseball, why can’t they at least implement something that can at least give the small market teams a fighting chance to keep their best players?
I'm all in favor of your concept. But we already have this QO regime and comp picks, and now I'm hearing media complaints that the comp picks attached to Keuchel and Kimbral are somehow unfair and should be eliminated.
-
Lol had to log in just because davis is pitching tonight
-
10 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:
Why was dumping O'Day's salary so important? I could understand it more if we were able to dump Trumbo or Davis, but O'Day is only under contract for one more year right? I just can't wrap my head around why ridding the team of his salary was more important than acquiring "quality" prospects.
I think it's probably possible to put a $ value on prospects. I'm not sure how that calculus works, though.
-
35 minutes ago, Ruzious said:
I heard on the radio the other day that Lester's really taken that aspect of the game to heart. He used to be among the worst in holding runners on base, and he's worked hard every year to improve at it. And it definitely helps having a better throwing catcher now.
I think there will be a competitive advantage to the team(s) that make a concerted effort to run a lot. Otoh, if other teams put more emphasis to stop the running game, it'll likely lessen the benefit.
Last time I saw him, he still had that huge mental block preventing him from throwing to 1B. One of the weirdest things in baseball lol...
-
Lol it's getting hard to keep "waiting and seeing" on this trade. However, at least I feel pretty good about the Manny, Schoop, and Britton trades. I can still sleep at night knowing we went 3/4
-
12 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:
Funny how high K low OBP, bad defensive range players with power are not valued very highly by anyone but the Orioles
Looks like the Brewers valued it at least long enough to make the trade though
-
1 hour ago, Ruzious said:
I didn't say he jumped ahead of 8 prospects. I said he was behind 8 prospects at the time of the trade.
Yeah, fair enough, but how do you reconcile that with the fact that he just got an MLB start, despite being younger than most (or all?) of the dudes on your list? To me, his promotion is evidence that he was not, in fact, the 8th man down, as you believe.
-
1 hour ago, Ruzious said:
I'm a Braves fan, and I've been following their minor leagues very closely for years, so I'm not talking out of my ass.
These are starting pitching prospects that were ahead of Wilson at the time of the trade:
Touki Toussaint
Kolby Allard
Mike Soroka
Ian Anderson
Kyle Wright
Luis Gohara
Joey Wentz
Max Fried - maybe not technically a rookie, but he's played most of the season in the minors, and they are still very high on him.
That's 8 young guys that were not in the Braves rotation rated ahead of Wilson, and some would have put Kyle Muller up there with Wilson. And if they had signed their high 1st rounder - Carter Stewart - he likely would have been rated up there, as well. Instead, they get the 9th pick in next year's draft. The Braves have the best group of young pitchers that any organization in baseball has - maybe the best they've ever had - and they once had Glavine, Smoltz, and Avery.
If anyone says they expected Wilson to pitch in the majors this early, they're lying. The Braves were and are in a pennant race, and Gausman was a huge get for them for which they gave up basically nothing of value to them. And they have him for 2 more years - so this was no rental move for them like a lot of the trades before the deadline were. And that's a major reason why the trade package should have been much bigger than it was, imo.
With all due respect, I am having a hard time believing that Wilson jumped ahead of 8 other prospects in a matter of 3 weeks. This is especially true in view of his minor league started of August 4 and 9, where he combined for 10 ER in 12 IP. He subsequently had one great start in the minors, and then got called up. More likely, the Braves were high on him all along.
-
3 minutes ago, bird watcher said:
I think someone will give Jones more due to name recognition and thinking he will be better at a corner spot but can fill in as a CF. To be honest, I hadn't looked at Markakis' stats when I voted. He really is having a better year. I could see Jones getting a lift moving to a new team though and maybe a GM feels the same.
I wonder if AJ could re-invent himself as a hitter, especially if he can bulk a little in RF.
-
40 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:
It's not our money and with or without O'Day the team's payroll is still considerably less now than it was 2 months ago (and will be even less after the season ends). And unless the Orioles' invest all of the money saved into international signings, I don't think how you can compare the two.
I get it. But look, my point is just that there is probably a way to quantify the value of a top prospect. I don't know how to do that, but if I were a baseball professional, I probably would figure this out. Surely you agree that money is finite, and money not allocated to Gausman/O'Day could be allocated elsewhere, and its possible that "elsewhere" would lead to getting good players.
-
1 hour ago, maybenxtyr said:
just saying that they didn't get their best return because of O'Day.
I sort of agree, but I've seen very little analysis on this board comparing the value of the saved salary to the value of prospects. That is to say, is a fringe-100 prospect worth more than, say, $10m?
If we had unlimited $, then of course the answer is to prefer a top prospect over the $. In reality, where money isn't unlimited, I don't know the answer to that.
-
28 minutes ago, Finisher said:
"It appears Kevin Gausman has completely stopped throwing from the windup. Only took one start for the Braves to make the change"
8 innings, 1 run, 8 Ks
lol awesome. So basically, the usual
-
Just now, Reboulet'sStache said:
Yes, I'll take every team's Chris Davis and Trumbo right now if their contracts align with our rebuild. Now if they are on the books for the next 10 years, obviously I don't want that. But 0 WAR players that are making too much money and teams want to get rid of? Let me have them. Send me your top prospects and I'll take them. Build up an elite farm system. And about the time where all of these prospects I've "bought" are ready to turn us into a competitor, is the time these salaries are coming off the books. And now I take that money and invest it in legit free agents to supplement the young, cost controlled players I brought.
That's called a rebuild.
Agree with your general sentiment, but surely there is a max to how much cash you would pay for a prospect, don't you think?
-
2 minutes ago, esmd said:
The Gausman deal looks a lot better if they get VVM. If not.......ugh. That said, they can blow everyone else out of the water, so there's no reason they shouldn't get him once eligible.
...Unless he doesn't become eligible until next year and then all the competition is back in play
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, clapdiddy said:
So you keep Gausman, then. Agreed with most takes on here. Unimpressed with the Gausman deal. It only makes sense if we absolutely needed the slot money for VVM.
Yeah I am feeling a bit underwhelmed too, but we don't know how the deal went down. Maybe the package was set and DD then jammed O'Day down their throats to save an extra ~10+m.
-
1 minute ago, GoldGlove21 said:
They had like 9 players in the top #100 and we couldn't get one BECAUSE...... we offloaded O'Day' money.
Eh, you don't know what they would have offered without O'Day
-
1
-
-
Just now, esmd said:
This tells me that the Oriole's think Gausman is as good as he's ever going to be. Otherwise I think they'd hang on to him. We shall see. Hope he's not the next Cy Young Award winner that we ship out of town.
Shipping a Cy Young winner out of town wouldn't be as painful if we had gotten more than Scott Feldman in return. And yeah, I realize we technically turned Clevenger into one good year of Trumbo, but that isn't really doing it for me...
-
Can someone who watched tonight's game give a summary of any changes to his stance/approach? My bet was nothing changed, but then I saw a HR in the box score. Now I'm conflicted because, like a metaphorical Trainwreck, I couldn't look away from CD1.0's historically bad season.
-
15 minutes ago, ThomasTomasz said:
I can't imagine the MLBPA being too happy and approving Davis to accept a contract buyout. That is the one thing the MLB players have going for them- fully guaranteed contracts, and I do not see them changing that.
Davis would have to retire, and then it would still probably cause the MLBPA to form an investigation and could hurt Davis' future in any MLB-related role would he desire one. Even upon retirement, any money he agreed to defer would still be due to him I believe. And I'm going to be brutally honest, self-respect or not, that's $100 million-plus still left on the table. Davis would be foolish to retire and not force a release. His children's children's children could be set for life if that money is managed appropriately. A person can't just walk away from that.
Is anyone on this board familiar with all the terms of an MLB contract? I know that the money is “guaranteed” for all practical purposes, but I wonder if there’s some clause whereby the Orioles could aruge that by being historically bad, Davis somehow has failed go uphold his end for the bargain. For $100m, I’ll bet there are lawyers who would at least attempt that argument.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:
I don't think Davis is going to be willing to surrender enough of his future earnings to satisfy ownership.
And I don't blame him, it's his money.
It’ll be interesting for sure. It doesnt seem financially rational for a player to surrender such money. But as this thread points out, Davis is historically bad so somewhere along the lines I suspect he will finally give up. I dont see anyone having the mental toughness to continue this for five years.
But what about the players association? Would they be cool with a guy giving up guaranteed money?
-
5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
an under-perfuming Davis.
I'd say he's over-perfuming. Really stinking up the joint!
But yeah, pretty awesome leap in logic to go from Cano's suspension to Davis. I wish Rene would share his insight on that one.
-
1
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Cumberbundy said:
If not in the rule 5, there are other ways teams can hurt the O's if they see a practice as beneath the dignity of their game. There are more unwritten rules in baseball than written.
Not sure if you're implying that taking players in the Rule 5 draft is somehow against an unwritten rule - but there are 10-15 teams doing it every single year, so looks like the dignity of the game may not be particularly high.
-
1 minute ago, SteveA said:
Minor league rehabs can only last 20 days.
He has to be called up by about August 18. That's 2 weeks before rosters expand.
JJ Hardy comes off the DL that day too.
Youre right - good call.
Should Baseball Have The Franchise Tag Or Max Contracts?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Maybe I’m overly sensitive, but I think your post is instigating on race where little to no evidence exists. This is particularly true in view of the fact that many minority players got paid by the orioles.
As to your question, I’m not sure I believe that the Orioles weren’t interested. I think they lost interest when they realized what amount of money it was going to take to sign Manny.
And you don’t want to talk about other teams, but it’s necessary to look at other teams. If your point is that refusal to pay Manny is indicative of racism, which seems to be your point, then the Yankees, Dodgers, Cindy, etc. are equally guilty.
Whu do you think the Dodgers made no effort to resign Manny? I don’t know the answer, but it seems to show that the orioles weren’t the only ones.