geschinger

I've watched more minor league games this year than MLB games and increasing pace of play has not taken anything away from those games it has only improved it. Once players are used to it, you don't even notice it.

Players will get used to things like the pitch clocks and it won't be an issue. What we've seen with the pitch clocks in minor league games is that it's shortened games by 20 minutes. The makes the product on the field and more importantly on TV better. Those are the kind of changes everyone in the game should be embracing.

I guess what my question is whether or not the Orioles are being cagey or misleading or otherwise doing something wrong when it comes to releasing information on Stowers injury or is this par for the course for MLB organizations when it comes to prospects of the statute of Stowers.

That's a different scenario - one in which he's misled or lied to. The theory presented was that he willingly took a job where his role is to slash payroll and nothing else. That makes no logical sense whatsoever for someone like Elias to take that job.

I don't like the Orioles being as conservative as they are but I look at a team like Seattle and wonder if they are not doing their top prospects a disservice. Is Jarred Kelenic being overmatched by MLB pitching at this point in his career the best thing for his development. I'm not convinced it is. That doesn't apply to someone like Braddish which I cannot justify in any way him being in Norfolk and not in Baltimore.

If it was someone like Duquette at the end of his career wanting one more shot at position like that maybe that would make sense. Someone under 40 putting themselves in a position to specatularly fail and limit their career propspects moving forward - no way to spin that into a theory that makes sense.

I'm not sure it's a strategy rather than media covering the Orioles not doing a great job getting the details out. On the Norfolk TV broadcast from last week they said it was just a bruise. A few days later Connolly tweeted it's a bruise and he's swinging a bat and improving. Roch tweets today that he took BP and may be in the lineup today or very soon after. That doesn't sound to me like the team is trying to hide injury information but that it's not being reported where fans might see it? What I don't know if this is the media dropping the ball or if this is a normal amount of reporting for an injury of a prospect the caliber of Stowers.

During the Os/Yankees game in Tampa on 3/23 he was consistently at 94mph

All I know is that it was widely reported on March 16 that he was being shutdown for 2-3 weeks. Could be that he misspoke or engages in wishful thinking contradicting the diagnosis. I can see a some potential wishful thinking in a quote from him in the article. In the article from MLB.COM on that day:

I think it may be more misintrepretation than initial estimates being way off. On March 16 it was reported he was being shutdown from baseball activities for 2-3 weeks not that he'll be back to game action in 2-3 weeks. I don't know what the expected time frame is for going from shutdown to game action but if he's back on or around when he eligible to come off the IL that would not be indicative of screweing up the diagnosis.

Adley was assigned to the Norfolk Tides on April 8 and added to the 7-day Injured list on April 8.

Have the Tigers really improved quicker or just started a year earlier? Detroit had their 3 ~100 loss seasons starting in 2017. Last year for the Tigers was what I hope the Orioles follow through on this year. High draft picks from those horrible teams made thier debut and they ran a lot of young players out there and got better as the year progressed.

I like it. Once teams become proficient using the tech it should noticeably improve the pace of games.

67-95. May be wishful thinking but I'd like to at least cut the deficit in half from what I think is necessary to be a successful franchise rebuild. That would be 15 additional wins in 2022 and at least 15 more in 2023.

This is the correct take. Without a ceiling, having a floor makes no sense.

I'm guessing they'll use him similar to how Texas did. There were only a couple of games where he got pulled under 80 pitches due to performance and even in his worst games they still left him on average between 90 and 100 pitches in those starts. He had 13 quality starts last year and gave up 4 or fewer runs in 23 of his starts. Even if he's as bad overall in 2022 as he was in 2021 if he can do similar I think the Orioles consider a worthwhile signing.

We need to see who among the above develops and who bombs before deciding where it makes sense to allocate longer term commitments.

That change the calculus? When it comes to when to debut a player I think you have three choices - (1) allow him to debut when you think he's ready without trying to optimize. (2) Wait enough time after he's ready to maybe get an extra year (relatively easy choice for a prospect who would be a surprise that they are developed enough to be a potental top 3 RoY candidate. (3) Put him on the opening day roster because you think he's more likely to be good enough to finish in the top 3 in AL RoY voting and return the franchise a compensation pick and $2m more in draft pool money. With a player like Adley especially with the injury (2) is probably the way to go. However considering how little it takes to finish in the top 3 most years I'd be surprised and maybe quite a bit disappointed Adley performed poorly enough to earn that extra year.

I do think there are times where exceptions make sense. As a thought excercise - instead of giving Ripken a new contract in 1993 they had the opportunity to trade him staright up for Tim Salmon. From a productivity perspective, Salmon is the better choice, he averaged .6 WAR higher per year over the length of that contract. In a scenario like that I think the right call is keep Ripken. That is only the case if productivity is close and if it is one of those rare players whose name on the back adds other significant value on top of their measurable performance. Tony Gwynn, George Brett, Derek Jeter, and Chipper Jones type players of which someone like Trey clearly is not.

The answer is whatever prevents the Ravens from winning a SB title. It is an interesting question though and I think there is a spectrum and it's never black and white - you never get that if you do X you win a championship. I value the team more the individual but it's a spectrum. If it's a close call - you aren't giving up a ton of performative value and the player is a Ripken/Gwynn type I lean towards the player otherwise I think the calculus should be to make the move that increases the odds of winning now (if you are in a position to have a legitimate shot at a title) or win in the future.

There is alway the chance he gets injured which he did which takes the potential carrot away. But if not, looking at the top 3 from the last couple of years (3rd place finisher played 70 and 81 games in 21/19) If he's anywhere near as good as advertised chances are significant that he's getting a full year of service anyway and we would have thrown away a compensatory pick and additional $2m in draft pool money.

I don't think developing potential starters in the pen is successful approach, but yes, after an extended opportunity it's reasonable to suspect they don't have a future as a starter, I'd send those guys to the pen to see if they can make it there. Unless you aren't counting Lyles as a FA starter, we agree. I think they should have signed one more starter.

With a couple of players, totally agree. Not sure when it's half a roster. I guess it depends on how many starts/innings you think is reasonably needed to make a judgement on whether the player has a future. I'd like to see the Orioles give extended opportunites to as many players as they can in 2022 among guys like Akin, Lowther, Bradish, Wells, Baumann, Rodriguez, and probably a couple more I'm not remembering. I'm not sure you can get them all adequate opportunities if you are maximizing winning in 2022 and say sign 3 FA starters who take an additional 70-80 of those available starts and 400+ of those available innings.

I disagree. I think what they should be maximizing is the development of their young players. I would have liked to have seen them sign one more starting pitcher as workload may be an issue if there are some awful starts which seems inevitable with the lack of experience. I would have been totally against going out and getting 3-4 free agent pitchers and giving them 100+ starts to try to maximize wins.

That is the stick, what about the carrot? Surely the number one overall prospect in baseball has decent odds of bringing back the reward of one of the extra draft picks. My understanding of where those bonus picks end up in the draft that would have been the pick and additional draft pool money to add an additional Gunnar Henderson or Jordan Wesburg caliber pick to the system.