Jump to content

forphase1

Plus Member
  • Posts

    1785
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

forphase1 last won the day on March 7 2022

forphase1 had the most liked content!

Personal Information

  • Favorite Current Oriole
    Gunnar Henderson
  • Favorite All Time Oriole
    Cal Ripken

Recent Profile Visitors

2239 profile views

forphase1's Achievements

Perennial All-Star

Perennial All-Star (11/14)

  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Very Popular Rare

Recent Badges

487

Reputation

  1. Depends on the situation I suppose, and the track record of the player in question. A vet who has proven himself to be good, or bad, isn't someone that I put a bunch of weight on their numbers, good or bad. Two examples right now. I don't really care about how good Burnes has looked or what his numbers currently are in the spring. He's been one of the top pitchers in baseball for the past handful of years, and I trust he'll be fine. At the same time I don't really care that Mateo has a .943 OPS this spring. I've seen enough of him over the past few seasons to be fairly certain just what we have, and what we don't have, with him, so his spring training numbers don't really move me much. Rookies are a bit different to me. Unlike most 'vets', the rookies are still improving and have room to grow, so to speak. They are also, in some cases, facing their first real taste of MLB pitching, though of course we know many of the pitchers in the spring will be in the milb come OD, and even the pitchers that are going to make the MLB teams aren't often on the top of their game or giving full effort. But it still is the first real taste we get of them against something other than just their minor league peers. Since they have a much smaller body of work than a vet, their spring training numbers tend to carry more weight with me simply as they don't have years of prior stats to either discount spring struggles or spring successes. Spring training numbers need taken with a grain of salt, sure. But just like most of us use SOME SSS numbers to help reinforce our thoughts and opinions, spring is the same way, SSS though with more volatility behind them, IMO.
  2. I also think the upgrade from Urias to Mayo is a bigger upgrade than Westburg to Holliday, at least for this year. If I had to choose one over the other, I'd pick Mayo largely due to the bat being more ready now and also due to whose spot he takes.
  3. Depth is good, but only 1) if it actually ends up being needed and 2) if what we are keeping as depth aren't actually better than what we are starting. It's not as clear in the outfield admittedly, though I don't value Hays as highly around here as some others do. He really dropped off in the 2nd half last year and that kinda soured me a bit more on him. But I am beyond convinced that the Holliday/Henderson/Mayo/Westburg infield would outperform the Westburg/Henderson/Urias/Mateo infield. I like having depth, but I like having the best players on the MLB team and not stuck in AAA more.
  4. In 2 years (after next season in your example) Stowers will be 28 and Kjerstad 27. That a bit long in the tooth to be finally starting in the majors. I'd rather get something of value from Santander, Hays and Mullins than to just let them walk when they are a FA, especially if we have young, cheap guys who can replace at least MOST, if not all, of the value. Mullins can't be replaced in the field with Stowers, Kjerstad or Cower of course. But his bat can be.
  5. We are paying two games today at the same time. Not sure we can really get a ton of insight from either lineup really.
  6. Another HR for Stowers today. While I see no room for him on the Os, I hope we move him soon for his career sake. I think he'll be an average player for a handful of years and can carve him out a pretty decent career. But he's not going to get a chance here really.
  7. Holliday is the #1 prospect in mlb and everyone is following his progress. I'd guess that Elias is asked a dozen questions about Holliday for every one question asked about Mayo. That's not a knock on Mayo, but rather just how hyped Holliday is, rightfully so. Again, the PR and expectations are vastly different nationally, and this the differences in answers. Again, maybe Elias is being completely honest, and Holliday legitimately can win an OD spot. But I'll believe it when it actually happens, his rosey comments notwithstanding. Yes, there is a reason Holliday was promoted that quickly. He's that good. And yes, there is a reason they are looking to change his position, he's sorta blocked by Henderson, be it this year OR next year.
  8. Mayo v Holliday. I think Mayo is more mlb ready TODAY with the bat than Holliday. Holliday is a bigger talent and likely has a better career, but Mayo is more ready to help the team now than Holliday. Also, for me at least, I like Westburg, who Holliday replaces, better than I like Urias, who Mayo replaces. Having Mayo on the roster I feel makes us overall better than Holliday based on both current readiness and who they take playing time from. PR speak is still PR speak. All needs taken with grain of salt and can't read too much into it, good or bad. Holliday was promoted as deserved. He showed he outclassed the competition at every level. But he hasn't yet proven that in AAA as he wasn't there long enough. I don't think he needs to be there either, but I expect him to be.
  9. In my estimation he should start the season as our OD 2nd, and should be in MLB all year. Let him get any mlb growing pains out of the way now. But it's not my estimation that's relevant. I'm arguing based on what I expect Elias and the Os will do, not what I'd do if I was in charge. I'd much rather have him letting his talent shine in mlb and learning what he needs here, as I think his talent is so good he doesn't need much more milb seasoning. But I'm not the GM, and I'm not weighing service time, future arbitration or contract status or even the ROY draft picks, all of which a good GM is likely pondering and weighing, at least to some degree. I think the chances of Holliday being sent down at about 85%. Then if sent down I think it's 100% sure he's down long enough to get the year of service back, likely 70% chance he's kept down long enough to avoid super 2 status and a very low, but not zero, chance they keep him down long enough to be a rookie next year...10-15% chance or so. Unlikely, but not impossible or completely outside the realm of possibilities either.
  10. For me there isn't a hard line on what I have to get for Urias to make the Os better. If we say we HAVE to get 75%+ of his value before we'd part with him, then we keep better players in AAA or on the bench while searching for a trading partner that may or may not materialize. I want the Os to get better, and IF that means we sacrifice Urias in order to do that, then so be it. Again, I'm not saying we HAVE to do that as I'd keep him over Mateo. But not am I so worried about getting value for Urias that I keep Holliday and Mayo in AAA because I can't milk a sufficient return for Urias. Sure, that's the ideal situation, but not one I'm refusing to move off of I'd a trade partner can't be found. As to the rookie integration plan, I think it's a bit overblown. Some rookies struggle for sure. But not all do. I wouldn't want to start 4 at the same time maybe, but a couple? And how long does this 'integration ' last? Does each guy need a week? A month? Half a season? I dunno. I have no problem with having all of Mayo, Holliday, and Cowser on the team to start the year, and I wouldn't complain if Kjerstad is here too, if it makes sense to do so playing time wise. I don't see that for Kjerstad as I don't think the 3 OF starters sit enough for him to get sufficient playing time.
  11. Sure, it's better to get something of value for him if we can. But if the goal is to improve the MLB team we can't just hang onto guys that no one else wants because we don't get anything back for them. Be it Mateo, Urias or whomever, at some point if we have a better player to take their roster spot and make the Os a better team, we need to make those moves, even if we can't find a willing trade partner for the guy being replaced. Now I think we should be able to find a place for Urias as he has some value, but I'm not going to let that hold me up or force me into keeping him longer than I should if I'm unable to do so. Again, if I had my way I'd start Holliday, Henderson and Mayo with Westburg getting 3-4 starts a week spelling one of those guys. I'd personally keep Urias over Mateo if we felt we still needed another IF body, but I get some of the arguments the other way. But at the end of the day we can't be held hostage by demanding to get value out of everyone we move on from. Of course that's the best, ideal situation, but it takes two to tango. At some point we will need to move on, even if it means releasing some guys we'd much rather trade.
  12. Did I say terrible? Or did I say he really took a step backwards? Went from having a .720 OPS and winning the GG to a .703 OPS with a much weaker defense. Yeah, still had a 1.8 WAR in 116 games...but he had a 3.6 WAR in only 118 games the year before. Thus the 'really took a step backwards' comment. Never said he was terrible. But nor was he good enough last year that we shouldn't seriously consider moving on from him with Mayo if Mayo can hold down a serviceable 3rd. I like Urias as a backup, and honestly I prefer him over Mateo. But if we need the roster spot in order for Mayo, Holliday or Cowser to make the roster, I'm fine with moving on from him. I doubt we carry all of Westburg, Henderson, Mayo, Holliday, Urias and Mateo.
  13. First is whomever gets cut to give him a spot is possibly lost if claimed. The Os like hoarding talent to a point. Second, if he's up some favorites like Mateo and Urias get less playing time. That's great from my perspective, but I'm not making the decision. Third, the competition for ROY this year appears to be intense. If getting that extra pick is really a serious consideration, he's likely to have a better shot next year due to his additional maturity and the rookie class may not be as deep. As I've stated, I don't agree with starting him in AAA, and I want him starting OD at 2nd for the Os. But I expect him in AAA for at least a few weeks, maybe a couple of months and possibly, though maybe unlikely, for a large part of the season.
  14. I'm not trying to convince you really, or anyone else. Heck I HOPE I'm wrong as I want Holliday as our OD 2nd. But I am trying to be realistic and looking at Elias past history, our roster crunch and construction and the economics of things, I don't think he'll be here to start OD. The question then is if he's down just a few weeks to get the year of service, a couple of months to miss Super 2, or most of the season to retain rookie eligibility. I don't think him being down that long is likely, but nor do I believe it to be an impossibility.
×
×
  • Create New...