Moose Milligan

I'd much rather see the Rays win than the Sox and Yankees. I don't think that'll ever change.

I'm good with him being a starter (preferably at 2B) to start the 2022 season. He's earned it.

Ugh, woof. I'd go with...DJ Stewart. Not great, but he's a known quantity of sorts. He probably is what he is at this point, but maybe he can become a better hitter. He gets on base at a good clip and once or twice a summer he can go on a tear. Diaz hasn't proven anything. He's always hurt. DJ Stewart gets hurt a lot, too, but at least he's done something (even if it's not great) at the ML level. That said, I'm not particularly excited about that choice.

I'm about ready to write him off but I'd be alright with giving him one more year in the system to see if he can make anything out of it.

Well if they don't want to win the NL East they'll sign him.

I think Gallo is a pretty good defender too, from what I understand.

It was worth a shot. He seemed like a good dude, I hope he catches on somewhere else.

He's critical and a little blunt. I think his style rubs some people the wrong way. I don't really have a problem with him, he's pretty good.

I see what you're saying but he still has a good separation between his batting average and OBP. IMO, that doesn't necessarily have to change if the batting average goes up. Chris Davis (shut up, I know) was usually around a .100 point difference between the two no matter how bad the batting average was. But even if we're going by your viewpoint, if he hit .250 I think his OBP would be .350 at least.

If you're a baseball fan, Keith Law hates your team.

Historically bad enough to have endured the worst stretch of baseball in history if you want to go by the metric in the ESPN article. I don't think we'll be picking 4th next year.

If he could hit .250 his on base percentage would probably be close to .400 or over it. I agree with @jamalshw, it's unfortunate but his defense makes him a liability.

A blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile. A positive start for him. I have my doubts that he can do it again in the next one. I'd love to be wrong, though.

Well it was a narcissistic take. He wasn't wrong. For the last time, I think the article was good for what it was. It was for a national publication. It was intended to inform baseball fans who are not necessarily Orioles fans as to who they have in the minors and how they can possibly get better. From that perspective, it was a good article. It did that clearly and concisely. It didn't ramble, it was focused. And now it's some kind of analysis BEYOND "the pitching is terrible because the pitching is terrible." But you don't have to be a good journalist to critique journalism, clearly you've critiqued this article all the while missing what the intent was (again, an article for a national publication). No one here's asked you to do any kind of journalism.

I don't think I really ranted there. And again, you're saying it's not good journalism without providing examples of what good journalism is. You say you want to further your understanding of a topic, yet you don't say what you don't understand and would like to learn, specifically. You said "some kind of analysis" but didn't say what that would entail. You wanted to know why the pitching was historically bad but that's it...again, just a shallow as the article. I've not taken anything personal here. It's not like you insulted something personal about me. If I made fun of your mother, that'd be personal. And I'm also not really bent out of shape, I'm pretty amused.

I'm more interested in why you're picking this hill to die on. It's kind of weird. Like every once in awhile a poster on here shows his ass. I'm not above it, mind you, I've done it plenty. I'm not even defending the article, I simply stated what the intent of the article was. You agreed that it wasn't "for" you, yet you continued to rant about it. You didn't even really go into any details about the specific analysis of the pitching woes and what you were looking for. We're not talking about my standards here, we're actually talking about yours. You said you wanted something more interesting than "the pitching his historically terrible because they're giving up runs a historical rate." You wanted him to "dig into the pitching data and come up with 'some kind of analysis' that would offer a fresh perspective," which is still really vague. "Some kind of analysis" is precisely as vague as the article you're claiming he wrote. Is that it, you wanted some stat analysis? Did you want him to explain ERA+ to you? FIP? "Far more interesting." "Some kind of analysis." You also said you don't have much free time, and what free time you do have, you're extremely lazy with. And yet here we are.

You've not really offered anything other than "I want more."

@Frobbyand I aren't at the game today but we're taking credit for this one, too. Because we can.

I don't think there's ever been a WS winning team with 5 home grown starters. Even going back to the days before free agency. You can't have a team built of only your own draft picks and international signings. It's just impossible.

Well I don't think the author was looking to reach a specific word count. I'm not praising the article, I think it's pretty solid. With a good conclusion. Can't rely on the farm system to get the team where it needs to be. Nothing wrong with that.

Well IIRC, it was a fangraphs article, one of the national publications that regularly do better than...this, which is a fangraphs article. Why is the pitching historically terrible? Because they're giving up runs at a historically terrible rate. That doesn't require much thinking. Again, you're missing the point. This article isn't for you. You already know all of this stuff. This article is for the Seattle Mariners diehard who doesn't know what's going on with the Orioles and would be curious as to what's going on with them.

You've gotta consider who they're writing for. No, it's not news to anyone on this board and any one of us could have written it. But again, it's being written for baseball fans who love the game, love advanced metrics but aren't cued into what the Orioles are doing on a daily basis like we are here. The conclusions are obvious, of course they are. They're obvious because that's what needs to happen here, there's no other option. What other article would you expect from a national outlet?

I thought it was a pretty good article. If anyone out there gives a **** to learn about what the Orioles are up to, this would give anyone who would bother to look a rundown as to what's going on. It was fair in regards to pitching prospects, recapping what we've discussed about G-Rod, Hall having issues and setbacks and practically everyone else. It was also nice to see Acevedo get a mention. The summary, IMO, was well done: It's not wrong.

This explains everything.

Elias hasn't spotted Ken Griffey Jr. and I in the same room, either.