Mizerooskie
-
Posts
439 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mizerooskie
-
-
Sell Mancini, Odor, Lyles for farm system depth to replenish some of the package you put together for Soto
.
I'm only half-kidding...I think.
-
1 hour ago, Low Country Bird said:
Hello back. '98 for me. How about you?
'05. Got to see the Greene/Baker/Johnson team, so that was cool.
Definitely rooting against Smith being taken!
-
27 minutes ago, Low Country Bird said:
As a Clemson alum, this discussion is very interesting for both my O's and Tigers.
First re Wagner, he was an absolute stud this year. Any time we needed a big hit, he seemed to deliver. Caden Grice, who we thought was our best player going into the season, was brutal this year. Max picked up where Grice left off last year and carried the offense. I don't think he's coming back to Clemson and think he will sign at or under slot. We had a coaching change a month ago and while there's a great deal of excitement for Bakich, numerous players have left/transferred. When Wagner announced he was leaving, there didn't seem to be any uncertainty. And there doesn't seem to be any from the coaches that he's not coming back. So I doubt he gives up the money (even at or under slot) to come back to a new coaching staff. I don't see how he could have a better year than this year.
As to the HS pitchers, both Porter and Tristan Smith are Clemson commits so it's been interesting watching them slide a bit (Porter more so than Smith). Obviously, the hope at Clemson is that they are now priced out of any remaining slot money and will enroll in August. While it worked out for us for Will Taylor, we were burned on Bubba Chandler last year so many are prepared that Porter will be drafted today, sign an overslot deal and never step foot in a classroom at Clemson. I just hope that at this point, it's either Clemson or the O's.
Hello fellow Clemson alum!
-
8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Heyman saying Jones will get 8M+. But what about the 10M!!?!?!! Lol. People actually believed that. SMH
That would seem to indicate that Holliday really did end up atop their board for non-financial reasons.
-
24 minutes ago, tntoriole said:
I am not happy with the pick. I think Jones will be a star and Holliday will not . But we shall see
Based on?
-
4 minutes ago, Remember The Alomar said:
Not trying to give you a hard time, but there is also a world where they think he's the best prospect and that they can save some money. I'm not making that argument, per se, but the two possibilities aren't necessarily mutually exclusive from the perspective of the Orioles.
And that scenario would fall under the first option which was financial impact agnostic
.
-
1
-
-
If they took Holliday because they think he's the best prospect, or most likely to succeed based on observable ability, projection, and character - good pick.
If they took him to save money when they have a pool that doesn't require it for later oversign - bad pick.
Evaluating a pick based on internet scouts is silly, IMO.
-
I just think of his contract as paying for the 1st overall pick in 2020, and it makes me feel slightly better.
-
1 minute ago, Ruzious said:
WAC POY - that should count for something. Everything indicates he's a true workhorse that loves the game. Gotta wonder - once he adds 15 lbs of muscle, are people going to still say his power rating is just 35? Sure doesn't strike out much.
Lots of XBHs as well. The assumption used to be that those doubles and triples could turn into HRs with muscle added. It all depends on how the Las Cruces elevation helped him, I suppose.
-
5 minutes ago, MurphDogg said:
True defensive shortstop, the question is whether the bat plays, per Callis and company. Don't trust those numbers in NMSU, some wild elevation out there.
Still, that's a hell of a slash line for a 4th rounder.
This guy played in the Ripken League as an 18 year old. That's kinda cool.
-
He smashed the Cape Cod League last summer (382/450/500). Maybe that gives Elias and company confidence the bat can come around.
-
I'm just glad there was a consensus #1 to take this year.
Welcome to the organization, Adley! I hope your bat translates better than Mauer with Power!
-
Sigh. You don't think a big market team would go over market value to pull him away from the O's in the offseason? I certainly do, which would mean signing him to a market rates wouldn't be done just as easily in the offseason.Well I disagree, even if he agrees to a deal before hitting the market, at the time of the trade you have him for 2 months. That's all. Any extension, which I see as extremely unlikely 2 months away from free agency anyway, would be paying market rates after the fact. Something that could be done just as easily in the offseason. -
So two months in Baltimore is going to make him throw away millions of dollars so sign below market value? The crab cakes are good' date=' but I'm not sure they are THAT good.[/quote']
Please point out where I said he'd sign below market value.
-
Who cares when you sign him? All this does is get you out of the competitive bidding process, if he's willing to forgo getting out of that process. There's no guarantee the negotiating window gets you anything at all. If he wants to test the waters he'll test the waters, unless you blow him out of the water. Very little value in the trade beyond the production over the next two months.
I'm quite sure Dan Duquette cares when they sign him. You think he wants his only opportunity to sign an OF upgrade to be during a competitive bidding process? Context is just as important for evaluating roster building as it is in evaluating statistics.
-
OK. Even if you take that stance, if he signs during the negotiating window for market value, it can't be with another team. As I said before, that wouldn't have been possible without the trade.Free Agency is not some great mystery. He isn't signing for anything that isn't near his market value during the negotiating window. -
Why would he agree to a deal he couldn't have gotten in free agency? If they do extend it will be at free agent market costs. So, there is no difference. The trade is for 2 months.
Because he likes his experience in Baltimore, or any of a myriad of other reasons?
Again, there is a difference if he doesn't hit the market. There would be no competition they'd have to outbid.
I don't get why in this situation, ignoring context is seen as the more accurate means of evaluation.
-
Completely disagree. You've traded for two months of him, plus a negotiating window. I wouldn't pay $50 and a goat for the window.
This doesn't make much sense to me. If they sign him before he hits free agency, it's a direct result of the trade. If would have been impossible without the trade.
-
Could we not have signed him the off-season without the trade? Whether we extend him or not' date=' in the end, we traded for 2 months of him. They trade should be judge based purely on that.[/quote']Disagree. If they traded for him with the intention of signing him, then whether they sign him should absolutely factor into the trade.
-
My verdict: incomplete.
If they extend Parra or win the WS, it's a great trade. A 2 win outfielder that fits the team philosophy is much more valuable than a prospect of Davies' caliber, and the bust potential associated therewith, IMO.
If Parra walks, it's pretty terrible.
-
I was so utterly confused by the first page of this thread. That'll teach me to look at the date of posts I'm reading.
-
-
And I'm sorry for the next one.
Please don't bring the ban hammer down.
-
Should we offer extensions to any of our starting pitchers, either now or in the offseason?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Operating under two assumptions here: 1 - that an extension wouldn't hinder any young hitter extension possibilities, via some internal Angelos cap, and 2 - that he'd accept a fair deal...
I'd extend Flaherty. The July/August trend is extremely promising from a guy with his talent, and you'd have next year's rotation solidified.