gtown

I think they like what they have and I expect the moves to be minor. 1. Sign Wade Miley or Rich Hill. Both have pitched here before and as LHP, they will like new dimensions in LF. Neither would put up high strikeouts, but since they will face a lot of RH hitters, they will not be hurt by banning the shift as much as RHP would. Either would be a 4th or 5th starter. 2. Re-sign Jordan Lyles. I expect them to do this to reward him for eating innings in '22. 3. Sign Joey Gallo. Trey Mancini will likely not return. He hates the new dimensions. Given Trey's performance in Houston, he may not have a lot of suitors though. Gallo would be the primary DH and could back up Mountcastle on occasion at 1B. He'd also be the 5th outfielder. Gallo stands to gain from banning the shift as much as anyone and he's only 29. 4. Include Anthony Santander in a package for a solid 2-3 starter. I don't like this because I like Santander but the outfield is getting crowded and he has value. Barring injury, season starts with a rotation of Bradish, Kremer, Lyles, Miley/Hill, Voth with Grayson Rodriguez and then John Means joining later.

Clearly, they're trying to win the 2013 World Series. Look for a Koji Uehara reunion next.

Here are the top 20 all time worst Orioles in what I call BSP--blown save percentage. That's BS/(Saves + Holds + BS). It's not perfect, but if a set up man holds the lead without finishing, he gets a hold. Only 46 pitchers met my minimum of 10 total chances. Note that Kevin Gregg had no holds, so those are pretty much 9th inning blown saves. Saves Holds BS BSP Jason Berken 0 11 7 0.3889 18 Jason Grimsley 0 15 9 0.3750 24 Jim Hoey 0 8 4 0.3333 12 Tanner Scott 1 11 5 0.2941 17 T.J. McFarland 0 8 3 0.2727 11 Rick Bauer 1 15 6 0.2727 22 Mark Hendrickson 1 10 4 0.2667 15 Matt Albers 0 23 8 0.2581 31 Steve Kline 0 9 3 0.2500 12 Shawn Armstrong 4 11 5 0.2500 20 Pedro Strop 3 31 11 0.2444 45 Miguel Castro 3 19 7 0.2414 29 Kevin Gregg 22 0 7 0.2414 29 John Parrish 1 13 4 0.2222 18 Jamie Walker 7 32 11 0.2200 50 Paul Fry 5 22 7 0.2059 34 Chris Ray 49 14 16 0.2025 79 Luis Ayala 1 11 3 0.2000 15 LaTroy Hawkins 0 16 4 0.2000 20 Alfredo Simon 17 0 4 0.1905 21

Save percentage is biased heavily against set-up men. They can only blow the "save," when they are unlikely to ever close that game and get the save. Probably hard to do, but final inning blown saves would be more informing.

Yes, but they'll be over 40 when their major leaguers come back. There is a good chance they'll have to DFA five to 10 players when that happens. They would have to hope they clear waivers.

Another consideration: The Marlins don't have enough players on the 40-man to field a team. They'll have to select the contracts of guys that are in their 60-man pool that are not on their 40-man roster. When their COVID players come back, they're going to have DFA a bunch of players to get back to 40 (i think COVID doesn't count against the 40). Maybe this is a deal for a minor leaguer on their 60-man. Definitely not a star, but maybe someone decent that the Marlins were afraid of losing in a week or so. From the Marlins' perspective, why not get someone for a guy like that? Just a thought.

The Marlins aren't really in any position to send any players back now. They need to field a team when play starts for them. When the COVID-positive players start coming back, they will have an excess of players (Bleier plus their waiver claims). The O's either get the PTBNL then or it will be a lower level prospect (not on the 60) after the season. Hard for me to criticize the deal without knowing what's coming back.

Yep, I'm expecting Monday and Tuesday's games to be against the Marlins. The Phillies would play New York.

OBP was definitely undervalued back then. Mickey Tettleton was traded after a "disappointing season." He hit .223 in 1990, but with a .376 OBP and an OPS+ of 116.

That only makes sense if the reason they don't spend the full allotments is that the team can't afford it. Come on, that's not the case. If it is the franchise is in WAY more trouble that any of of think. If you think that not signing Yasiel Puig is going to be the breaking point that allows the Baltimore Orioles to spend their full allotments, than I'm not even sure what to say anymore.

No. All prospects, even first round picks are gambles. But this isn't even like a draft pick. It's not rotisserie baseball. A rebuilding team should be looking at all avenues to add prospects. You have a hypothetical $1.7 M. You have a chance to gamble on the potential of a prospect. How else could you use that money to get a prospect? Again, the draft and pool money are capped. So you could take the risk as a low payroll team. It might work out, it might not. If you don't spend the money you get nothing. I like the risk.

How do you judge the "return" for a prospect? That's a serious question. There is not really an open market for prospects, unless you consider international slot money. You get prospects primarily through the draft and the the international pool. Both are capped. It's not like they can use the $1.7M to go buy a prospect instead. For a low payroll team, I like the risk, especially this year when injuries + COVID + opting out can put teams in a pinch. What else could they do with that kind of money?

What do you really mean by "breaking even?" Payroll is low. I'm guessing Puig's prorated salary would be between $1 -2 million. This is akin to paying x dollars for a mystery prospect from a grab bag. Yes, it's a gamble, but for a rebuilding team, the goal is to accumulate prospects.

I'm not suggesting a Torres-level return or even close. There's a wide gap between that and nothing of value.

Unless a first place team suddenly has one or more key players test positive or opt out of the rest of the season. It's a roll of the dice, but pretty low risk for the Orioles.

Puig is a buy low, potential trade chip if he gets hot. Why not? With Mancini out, he's not really blocking anyone right now.

The Tettleton trade was one of the worst in team history but has been overshadowed by the trade for Davis. They traded a switch-hitting catcher with power for a pitcher recovering from arm problems. OBP wasn't valued as much then -- Tettleton walked a lot and was way more valuable than what they got for him.

I'm never crazy about quantity over quality. I'm not fooling myself into thinking that Bundy would net a premium prospect. But maybe one 15-20 in their system instead of four guys? Or two 25-30 guys and no one else. It's easy to give up 30+ guys in even a good system--obviously they're not all going to make the 26-man roster. Maybe they want to flip fringe players for international pool money? And therefore stockpiling??

None of the four made the Angels' midseason Top 30. Mattson: https://baseballamerica.com/players/99840/isaac-mattson/… Peek: https://baseballamerica.com/players/106305/zach-peek/… Kyle Bradish: https://baseballamerica.com/players/99246/kyle-bradish/… Brnovich: https://baseballamerica.com/players/105861/kyle-brnovich/

I'd be very much against signing Russell, not for baseball reasons.

You asked why there wasn't a stronger return, if he indeed was at fair market value. I explained that there are free agents available for fair market value.

I disagree. There are other options at fair market value, so why give up anything now when you can sign free agent X at fair market value. That's why have have continued to argue to roll the dice and try to make a deadline deal, when supply of fair market value is much lower (and salary for 1/2 season is less important).

Since they got a player back, I don't hate it as much. Still very much against. I think he was traded when his value was at its lowest in the annual cycle. The fact that at least one team was interested at $10 mill suggests his value would be higher as a midseason pickup for a contender.

Devan Fink, Fangraphs: I see very little justification for Orioles cutting Jonathan Villar. He hit .274/.339/.453 with a 107 wRC+, was worth 10.5 BsR, and produced a total of 4 WAR. Probably won't repeat those numbers, but I still don't see an issue with paying him ~$10 million in arbitration. And, also, maybe you throw in some cash and trade him? Losing Villar for literally nothing seems less-than-ideal. Eno Sarris, Fangraphs: Come on. Jonathan Villar is projected to be average in just about every facet of the game, and is only due ~$10 million next year. Orioles really couldn’t find a taker without putting him on waivers? The Padres were obviously looking. Nobody else? This sucks. Alex Fast, MLB producer: Option A) Pay Villar $10.4 Mil and trade him mid-season Option B) Let Villar become a FA Struggling to see why option B is better. Dan Connolly (to be fair, in a balanced piece): The other scenario we thought was a possibility heading into the offseason looks fully unrealistic now: That the Orioles would offer Villar arbitration, pay half that award in salary and trade him in July as a rental to get some minor-leaguers in return. That, of course, is gambling that Villar has another great campaign and further boosts his trade value. That’s what is probably going to stick with fans the most. Why not roll the dice? Grant McAuley, Braves radio: So, the Orioles are saying that not one of the other 29 teams in MLB would give them anything for Jonathan Villar, a 4.0 WAR player who doesn't turn 30 until 2021? Not an A-Ball flyer or even the dreaded bad contract/change of scenery swap? Nothing?! Not worth trying? Awful. --------------------- That's not to mention the slew of reporters claiming the so-called lack of interest at $10M is evidence of collusion.

I didn't accuse it and you didn't say it, I back the so-called stupid idea and I used the term myself.