makoman

I grew up 5 min from G&M! Crabs and crab cakes were basically the only food my family splurged on, G&M was the best. Also been to Timbuktu a few times but didn’t know they had good crab cakes. To the rest of the thread, I prefer broiled but fried are good on occasion. I like to make them too but won’t win any awards and would never put the mustard in them. I love soft shells too. Hope Mr. Servideo ends up spending a long time in Baltimore and learns a thing or two about this.

The weird thing is many of those guys like Key and Viola (WS MVP!) and Stieb and Chuck Finley and even David Cone (5 rings!) and Gooden and Saberhagen (WS MVP!) and Kevin Brown got like 10 votes and were off the ballot their first year, like it was a no brainer that they no way no how deserved to be in. Yet Morris who was probably-maybe-slightly-better-or-maybe-not lived on, due I guess to wins and 1 night in 1991.

His ERA was 4.04, the league ERA was 3.94, his own team's ERA was 3.91. So that's about average. That's obviously what I meant since I was citing ERA+. WAR is a counting stat, so doing an averageish job over 240 innings will help your WAR. I acknowledged that he pitched a ton of innings and that had value.

Some random thoughts: If there is some legal problem the MLBPA certainly has a lot of expensive lawyers on retainer. Just because you don't intend to agree to more than 60 doesn't mean you wouldn't if the price was right. Also they always have the backdrop that they had to put safety first, even if no one believes it. The fact that a bunch of complexes had to shut down in June kind of supports the idea that they probably shouldn't have really been playing in June. The union's first proposal was for like 114 games, that doesn't look that reasonable. I don't have a strong feeling about this, but Bauer is a loudmouth and you'll hate anything Manfred does so there's that.

His ERA was over 4, ERA+ was 101. He was basically league average. On the same staff, Jimmy Key was probably better (better ERA, but worse FIP) and went 13-13. Juan Guzman was waaaaaay better and went 16-5. Wins are weird. He did pitch a ton of innings, which does have value. Maybe he pitched to the score ?

He sure did! 3.80 ERA in the postseason, compared to 3.90 in the regular season. Clutch! The Blue Jays were lucky to win the WS the year after his legendary Twins performance, with Morris having a 6.57 ERA in the ALCS and 8.44 in the WS.

I mean, it's all about what you mean by "ready." Manny was productive and not an all star debuting in his age 19 season. And it's not like he was dominating the minors. But he was clearly "ready" and had MVP votes in his age 20 season. If he had starred in the SEC instead of being below average at Frederick would that talent never have come through? Adam Jones made the majors at 20 and again at 21, though he wasn't all that productive. But looking at his AAA stats he was probably ready... Even Ryan Mountcastle probably could have hit adequately last year at 22. So why shouldn't a 22 year old Rutschman or Kjerstad or Tork or Andrew Vaughn or Austin Martin be capable of holding their own in the majors? Yeah, it would be an adjustment, but a lot of these guys could figure it out and do ok. Not just any guys, but the top few are supposed to be the very best hitters in their class after all. Again, this is not to say this would be the best way to develop them necessarily, and certainly is bad for service time, which is why it doesn't happen. But a handful of guys each year should be capable. I'm actually curious if it will happen this year, in a year with no minors. Not in Baltimore, we haven't really shown that we would do that. But if Toronto somehow finds themselves contending, and if Austin Martin really has a 70 hit tool, why not have him be some kind of super sub? What if Pittsburgh is doing well and needs a DH, and in BP Gonzales really looks like the guy who OPSs over 1.000 everywhere he goes?

Anything’s possible and WAR isn’t everything but he has less WAR than Baines, who was roundly considered an awful pick. No way Cruz gets voted in—maybe he’ll be best buddies with someone on whatever committee in 25 years.

Every year a handful of players who were HS draftees or amateur free agents debut at 20. I don't see why the very best college players shouldn't be capable of playing in the majors in their first year or so after being drafted when they are 21 or 22. Whether that is best for their development or service time issues is a different story and probably why it rarely happens. Even so, it is nice to hear that about our somewhat controversial draft pick.

Unfortunately that was Peter Angelos' opinion of the international market.

That's fair. In baseball especially so many guys fail you are often going to do better with the premium guys. Say, two firsts may have better outcomes than a first and three seconds. One could argue having more chances is better, but who knows, that's philosophical. One reason I've been willing to defend these guys is I'm not knowledgable enough to have any real opinion on prospects, but I think they are smart and doing something different, and that means their board is probably vastly different than the public boards. We're at a huge disadvantage in our division and aren't going to catch up just by doing what everyone else is doing, so I like that we are trying something. I want to give that a chance, although I recognize that's nothing more than some blind faith and hopefulness. I guess we'll know more in a few years.

So who then? Westburg signed for slot $2.365M. Who should they have taken instead that cost more? Loftin was 2 picks later for $3M. Fangraphs had them ranked back to back with Westburg higher, so we can't really say they took a lesser guy to be cheap. Wilcox, Kelley, and Ginn signed for $3.3M, $3M, and $2.9M. That's a lot more, and our extra couple 100k wouldn't get there. Kyle Harrison signed for $2.5M, but was rated far lower than Westburg by everybody. That's it who signed above and was drafted after Westburg so far, that I saw. I haven't seen Fulton reported but he's supposed to be over slot--I can see this org shying away from an injured guy though. Anyway, if they wanted any of those guys they could have had them and still not spent all the money, by simply taking them instead of Haskin for $1.9 and not signing Baumler or Mayo. Neither of those guys were a sure thing when they drafted Haskin, it would have been reasonable to just use that extra money set aside for Baumler right then and there if they loved Wilcox. Or take Wilcox instead of Servideo and then just forget about Mayo and Baumler. A lot of fans would have been thrilled with Wilcox instead of Haskin plus a senior sign in the 5th. Apparently they didn't love Wilcox, or they simply preferred Haskin plus another overslot chance later. Maybe they should have taken Casey Martin instead of Servideo. I can buy that, though he did strike out over 30% of the time this year and some think he'll leave short for CF, but it's impossible to say without knowing their board. They must have seen a lot of Martin in scouting Kjerstad. But anyway, they clearly decided that for some people the small sample size was projectable and Servideo had a hell of a good small sample size, it's reasonable to say they just liked him. I can understand being wary based on this org's history, but it's hard to critique without a reason behind it. To do so is just making stuff up, just like I made some stuff up above about their preferences. It's also hard to critique not going over slot when they did go over slot, twice.

Peter looked pretty good at first too with hiring Gillick and Davey, Camden Yards full, and a consistent top 5 payroll. Then he decided he was the smartest man in the room. The direction so far is positive but time will tell.

You clearly didn't read or understand my point. Let me spell it out. You said you didn't want the guy who strikes out a ton, even if he's successful. So I looked at the guys who struck out a ton and were successful (because they got to play enough to strike out a lot) last year to see what they were worth last year. I brought up Odor and his .205 as he was the outlier who wasn't worth much. I never said you said anything about .205 (but you did say .240, which also has no basis in anything). And I looked at the guys last year who fit your desired profile (lots of doubles, 15ish HR, good average) last year to see what they were worth. The point was the high K high power guys compared favorably to the high doubles high average lower power guys. Note: I don't care what hall of famers from a bygone era were worth. It's a bit more relevant to today's game to look at guys from last year, not Wade Boggs. Mike Schmidt led the league in Ks several times, I didn't bring him up. What a whiny post. It's really getting old, talking about yourself as "a man" and everybody else as kool aid drinkers. To be honest I was pretty ambivalent about this pick from the start but your posts have really convinced me to like the pick more and more just by being so grating.

The thing is, if they really wanted any of these over slot guys like Ginn or Wilcox or Fulton they could have had them. They knew they were going to have a couple million extra and Mayo and Baumler were surely not written in stone when Westburg or Haskin were taken. They apparently valued trying to get two over slot rather than one, or were risking someone to slip into the 4th (which seems strange). This team clearly has some idiosyncratic evaluation ideas and they may well just like who they got. Hard to say, and hard to say how it will go.

Everyone already knew that this was approximately his market value. That doesn't mean the O's or the player think he's the 8th best player in this draft.

Of course, but he's basically saying even if Kjerstad is a success he doesn't want the guy who mashes and K's a lot, he wants Dustin Pedroia. If he's going to assume Martin is Pedoria a multiple time MVP candidate I can assume Kjerstad is good enough to lead the league in Ks. This whole discussion is kind of off the rails at this point anyway.

9 players had over 170 Ks last year. They were worth (fWAR) 4.5, 5.6, 4.8, 3.6, 4.6, 0.3, 4.0, 5.8, 2.2. Roughned Odor was the outlier, but there's no reason at this point to think this kid is going to hit .205. 15-20 homers, high average and OBP, lots of doubles. That's what, Bryan Reynolds? Trea Turner? Whit Merrifield? Corey Seagor? 3.2, 3.5, 2.9, 3.3. You'd prefer Ozzie Albies or Jeff McNeil, both 4.6, but up in the 20s HR. Nothing wrong with that kind of guy at all, but let's not act like they are far and away better than guys who hit lots of homers and strike out a ton. Being a 15 HR guy in 2009 was different than 2019. It would be nice if we knew Martin would be adequate at a premium position but that's far from set in stone.

My understanding is the "Oriole Way" was a focus on the correct fundamentals. You win by doing the little things right. Field every grounder the right way, do every cut off play the same way, know how you're supposed to take a lead, etc. etc. Perfect practice makes perfect. "Playing the game the right way" is different. To me it's more of an old sportswriter construct of deifying the old traditional (and some would say boring) way of playing like we imagine people played in 1950. No showboating or really acting like you are having fun at all. Follow all the unwritten rules. And gosh, if you didn't show the utmost in grave respect then Bob Gibson would darn near kill you next time you came to bat, and that is fair and "right." Most importantly, it let those old sportswriters write articles about how they'd prefer Eckstein and Counsell to ARod. I like the former, couldn't really care less about the latter. And back on topic, I'm not going to form an opinion of a guy based on a one-off play where he shoves someone while coming to a full speed stop. Guess what, if you stop on a dime where somebody else is you might give a shove to keep your balance. Or maybe it was on purpose and a chad move, but I don't really care that much.

The question will be whether he is the Roberts with a <.100 ISO in the minors or if that develops. 10 HR last year is less than Roberts had either sophomore or junior year.

Yes they know where they’re ranked. That’s why you can say “Hey, we want to take you at 2. We see you’re ranked at around 10. So we’ll pay you slot for 7 and call it a day, good?” You can do this because he’s afraid if he doesn’t agree he will fall to 9 or 10. Even if you think he’s really #2 you can do this. This works best when you think the market undervalues the guy you love.

Teams lose the DH from time to time. Like if the DH moves to the field. I assume that can still happen. Wasn’t Buck against Wieters DHing for this reason, or am I misremembering?

Bleday got an additional 3/4 season to improve his stock.

https://www.fangraphs.com/prospects/the-board/2020-mlb-draft/summary?sort=1,-1&type=0&team= Fangraphs apparently has Kjerstad at 110. However they have him as 50 FV, tied for 2nd highest in this class with several others (only Tork was at 55). Everyone from 47 to 100 was FV 50.

Not to pick on you in particular, but I feel like everyone is really meh on the Westburg pick and I don't get it.* He was consensus ranked around 30. Fangraphs gave him a 45 FV. Everyone was thrilled with the Gunnar pick. He was consensus ranked around 25-40 I think, Luke had him at 38, some a bit higher. Fangraphs gave him a 40+ FV at draft time. Yes, picking 30th vs 42nd, but still... I hadn't heard of this guy until 2 weeks ago but I don't think we should sleep on him, he's got some tools but they'll need to develop as he hasn't gotten a ton of results. But it's not like he's some senior sign. *Probably many are still disappointed that we didn't go overslot right there?