Pickles
-
Posts
5900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
I don't really have a beef?
I mean I think it's stupid to start him in AA but I don't think it will do him any harm.
I just don't think he's going to be a full on rotation piece until 2024, which is what I said in the first place.
Well, you seemed to be blaming it on Elias so........ seemed like you were beefing. And now calling it stupid....lol
He's going to be up here in 2-3 months, so long as he's healthy and successful.
And then he's likely to be used as suggested before. At least initially.
And I think it is all quite practical.
-
11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
OK so ~100 innings this year, ~130 in 2023 means he's good for a full time rotation spot in 2024.
As for prudent? He struck out 15.9/9 last year. It wouldn't be imprudent to stick him in a ML bullpen at 23.
Was anyone suggesting that having Tyler Wells pitch out of the bullpen last year was imprudent?
Yeah, I don't get it. So what's your beef?
He's probably going to spend the next two years in the MLs, pitching as a swing man, getting experience and building up innings.
-
2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
Not in the rotation.
How many innings do you think he gets this year?]
He pitched 31 innings last year and Elias is having him repeat AA.
Whatever innings he gets in the majors will be bullpen innings. I guess he might have some "opener" starts but that isn't functionally different than bullpen work.
The way Elias builds innings he won't be a full on rotation member until 2024 and that if things go right.
Well, I'm not sure Elias is radically different from other GMs when it comes to pitcher usage or development.
I think they'd like Hall to get ~100 innings this year.
With probably as much as that in the MLs as is prudent and possible.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
When is Hall in the rotation, 2024?
You don't think the plan is for him to get ML time this year?
-
8 minutes ago, DocJJ said:
I guess the question really is:
How will this team perform with Rutschman catching, Rodriguez and Hall in the rotation? I think those guys will certainly help but won't be enough to make a huge difference- maybe we win 60 games instead of 50?
While we have a number of other intriguing prospects, I'm not sure any of them are really that close to the majors. We can what Stowers does and Neustrom (off to a good start)... I think Mayo, Westburg, Henderson are still a full year or more away...
Well, that's exactly what it's going to take:
Time.
This team will be better this summer than last year; they will add 2-3 legitimate major league pieces this year. Then they need to do that next year. And be better still. And the year after. Ad infinitum.
The question to me has always been: How long will that take? And what is the optimal route?
But if we're not better this year, we have a problem.
-
Narrator:
They didn't.
-
1
-
-
The line is obviously terrible and Tony made some good points, but I'm not discouraged.
The stuff is there. He showed above average fastball, changeup, and breaking ball today. The foundation is there.
He got himself in trouble by not being aggressive enough within the zone, and then he booted a fieldable ball that should have been two. Then he's up into 30+ pitches for the inning, and 50+ for the game, and he gives up a HR.
-
6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
No. Mountcastle
By one I meant one.
He's been pretty speedy for a 1B type but he will eventually slow. I'm curious if added mass with expedite that process.
Mateo was at 30.4 last season (tied for 5th in the league).
Ah, ok. I see.
He's still a young man. Even with the added mass, I don't expect to see him slow dramatically quite yet. The weight at least looks to be good weight. He hit that ball out to RF today real easy.
-
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
1- His sprint speed was 28.1 ft/sec last year. I'm curious how fast it will decline year to year. (was 28.0 in 2020)
I'm assuming this is a reference to Mateo?
-
I was thinking about starting a thread because I had the opportunity to closely watch the game with the exception of the first inning, and I had a few impressions:
1) Mountcastle looks noticeably bigger. He obviously hit the homer but he also had a nice play at first. I think there might be more upside there than he is popularly given credit for.
2) Mateo, despite the error, had a nice day in the field and at the plate. Several good ABs, reached base a couple times, had the SB, and several nice plays in the field.
3) The entire infield, particularly Odor, was real sharp. Several DPs, and several nice plays. Every single player made a play of note.
4) Akin, as noted in Frobby's thread, looked real good. His stuff isn't great, but he has to throw strikes, and he did.
5) Lyes, as noted in yet another thread, didn't look so good.
6) Santander is hitting the ball well so far this year. Seems like every AB I've seen of his this year he has hit the ball very hard.
-
Just now, NelsonCruuuuuz said:
Prob correct but I didn’t make a decision to sign the retread linked to a death of a player. Not a good look. Better options out there. I miss the Buck Showalter era (minus Ubaldo decisions).
We signed notorious anti-Semite and hate crime commissioner Delmon Young while Buck was here. Thank God we did too.
Recreational drug use doesn't bother me. At all. It's unfortunate Skaggs died. But that's not on Harvey. And frankly, it's not even on the guy who sold the pills to Skaggs.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:
I stopped reading at inconsequential details.
Keep playing yourself homie.
Well, seems like you quit reading before then because I didn't use the word details, homie.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, NelsonCruuuuuz said:
Nice! OxyContin bonus for 100 innings pitched?
If you think Harvey is the only one popping pills, you got another thing coming to you.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Are you kidding me?
I know you like being the contrarian on here sometimes but this is a weird situation to flex on.
We absolutely do have the luxury of not giving a crap about the personal aspects of an organization, but then you go ahead and say "people who actually run organizations have to take these things into consideration."
Yeah, he was professional last year but that doesn't overlook the giant cloud that's hanging over this guy's head. I said I don't care about it and I don't. But there are plenty of others that do...and when you take into consideration his performance last year with the opioid situation and the death of a former teammate that he was directly involved in, I'm not sure how you can justify your stance on "people who actually run organizations have to take these things into consideration."
There are plenty of other players who could give a similar performance WITHOUT the negative aspect of Harvey's personal life. Like you said, a low maintenance break-only-in-case-of-emergency is a fine signing.
But does it have to be the guy who's a former cocaine user and played a part in Tyler Skaggs' death? It can't be someone else who doesn't have that baggage?
I guess to some not losing my shit over these inconsequential deals and using them as an excuse to call everyone stupid or dumb, makes me a contrarian. LOL.
The drug thing doesn't bother me. At all. It's a little contrarian to claim that it doesn't bother you, but then cite it as a reason to not sign him. I suspect the vast majority of ML players use recreational drugs. I personally ran into a very successful starting pitcher for the Rays about 10 years ago buying Swisher Sweets in Fort Worth Texas.
Again, the people who dealt with him on a day to day basis last year seem to have some appreciation for him. That's honestly enough for me.
If they gave him a guaranteed contract, or a bunch of money, or a rotation spot, I'd criticize it. As of now, this is a nothing move. So forgive me for being contrarian, but I"m not going to get all worked up about it and start calling everyone a moron.
Compare it to the Odor signing. I had the same reaction at the time: Eh. Now, that he's made the roster, I'm less happy with it. If he starts taking opportunities from Mateo and Urias, I'll be real unhappy about it.
But I'm not going to start calling everyone a moron the second they do something I'm not in full-throated agreeement with.
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Why's it important to remember that?
Because it very well explains this signing.
I know you guys have the luxury of not giving a crap about the personal aspects of an organization, but people who actually run organizations have to take these things into consideration.
Harvey comported as a professional last year. He did what he was asked and never complained. Presumably, they were likewise happy with his presence in the locker room and around the team.
These things have value.
Now, you don't give a guy a 20 million dollar deal based on it. Or even a guaranteed roster spot. But if you're just looking for a low maintenance break-only-in-case-of-emergency option, getting the one you're familiar with makes imminent sense.
-
I think it's important to remember Harvey was a good soldier last year, and this could be seen as an opportunity in turn.
-
Eh. A MiL deal is fine imo.
-
1
-
-
Hopefully, sparingly.
-
But to your point, McKenna can't hit. SSS AAA stats be damned. He'll never be more than a 5th outfielder, but his defense and speed do provide some value.
-
I think it comes down to Odor vs. Stewart. I think McKenna makes the team.
-
27 minutes ago, Ruzious said:
I'm going to be that guy - the one who admits I thought it was silly to move him out of the bullpen. So far, it looks like I was completely wrong, and I'm very pleased that's the case.
Nobody on either side of the debate should be claiming victory or conceding defeat.
I've been adamant that he deserved a shot to start. They're going to give him one. And he's done well in his ST build up this year.
That's a far cry from being a successful ML starter.
-
5 hours ago, now said:
Meanwhile the current IF crop is making it easy to wait for the young 'uns:
Mateo .381
Martin .409
Urias .385
Gutierrez .360What are you talking about? Those are great averages!
-
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
If he's healthy all season and they shut him down because of a predetermined innings limit I'll gladly count that as an L.
It will be interesting to see how they use him.
If he makes 30 starts and gives you 3-4 innings a turn, that's well within his innings goal for this year imo.
But they just let him pitch 3.2 in Spring Training. Are they going to use him more conventionally and shoot for a higher innings total?
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
No idea.
Every pitcher is different. Some have problems with the number of pitches in an appearance when starting, another might have an issue with pitching back to back days or having to warm up so often.
I could easily be wrong, it's just a feeling. Anytime a young pitcher has a history of injury my default is pretty much that he's going to miss some time in any given season.
I mean, betting on pitchers to get injured is a pretty safe one.
And in this case, you're correct, even by default.
Wells isn't ready to take a full seasons worth of starts. They're going to have to limit, and shut him down at some point.
Elias expects hitting to be good and pitching to struggle
in Orioles Talk
Posted
This too.
He doesn't even need to build up to 200 innings to be valuable.