Pickles
-
Posts
5900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
4 hours ago, NCRaven said:
I think “cleared” might be the wrong way of putting it. Not having enough evidence to bring charges isn’t the same as saying he definitively did nothing wrong.
That's not how it works in this country. Thank God.
He's under no need to prove his innocence.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Why would they be moronic to trade for him?
They would be moronic to overvalue him based on 39 games and coming off a season-ending injury.
His value isn't material lower now than then. It's always been middling.
-
1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:
+1, I went with .760-.799. He and Mancini are the ones to watch for trade value. I hope they start hot so they can get us some pitching help when Stowers is ready.
I don't expect a ton for either, but it's possible if Santander is having a strong season he could get something with some future value.
-
17 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Should have dealt him after 2020 but he can recover his trade value if he can stay healthy. Problem is, he probably won’t stay healthy.
How moronic do you think ML GMs are that they would have been fooled by 39 games which ended, predictably, in season ending injury?
-
I think he'll get in the high 700s- held back by his OBP issues.
Him having a monster year and being able to be flipped in August for some legit talent would be an ideal scenario.
-
1
-
-
If I was setting an over-under for Mullins I'd set it at 800 so I went with the 780-819 option.
Though I think there's an argument to be made that that is perhaps pessimistic.
-
12 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
The aforementioned teams won't always be this good. But in case you haven't noticed, we've been practically at the bottom of the barrel more often than not over the past 20 years. Hell, over the past 30 years.
So while the Sox and Yankees might not always be good, we have to contend with the Jays and Rays who look to be very good, too.
I will put it this way, all of the other 4 teams do things better than the Orioles. I would argue they're all better run. Maybe that changes when Elias' plan comes to fruition.
For the record, I'd prefer to stay in this division and figure out ways to beat the competition.
I'm not sure why pointing out our division makes it harder to compete makes me answerable for all of ownership's failures.
-
2 minutes ago, Frobby said:
That “how can we compete with those payrolls” argument was a great argument — in 2007. Then Tampa came along.
But anyway, if the argument is that we will have to take bigger risks than another team might because the teams in our division will always be very good, I’d have to think about that one.
Well, I might even agree we need to take more risks, but be specific about the risk.
It is real easy to argue "spend money" but when presented with what flesh and blood free agents go for, say it is "atrocious" is a moving goal post.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:
I'd argue that we made the playoffs 3 times in a 5 year span when the aforementioned teams weren't particularly good.
In regards to what you and SG are debating, I can't even make sense of it anymore.
The aforementioned teams won't always be this good. That's a fact. In 3-4 years, there might be a very different landscape in the AL East. It will always be difficult for a lot of reasons, but it can't remain this good.
Those 2012-16 Orioles teams weren't great teams certainly. But you could easily argue that the 14 team was decidedly unlucky for a team that won as many games as it did. They lost 3-4 of their 5 best regulars.
Nobody of any credence has suggested we "can't" compete in this division. The differences of perspective are of methods of doing just that: competing.
-
15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
I never said anything about criticizing the FO for not signing Correa. Are you this delusional in person? I even said the deal I would sign him that would never be approved and that it was just for discussion purposes.
How is that bashing them for not signing him? Show me where I’m bashing them. Prove it.
And yea, people consistently complain about the division and the schedule and use it as a crutch for not contending. But of course you consider the division when it comes to what you need to do to build a consistent contender.
You don't bash them for not signing Correa. You're far more subtle. LOL.
You bash them for not "spending any money."
But when presented with what an actual sensible FA costs, you balk at it, and call the contract atrocious.
You sound like Peter Angelos. That would make sense.
Didn't you shine his shoes once?
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
There's been plenty of whining over the years on this board about the division. Maybe not the exact words that "we cannot compete in this division," but similar sentiments. How can we compete with the payrolls of Boston and NYY, etc. Calling for re-alignment, etc. It's been a theme on here for a long time.
It undoubtedly makes it more difficult. I've made the argument in the past. And was told I was making "excuses." It would be pretty difficult for anyone over the age of 10 to make the argument we can't compete in this division; considering we made the playoffs 3 times in a 5 year span within the last decade. So, yeah, exact words or not, few have ever made that claim.
To then use the idea that our division makes it more difficult to compete to justify signing a FA, who you believe is going to sign an "atrocious" deal, is odd.
-
2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
I did?
I'm asking questions about what you would do if the rebuild was showing signs of not working over a period of years. I didn't say 2023. Heck make it 2025 if you want, or 2027.
Was nice of you to call my questions serious.
I expect the team to start winning more games from this point on. What that looks like remains to be seen.
If there is a deviation from that, then I will start reevaluating.
-
Just now, Sports Guy said:
Plenty of people blame our division and schedule and say it stops us. If you don’t see that, try reading.
Your last paragraph is moronic. I mentioned Correa because of the Q&A posted. I think his contract will be atrocious. The contract he gets will be regrettable and I wouldn’t sign him to it. How is that, in any way, trying to say I can do a better job? That’s just stupidity.
I personally have made the argument in the past, and was ridiculed by YOU for it, that we would have to have different strategy because of the division we played in. And yet nobody has literally ever said we cannot compete in this division.
Which was what you just claimed.
So here we are, and you're saying..... what exactly? Correa is going to sign a terrible contract, but Correa is the kind of guy we should criticize the FO for not signing, because you know you have to hit on a 16 sometimes, because of the division we play in?
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
Kinda.
You are also accusing me of things I didn't say.
Are you OK with the O's deviating from the course if it looks as if the current strategy isn't going to pan out even if it means accepted elevated levels of risk? Or would you rather lay low, recycle the roster and hope for lightning to strike? Maybe a huge selloff and slashed payroll so they can save money for when they are good is an idea they could try?
Or do you have a different plan if things don't work out?
I don't see how they can get the pitching to line up with the hitters to create a window with the present roster.
You're also not responding to the things I write. But instead posing a serious of rhetorical questions.
You could go back and respond to my previous post past the first line.
-
8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
The FO shares your perspective because it’s what ownership wants.
If the lockout ended tonight and they signed Correa and added a good starter tomorrow, there is no way you would be on here bashing them.
Well, I've already said Correa makes a lot of sense. So if they signed him I'd be fine with it. It would depend on the pitcher and the contract whether I'd like that.
And you're not incorrect. I'd probably disagree with how they spent the money in an ideal world, but if ownership showed a willingness to maintain a high ML payroll, while still trying to build a cutting edge system and the money that goes into that, I'd cheer that on.
I just don't see that happening. So I choose to ponder about the world that actually exists.
-
2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
No, saying we can’t compete because of our division is an excuse and cowardly. That doesn’t mean you don’t consider the division you are in…and in fact, many of my arguments do just that.
Look, if you want to try to “get me”, you could at least make an attempt to represent my arguments correctly.
Nobody has ever said we can 't compete because of our division. Ever. Literally.
That's your problem, sportsguy, nobody is trying to "get you." They're engaging in conversation with you, and you flip like a fish; them noticing it is not their problem.
I mean, in this thread alone, you've basically went from saying Correa's contract will be "atrocious"- the point I joined the conversation- to attempting to use the non-acquisition as yet another cudgel to tell the board about how much better you could do the job than the professionals.
-
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
You object to me asking if you were fine with it?
Because that's what I did.
I inquired.
And I'm answering.
-
4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
No, you hit on 16 because the odds say you do when the dealer is showing 7-ace. It’s called basic strategy.
And let me tell you this…the entire division is showing 7-ace.
I thought using the division we play in to alter strategy was an "excuse" and "cowardly?"
-
8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
What if the dealer has a seven showing?
What if the rebuild never hits on all cylinders? Do you keep going, well if this guy and that guy pan out we can add to that next offseason forever? At some point do you tear it all down again and start from scratch or do you muddle along at 70 wins?
Now I'm not saying sign Correa and I don't think he'd sign here anyway.
But at some point the O's are probably going to have to hit on 16.
I don't think they can win with a pair of eights, not at this table.
Well, let me say, I object to the idea that I'm willing to kick the can "indefinitely."
I expect the Orioles payroll to increase as they develop better players and as a consequence win more.
I do not expect the payroll increase by signing external FAs. I largely support this because signing external FAs has proven time and again a poor way to build a baseball team. There are exceptions and Correa could be one of them. Again, it's why I'm willing to entertain the idea.
I simply have a further horizon than a few of you. I think just as many people, and apparently the FO as well, share my perspective, as agree with yours and others.
This arbitrary idea that we must be "competing" in 2023 is not something I agree with.
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
Do you ever turn on the gas? Are you fine with kicking it down the road another year indefinitely?
You don't hit on 16 just to feel good.
-
On 1/14/2022 at 11:18 AM, Frobby said:
As usual, Fangraphs is rolling out it’s farm system analyses team-by-team. Unlike other publications, they don’t do a top 20 or top 30. Rather, they list every player in an organization who they grade 35+ or higher. Some teams have way more than others. Also, though it doesn’t appear in the articles on each team, Fangraphs has placed a dollar value on each level of prospect, e.g. a 55 FV pitcher is worth $34 mm. So,
That's a pretty blunt instrument.
I certainly wouldn't say all 55 FVs are created equal.
-
4 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
So, you are kind of all over the place here. I will address each point and remember, that the conversation is being done within the context of the idea of adding Correa.
1) I would sign Correa and would want the Os to sign him if it was for 7 or less years. That's my max. Since that contract won't happen, this is all a moot point but hey, its a discussion board, so wtf.
2) Yes, the Rays went from 66 wins. They didn't go from 60 or less. They are the closest and perhaps the only example to do it in ONE YEAR, which is what I was saying. I agree that it can happen in 2 years although even those examples aren't plentiful. That being said, my point is that if you end up going into 2023 after just winning 60 games, I don't feel its realistic to think they are contending in 2023 and my goal would be to contend in 2023. I think its absurd to head into 2023 hoping to be a 80ish win team at best.
2a) If they increase the number of playoff teams, it may mean 88ish wins gets you in the playoffs and that could change things some. Right now, the odds aren't with you that you can win 60 games or less and get in. Even if you want to go to 65 wins, its still unlikely.
3) Again, your predictions mean nothing. They literally bring nothing to the conversation. Your rationale there doesn't mean anything so again, I don't get why you are bringing it up but congrats, you did well with your predictions. Go upstairs and make sure you tell your mom and have her pat you on the back.
The overall point is this...If the team went out and signed Correa, it should speed up their own timeline. It should also cause them to make a further move or 2 for the 2022 team. If you signed him, my expectation would be that you could/should be a 75ish win team and that you are in great position to contend in 2023. I do not feel that having another season similar to what we have seen, even if its accompanied by 5-10 more wins will do that and my goal is contention in 2023, again especially if you sign Correa.
By the end of 2022, a lot of this young talent should be up seeing time. Combine that with an elite talent like Correa and a ton of payroll flexibility long term and 2023 sets up as a potentially great season for the organization. The idea that it is "a year early" is meaningless. You get talent when you can get it. The rest will fall into place.
And again, next offseason isn't good for free agency and the offseason after that isn't good either unless Manny opts out and would you really go pay him huge money at that point? So, how are you adding real talent? Trading a bunch of prospects for it? Always an option but I am guessing many would cry about that one and you obviously need the players to keep developing to have the value to land the top guys. So, thats a risk as well.
At this point, Correa is probably your best chance at landing an elite talent at a youngish age. So, if he would sign here for a deal that makes sense (which he won't) and if you believe in your young talent, which I am guessing you do, signing him now is a smart move.
Narrowing the scope of our conversation and focusing it back on a possible Correa acquisition:
I don't think our parameters are far off on the kind of contract we'd hand him.
I'd go like 8/250. Maybe even 10/300 with a frontloaded contract. Only because I agree he's an exceptional case that doesn't come around often.
He almost certainly won't sign here for that.
The answer isn't then to go spend 30 million a year on 3 mediocre free agents.
It's to keep the course. Even if that means you don't "compete" in 2023.
-
21 minutes ago, rudyrooster said:
50 years status quo? Even more reason to update the process.
Well, I won't argue the necessity or wisdom of changing the FA rules.
I will point out that demanding a change favorable to yourself and then walking back from that demand is no real concession at all.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, rudyrooster said:
Negotiations are a "give and take" situation. I thus far have seen only the MLBPA make any significant "give" in these negotiations. The union has reportedly abandoned its proposal on getting players a quicker path to free agency. I had perceived this particular issue as being one of the main "sticking points" on the way to a new CBA. I realize there are other major issues to be worked out. Just wanted to make that point.
Making a demand that overturns the 50 year status quo, and then walking back from that demand, isn't much of a concession.
The Athletic: First Moves AL Teams Should Make After Lockout Ends
in Orioles Talk
Posted
For me, this is where I am.
That's a huge red flag.