Pickles
-
Posts
5857 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
I'm actually good with this. He's got upside and he's undoubtedly cheap.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Which I know is technically balls in play, but it's not exactly.
-
2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Well, moving it back would have pitch velocity decrease by the time it reaches home plate + more time for the batter to identify pitch and most likely make contact. More balls in play.
But how would they determine how far to move it back? A foot? 3 feet?
More balls in play, or just more walks and balls in the air?
-
1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:
I dunno, I'm thankful that I'm not in a position where I've gotta figure that out.
I'm not a total purist but when people start mentioning things like moving the mound back...ehhh, I dunno. You don't see the NBA raising the rim, the NFL making the field longer. 60 feet, 6 inches is sacrosanct, IMO.
I mean if you can raise it I could see moving it a little. But I don't see how that solves the problem.
The problem isn't an imbalance between offense and defense.
The problem is both offense and defense are seeking to do the same thing. Which is boring.
-
1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:
Sure..and the Os are doing that by establishing a true cheap foundation. They can further increase that by bringing in the correct players from Outside the organization.
Agreed. And the correct players will be expensive and thus correspond closely to when the team is truly ready to compete of the playoffs.
-
2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
3 outcomes? I agree. Hard to go back when pitchers are throwing high 90s and triple digits and batters are gearing up for launch angles.
Yeah, how do you get more balls in play- when BOTH pitchers and hitters are trying to reduce them?
-
3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Fwiw, I don’t think it’s ideal. I can’t say I would be pissed if they did those deals because it would be exciting but I think it would be a poor use resources.
That being said, you can do sign those deals and have those guys suck 4-6 years into them and still field a team that can win a title. Your margin for error is lessened but you can still do it if you are smart.
Isn't it smart to increase your margin for error?
-
6 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
MLB, IMO, has decided to get steroid like results after banning PEDs...they want big time offense, but they know they can't allow guys to keep juicing. So they got a rabbit ball instead.
They're always messing with the game conditions, generally to enhance offense as an appeal to the average fan.
I'm not sure the way out of this current iteration of MLB though. I do know it isn't nearly as fun to watch.
-
1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:
I don't know if average age is declining and pushing older guys out of the league earlier due to the way they hold up. In baseball you can have an older player, 37 or 38 years old who's making a few million based off his name or you can have a 22, 23 year old prospect with some upside instead.
Sure there are some outliers and Scherzer might be one of those guys. They can certainly recover faster. But there are still players playing at very high levels into their mid 30s no matter what the sport. Whether teams are jumping to give them longer contracts is a different point altogether.
Steroids or the lack thereof. That's a huge factor for this phenomena in MLB the last decade+.
-
9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Maybe..it depends on what else they do.
Think of it this way.
Let’s say the Os signed Correa tomorrow to a 10/375 deal and then signed Freddie Freeman to a 6/180 deal.
Thats roughly 70 million a year for 2 players starting in 2021.
How much is the rest of the roster going to make? How much will the rest of the roster be in 3 years? 5 years?
But then those are your free agents. For the whole Rutchsman and crew run. Will it kill you? Maybe not. Is it ideal?That's were the objections come in. Both for particular players and the particular timing.
-
2 hours ago, Yardball85 said:
Interesting quote from the Rangers at the end of the season re: AROD's contract and their current approach to signing good players to supplement their young core:
“The size of the contract that was given to Alex at the time, that wasn't so much the issue,” Daniels said at the Rangers end-of-season press conference. “It was that it was not consistent with the rest of the plan. There was not a continuing commitment to be able to build, whether that was to promote young players and develop them or to be able to add other key players externally. That didn’t really happen.
“We're not looking to solve one player to be the finishing piece. But we're looking for players that can be part of helping to turn this around and really launch us to where we want to go and also that can help our young players develop as they get up here.”
https://www.mlb.com/rangers/news/corey-seager-rangers-deal
Disclaimer: I think the Seager deal was ridiculous. It is the process that I like, not the contracts themselves.
I'll finish reading the rest but I have to chime in here:
1) I had to come here and see the reactions to the Rangers' signings, in particular.
2) I hate Jon Daniels. He's a grade-A moron that made one good trade in his life- and it was the direct result of the fact they did continue to develop- far better than he ever has- in that time period.
Michael Young, Hank Blalock, and Mark Texiera, Travis Hafner would all debut for the Rangers within 2 years of Rodrguez signing. Looks like a pretty good core without A-Rod.
As someone who lives in North Texas two more to think about:
1) This spending spree is financed by the taxpayers of the region who got gauged to build two stadiums in less than 30 years; one of which was a billion dollar monstrosity that has all the charm of a sound stage. (That's just for the Rangers. Not even mentioning the Cowboys.
2) They will stick stink. They will be lucky to go .500 next year, and both of these contracts are awful and will hamstring this franchise for years into the future.
-
2 minutes ago, owknows said:
It was actually sarcasm in support of your position.
Definitely too hot in here
I thought my sarcasm was pretty clear too.
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
That was a joke.
You might want to step back for a couple minutes.
Really? Tell me more. You are clearly an expert on sarcasm.
-
1 minute ago, owknows said:
I have it on good authority that there were no ill effects of the Chris Davis contract.
Lighting 15% of your payroll on fire, carrying dead weight on the roster, and blocking potential replacements, is not detrimental in way.
Be realistic and logical, moron.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:
We're baseball fans. This is a hobby. People want to enjoy their hobby. I get the frustration of sitting out the offseason and knowing we will again absolutely suck.
I'm not saying this is fun.
-
2 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:
At least the Rangers are doing something even if it's misguided. The collective bargaining agreement is going to expire on 12/01 with no moves of note by the O's.
Doing stupid things is stupid.
Are you under the impression MLB issues participation trophies?
-
5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
I want to know what people are afraid of. What do you think is going to happen if they try to win?
Give out a bunch of stupid contracts so in three years when they actually might be competitive they're saddled with people like Sieman at 35 years old making 25 million dollars to be terrible.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
I said it before, I'll say it again. It looks like the Semien signing has all the hallmarks of a bad signing.
But at least they're trying. At least they're not afraid to go for it. Maybe they know something we don't. Maybe they think they've got some prospects that are close that can help them compete. Maybe it won't be a bad signing.
At least they're trying. Again, you seem to be the only one here struggling with that.
I'm pretty sure I said we should have signed him to what the Tigers signed him to. I don't think I ever put Ed-Rod and blank check in the same sentence, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.
Well I guess I have higher standards. Trying while doing something stupid doesn't impress.
I don't want the Orioles to do stupid things. That doesn't improve their competitiveness.
That isn't difficult to understand unless you have an illogical horse you need to beat.
-
1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:
If you think what they are doing is logical, I think you skipped the day of school where they discussed what logic is.
Good one.
-
6 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Go look it up if you're so worried about it. Onus is on you to look it up if you care so much. But you'd be the only one on here who's so concerned with what people were saying on here 6 months ago.
Your position then is basically the O's should ahve given E-Rod a blank check.
That's a reasonable position that is in touch with reality.
-
3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
I agree, I said that the Rangers made a bad signing but they think they're doing something good. That's their prerogative. And that is what the MFYs do, they can afford to do it. Rangers, I'm assuming, not so much.
I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore.
That's because your position is inherently illogical and when someone speaks logic to it, you can't get over the cognitive dissonance.
So once again, the Rangers did something "good" by making a "bad" signing?
That is oxymoronic.
-
2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
I think plenty of us have suggested FAs that we'd like to sign and prefer not to sign. For me it's been Ed-Rod and Matz.
OK, so I understood it pretty f-ing well then, and your snark was more than misplaced.
Got it.
-
3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
I think I've been pretty clear in regards to what just happened with the Semien signing. It seems like you're the only one here who's having a hard time grasping what I've stated. CoC seems to get it. SG seems to get it. OsFanSincethe80s seems to get it.
I've got no idea what I said or didn't say about Ed-Rod this past summer.
Isn't that convenient?
-
2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Again, it’s more than that. It’s just the simple concept of trying to get better and not accept losing. Free agency is one of those ways but there are others.
You are fine with losing and being pathetic. That’s fine. I was for a few years as well.
Im not anymore. It’s perfectly understandable why people are fed up with it.
I'm fine with the Orioles going about a logical process.
Not knee-jerk overreactions because people got fooled by a SSS in 2020.
I'd like to see the O's get better. I'm not against FA signings. I'm wary of them as history shows. But I'm not outright against it.
But using terrible FA contracts as cudgels to berate the O's process is just not convincing.
-
1
-
Orioles signing Rougned Odor
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Oh, I don't think he's going to start playing well again. But that is still there. Even if he doesn't achieve it. And he almost certainly won't.