Pickles

I don't know enough about the day to day machinations of the Tigers' organization to speak too intelligently about what is going on there, and I doubt anyone else here does either. So making direct comparisons there seems a bit silly. However, as a general meditation on a rebuild, specific to the Orioles' situation, this conversation has some merit. First, many have rightfully focused on the most noticeable and prominent aspect of such a rebuild: Player acquisition. I think the O's record is mixed, or neutral, in this regard under Elias. He hasn't had the opportunities to trade away ML talent for prospects, not significant ones anyway, so there isn't much to talk about here. He's only overseen two amateur drafts. There's not a lot of information to go on there. Some will rightfully point out drafting Adley where he did wasn't much of an accomplishment. Some will criticize the Kjerstad pick. Well, we don't know enough about that yet either. That's not to mention that with the lower picks we have even less to evaluate. It's going to take time to fairly grade the recent drafts. The same is largely true of their international efforts. It's great to see the change there- but that's far more attributable to change in ownership than anything else. And it remains to be seen if Elias and Co. are going to capitalize on the opportunity. So while player acquisition is the more obvious aspect of a rebuild, and the one that draws the strongest of fan opinions, 2+ years into a rebuild how valid those opinions are or aren't isn't clear yet. (Except process decisions. Opinions on process are quite valid almost immediately. What I find though is we have less insight into those processes than we think, and it often devolves into people attributing motive to processes which they can't possibly know, and then attacking their own attributions.) Second, what few have touched on, is the less obvious, and perhaps even more important aspect of a rebuild: Player development. Acquiring talent is important. However, if you don't create an environment for that talent to thrive, then you aren't going to succeed. Sure, there are the Mannys and the Mussinas- guys that Showalter said you "can't screw up." But there aren't enough of them to build an organization around. You're going to have to develop late bloomers, cast offs, late round picks, etc. into useable ML players. And on this front, I have been very happy with the O's progress so far. There's development that's going on at the MiL level, but in a rebuild it will extend to the ML level as well. Again, these processes are largely unseen and I doubt too many of us are that informed to have strong opinions about them. I mean, does anyone want to actually posit they should be telling the O's how to conduct batting practice, or soft toss, or throwing programs? So we're going to have to judge results, and imo the results have been encouraging. Things I am most encouraged about: 1) Veteran players are performing here. Guys like Iguelias and Galvis and Harvey (Franco so far is an exception) are joining our program and showing improvements. This isn't likely to change a lot about the rebuild, but it is encouraging nonetheless. 2) The development of the young major leaguers. This is likely to change a lot about the rebuild and there is a lot to like so far. The development of Means, and the specific attribution of it to his work with the staff, has been a minor miracle. We've seen Mullins taking big strides this year, likewise after a developmental decision. These are the two "star" examples so far, but guys like Hays, Santander, Stewart, Mountcastle are establishing themselves as major league contributors. It hasn't been a perfect record of course- calling Cisco- but it seems leap years ahead of where we had been for so long. 3) The development of the minor league players. The cancellation of last year, and how little we've seen so far, leave this incomplete, but there are some encouraging signs. The MiL teams played winning ball in 2019, and seem to be well on the way to repeating that in 2021. Now, winning % at the MiL level isn't what it is all about, but I'd rather win than lose, always, and we've seen concrete improvement. Of course, more important to the rebuild is the development of the individual players. The early returns on Hall and Rodriguez are fantastic. Despite some of the unreasonable agnst in the Adley thread, there has been absolutely nothing wrong with his performance and development so far. There's guys like Henderson and Hall who have exceeded expectations. I mean, other than Kjerstad, and that seems to be an act of God, has any of our prospects seriously disappointed of late? I can't recall. 4) This is kind of a composite point as it entails both development and acquisition. The bullpen. In today's day and age, there is little excuse for not having a solid bullpen. If you are proactive and aggressive you can compile a solid bullpen for virtually nothing. Duquette did it. It was the backbone of his success. We've seen yearly improvments in our pen since Elias got here, and we have a cheap, solid, flexible bullpen situation right now. If they were still trotting out Mike Wright to pitch 70 innings of a 7.00 ERA, I'd be far more critical. This shows a FO that is doing their diligence. Hopefully, we can turn some of these RP arms into future pieces. So, I don't have anything to say about the Tigers. I think trying to make a comparison to their situation is pretty futile, and not particularly illuminating. But as far as the O's rebuild goes, I'm pretty encouraged.

I guess we'll see shortly because if Means is having any issues he won't be making that next start.

Elias just was interviewed mid-inning. He specifically said Means was pushed back in order to control his innings. Specifically cited going from 60 to 162 games this year. So, no injury, in case there were any concerns.

Very disappointed.

By the way, if I thought we were going to actually win something this year I'd be willing to ride Means into the ground like a rented donkey. But we're not, so what's the point?

I quit a while ago. Best thing I ever did. Thanks for your concern though. I'm not sure if it was called the Verducci effect, but there was pretty prominent study done ~15 years ago, which suggested that large innings spikes can lead to injury. And then basically every team in baseball began developing their pitchers in a pretty uniform way in regards to innings counts. I concede there was nothing concrete then. I'd be curious to know how it was "debunked." How many times with your own eyes have you seen some pitcher- in a postseason, in a regular season, as a prospect- pitch a lot more innings than normal and have residual effects? I think it's common sense wisdom. Just as not smoking is. As far as your evaluation of Means, I agree with that whole-heartedly. "Low stress innings." "Low pitch counts." "Few baserunners." Sounds exactly like a guy who is about to pitch a whole lot of innings. Like over six per start. Which if you run him out there every fifth day adds up to about...... 210 innings.

I guess I should have mentioned this earlier, but not only do I think Means easily surpasses 200 innings if they just let it rip, I disagree about your other point here as well. Is there any concrete evidence smoking causes cancer? No, there's only the association. The same is true of large inning spikes. There's nothing concrete but there is association. So, I want them to err on the side of caution. And if it doesn't make any difference, why worry about 2-3 starts in a non-competitive year?

If you give him 33 starts this year, he's getting 200 innings. Again, he's on pace for about 215 right now.

Is there anything from his performance this year that would suggest he couldn't easily pass 200 innings?

This where the conversation needs to be. How many innings is the target for Means and how is the best way to get there? He's thrown 33% of his career high, in under 25% of the season. If you just ride him this year, your could get up to 210 innings. Is that what you want?

You can be sure they aren't "guessing." What's your innings target for Means this season?

I get that. But that hasn't changed in the last 4 weeks. He is what he is. I guess my perspective is this: If you were fine running him out there in April, then how on Earth did 4 weeks change anything?

You mean saying he 'looks like a little leaguer" is gross exaggeration?

I'm surprised at all the Franco hate. He's clearly in a class above Ruiz.

Thanks for the replies all. What a shame to miss out on a perfect game on a play like that.

Was this a perfect game or no-hitter? Headlines say no-hitter, but boxscore shows no walks, no hits, and no errors, and 27 batters faced.

If Rodriguez and Hall both pitch to expectations, which imo would be #2s, I'd be shocked.

Not to depress anybody, but so far I count two that will be more credentialed when they get here than Kremer.

He's smart. Probably would. I noticed after the mound visit, Severino was setting a clear target.

Palmer blaming that lack of command on Severino not setting a target. I don't know. I love Palmer. He knows what he's talking about. But I have to put that pretty far down the list of problems.

Doesn't look like he wants to be in MLB either.

I want to see Martin.

If you don't have two top 50 global prospects, then the conversation doesn't even begin.

Sure. And those teams would not be your market for getting prospects-ever.

I wasn't really making a point about Plutko in a specific way, nor intending to suggest you did. The most specific thing I can say about Plutko is: He's looked very good this year. Probably our second best pitcher.