Pickles
-
Posts
5900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
Just now, sportsfan8703 said:
Not if they take up 40 man roster space. It's not a big deal currently, but it will be. Currently we don't have Mountcastle on the 40 man. He'll be added at some point next season. We'll also have to add 2 SP from outside the org currently, to the 40 man. That's 3 spots right there. Plus whatever other prospects we add during the season. We'll have to protect more players next winter. Admittedly, I am making the point against taking a draft and stash type of player, like I want us to take.
There's opportunity costs of course.
I'm just saying a very general point: Just because we have one prosepct, doesn't mean we shouldn't take a similar one.
-
Just now, sportsfan8703 said:
My take on not drafting a player like McKenna, or slightly worse, is that if Mckenna doesn't have a good season in AAA, he might not be on the 40 man roster next November. So why occupy another 40 man spot on a player like that?
Well not specifically to this case, but as a general rule:
It is better to have more bites at the apple; i.e. more prospects equal more players.
-
4 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Dude, no one knew back then when they'd get good...just like no one knows now. Way too many unknowns and variables that could have come into play between 2009 and 2012.
No one knew who Manny Machado was in 2009. And if they did, they certainly didn't know he was going to get drafted by us and be a part of that 2012 team.
No one knew we'd have JJ Hardy in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
No one knew we'd have Wei Yin Chen in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
No one knew we'd have Jason Hammel in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
No one knew we'd have Chris Davis perform like he did in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
No one knew we'd have Mark Reynolds in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
No one knew we'd have Pedro Strop in 2012 while we were watching the 2009 team.
You have no idea who will be on this team in 2025, just like you have no idea who'll be here in 2022. You like to think you know, but you don't.
Are you going to keep whining?
Who is whining, bro?
It's a statement of fact.
This team is bad.
We're in the BEGINNING stages of a rebuild.
We're behind teams people want to point to as symbols of ineptitude.
There's a lot of folks talking about 2022.
They better calm the hell down.
And, at the same time, people who want to vent about how bad this team is, are absolutely entitled.
No matter your perspective, you need to get a sense of humor about it.
-
Just now, Frobby said:
I have a soft spot for that 2009 team. We saw the debuts of Wieters, Tillman, Matusz, Bergesen, Berken, D. Hernandez, Reimold, Uehara and J. Turner. That was the year Adam started with the pies. Yeah, the team stank, but I don’t think of the old vets on that team, I think of the young guys who were coming up. Plus, Jones and Markakis. Luke Scott was pretty entertaining too.
I actually think this year could be a bit like that, with Mountcastle, Akin, Kremer and Zimmermann all potentially debuting and a few others knocking on the door, plus getting a better look at Hays, Santander, Stewart and some others.
I think that's what a lot of folks don't get. And they are in for a rude awakening.
The 2009 team is probably 2-3 years ahead of the 2020 teams in terms of being able to compete.
When did they actually become good?
So when does that put the timetable for this current group?
(About 2025 or so.)
There's so much more losing to come.
-
Just now, interloper said:
Like @Moose Milligan just said, if you think this is embarrassing, you need to look at the early 2000s teams. Rudderless, devoid of intelligent team-building, constant Warehouse in-fighting, steroid rumors, poorly-spent money, horrible pitching, bad drafts, bad coaching.
The new crew is being honest about it. There's no wool being pulled over anyone's eyes. It's transparent as much as it can be, and it's being done correctly, it would seem.
The fact that MacPhail fixed as much as he did and things STILL weren't being run right should tell you a lot. Dan finally built a winner with some savvy moves and Buck and luck, but they overextended themselves and now you're seeing the result. Replace Elias with any other GM and they'd still be rebuilding. There was no way around it because they'd backed themselves into a corner.
Hey man, I am not arguing any of that.
And I been around since the 80s baby. The nadir to me wasn't the early 2000s. That was shocking. And abrupt.
The nadir to me was losing 30-3 to the Rangers in 2007.
And yeah, both were embarrassing.
And averaging 105 losses for 5 years is embarrsing. And we're not even to the middle point of that yet.
And that isn't MacPhail's or Elias'or even Duquette's fault. But it's happening. And it sucks.
-
1
-
-
Just now, weams said:
This does not say that. It does not.
Correct.
Let's put it this way: If the O's were in a financial position to be making these kinds of trades, they just wouldn't have traded Villar for a lottery ticket.
-
8 minutes ago, interloper said:
I think y'all are crazy, I'm having a blast with this rebuild. I sincerely mean that. The organization is so much more interesting than it's been since the three playoff runs. Check back with me in 3 years and if we're in the same spot I'll be venting. Until then, I'm eating all this up and having a good time seeing how it shakes out.
Here's how I feel about it, and it is largely how I felt about it in 2007 when MacPhail came on board and it was similar, if less streamlined:
It is interesting But it is frustrating too. Really frustrating. Often embarrassing.
And in 3 years, we probably won't be losing 110 games, but we likely won't be winning 90. We will still be in the middle of it.
-
1
-
-
I know this is going back a few pages but I want to repeat my stance.
I don't think it is fair to call me a Mountcastle "hater." I think it is very likely he has a long major league career.
I claim the label Mountcastle "doubter." In the sense that I don't ever think he is going to be a consistent "all-star" player. And I believe that because when looking at the power tool, the hit tool, and the on-base tool, it just doesn't add up for a first basemen.
I hope very much I'm wrong. And I feel in a year about Mountcastle the way I feel about Lamar Jackson right now.
-
1
-
-
Eh. Sounds like a nothingburger.
Of course any decision of that kind would have to go to ownership.
And of course they aren't actively pursuing those kinds of trades.
-
4
-
-
There needs to be an epic rant thread on the main board for the frustration of what will come, has come, and is coming as we speak.
Upside: An epic Reynolds and sunflower seeds meme.
Downside: Losing half the board in epic flamewars.
What do ya'll think?
-
Just now, Frobby said:
For what it’s worth, after last year’s Rule 5 draft, Luke ranked Richie Martin 22nd and Drew Jackson 24th on his Orioles prospect list. Neither one was at the top of Luke’s Rule 5 list (Martin was 10th, Jackson was 16th), so I’d guess the 9 guys Luke liked better than Martin would have been ranked a little higher on his Orioles’ prospects list if we drafted them. Of course, I think the OH top 30 this year is stronger than last year, so you might be correct that nobody on Luke’s 2019 Rule 5 list would crack our top 20.
Well, it is a good question. I'd like to hear Luke's thoughts. But, imo, by their very nature Rule 5 guys should be pretty low on prospect lists.
-
6 minutes ago, weams said:
Cole signed with the Yankees.
I think our two highest FA pitcher signings were absolutely horrible. By total amount, that would be Ubaldo and Cobb, correct?
I suspect this deal will start becoming an albatross right around when the O's are decent again.
-
43 minutes ago, Aglets said:
Not sure if this is a serious post or not. The O's are highly unlike to sign any FA that costs more than like $6M this year. And that feels generous on my part to set the bar there. Bumgarner made 12M last year and pitched pretty well. We are still in a tear it down kinda mode.
I think it is far more likely they will sign no free agents for more than 600 K guaranteed, than they will sign one for more than 6 mil.
-
11 minutes ago, Frobby said:
Thanks, Luke. I’d be curious where you would have placed the guys at the top of your list in the Orioles’ top 30, if they were in our organization. I see that Cumberland is 43 here and Sedlock and Fenter are unlisted. All three of those were in the OH top 30, so to me that implies that many on this list would be top 20 prospects if they were with the O’s, and some maybe in the top 10-15 range. You’ve got 6 pitchers in your top 10 — any there that you’d rank up there with Akin or Kremer (understanding that they may be a little greener)? As to the three outfielders, would you put them above Stower and McKenna? Would Yonny Hernandez rank over Hernaiz and Hall?
I'd like an answer on that. I can't believe any of these guys would be in the top 15 on the O's list. And really not even the top 20.
-
Great work. Thanks. This will be the first place to look after the draft, for sure.
Last year I had a preference for Martin. And after looking at him for a year I'm ok with it. He's Ceasar Izturis. I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this earlier, but he even physically resembles him. For a team that is going to be bad for a few years, and has no middle infield in the system, that isn't the worst outcome.
My only insight this year would be they need to seek upside.
-
Takes a thief.
-
20 hours ago, Tony-OH said:
I would be utterly shocked if Mountcastle "pulled a Sisco". Then again, I had concerns about Sisco's bat when he K rate started going up and his struggles in AAA.
I don't see it happening either, but the possibility is not non-existent.
Sisco showed some warning signs in AAA for sure. But it's not as if that season was awful. And up to that point he'd hit like 320/400 through the minor leagues at young ages. And gotten really good scouting reports.
And here he is. With a 203 career batting average.
It's hard to hit 300 consistently in the bigs.
Another guy that has been in the news lately is also relevant. Howie Kendrick. Drafted out of high school, he hit in the 360s over 1500 abs in the minors. Scouts said he would win batting titles.
Howie Kendrick has never hit 300 in a season in which he has qualified for the batting title.
It's hard to hit 300 consistently in the bigs.
-
20 hours ago, atomic said:
If Mountcastle played at DH every game his WAR would have been higher. In the Minors at every level Mountcastle was younger than Mancini by a couple of years and out hit him. I would definitely rank Mountcastle above Hall as a prospect.
I don't want to get too hung up on the specific WAR number because I think it is flawed.
I just pointing out the very high offensive bar a guy has to surpass if he essentially is an average defensive first baseman.
-
10 hours ago, Frobby said:
Jones is a bit overrated here. His career OPS+ is 106, and his best 5-year run was 116. That’s good, but not elite. I loved what he did here, but it’s not like he’s some near Hall of Famer. Among active position players he’s 39th in WAR. 18 of those players are his age or younger, and 28 have played as many seasons or fewer.
Now, do I expect Hays to top his career WAR? Not really. Is it nearly impossible? I wouldn’t say that.
It's funny but I almost feel as if Jones is a bit underrated around here. Call it recency bias, but I think people really underrate his defense, because they remember when he was old, and they rely on numbers which I think are really flawed.
I don't think Jones was winning GGs while being a negative in the field, which some of the stats will tell you. Not in his prime. I think, and this is true of Markakis too, that their career WAR values are suppressed by defensive statistics which I don't fully trust.
Not to say that either of these guys are anymore than the Hall of Very Good, but they were ours, and they led us out of the darkness.
-
4
-
-
14 hours ago, LookinUp said:
I have no idea what Tony and Luke will pick, but there's at least a chance they still keep Harvey very high. I know Luke wasn't sold on his move to the bullpen being permanent. If it isn't, he's still a very high upside starter, even though his 2019 performance didn't warrant it (which was his first consistent work in years).
Also, I know Luke mentioned his scoring criteria in another thread, but comparing a guy like Harvey to a guy like Gunnar and rank ordering their prospect status is slightly less easy than putting an elephant on the moon. I hate to be the fun sucker, but the order here really doesn't matter very much. I just love that we're tossing around the names of several guys who have legit claims to being high level prospects or near term contributors even going past #10.
Here's my reasoning that this is too high for here:
I think his days as a SP are over. He got BAD results last year starting. Go look at the numbers. He was the worst of the AA starters by far. Between not getting results, and the arduous process of building him up to the point he could throw 180 innings a year, imo it's safe to say he won't start anymore.
So he's a BP guy. Ok, fine. He can still have a future here, and help. However, on a "Who would you rather have?" kind of evaluation, anybody who has MOR upside is more valuable. Unless you think Harvey goes full Britton in the pen.
So if you want to rank him over Akin? Sure, I get it.
But over Baumann, in particular, I don't see it.
-
16 hours ago, WalkWithElias said:
I am relieved they finally made the move to send Harvey to the bullpen It does crater his "prospect status" because we can't dream he'll develop into a TOR starter, but the possibility of having a young, inexpensive, high-leverage power arm at the back of the bullpen is good enough for me.
I went Henderson-Baumann because using Tony's "Who would you rather have in the system" rule, Henderson is a high upside power bat with the ability to play the left side of the infield and the only other option that included Henderson was Kremer who I'd rate below Baumann because he doesn't have the same upside.
That's largely how I felt about.
-
Should have looked at this before I picked 7 and 8.
-
I think Henderson is the first upside guy the OH staff loves. And I think they like Baumann more than Lowther or Kremer. I don't really think Harvey has any place this high on the list.
-
Just now, Philip said:
So, is Hays at his best better than AJ at his best?
I'll go ahead and say "No."
-
1
-
Can anyone vent how hard to wait on rebuild?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Well, maybe it is not funny but it is true.