ChosenOne21

Ah, I see. I believe these things can have an impact on a team, but that it's probably more in the 1-3 win range when you account for everything else

The null hypothesis has to be that the team would win more if we replaced Odor with a .750-.800 OPS player. We know that increasing offensive ability leads to winning more games. Would it actually happen in practice? Likely yes, but these things are never for sure. Still, I'll take the .800 OPS player with an average clubhouse presence over the .600 OPS guy who's great in the clubhouse every time. Has Cedric Mullins or anyone actually said these things make a difference at the plate? I hear them say they learn things, or it makes the clubhouse more fun, but I don't hear them say team encouragement helps them in the moment. FWIW, when I played little league, I thought my team shouting at me when I was trying to hit was a distraction. There's a reason the defense always yelled, "Hey, batter batter." This is the sort of thing I hear talking heads on ESPN say, not players. I remember a decade or so ago, these talking heads were always on about how the good players make adjustments when hitting with runners in scoring position and that's where clutchiness comes from. Then, someone had the brilliant idea to actually ask the players if they did anything different when hitting with runners in scoring position and the answers all ranged from "not really" to "no" to "I just try to put a good swing on the ball like always."

I'm pretty sure this is a better team if we just replace Odor with Westburg or Vavra

I would love to know how you got that number

Obviously, all other things equal I'd rather have a team with "veteranosity" and "chemistry." That said, I wonder how you would quantify the effects something like that has on a team? Best I can think of is have "experts" assign some kind of score or classification to the clubhouses of the various teams each year and when a player switches teams from a bad or good clubhouse to the opposite see if their performance changes by more than we would normally expect from them being one year older. That said, how would you separate the clubhouse effect from the player receiving different, and possibly better or worse, coaching? I'm glad Chirinos, Odor, Mancini and Lyles are well-liked and have fostered an atmosphere of fun. I'm not sure how much that actually contributes to winning games. That said, these guys aren't going to be around for long one way or the other. I hope someone else steps up to maintain clubhouse atmosphere when they do, or at the very least the players who remain act like grown-ass men and do their jobs to the best of their ability regardless. I have a hard time believing someone could get to the majors if their performance nosedives every time someone they like leaves their team.

That would be an argument for not pinch-hitting him at all. We pinch hit him for our shortstop.

Why the heck didn't we pinch hit Adley for Chirinos instead?

Are you suggesting Watkins is Jamie Moyer? Odds have to be at least 1 in 10000 against that

Sure, some guys succeed like that. But the odds are heavily stacked against it. For every Jordan Lyles, there are dozens of guys with similar stuff who didn't make it

AAAA stuff, but MLB results. I'll take it for now, but I too am skeptical he'll keep this up for very long

It could be the year-round pitching, sure. Arms need time to recover. Completely agree with you about the pitch counts. My guess is the teams are trying to take it easy with arms they feel have been subject to too much stress in the past, but who knows It could be that teams think third time through the lineup is going to be a thing of the past soon and so they aren't building up their pitchers to do that

I don't have the time to research this right now, but for every top HS pitcher who "refuses to be abused" I hear about ten who threw 130 pitches and came in to close the next day, or something like that I'll define abuse as pitching on less than three days rest or throwing more than 100 pitches in a start if that helps

I'm guessing they'd like to see 100. IIRC in years past the Orioles have looked to jump maximum innings on their starting pitchers by around 50 per year

I agree as long as he wasn't being abused in high school. Problem is, most of these guys were

Pitchers are throwing harder than ever, too, which probably cancels out some of the benefit from lighter workloads. There has to be some reduction in injuries from lighter workloads. Average people don't suddenly need Tommy John from going about their daily lives. Whether that reduction is statistically or practically significant, I can't say

Handley has a sterling defensive reputation, and can he really hit worse than Chirinos? He seems like a no-brainer add unless his hitting completely falls off the rest of the year. And if it doesn't he should really be the backup catcher from opening day. I'd rather have him than some random one-year veteran deal

It often is an excuse, but it does really happen sometimes. I dunno. I just want to see better results

Sounds like Kremer has improved from his abysmal last year, but is getting pretty lucky. Tony, what do you think Kremer would look like with his current stuff and average luck? 4th/5th starter, ERA somewhere between 4.50 and 5.50?

There should be some hard cap on spending to avoid exactly this. It can be a few million higher than the soft cap, just enough that someone can't do what was suggested. I doubt anyone is going to spend that much regardless, but it couldn't hurt to have the rule

Man, I want to see our lineup with Westburg, Henderson, and Vavra instead of Nevin, Mateo, and Martin/Odor

Jesus take the wheel, here he is

I hope not. The results aren't there at all, but at least Voth has intriguing stuff. Spenser Watkins is a dime-a-dozen AAAA player with nothing especially interesting about him

Carl's Jr. yeah

Want: Jones Take: Jones I know all the buzz has us taking someone else, but someone has to predict it going down like this

It's listed as a stolen base, not defensive indifference