LookinUp

Ehh. I think we may be missing another unspoken story here. Perhaps, as Tony said, because of his space limits. If the O's are essentially preparing for a sale, this rebuild strategy makes even more sense. So does the exit of that business exec that was here for about 5 minutes. I've always thought this, but the Elias rebuild strategy doesn't just make sense from a long term, foundation up, perspective. It also makes sense if the Angelos' are preparing the team for sale. Typically, sellers of sports teams and other businesses like to strip as much of the overhead as possible. The O's cutting of payroll and not taking on any substantial salary (both last year and this year) fits perfectly with that narrative. If they are preparing the O's for a sale, I just hope the new guy is on board with Elias' strategies, because I really like what he's doing.

Akin might not be able to live up to his part of that bargain. There are several guys on the horizon though. It's possible one or more step up. We will need them to, for sure. The probabilities of even the top guys in our group becoming exactly what we're hoping for are probably pretty small.

Not to make excuses, but it's freaking hot today.

Who knows? Like I said, sometimes I love the guy and sometimes I hate him. His opinions are so strong that they're often off-putting. He dismisses nuance. That gives him clarity, which is good, but not context.

I don't disagree with your post. You pretty artfully articulated how we got here, but you didn't address how to get out of it. If your answer is to spend more money in the short run in hopes of competing (e.g., the anti-tanking strategy), I'd like to know just how much you mean. In practice, the O's have done that in the past and failed to compete. That approach created the conditions for fans to leave. Elias' plan is to create the conditions for sustained success. If he achieves that, he will bring back old fans and they will bring their kids, and their friends. If it's truly sustained, he will create the conditions for financial success and a new love affair between generations of fans and the O's.

My guess is it's more like this: Group A(Potential TOR) Hall, Rodriguez Group B(Mid rotation) Baumann, Lowther, Hanifee Group C (Back of Rotation/Swingman/reliever) Wells, Zimmerman, Knight, Sedlock, Rom, Akin, Kremer, Harvey(wildcard) Notes: I could be too bullish on Hanifee/Lowther and not quite enough on Kremer. I do agree that Harvey is a total wildcard though. I'd argue Sedlock is a wildcard too, and could see his ceiling as mid rotation starter, though with a sort of low probability.

I've been listening to Loverro for years now. I alternate between loving and hating the guy. This I know: he takes a position and then drives it home to the extreme. When he's right, he's right. When he's not, he comes across as whiny and screechy. With that said, I think he broke news in this article when he said this: So buried in his article about how the O's won't be good until they sell, he broke a story that he has sources that John Angelos is looking into a way to transfer ownership to the next group.

I definitely think that some teams will weigh his team control more heavily than others. That might create a market that's more heated than what we might expect just based on his results this year. With that said, I think the Orioles are also one of those teams. We're not being held at gunpoint here. Elias will get a trade he wants or he'll simply keep Givens. Now, what Elias wants probably differs significantly from what BA/BP put on their top prospect lists. I think he wants guys that may be on the national guys radars (at best), but have not played enough to warrant a ton of hype yet. That return might disappoint many on this site, but I'd operate under the assumption (like I did with the Cashner trade) that Elias is targeting guys who fit well into what he wants to add to the organization.

^^^ Brown noser. In all seriousness, fair or not, it means more to me when our guys are doing this with great stuff (Hall, Baumann). While probabilities are dependent on the pitcher, guys with this kind of stuff establish their ceilings as much higher than several of our other guys who's results are great this year (Lowther, Wells, Rom). I'm guessing Hanifee is somewhere in between.

I remember when Xavier Avery had a stretch like this. I think better production over time is possible with this kid based on what I've read on this site. It's about time he shows what he's made of. Hopefully this is the start of something real with the bat. If so, he's our CF of the future. If not, he's probably not.

Slightly different for me. I'd go Lowther, Akin, Wells, Zimmerman. I just really fear Wells' ML profile even with his awesome production this year. He will have to be pinpoint. I have no idea how you rank them against guys like Harvey though. It's production against stuff. At this point, I think I'd rather have Harvey than any of them even with his wild swings in effectiveness. I don't know. Maybe not Lowther.

Without you two, I'm not sure anyone who is not part of the organization would have any idea about the type of breakout year Baumann is having. You were early on this one. Hopefully this breakout continues. It's hard to know in the relatively early stages whether he'll continue to grow, plateau where he's at now, or fizzle into something like a flash in the pan. It'll be fun to keep watching though.

In fairness to Mountcastle, his production is not a figment of our imagination. He's a good hitter, no doubt. You may not have seen him on his best nights, but there has never been a player who doesn't go into hitting funks. That's the nature of the game.

I've liked this kid since last year's prospect lists were released. Hasn't had the best year, but maybe that's changing. I think he could be one of the less heralded gems of our system. Not a TOR guy, but a chance to be a good mid rotation starter if things work out.

I will be pleasantly surprised if any of our 2019 drafted pitchers becomes a regular on the O's at any time in the future. My expectations aren't high, though I do feel like our development of those guys will be light years ahead of where it was in the past.

Because his walk numbers aren't as bad and he has genuine defensive value. I think their hit tools are similar, with a bit less power for Hays. For me, I don't like that either's walk rates are low, but I really worry about just how low Mountcastle's are. They're pretty extreme.

There's no doubt that's true, but we always hope that professional instruction will improve the warts of guys we draft. Mountcastle has had that instruction for years now and still has that same wart. That makes me less bullish that he'll be able to improve upon this one aspect of his game than I might be if he were just leaving college. I'm not speaking for RZNJ, but maybe that's where the disconnect is between me and you guys. I really do value the age/level thing, but I think I'm discounting it a bit because he's already been in the system for so long. I feel like age/level is the reason he's rated higher than guys like Diaz and Hays, but I don't like the profile as much as those guys, so I'd personally rate him below them. It's also worth noting that I think we're arguing on the margins here. I like Mountcastle, but am sympathetic to RZNJ's position too.

There is no doubt that the lack of walks limits the upside of both Hays and Mountcastle, but we can probably stop acting like Tony and Luke don't know about the issue. They're obviously weighing everything, including age, position, hit tool, power, etc. along with the walks. I think Hays, if healthy, can be better than Adam Jones. That's pretty darn good, but not Mookie Betts good. I think Mountcastle would be worse, mostly because he doesn't have defensive value. I don't think the walks will be fatal to their profiles, but admit that I am concerned it will be a very big issue in the majors.

I feel like I see some emotional defenses of him every now and then that just seem weird to come from someone who's unaffiliated. Maybe it's not him, but a colleague. Not sure. Don't really care, actually. Like I said, I'd definitely be on this board if I were an O's reporter.

That would be nice, but what makes you think this?

I'm not sure if easily is the right word, but the whole concept of using the Rule V pretty much requires a team to take a guy who isn't ready and play him in hopes that it starts to click. As maddening as it is to see him out there, the 2019 O's are pretty much the perfect team to let a guy like that try to figure it out. If he doesn't, so what? At least we gave it a try. I'm not sure how two more bad months from Martin are going to hurt the future of the franchise. In fact, it's a win-win for us. If he clicks, wow. Didn't expect that but I'll take it. If not, it helps getting #1 overall next year.

I'd bet a lot of money that he still does, but I don't know which user he is. In fairness, if I were covering the O's, I'd definitely follow this message board too. There are a lot of ideas floated around here that can be decent topics to discuss. I know I posted many months ago about how good about 10 pitchers were doing. Within a day or two, a bunch of guys started writing about it. I don't know if that had anything to do with my post (which was fine, but nothing crazy creative or earth shattering), but the coincidence was there for sure.

Completely agree. Go for young upside, consistently. It's a long term rebuild strategy. Not focused on the near term. Good.

I'm starting to agree with this. I think he's found his legs. He struggled around his injuries, but has put up an .825 OPS over the last 90 days even despite those struggles. I wish he hit for a better average, but the OBP and power seem to be present.

I don't want any of them gone until after the season. Get that #1 pick and then worry about playing young guys with upside on next year's roster. With that said, I think it's a stretch to act like we have good alternatives to either Broxton or Martin. I guess you could put Villar at SS and Wilkerson at 2B, but Villar isn't really a SS and there's a good chance he'll be gone in two weeks. After him, you have to look to AA for Mason McCoy to find upside. Until two months ago, pretty much nobody except the really knowledgeable O's followers even knew McCoy existed. If you cut Broxton, you essentially have to put a corner outfielder in CF. Many here would be fine with that, but I don't blame Elias for trying to put a decent defense behind his pitching staff.