LookinUp

Right, and more people swing like Chris Davis in the minors.

My totally unproven theory is that Elias/Sig really focus on changing eye levels to inflate K rates (not just eye levels, but it's an important piece). The problem is that as hitters get better, letter-high fastballs and generally mistakes up in the zone get turned around more and more. That's one way that stuff starts to differentiate these guys, and guys with lesser stuff give up more home runs. This has always been true, of course. It's just my little theory as to why K rates are so impressive this year for so many guys whose prospect sheet looks more like Mark Buehrle's than Nolan Ryan's. It seems like Lowther's fastball still plays (I believe Luke/Tony mentioned he has a high spin rate). It seems like Wells has to rely on doing it the more traditional way (changing speeds/locating).

It is crazy how bad the bottom of baseball is this year. A .300 team might end up picking second.

The crazy thing about Harvey is his stuff is still electric, just erratic. His upside is limited by health, but so was Andrew Miller’s. Sorry, I shouldn’t have done that. ?

It sure would be cool if we got a Thome or Hoffman to come out of nowhere in our system. Here's a great article about Thome: https://www.minorleagueball.com/2013/4/11/4214024/prospect-retrospective-jim-thome-hall-of-fame If you look at the profile, it makes sense. He was a cold weather kid who was a late developer (physically). He also had good strike zone judgement even when he didn't have power. They really moved him fast through the system though once he took off. Probably too fast, in retrospect. The moral to the story is that the O's need to go to Minnesota, find a kid who walks a lot and has a dad that is 6-8" taller than him and draft that kid in the 18th round.

Maybe so. It's funny how deals tend to make sense for both teams. They had a low payroll, wanted a bullpen arm with upside without giving up young prospects, and they were in a pennant race. We were carrying an expensive and under performing reliever and we were dropping salary like it was going out of style. Britton's was a similar type of deal. He was performing better, but had been injured and hadn't really regained his command at all. The team was tanking, he was a FA to be and also pretty expensive. Yet people think we should have gotten a major return. I think people's complaints about last year's trade deadline are right on the prospects we got back but wrong on the blame. The market was what it was because we decided to hold onto all of those guys for too long and ultimately sold low on just about everyone. That is why the return was mostly about salary relief. It wasn't because Duquette's a dunce who just decided to make stupid deals.

I tend to agree with this criticism of Hyde, but I understand both sides of that issue. On one hand, I want him to put Givens in manageable positions to succeed. Let him get an out or two, finish an inning or start a different one. At this point it would be nice if he was backed down to a middle relief match up guy just so he can have some success to build on. On the other hand, if you don't put Givens in those situations, who was going to get the outs? That answer is anyone's guess. The truth is there's probably no answer. In hindsight, I think I would have liked Hyde to back off of the relievers a bit. Use them more often, but for fewer outs. Don't let things snowball. He would probably concede that point right now, but a couple of months ago I'm sure he was hoping he had a high-leverage reliever that could be really important for this team on the field and at the July deadline. Instead, it imploded. Now it's time to build the young man back up.

Yeah, he was making $5+ million for the O's last year. They probably saved roughly $1.5-$2.0 million by trading him. It was a money dump because his production just hasn't been very good. The fact he did well for Atlanta is nice, but we weren't selling high and we were in full tank mode. It was a decent risk for Atlanta that mostly panned out.

Elias and Sig are two of the smartest executives in MLB. I hope they don't over think this.

The data isn't perfectly stable, but for HR rate, Camden Yards typically ranks pretty high. Here are a few seasons. 2019 - 5th 2018 - 8th 2017 - 3rd 2016 - 18th 2015 - 2nd 2014 - 20th 2013 - 4th 2012 - 5th 2011 - 8th 2010 - 5th 2009 - 5th 2008 - 1st 2007 - 3rd 2006 - 8th 2005 - 15th http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor/_/sort/HRFactor

The eyeball test tells me that HR% is significantly skewed by park factors. Baltimore, Cincinnati, Arizona and Colorado comprise the top 10. It's hard to keep the ball in those parks.

We can only hope. I like the athleticism though.

I have a hard time guessing what would be an acceptable return for Villar. He's a good, but not that good, middle infielder. What is that going to be worth at the deadline? Hopefully something useful.

I think the interesting questions are how do the O's view Means, how do other teams view him, do we think he's part of our future or is he better used to gain pieces that are part of our future? For the last couple of decades, we would have kept Means and elevated him beyond what should reasonably be expected. During those times, I don't think we were particularly good about understanding what could reasonably be expected in the future; certainly not as sophisticated as Sig and Elias. I'm on the fence about what we actually should do this time around, because I do see value in a young, controllable #3-5 starting pitcher. However, I do think it's worthy of gauging other teams' interest just in case we could flip him for a high level prospect or two that could be much more valuable to a rebuild. I'm not sure what other teams think just yet, but I'd bet that if he's pitching this well by mid-July, we'll get calls.

Yeah. I don't know how it'll all churn, but the churn has already started and it isn't stopping anytime soon.

The sell off is what it is. They don't usually go well and I'm not assuming that this one will net out all that good either. However, Diaz and Kremer alone could make it "ok" if they develop. Dumping on either is uninformed.

Optimally, I don't think our future CF is in the org yet. However, the numbers say that Hays might have to be a CF, at least in the short run, if we want to keep Stewart, Diaz, Mountcastle, Smith and Mancini. That's 5 guys for CoF/1b/DH and it doesn't include Hays or other guys like Nunez if his bat sticks (and certainly not Davis/Trumbo). So if Hays forces his way up, it might have to be as a CF for the time being.

It's ridiculous because of everything you pointed out, but it's also ridiculous because he didn't get "shelled." He gave up 3 in the first and 1 in the 5th. Nobody had any reports on what happened in the first, but getting hit in the first is common. Having it happen to a guy who's just back from rehab can't be surprising. Rather than hyperventilating over every start, I say we give the kid 5 minutes to get his legs under him and start his thing again. Tony/Luke listed him as our #3 prospect last year. That's high praise and they know much more than the aforementioned poster.

I have a feeling this Broxton guy will be given a ton of opportunity in CF this year.

If Diaz is who *they* thought he was and Hays is who *we* thought he was, they'll be very exciting over the next several years. I'm not going to over react to SSS. They just need to play. *they* is the national press at last year's deadline *we* is the OH when Hays has a healthy stretch

Of course. The question is about how strong the offer is.

https://www.pressboxonline.com/2019/05/28/the-ross-grimsley-show-may-28-2019 Decent article. One angle I just thought of that's not raised by most is Elias betting on Mancini. By that, I mean that Elias believes the bat is under rated and holds out for a very strong offer. I don't know if that's likely, but it could mean that Mancini is both not part of our rebuild plans and around until this off season or next trade deadline.

Continuing this discussion from the Gray Rod thread. Here's an interesting quote from the article: I think this is generally true. However, I also think that Lowther and Wells are taking the path that you have to take as this kind of pitcher. They're dominating without dominant stuff. That might even be misleading. Their stuff might be dominant, albeit without dominant velocity. They're not going to get promoted on potential alone. A guy like Harvey will probably make the majors either with the O's or as someone else's Rule V pick some day just because of his stuff. Wells and Lowther will have to carve out their spots by screwing with the timing of batters and something close to pinpoint control.

I'm not in a rush on Wells and Lowther, but I think I agree. Every new level will be harder, of course, and their performances seem to belie their profiles. They're doing something right, but I will have doubts at every level just because they're not bringing it mid-90's. It's unfortunate, but true.

Can't find a scouting report on him online. Guess we'll have to wait.