LookinUp

I feel like if we make a big trade this offseason, Drew Rom will be a guy we trade away. I obviously could be wrong, but I get the feeling that other teams value him more than we do at this point.

I definitely think they over did this lottery. 3-5 spots up for grabs, max, IMO.

This is the reason Aguilar is here. Because Elias didn't want to use a 40-man spot on Westburg. At least that's the only reason I can think of. And it's crap. He chose a struggling re-tread over an exciting young player, during a playoff race, to save a 40-man roster spot. That's my conclusion and I hate it.

You guys are right in terms of WAR, so I was just curious where Santander ranked by position. Per ESPN, Santander ranks: 1. 11th in OPS for all MLB outfielders. I couldn't believe this, but it's true. 2. If he qualified as DH, that same OPS would rank 2nd in MLB. Yes, those numbers can move for any number of reasons, but he certainly looks like he could be one of the top DHs in MLB. WAR doesn't value that very highly, but I don't really care about that. Not all stats are always helpful. To Frobby's point, if he's replaced by a better defensive outfielder with a decent bat, it could be a really nice net positive move. https://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/player/_/position/of/table/batting/sort/OPS/dir/desc

Westburg, Norby and Cowser don't need to be protected, so there's likely almost zero chance they're added at this point. Grayson and Ortiz need to be protected, so they'll be added now or in the next couple of weeks either way. So they're more likely to be added, if needed. I know SG says we have plenty of guys to drop, and he's right in a sense, but it's not wise to lose the ability to protect even a mid level prospect for a week of baseball when you're not making the playoffs. If they promoted Westburg, it should have been weeks ago.

It might mean we cannot protect someone like Hanifee or someone similar. Here's a good thread on the actual folks who need to be protected. I'm not sure if it's up to date after trades. I haven't read through it in a while.

I think he would be a solid piece in return for a top end starter. Kind of like Mullins. But each would need to be pared with a legit prospect like Westburg, Norby, or Stowers, at least. Probably would need a 3rd piece from FCL to A ball, too.

Not saying this is wrong, but Stowers has been better against lefties for each of the last two years. He didn't play in 2020 and was worse against lefties in 2019.

I personally think it's muscle memory more than instincts. I think the fascinating thing will be to see if the O's can get some of these vets to train a new muscle memory. Santander seems to have a little bit. When Mountcastle's on it looks like he has, but that huge slump raises questions. Hays, not so much. And then there's pitch recognition and swinging at mostly only good pitches. Is that muscle memory or instincts? Is it trainable for an adult? I have no idea.

You're probably right, but it would be awesome if they gave Ortiz 2B for the next week.

Well I guess you taught him a lesson. Way to go! It's the internet. I get it. You're going to do you. We all do. I just like the fact that new posters are joining the discussion. There are some good ones and I don't like the idea of chasing someone away so you can teach him not to couch an argument in terms of a small sample size.

I just don't get some of you sometimes. Relatively new poster (11 posts total) starts a perfectly reasonable thread in which he acknowledges there's two sides to the discussion. Then one of the longstanding posters, and at least 3 other longstanding posters, act like d!cks. Why? Santander has improved. He seems to actually be somewhat adaptable to the new plate approach the O's are pushing. Yeah, he's "only" a 2.3 WAR guy right now. He's also losing a pretty significant amount of WAR from his defense. And as a switch hitter, he's not a liability against LHP or RHP. He's a perfect DH, especially for Camden Yards, and maybe you can get some 1B innings from him. He's not Rutschman or Henderson, so of course you trade him in the right deal. But he has improved, so maybe you're also willing to stand pat or sign him to a reasonable extension.

You obviously can't have a full team with high OBP guys. I mean, it'd be nice, but it's not always possible. The Astros just let a SS walk and went with a D first guy. Catcher is also low OBP. Still, as a team their OBP is .320 while the O's is .306. Given the option, the O's will go for higher OBP guys. They're training it. Now will they keep Mountcastle if he rakes and has a lot of power? Of course. Will Mullins D make it harder to replace him? Sure. I'd still wager those types will be moved out when options exist to do so. And that brings us back to Mateo and the fact that he has better OBP types on the come behind him. I think he's gone.

I think this is a good and fair point. He does seem to go through some quick stretches where he hits like he's drunk or something, but then tends to settle in pretty nicely.

I've heard Armbruester could be a good bullpen arm. Maybe even more, but could be that next year for us.

Now do it for Washington football. I think the answer is both.

I'll have to ask Frobby.

No. You just like to shoot things down without supporting the argument. Mountcastle wasn't chosen by Elias. My guess, and it's only that, is that he wouldn't have been chosen by Elias because Elias wants people with good OBP skills. RZNJ's post is on point even if you can nitpick a small sample here or a nugget there. Elias wants guys with better OBP skills and trains that heavily from the minute they enter the org. The question for me is whether an old dog can learn a new trick. Santander, for example, has improved his bb% and reduced his k% this year. Neither are extreme improvements, but taken together it's been a real benefit. Can others do it?

Ok, what would you do? 1 year before his contract is up, do you make an offer? How much? When his contract is up, do you make an offer? How much? When his contract is up an another team offers him $5/35 million, do you beat that offer?

I think the positives that people here point out about Mateo are true. It's also the reason he should have decent trade value this offseason. He's not a scrub. He's a decent player with decent value. I think we have better in house, and that he's worth more to this franchise by using his value to acquire value where we have more pressing needs.

Honestly, this is the bottom line. He's a low OBP guy who you hope can have extended hot streaks while playing great defense. This year he's ~20% below league average offensively. Ortiz and Henderson are likely to have offensive floors similar to Mateo's observed ceiling while still having very good or better defense to fall back on. This team is still 1-2 years away from jettisoning the good but low OBP players from regime's past. That includes Mullins, Hays and Mountcastle. It also includes Mateo, even though he's not from the old regime. While we may not move on from all of them, that type of player is not long for this team. They will be pushed aside by guys who see more pitches per at bat and carry a better OBP. I think we all need to get used to that idea.

He's a true 5 tool player. A rare breed. They should pay him this offseason.

To your point, I think the single question I think Elias hasn't yet answered is whether he's able to develop/acquire pitching that's capable of making a good team a really good or great team. I'm pretty sure we'll get there from the position player perspective, and I like that our pitchers have over performed relative to their previous expectations, but that's the elephant in the room for me.

I'm not advocating the O's pay Elias like a top player. I'm advocating they pay him like the top GM. He's earned that. It's naive to think anything different, IMO. The alternative is letting him go, promoting Sig and hoping he's as good. It's a reasonable plan, but for a difference of $3 million/year (or whatever the number), I'm keeping the architect in house.

We all want to see that, but we're at a place with where ownership can create a significantly divergent approach. One owner might be happy to go pay $200 million while another wants Noah Denoyer to be in the starting rotation. Even then, playoff success is almost random. I think the measure is getting there with a chance more than actually winning.