LookinUp

I think this is a naive post. There aren't a 1,000 GMs who 1) have GM experience and 2) completely rebuilt a train wreck franchise into one that is the envy of most teams. I'm not saying he's the only one. I am saying he's one of 5 or 6 people in the world with that resume. There might be 5-10 more who can reasonably claim to be able to do the same thing, but without the results. The new owner of the Angels would be an idiot not to try to hire Elias. Same with the new owner of the Nationals. That's two big market teams right there.

As RZNJ said, I think it's just like player free agency. Player 1 gets $30m per year, the next guy up ends up with $32m per year. The point is that Elias will get offers like that if we don't make them, and we'll lose him. So you pay him what it reasonably takes. Is $10m too much? Probably. But that's not the point. The point is he needs to be priority #1 to keep over any player.

Andrew Friedman makes $7 million. He signed it in 2019. I think the O's will have to make him the top paid guy, or close to it. I'm a little surprised others aren't paid that much, so I'm probably high on his AAV, but I also want him for 10 years, at which point that wouldn't be as outlandish.

Biggest turnaround pretty much ever. Top rated farm system for the second year in a row. Turning below average pitchers into better than average pitchers. Leaders in data and player development. I don't think it's Orioles centric view.

I tend to agree with this. I'm not sure what he's going to be next year at this point. Are the k's a transition-to-new-swing issue or something that's going to be an issue throughout his career?

I'd wager that right now Elias is viewed as a top 5 executive in baseball. Braves, Dodgers, Astros, Rays are likely at the top. Not sure who else would be viewed as favorably as Elias. Even if you nitpick that ranking, he will absolutely be in demand. I think the O's should offer him 10 years and $80-100 million to stay. Not even kidding.

Right. I'd agree that it wouldn't be a factor if the existing options were clearly better, but the only potentially clearly better aspect of their games is defensive and/or speed. The offensive profile of all of our young guys is superior to Mateo's, and likely superior to Urias'. Bottom line, if I'm forced to choose, I'd take all of Henderson, Ortiz, Westburg and Norby above Mateo and Urias. Vavra's another story, but his left handedness could be an attribute since all but Henderson are RH hitters. A real luxury would be to have Mateo as a util guy, but I just think he has more value in a trade than as a util guy.

In a vacuum, you're correct, but you're not stashing several ML ready guys in AAA all season. Maybe for a month or two, but not for 5-6. That means they'll either be up on our team or on another team, and Mateo/Urias having some service time versus zero service time means that even if they're not THAT expensive, they're still more expensive than the other guys, and that delta will grow in the next couple of years. So, yeah, they're more expensive, and some will have to be moved, so I'm guessing the more expensive guys are the ones to go.

The O's aggressive promotions has put them in a very weird position. It can be argued that all of Mateo, Urias, Henderson, Vavra, Ortiz and Westburg are ready for essentially 3 positions. Norby is probably ready, but if you said he needs 2 more months in theory, I could agree. Long story short, this isn't just a discussion about Mateo and Henderson. They are going to have to move some of these guys. The rookies are cheaper, so I just assume Mateo/Urias are more likely to be gone.

Does he have to go on the 40 man this year? If so, I can see him getting called up. If not, at this point, I'm only promoting him if we can make the playoffs and he can help us. The odds are so low of that happening that I just don't think it's worth losing the 40 man spot just to give him a cup of coffee.

He might actually be a logical 3/4th piece in a big deal. Kind of like Sherrill but without quite that upside.

I feel like he’s basically going through spring training again. Hasn’t regained the feel for pitching yet, but I assume he will.

Do you expect offense to be down again next year? I do not. I think the ball will start flying again. Add in the change in shifts and k's/weak contact that comes from more elite arms will gain in importance. I do think the O's need to add several arms though. I don't think we have a pitching cavalry coming next year outside of Grayson and Means' return.

Are you trying to say that dunking on Johnson's hit tool after his first cup of coffee in pro ball was unwarranted? I'm happy with Holliday, but certainly don't root against the other guys. I hope Johnson in particular does well. Seems like a good dude.

Fingers crossed we're 12 months from that. Quite possible that Bassallo pops big next year and looks like a top 5 guy. We can only hope. We're starting to see some intl guys littered in our top 30 already, so maybe we really are only 12 months away from getting your wish.

I doubt he'd do it with our first pick in the draft, but with our second pick it wouldn't shock me if Elias found a Norby type who profiles as the best remaining bat but without a lot of positional value. The Rays picked a 1B with their #29 pick this year. I could see us going that route. Just looking at prospects, there aren't a ton of top guys who are listed at 1B, and Mountcastle is right in the middle (by OPS) of MLB 1B. There just aren't a ton of guys that I'd want who are actually attainable. I think I'd go the Mountcastle plus platoon type guy approach to try to maximize the value from that position. Anthony Rizzo seems to have an opt out, so he'd be a good target.

I have no idea what the data says, particularly in the majors, but in younger leagues the difference is substantial. The longer person can not only stay on the bag for balls left, right and high, but he can also theoretically stretch farther and require fewer scoops. Like I said, I have no idea what the data says, but I don't think it's a coincidence that many 1Bs are taller.

He hit .276 in August. His next best month was .250. Ironically, his best month last year was August as well, but again no other month was above .250. Yes. Height matters simply because it lets the 1B reach more baseballs. You'd generally prefer a 6'3" guy as long as he's not a stiff.

Barring injury, the rookies won't be handed spots. They'd be the better options, IMO.

I understand the logic of those who say the O's should go for the best defensive alignment of Henderson (3b), Mateo (SS) and Ortiz (2B). I certainly get it and think it could work. But Mateo's wRC+ is 83. His OBP is .267. His total WAR is 2.3 and heavily carried by defense. The guys behind him all project to be good to very good defensively. Urias has a wRC+ of 96 and plays a position where his likely replacement is a better defender (even though he's good). Urias is less good at 2B, so the averagish bat isn't going to hold up there. We also have tremendous depth in the infield with real upside. Westburg supposedly has good range and certainly a better bat at 2b. Ortiz, according to Tony, has jumped Westburg as a prospect. Norby has 26 HRs in ~115 games. Hernaiz has had a good year. One of our best prospects (Mayo) is a 3B. We just drafted another 3B with real upside and the #1 overall pick was a SS. I don't see the O's playing Mateo and Urias over guys who will get on base much more often and still play good defense. I see them trading high rather than diminishing their value by making them utility guys. The only questions for me are 1) exactly where they all play, 2) whether we trade any young guys in big deals and 3) whether we try to squeeze another year of service time out of Ortiz specifically.

Will you understand the eagerness when Keith Law puts Ortiz in his top 50 prospects and projects him to be an above average ML SS? I'm not equating him to Gunnar Henderson, but his season has been beast for the last 3 months and his glove is supposed to be superb. He doesn't have Mateo's range (who does), but he has the rest of his defensive game from what I've heard.

I'd think the way to do this is by comparing his FV to the FV of those we have now. Was he a 45? 50? I'd doubt he was a 55. Fangraphs had him as their #36 prospect. That's probably as high as he was rated and would put him roughly 4th in the current O's list. MLB.com had him 68th, which would put him between 5 and 7, probably, depending on how the end of this year shakes out. He was a really good prospect though. Significantly better than Povich (at this point), IMO.

My impression from a bunch of interviews is that the O's aren't prescriptive about changes. Instead, they're giving the players a ton of data/information and letting them work through what works best for them. I'm sure it's not 100% either way (prescriptive vs. player choice), but those quotes align pretty well with a player understanding what the O's are looking for (power in this case) and then figuring out the best way to get there.

1. Gunnar 2. Rodriguez 3. Holiday 4. Cowser 5. Hall 6. Mayo 7. Ortiz 8. Westburg 9. Norby 10. Beavers 11. Fabian 12. Basallo 13. Hernaiz 14. Seth Johnson 15. Kjerstad Nitpick the order, but this system is absolutely loaded. I couldn't find room for a couple of nice bats like Wagner, Bencosme and Estrada, and I'm kind of liking the 2021 drafted pitchers and think some may become prominent in the system next year. And there's a decent chance that once Baumler pitches healthy that he flies into the top 10 kind of like Ortiz has done this year.

Unless they're able to lock at least one up early, yes.