Sanfran327

This is a dumb suggestion. The reason that there is no parity in baseball is because the draft is unpredictable and takes years to impact the big club and there's no salary cap. Tanking is really the only way to go, but not just for the draft picks. It goes all the way back to the Billy Beane comment that "you're either building for something special or you've got nothing," or something like that. Especially for us, there's no real sense in being in between.

Good writeup. Am I being unfair/impatient/short-sighted/stupid to be disappointed that our #2 overall prospect has a mid-rotation projection? Is he just too young to tell? I assume that a strong 2020 could change his outlook. And I'm not disappointed by Rodriguez, but if our #2 has a mid rotation projection, what does the rest of our top 10 look like?

Echoing a lot of sentiments from earlier in the thread, I'm happy for my Nats fan friends, but also annoyed at the sudden interest. Maybe it's more annoying because it's the Nats and many of us NOVA/DC folks are in the local social media territory and see all of these brand new fans coming out of the woodwork. Those of us that post here are a rare breed. We live and die with a historically bad team through thick and thin, wondering if we'll ever be fortunate enough to feel this type of joy. From our perspective (or at least from mine) the bandwagoners are so easy to resent because they're happy about a team that they didn't give two squirts about 2 months ago. And they're all over our social media timelines in their new hats and World Series Champions t-shirts. I really don't want to be judgmental about it, but damn it, it's annoying. I'd never call anyone out, but I'm annoyed as hell. I watched because I have some close friends that are legitimate die hards. I haven't watched the World Series in a very long time. I just don't spend a lot of time watching non-Orioles baseball. I spend enough screen time on my own team. Anyway, as I was watching, I was nearly emotionless. I had some feels late in Game 7, but mostly because I would have hated to see them blow it. I don't know if I emoted at all after the final pitch - I just didn't care. The Nats are not my team and never will be. The idea of jumping ship is just so foreign to me that I can't even process it. How in the world can you just decide to root for another team? Or just decide to root for any team for that matter. If it's not organic, is it even real? The deeper resentment that I have about this is that most Nats fans used to be Orioles fans that jumped ship. Think about that for a while. What Nats fan over, say, 32-33 years old wasn't an O's fan first if they're a passionate baseball fan? Frobby has his example of the 75 year old fan that used to be a Senators fan. That's an outlier. As a 37 year old guy, many of my friends that are now Nationals fans were following the Orioles 16 years ago. Now they're on cloud 9 because the geographically local team won? Does not compute. To each their own. Hopefully the Orioles Hangout faithful are rewarded with a Championship one day. Lord knows we deserve it.

Your last line makes sense, but your original analogy was so far off base it was in outer space. Just givin you a hard time.

Pretty easy to not book the convention center. What do you suggest they do about a home ball park? I'll wait.

It's a bad look if they don't.

That's the hope.

Sorry, I gotta disagree. He was bad. But he bounced back and he was never nearly this bad.

I'll give you that. But what else do we need to see from Chris Davis at this point? Is there any reasonable chance that he revives his career? I'd say 98% no.

Good grief. Thank you.

This has nothing to do with spending money. The money is already spent and gone (in a certain sense). We're not talking about asking for additional resources. We're talking about opening up a dead, wasted roster spot. Yes, there will be a cost to adding a player to fill his spot, but in all likelihood, it will be a league-minimum rookie player.

I guess if you want to isolate my post to that part of that sentence, you can leap to that conclusion. But if you read the whole thing, or anything else I've said in this thread, it's pretty clear that that's not at all what I think. I'll bite though, and say that if Elias himself wants to keep Davis on the roster beyond the end of the 2019 season, that absolutely makes me question his judgement. I have the luxury of being an armchair GM though, and not a real one.

Disagree with the first part, but agree 100% with the second. I like Elias a lot. Huge fan of him and everything he's said and done so far. My only point is that if Davis is on the roster to start Spring Training in 2020, it's a sign that he does not have full control, which is a big problem, and further, a huge warning sign that he will not be able to implement his plan exactly the way he wants to (or potentially needs to) to achieve the level of success we all hope for. Davis is making a ton of money, but he shouldn't be on the roster anymore. Simple economics tells you to just walk away and swallow the sunk cost. Big pill to swallow, I know. But it needs to happen.

His presence on the roster is not what separates us from being screwed or not. It's a sign that our GM either doesn't have full control of baseball operations, or that he's showing that he's just not a smart GM. I would really hate to start thinking the latter so quickly, because I have extremely high hopes for him and the future of our team. But moving forward should not include Chris Davis any longer.

I'm not here to trash the guy, either. If anything, I'm sad for him. But enough is enough, and it's time to part ways with him.

The poll is intentionally binary. Knee-jerk response yes or no based on your gut feeling. I'm inclined to say yes, because we're really pretty screwed if not.

You're much closer to it than I am, but multiple blowups in the dugout suggest a bigger problem than just "losing will get to ya." Bad manager hires happen all the time. Like I said before, one-and-done situations are counter productive in most ways. In others, trying to make a bad situation work longer than it has to is an even bigger drag on progress. I'm not saying that Hyde should be gone after this season, merely that he could be, and that I wouldn't be surprised. I wouldn't advocate for or against him at this point. You're right though. Pinning any of the losses like last night on Hyde is not right, and misplaced blame on my part. He's got to figure out how to finish 162 games with the players he's got one way or another, and he can't make them execute. Having said that, I do think it's a little crazy to keep putting the same players into the same situations where they've failed over and over again and expecting a new result.

Nobody as far as I know. Just my thought/hope. Forgot to cite my source and post my bibliography. After this particular disaster of a year though, with the dugout blow-ups and the constant gut-wrenching blown leads, bad team or not, I don't think anyone can really ignore what's happened under Hyde's watch. It's not just bad play because of bad players, it's dysfunction. That's much worse.

I have this crazy scenario in my head where the Cubs fire Maddon because they miss the playoffs or lose the WC game and we hire him to replace Hyde. I know that one-and-done managers are counter-productive, but I've said all year that Hyde was not going to manage a contending O's team. Turns out, he may not even manage next year's terrible team, either.

Didn't think so. Question for the group, I guess.

Good job, hall monitor. Curious though. Why turn off the language filter if it's not allowed?

All I saw last night was a guy that was effectively wild. The Nats could never really zero in on him because one pitch could paint the outside corner, the next could be a 52' fastball, and the next could be in your earhole. He had a good bottom line though.

Probably stating the obvious, but the offers are probably just too low. Givens is the worst he's been as a pro, so it makes sense for us to wait a year to let him rebuild value rather than sell low. As for Villar, they have to have 25 MLB-ish players on the roster to play games. Without anyone that can handle full-time duties ready to backfill him, maybe they're deciding to hold on to him in leiu of a poor return.

Agree. I'd like to keep Villar and Mancini until next year at least. I think both of them can continue to build value, and they represent 40% of the watchable players on this team.

This is the first time he's been a full-time player in his career. Hopefully it was a matter of the league adjusting to him, then him adjusting to that (and figuring it out).