Flash- bd

Basallo has really got to be on that list of prospects you like too much to be able to let go in a trade. Theres' no doubt who you trade between him and Westburg...or him and Kjerstad or Hall even, and I'm a huge fan of both of those.

Let's see. I know I shouldn't take Elias' word as the ultimate truth on matters as he'll obviously take a default positive stance on things like this, but he's been pretty insistent and consistent that they see Hall's future as a starter. In this case I tend to think there's something there but we shall see!

Kremer seems to be oddly underrated on this board and in baseball. If you compare his numbers with the guys who are being talked up this offseason-- EdRod, Gray, etc.--you can really make arguments for both. If Kremer were an FA the discussion around him might be quite different, honestly. But for whatever reason he seems to be a guy people like to underrate...perhaps it's because he doesn't really have that it factor when you watch him pitch and his stuff seems to scream more back of the rotation starter. But if we're looking at the cold hard facts, we're talking about a guy who has established himself as a very good 4 starter on a good team, and you can argue based on his performance in 2022 and his non-April performance last season and that he's still young-ish, with upside of a good 3.

We have 4 good starters. We have two pitchers (D.L. Hall and McDermott) with very interesting potential. We have a bit of a question mark but satisfying options as a 5th starter in Wells. With D.L. Hall it feels to me like it's .... or get off the pot regarding being a starter, we're not going to really find out much about him as a starter in relief this season, and I think we tend to underrate his potential as a starting piece, as to a lesser extent with McDermott. If we don't like the price for a pitcher with big potential like a Cease or a Quintana, I don't really see much point in the Bieber / Gray level of acquisitions, I would just go with the high upside play in whichever one of those guys performs better in spring training. (Wacha is the one guy I'd maybe sign as an FA, if you believe he is one of those guys who can continue to outperform his peripherals and bet on his last two seasons) So, yeah, if we don't use our amassed trade capital for a Cease or a Quintana type, or perhaps a high potential type like Woo / Miller / Hancock (would tend toward whoever we deem to have the highest potential of those 3), I would instead look to be packaging it for top bullpen arms, as much as two top ones, and also looking at trading some combination of Hays / Mountcastle / Santander (perhaps even Mullins if there's a CF upgrade out there, don't think there is, though, right?) and prospects for a ready made upgrade in our lineup in one of the corner spots or 1B / DH.

What does he say there? My man Flash, a god among men.

That's a very good point that I didn't think about it, and another very likely explanation. That said, regardless of the level of English of the Latin American players--which we know varies (Félix for example doesn't speak much, nor do I think does Canó? Mateo and Santander speak more, even if Santander still isn't totally comfortable giving interviews in English nor without a translator)--in the end, my point stands, that in these situations players inevitably group based on their culture and especially native language. Just as they are not going to go to a bible study in English, they are not going to go to a mass in English with the amount of options there are to attend mass in Spanish...in the end religion is a core belief thing and you are going to participate in it in your mother tongue, in what you learned it in and what you grew up with. I think Bichette Jr. at the Home Run derby is probably something that's pretty typical, or to be honest, he's probably better than the average. That level doesn't give for too much of a conversation. It's fine for joking around and having a laugh in time shared during baseball activities. But off the field it's not really going to be used to converse, and the Latin American players 9/10 will have a higher level in English than that level in Spanish, making it kind of pointless other than for getting along and having a laugh in the clubhouse and in baseball activities.

Am I really going to be the first one to mention that the Latin American players are very likely Catholic (very few Latin American players are not, so I'm just stating a strong percentage play here) but that they will no doubt be reading the bible in Spanish, hence why it makes sense they are not in the same bible group as the English speaking players mentioned? Really surprising this hasn't been mentioned...seems like the very likely and most obvious reason why they are not mentioned in the article or in the context of the group. I mean, maybe I'm overplaying my hand here, but it seems pretty obvious...in the end this is how these dressing rooms and clubhouses work in sport, in European football no one questions the fact that the English players will end up hanging out together and the Latin / Spanish players will end up hanging together in another group...it doesn't mean there's not a great atmosphere in the dressing room, it's just a fact about how we group as people.

101 wins is incredibly hard to duplicate in our division (saying nothing of our payroll). For me, taking into account the amount of talent we have in our organization to work with--which has to be balanced against the payroll point--a successful season would be a playoff berth. I guess 90 wins or about that if I'm being picky. Obviously anything further than that pushes up further my delight, with a deep run into the playoffs obviously being the desired thing.

Think this is worth underlining again. He's totally right that when he was hired this looked almost impossible. Definitely think we really need to appreciate the achievement that was this regular season.

Great stuff @Roy Firestone, really glad to see a post like this the day after the elimination, couldn't say it much better. Fantastic season and can't feel much more positive about this club and this regardless of yesterday's result. On to next season and let's secure another shot at this damned tournament!

Well said @Frobby, thanks to @Tony-OH and all the people who make this forum what it is, I'm especially thankful as an O's fan on the other side of the ocean who would certainly have lost his childhood connection to this club if it weren't for the help of this forum!

I know @Tony-OHdoesn't agree but I really want to see Hall in the rotation next season.

Bla bla bla narrative fallacy and ex post facto fallacy bla bla bla bla. It's what @glenn__davis says, playoffs are a crapshoot. This argument only would've made sense if we didn't win the division. We did. Comfortably.

Yeah, that's what I mean, it's different when it's a solo act like Polanski / Allen / Michael Jackson, not to mention it's a different realm, they are artists / entertainers. If they are profitable and people keep consuming their 'art' then it's pretty simple. A baseball team is a business which is a totally different equation where one player is one of many many and many aspects of the business. If all 30 teams decide that it's not good business I'm guessing it's probably for something. Agreed. Well, profitable and if it helps the sporting success of the team, which sometimes aren't the same question. And of course if it helps the sporting success of the team on the whole isn't so simple as 'does Bauer get more WAR than X option'. In short, it's a risk-benefit analysis, and if all teams are coming to the same conclusion I guess there's a reason.

This is true but a Michael Jackson / Roman Polanski / Woody Allen comparison isn't quite analogous. In the end baseball clubs are businesses. Polanski or Allen's films still make enough money to be profitable or these guys have enough resources to make them happen regardless. With a sports team you have to consider the financial and business fallout as well as the sporting aspect only (which also has its points to debate, of course). A similar case happened with Mason Greenwood in soccer in England, where Manchester United's internal investigation concluded that Greenwood was innocent but that they couldn't continue his career at United because of the number of sponsors that threatened to pull out (and the media fallout / reputation damage expected to the club).

Yeah, I quite like him, but you're right, that's a good response, and it goes along with similar qualms I have with him. Just because a model has flaws doesn't mean it's worthless, and as you say, it's easier to destroy than create.

Very true, that's a very good response to Taleb in general!

Fangraphs strikes me as the kind of predictions and statistical analysis that Nassim Taleb would absolutely destroy. Random thought, I know.

To point out something rather obvious, what's amazing about that list is that our two did it at the highest levels (Jackson with some difference).

For me next season's rotation should be: GRod, Bradish, Means, Kremer, Hall with Wells in the bullpen and McDermott as well as rotation depth. I really don't see the need for an addition here. If we are going to add it should definitely be for an elite bullpen arm. That's where I'd use our prospect assets to go for. Could also look into packaging some combination of Mountcastle, Hays, Santander, Westburg, Cowser, Urías, etc. for a top bat and outfielder.

Agreed, though I would actually move Frazier up to a B. I know we tend to be very analytic-based, focused on what can actually be measured, here on OH, but I have come to think differently about the worth of clubhouse dynamics and "veteranosity" over the years. Just because we don't have a way of measuring it does not mean it is not at least a minor factor, and it's easy to turn our nose up at things we can't measure, but I think there's a bit of human ego in that, maybe. It's easy to over-estimate the impact of these things, but I think when you see a team that's over-performing expectations and winning games at an extraordinary rate with a whole-is-better-than-the-sum-of-the-parts approach, that we also should be wary of dismissing it completely, and that the proof is to some extent in the pudding. I would also move up Irvin to a B, the fact is he's provided important innings and while we might've hoped for a slightly better ERA he's also sustained the quality of our rotation in times of need and his overall numbers probably don't quite reflect his overall contribution due to his early troubles and a few poor bullpen outings.

Who are they going to take out of the rotation for him? I guess Gibson? Flaherty, Bradish, Rodríguez, Kremer all seem unlikely...perhaps Bradish or Rodríguez for innings concerns? I'm not too optimistic about Means given his velocity readings in the minors. No harm in trying him though, I guess, especially if we feel that it's necessary to limit innings, or if it's for Gibson...with lower velocity I still think Means will be about Irvin level.

@larrytt's top tens are back! Now you know things are going good.

Looks like he'll need an offseason to get his velocity back to where it was, if he does manage to do so. I don't think Means at 91-92 is going to be much more than a Cole Irvin type or slightly better, tbh. The Means we know and love was sitting higher than that after his velocity increase in the minors.

His stuff looks really good and his command looks good enough. More and more I'm pretty convinced I want to see him in the rotation next season.