Jump to content

Yardball85

Limited Posting Member
  • Posts

    3734
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Yardball85

  1. For some reason, my Flanagan in memoriam and Thorne and Melanie bits were taken out by my editor. But anyway, I hope the article was enjoyable.
  2. The writer... is me actually. I am 34, so my watching experience started with Michael Reghi, who I did not care to include in this article.
  3. Agreed. Or Westburg comes onto the scene and can make those starts.
  4. Some might disagree https://birdswatcher.com/posts/grading-the-baltimore-orioles-broadcasters-past-and-present-01gr6smy5a20
  5. Frazier against a tough LHP feels like an automatic out, though I get that the point was to show Henderson getting a blow now and then against tough LHP. Which is fine with me .
  6. I have no problem with this. As long as Gunnar is playing every day regardless of the pitcher, this is fine.
  7. Very curious to see the terms. I am more than fine with not signing Wacha, especially after the Irvin trade.
  8. LOL - such bizarre programming on MASN when it is not baseball.
  9. Yet, again MASN and the Orioles being cheap/clueless. I guess they think fans would rather watch a random Texas Hold Em tournament from 2006.
  10. I don't mind Profar the player, and if the Orioles hadn't signed Frazier, he could have been a solid addition to play infield/outfield and start five times a week. However, signing Frazier, IMO, took all of those innings and at bats from a putative Profar option.
  11. Good. Assuming the Orioles don't trade one of Urias or Mateo, the bench should be Urias/Mateo, McCann, McKenna, and Vavra.
  12. Fried would, of course, be a great pick up. If it only cost Hall and Westburg, sign me up. But I imagine it would cost a lot more, especially for a team with WS aspirations like Atlanta.
  13. Poor use of resources IMO, unless you can get him for under $5M a season, which you can't. Profar/Frazier money should have been used on better starting pitching but I digress.
  14. I think it is Elias's focus. Ownership's focus is on winning, sure, but doing so as cheaply as possible, while also appearing to the public that they are do-gooders. Ownership sucks.
  15. My prom date was 15, turning 16 over the summer... I was a senior, she was a sophomore. Pretty sure that's normal/common.
  16. Yeah, a Hicks acquisition would be a waste of time and money, not to mention innings that could/should go to younger and cheaper options.
  17. It's mind boggling that the team continues to try to improve areas that don't really need improvement (2B, a McKenna replacement), instead of focusing on areas where improvement was more needed (a Brantley/Abreu type bat), and better starting pitching than Gibson/Irvin.
  18. Hard to say regarding innings. I definitely like Irvin's durability. But Eovaldi has more upside due to his significantly higher K rate (averaged over 1 K per inning in 2019-2021, just missed in 2022) and his longer track record of success, plus succeeding in the AL East. Plus, while Irvin is a lefty, he has reverse splits, so Walltimore won't necessarily help him more than a righty-handed starter. Aside from a rough 2019, his WHIP is comparable to Irvin's, a few points worse. Irvin worries me due to the soft-tossing nature and seemingly poor stuff. But as I said, I like the deal and am hoping for the best.
  19. At the risk of being a broken record - they should have signed Eovaldi or Bassitt. It was stupid not to - both are better pitchers with significantly better K rates than Irvin. That said, acquiring Irvin is fine in a vacuum. I just think the rotation needed bigger upgrades than the marginal ones Gibson and Irvin will provide.
  20. I don't mind this trade, but Eovaldi at 2 years $34M was not an overpay. I am still annoyed that the Orioles did not sign him for that or a similar amount).
  21. This is fine. But this is not a significant upgrade over what they have by any means. Hopefully they have ore moves up their sleeves.
  22. Ugh - why couldn't they have just signed, I don't know, the good players that were available earlier in the offseason?
  23. I certainly would try, the upside is there.
  24. Maybe he can, and I hope he does well. But the "maybe he can play" does not mean they should have signed him.
×
×
  • Create New...