TheWall
-
Posts
963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TheWall
-
-
13 minutes ago, Hallas said:
I have genuine concerns for Cowser going forward to the point that I'd seriously consider moving him. He's not as fast as I would have hoped, and isn't an elite defender, or even an average one. Generally for younger guys that are struggling out of the gate with the bat, I want to see them contribute with the glove or show some athleticism, and Cowser isn't doing that. His defense and speed mean that he's probably relegated to a corner outfield spot or DH, and while he's obviously going to improve from here on out with the bat, the early returns on his performance are more than a little concerning given his lack of premium defensive value.
I haven't seen anything from him that has indicated he'd ever need to be relegated to a DH role. His defense hasn't look fantastic and he probably isn't a CF long term, but I never really expected him to be.
The bit about needing to see plus defensive contributions from struggling rookies seems really off-base. Not every top prospect offers a plus glove. Gunnar was a negative defensively while he was struggling since his throws were off, but that didn't mean he couldn't be an elite player. Are you going to give up on Kjerstad or Mayo if they struggle in their first 60 PAs, because they are bat-first prospects?
-
18 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
There have been some aggressive moves with draft picks already. The Angels first rounder is in AA already, for example.
I just saw that. Are there any other teams pushing their guys that fast? I saw that Schanuel crushed 2 games and A ball and they sent him straight to AA where he hasn't looked overmatched. It worked for them with Neto, but I can't imagine this is a strategy that will be consistently optimal.
-
34 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
I mean, that’s just silly. Teams aren’t going to forgo trades for better players than anyone else can offer them just because we have a lot of guys and they want more.
The last thing I’m worried about is the Os finding teams that want their players.
I'd agree that is a silly idea in general, but I do think it might have impacted whatever negotiations we had for Cease since the White Sox were completely content to keep him and they apparently got fixated on some top guys.
-
5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Not very well
They used to have a solid MLB podcast, but dumped it.
-
19 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:
Everyone decided after Sunday Night Baseball that Verlander would put us over the hump. So then it must have had to happen.
Everyone is also ignoring that Verlander had a no-trade clause. We saw how that turned out for the Dodgers when they tried to make a move for E-Rod.
-
1
-
-
Why are we talking about Verlander? He wasn't a realistic option. Reports were that he only wanted to lift his no-trade clause for Houston and potentially LA.
-
18 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:
Because Wells stinks right now. I like Flaherty much better than Wells down the stretch.
Yes, which is why I said Flaherty makes us better.
-
Just now, Nite said:
Wells took himself out of the rotation. Dunno if you've been paying attention to his last 3 starts but... they weren't good or even competitive.
I'm aware. I've watched all of his starts. He's clearly gassed. That is the point.
We needed a 5th starter and Flaherty is better than Irvin, so this trade makes us better.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:
I mean… we’ll see. We didn’t really trade anything of major significance (no offense Mrs. Prieto.)
I really don't see how Flaherty doesn't make us better when you take Wells leaving the rotation into consideration.
-
Just now, Bemorewins said:
No
You think Flaherty is worse than Irvin? Wild. This absolutely helps stabilize the rotation.
-
1
-
-
I don't love that we had to give up all 3, but I also don't think you're ever going to love what you have to pay at the deadline. That's kind of the point.
We needed a starter. Flaherty should help. This is better than doing nothing.
-
16 minutes ago, banks703 said:
Sorry, I don’t trust that line of thinking. You’re right about the points but I just don’t believe that he doesn’t harbor negative feelings for the organization.
Not picking on you but know that I don’t make the above statement out of the side of my mouth.
Players are traded by organizations and return all the time. I have no idea why he would hard intense negative feelings when the organization is a completetely different place than it was when he was here. I'm sure he'd be excited to play on a winning team.
-
2 minutes ago, banks703 said:
My concern with eRod is what potential resentment does he hold for the O’s past regime trading him away all those years back? If any of us believe there isn’t any residual feelings and cite his being a professional and that he will do his job as expected.. I promise you there are still hard feelings. The best starter option potentially available or not, the fact that eRod can (and will) opt out of his deal makes me VERY nervous about a reunion.
What were the personal issues that he missed time last year? I think it’d be silly to give up anything of significant value for the dude.
Our ownership would probably prefer that he opt out.
-
Seems like a great guy. Excited to see him have success.
Side note: Cowser is definitely a plus-plus clubhouse guy. He's talking and having fun in every video I've ever seen of him.
-
16 hours ago, Frobby said:
I started this thread, but I also suck at this game. I’ve only had a perfect grid twice in about 25 games. I do enjoy it when I pick a guy like Lloyd Waner and score an 0.1%.
I'm perfect at about a similar rate. I'm definitely not very good at it, but it's really satisfying to finally remember someone after thinking on it for a while.
-
1 hour ago, Fiver6565 said:
Scored a 161 today, not that great but it’s my best. I keep messing up with a guess early on and not getting all 9.
Was surprised my selection for MVP/ROY was only 9%. I’m guessing among OH players it’s much higher
He was only at 1% when I picked him.
-
1 hour ago, Brooks The Great said:
Another classic Hangout argument made with no context. Do you know why I say that Law is biased against the Orioles? I'll explain it to you. Because of Law's history of dimissing O's prospects, as well as dismissing the organization under Elias in general before it's become clear that Elias is a great GM and has built a winner from scratch.
MLB Pipeline is also too low on Mayo. But, no, I don't think they're biased because they're low on Mayo. They're just too low on him because they're off on their evaluation on him, and late. Law is biased because of his history evaluating the O's. They both got to the same fairly inaccurate and tardy conclusion, but for different reasons.
Way to contort my statements into a point that I didn't make.
You're completely disregarding that Law has always been high on Ortiz and is now the highest of anyone on Basallo. Maybe he isn't biased against the Os and instead actually gives his opinion? He liked Ortiz before his breakout and even before Elias had proven himself to be solid at drafting.
He also releases his prospect rankings before the draft and tends to cling to his own evaluations longer than most. Do you think how he's viewed players has changed in the past simply because they were in our system? Which incredible prospects did we have prior to the Elias era that Law has missed on?
-
10 minutes ago, backwardsk said:
I misread one of today’s squares that was MVP and ROY. I thought it meant same year, which I’m not sure has happened. I guessed the guy who led the league in homers and later testified to Congress during the steroid hearings, but he didn’t win MVP. There are obvious answers for guys who won ROY and MVP later.
It didn't have to be same year, but it has happened. Ichiro did it in 01.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Brooks The Great said:
I'm not. Law is too contrarian of an evaluator and also has been biased against the O's in general.
I think he's low on Mayo, but you're going to accuse him of bias against the Os when he's higher than everyone on Basallo and Ortiz? He's also gushed about the Orioles talent development and drafting in recent months (including blurbs in this posting).
From looking at the comments on The Athletic - pretty much everyone thinks Law is biased against their team. Maybe he seemed biased about the Os in the past, because there wasn't much to actually be excited about. He's been plenty complimentary of our most recent wave of prospects.
I also find the idea that he's too contrarian to be a bit funny. Do we really want everyone to just copy / paste the MLB Pipeline rankings? Also a lot of the rankings from different publications are composite rankings of their various contributors, so they look more aligned. Law's rankings are his own.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, EddeeEddee said:
Marcelo Mayer is the 3rd best prospect in all of baseball according to MLB.com. The Red Sox trading him would be like the O's trading Jackson Holliday.
Yeah, and these articles are just random approximations. Mayer is very highly touted and if he was the centerpiece in an Ohtani trade it would certainly decrease the number of players the Sox would have to send. Maybe they'd send 1 or 2 other smaller pieces or maybe the Os would only send 4 players, but the framework makes sense.
-
12 minutes ago, TopGunnar said:
Oh yes he is lol. Maybe not right away, but he’s on his way out.
He's a pre-arb middle reliever who has been "ok" this year despite recent struggles. He was solid last year in the same role. I'd be shocked if he wasn't on the team next year.
-
4 minutes ago, yark14 said:
My opinion.
I'd love to hear the breakdown of why you think that would be a better move.
-
Just now, TopGunnar said:
Love this move. Elias and Hyde have seen enough of Bryan Baker
Baker isn't going anywhere.
-
7 minutes ago, Paul in Virginia said:
He seems to really love starting hot at new levels. Hope that carries over when he eventually makes the show.
Colton Cowser 2023
in Orioles Talk
Posted
It just seems wild to me that you'd be considering moving on from elite prospects after 60 PAs regardless of how they go. I'd assume there is about a 0% chance our front office (or any other competent org) shares that view. Short sample size + a rookie adjusting to a new level means things aren't always going to be pretty.