Gatoriole
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gatoriole
-
-
56 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:
Reports are the Red Sox are still talking about trading for Wil Myers and are talking about possible prospects Luis Campusano and Gabriel Arias coming back with him.
If the Orioles could take half of Myers Salary ($30 over the next 3 years), they would essentially be paying what the Red Sox paid for Moancada for a potential high level A ball prospect.
At some point you have to add prospect through means other than the draft/international spending or waiver wire dumpster diving. They dont have many tradeable commodities so this seems like a viable path toward more prospects.
I agree we should be looking at making these types of deals. We can't say whether we should make a deal for Myers since we do not know the prospects involved. But if we're going the tanking route (which we clearly are), we should be considering talent acquisition this way.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
if we had made the playoffs all of those years (or maybe even above .500), I would have a different opinion.
-
I think I like him better than most here. To, me the big questions are:
1) health (obviously); and
2) consistency
I think he has a lot of upside though.
-
5 hours ago, incubus said:
I’m literally wearing my 2019 spring training cap now, I have a streak going back to 2014, I feel I must buy it to keep the streak going...
I won't look down on you for skipping this one.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:
The 49ers coach looked like a middle aged white guy trying to be a 22-year-old rapper and (of course) failing miserably. At least Andy Reid embraces the 60-year-old walrus aesthetic. I can respect that.
I judge coaches based on how they wear their hats too.
-
2 hours ago, atomic said:
Elias is saying they are spending more on the draft because they are drafting higher in each round.
Perhaps this is my misunderstanding. Aren't we talking about the trading of international slot money? That does not relate to how much is spent on drafted players.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:
I know what he said.
I also know that every dollar that they traded away got spent by teams that had a better 2018-2019 International signing period than the O's did.
Unless someone produces actual proof I'm not going to back off of this opinion.
Mind you I was asked to go over this again.
You know that every dollar that the Orioles traded away got spent? I'm not sure if I'm following that statement correctly, but where is that tracked? As far as I have ever seen, media outlets seem to have a hard time tracking exactly how much has been spent.
-
8 hours ago, joelala said:
Good point, I can’t say with any confidence he’d be a defensive asset out there. but just looking at the way he moves and his body composition, I’d say he could at the very very least be Mancini-level. Also don’t know anything about his arm.
I haven't seen enough of him there either, but it's been my impression is he would be a Mancini or Schwarber in the outfield. If you draft Tork, it's probably as a 1B/DH. If you don't want a corner defender or college RHP (Hancock), then right now you're probably looking at Nick Gonzales (assuming Austin Martin goes #1).
But there's a whole season to be played for players to rise, particularly a high schooler.
Personally, right now, I'd be happy with Martin or Hancock and would prefer to avoid Tork. But we'll see. I won't be surprised if a high schooler ends up being in the discussion.
-
3 hours ago, Philip said:
Tony, I hope you’ll be able to find somebody else here with whom you can collaborate. It looks like quite an undertaking.
I have a question. How important is it to Mike to keep both rule five pitchers? It’s basically a free prospect, so it seems to me that even if they don’t do all that well, if he feels that the guy has future potential he keeps him anyway, right? Even over somebody who might be better prepared to help now?
edit: On the other hand, we never saw Araujo again after we sent him down...
We're still learning Elias, but it did not take long for him to jettison Drew Jackson last year (though he did head north with the team). On a team that is expected to be as bad as our team is expected to be, I can understand trying to keep two Rule 5 players. I'm not sure I'd bet on it though.
-
This hat has me concerned that Elias does not have full control. Our wonderboy GM would have never allowed this hat to be released to the public if he had full control.
-
3
-
-
8 hours ago, joelala said:
If he’s likely only a corner OF, no way I’d consider reaching. If we want a corner OF, give me Torkelson and I’ll happily pay more for the significantly higher floor.
What likelihood do you place on Torkelson being able to play corner OF in the majors?
-
Very interesting. It will be interesting to see if Severino, Santander, and Alberto can sustain the numbers in the categories they were stronger.
-
11 minutes ago, Philip said:
As I understand it, when the new period starts any money saved from this period Goes away. So if we don’t sign anybody between now and then that remaining million dollars or so just goes away but then it resets and we get the full amount back but only the full amount right?
when is the reset date?
This is essentially correct. I don't think the amount is necessarily the same year to year, so I wouldn't call it reset. But we cannot use any unused amount of this year's allotment and we do receive a new allotment.
I believe the date is July 2 (which you may see referenced as "J2").
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, MurphDogg said:
List will be released tomorrow at 3 PM. Adley Rutschman is one of the four players "in the mix" for the #1 spot, which would seem to indicate he will at least be in the top 4.
Nice, thanks for posting.
-
4 hours ago, jabba72 said:
I'd like to know an example of this other than possibly deferring to Jones not playing deep in the OF. Im not disagreeing, I just know the O's were doing aggressive shifting before it caught on the rest of the league, which suggests Buck had to accept analytics to make that decision. Chris Davis contract would be one decision if Buck was for that. That was a big one.
I think that's a really good question. As someone who is fairly pro-Buck, I am going to leave the question for people who want to criticize Buck to answer.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, interloper said:
Thanks for bringing this info to the board.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Frobby said:
I’d like to see the quotes from Buck that show him being against using stats. The worst I can recall him saying is that stats aren’t the only thing you look at. This interview pretty well sums up his views: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-managers-perspective-buck-showalter-on-the-changing-game/
For the vast majority of Buck's career, he was a forward-thinking manager. Going back to the late 90s/early 00s, I believe he changed the way outfielders were positioned (harder to find something to back this up; it is based on memory). Early in his Orioles tenure, we were early adopters of the infield shift. In 2014, his use of Andrew Miller out of the bullpen changed the way teams used the bullpen in the playoffs. From 2012-2016, he utilized his bullpen better than any manager in baseball (save the '16 Wild Card game that everyone is so upset about).
Buck is obviously an analytical thinker. His problem is that (in all likelihood) most of his information was based on his own anecdotal observations. That was good enough until the last 5-10 years as the available data became larger and larger. All of a sudden, computers could run scenarios with better information than Buck's personal experience.
We have heard that he was not receptive to data later in his Orioles tenure. But we know that we had a tiny analytics department that did not keep up with the league. We don't know whether the information that came to Buck from our analytics group as worthwhile.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Frobby said:
Correct. At least, different groups of writers. Also, I’m not sure what top 100 list was being cited. The official BA list comes out later this week, I believe.
The comparison was between the BA Top 100 referenced in this thread:
According to that thread, it was released 10/1/19. The comparison was to the BA Orioles Top 10 (the subject of this thread) which appears to have been released about a month later. I've never seen a publication put out the corresponding lists that are not correlated. Even though they typically use numerous writers.
-
2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:
It's almost as if prospect rankings are subjective and somewhat arbitrary!
I think we all know that prospect rankings in general are subjective. But I'm not sure if the point of the post went over your head. This is the same ranking a player ahead of another player in one place and behind him in another place. I haven't see that before. And being "subjective" or "arbitrary" does not explain the issue.
-
21 minutes ago, GuidoSarducci said:
An extreme solution would simply be to apply something like the rule 5 whenever a guy is sent down. The team would then have to either keep the player up in the bigs or lose them to another team. But If the waiving team decides to surrender the player, they should get draft pick compensation. And like the rule 5, the player would have to stay on the 25 man or the original team gets them back. And no abusing the IL
How about X number of years after a player is drafted, then he becomes a free agent? Perhaps a different period of time if drafted out of high school or college. Then, teams would be incentivized to have players in the majors as soon as they are ready.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:
But it doesn't matter. If a guy is dogging it down the line and the infielder sees it and tossed it over, they still get the out. The difficulty of the play would be measured by the average sprint speed because that is the actual difficulty. I would still argue a difficult play would not see a runner dog it down the line.
I misunderstood the import of the runner's average speed. I understood it that if the runner ran slower than his average and was thrown out, but if he had run his average speed and would have been safe, then it was held against the fielder.
I looked at the linked article and it looks like the speed is used to determine the likelihood that the defender will make the out. That makes more sense.
Nonetheless, I'm still not sure the average speed rather than speed on the play should be factored in. If the runner runs faster than his average speed, and the fielder doesn't make the out, the formula hurts the fielder based on how difficult the play was expected to be rather than how difficult the play actually was. Interesting stuff though.
-
1
-
-
He's #9 on MLB Pipeline right now.
-
45 minutes ago, Frobby said:
Arguably. To be clear, the sprint speed they use is on “competitive” plays, as further described here: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/sprint_speed_leaderboard
Yeah, the distinction I make probably makes little to no difference then. But I still agree with your point. We've all seen defenders, particularly infielders, who took as much times as they had based on how fast the runner is running on that particular play. JJ Hardy comes to mind.
-
27 minutes ago, Frobby said:
My one question about their methodology is they take the average sprint speed of the runner into account, rather than his sprint speed on the particular play in question. Their reason is that:
“A runner's average sprint speed is used in the calculation, rather than "on that play," because a fielder has to plan for a runner's best, even if on some plays a runner jogs, trips, etc.”
Well, do they? Can’t a fielder often see where the runner is and gauge his throw accordingly?
But I’m not sure it would make much difference if they did it the other way.
I'm not sure how much difference it makes either, but I agree with your point.
Also, if a fielder has to "plan for a runner's best," shouldn't they use the player's maximum sprint speed rather than average sprint speed?
-
1
-
Davis is definitley jacked this year...
in Orioles Talk
Posted
I was actually disappointed to hear he gained weight, but he looks good. I don't know that the comparison photo is a good comparison, but he looks like he's in shape. Let's hope it helps.
Personally, I think his issues largely stem from a decline in bat speed. I thought losing weight might help. It didn't. Maybe gaining strength will help the bat speed? I've been pessimistic, but seeing him jacked makes me think there is a chance. That said, I'm not expecting any prime-Crush transformation. Just back to replacement level would be a very optimistic outcome.