Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 488
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Ok sounds like you agree Henson is pretty much worthless. So what is Jarret Martin's upside/value to the organization and what is unique about him?

You're basically arguing that any C prospect is worthless. Which is wrong.

The majority will bust. A decent amount will have short careers as journeymen or bench players. And a small percentage will have long and productive major league careers. And that upside is worth more than a best case of, like, 200 innings of a 4.50 ERA that lifts us from 74 to 76 wins,all from a player who will then go on to sign a bad contract with another team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be easy for you to quote two examples in this thread that correlate with your analogy.
If I felt like taking the time, i would...But since I don't, I won't.

I can tell you that NcRaven made an argument similar to that in this thread...Search under him if you are so excited to see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I felt like taking the time, i would...But since I don't, I won't.

I can tell you that NcRaven made an argument similar to that in this thread...Search under him if you are so excited to see that.

This?....
I think the real issue here is that SG and others believe we actually gave something of value up to get Teagarden and Eveland. Duquette pretty clearly didn't. Myself, I don't either and I don't even mind giving up Miclat. Players whose upside says utility guy are, as some here are so fond of saying, "a dime a dozen."

Every player we gave up was replaced in the draft (Henry/Martin vs. Wright/Simon), free agency or the Rule 5 (Miclat/Hudson vs. Antonelli/Tolleson/Flaherty). Not only were they all easily replaceable, they've already been replaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're basically arguing that any C prospect is worthless. Which is wrong.

The majority will bust. A decent amount will have short careers as journeymen or bench players. And a small percentage will have long and productive major league careers. And that upside is worth more than a best case of, like, 200 innings of a 4.50 ERA that lifts us from 74 to 76 wins,all from a player who will then go on to sign a bad contract with another team.

I'm not saying a C prospect is worthless. I think Henson is essentially worthless. I admitted I don't know enough about Martin. I asked you to provide me soemthing compelling, because I haven't seen it. I'm just saying that Eveland has value and he's not something you can asssume you're just going to get for free. I disagree with that, though it could have been possible. If you're going to take the position every prospect is a unique snowflalke, I'm going to take the position that volatile pitchers and Evleland himslef is a unique snowflake. He's better than Reyes imo probably better than Bergy. I like his Minor League track record. I like he's an extreme GB pitcher with a low HR rate. I'm going to accept that we may have the ability to scout players and see something and this isn't only done by looking at stats on a spreadsheet. I'm gonna believe DD and company see something they like and believe Eveland may have some upside. Say he could make it as a BOR that would be huge. Also, time is money and I like the idea of guys that have decent Mil track records and ML exposure. Among other things, he could free us up to deal Guthrie and provide us something in a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is 100% correct. Yes, every prospect is a unique snowflake, but at a certain point, you can predict, and predict well, the success rate of certain classes of prospects - in the same way that every at-bat is a completely deterministic event given enough information that is also accurately described by the probability of the hitter's batting average.

Also, I'd rather hoard prospects than horde them. :D

Horde, hoard, whored. Whathaveyou. ;)

---

I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.736431,-73.993490

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've basically named many of the reasons why our reactions should be negative. The Orioles have plenty of 4/5 starter types. Eveland doesn't add anything the O's didn't already have. What they need is more 1-3 starter types.

They need to add both, in my opinion. I don't think you can ever really have enough 5 starter types...it seems like every year we get down to a point in the season where it doesn't look like we have a pitcher capable of throwing 5 innings and giving up no more than 3 runs. Every single year. Eveland just becomes another AAAA guy that we can lean on when necessary. Also, the more you stockpile pitching, the more likely that you find a diamond in the rough...not an ace but a Rodrigo Lopez or Jamie Moyer during his stint with the Orioles. Just somebody who surprises you a little bit, and turns out to be a serviceable starter. If Duquette has reasons to think that Eveland is a worthy gamble in that respect, I'm okay with the trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I better get my holiday 4-pack.

I just bought it, and they raised the friggin price again. Opening Day plus three other games is now #119. For the wife and I, with the Ticketmaster charges and stuff, cost me over $250. For 4 friggin lousy ass Orioles games.

Maybe I'll get lucky and see Dana starting on Opening Day? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying a C prospect is worthless. I think Henson is essentially worthless. I admitted I don't know enough about Martin. I asked you to provide me soemthing compelling, because I ahvent seen it. I'm just saying that Eveland has value and he's not something you can asssume you're just going to get for free. I disagree with that, though it could have been possible. If you're going to take the position every prospect is a unique snowflalke I'm going to take the position that volatile pitchers are unique snowflakes. He's better than Reyes and imo probably better than Bergy. I like his Minor League track record. I'm going to accept that we may have the ability to scout players and see something and this isn't only done by looking at stats on a spreadsheet. I'm gonna believe DD and comapny see something they like and believe Eveland may have some upside. Say he could make it as a BOR that would be huge. Also, time is money and I like the idea of guys that have decent Mil track records and ML exposure. Among other things, he could free us up to deal Guthrie and provide us something in a trade.
Yea...negative value.

Come on, how on earth can you say he has value?

Martin is a lefty reliever who has command and control issues...But he throws hard, is still young and has a good GO/AO ratio. He has some potential to be something for us.

Eveland may as well...but you could have gotten him or similar pitchers to him, for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just bought it, and they raised the friggin price again. Opening Day plus three other games is now #119. For the wife and I, with the Ticketmaster charges and stuff, cost me over $250. For 4 friggin lousy ass Orioles games.

Maybe I'll get lucky and see Dana starting on Opening Day? :rolleyes:

You have to take your wife to the Orioles to.....

Oh wait, nevermind..Should have kept reading. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • If Elias could somehow magically combine Stowers and Kjerstad into one player, then the O's would really have something.  I think Kjerstad has a special bat, but his defense anywhere leaves a lot to be desired.  I don't know if Stowers can keep his Ks low enough to be an everyday player, but the O's should find out before Santander hits free agency.
    • Read the ninth post on page one I wrote. That should have been the last post in this dumpster fire of a thread. Lol
    • What if he bats .100 for the next month?
    • I agree. And I think he has a higher upside than Kjerstad because he's actually a very good fielder. He's a guy that I think deserves regular playing time.
    • Back when we DFA'd Bauman, I said the right move would have been sending down Akin. He's just not very good. Sure he'll tease you with a month or two of good ball but he's very average. Cano is Cano. He had his 15 minutes of fame. He intimidates no one. And that's what you need from a high leverage guy. Vieira --- no need mincing words here --- he's not just a project, he stinks. Everyone has tried to fix his command issue and everyone has failed.  On the other hand, while he's no Bautista I don't mind rolling with Kimbrel this year. I like Coulombe. I think Perez, Webb and Tate are "ok".  The overall issue is that this bullpen isn't the bullpen a championship squad needs. Elias should have known that. Maybe he thought the offense and starting pitching would make up for our bullpen deficiencies. No team is perfect, I get that. I just don't know how a guy as bright as Elias thought this bullpen would be good enough coming out of Spring Training. Let's hope he makes some moves to get us a couple quality relievers.
    • From my understanding of the data the impetus for pulling pitchers early is not (usually) due to pitcher fatigue or pitcher injury risk, but rather because they're not as good the 3rd/4th time thru the lineup.  But I think I'd rather have our starters go from good to mediocre the 3rd time thru the lineup, versus trusting the crappy members of our bullpen with the ball.  Granted Akin had a bad game today and he had been pretty good, but we also tried to have Cionel get thru 2 innings and he gives up a leadoff triple.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...