Jump to content

On the Record: Who do you want the O's to pick?


Who do you want the O's to pick today?  

100 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want the O's to pick today?



Recommended Posts

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I voted for Rendon over Bundy last year. This year I'm just keeping my mouth shut, and rooting for whoever we pick to do well.

I STILL want Rendon in this organization in the worst way. With Jones signed, I'll have to figure out another crazy trade idea primed for this deadline or offseason. I got it...JJ (Johnson) + JJ (Hardy) for Rendon. Enough? [Answer: No, they don't want Hardy that bad.]

In theory, we're choosing between a lot of very good young players. Hopefully there's no bad choice in the bunch. If there is, I hope it's not our guy. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I STILL want Rendon in this organization in the worst way. With Jones signed, I'll have to figure out another crazy trade idea primed for this deadline or offseason. I got it...JJ (Johnson) + JJ (Hardy) for Rendon. Enough? [Answer: No, they don't want Hardy that bad.]

This might not be so far fetched. I think they definitely need to trade Rendon. With all of the injuries, 2B is probably out of the question right now and he's too good of a fielder to waste at 1B and I don't see Zimmerman moving off 3B until long after Rendon is MLB ready. The Nats have more than enough SP depth, their two biggest needs are SS and CF. The upcoming FA CF market is pretty thick, so it would make sense for SS to be the area they target in trade and Hardy would be one of the most valuable SS's available. Hardy alone obviously isn't equal value to Rendon and not sure how interested they'd be in Johnson, but perhaps a lower minors prospect like Delmonico would be of interest as the 2nd piece in a big package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they're looking for a CF...maybe Avery could be part of a deal? I assume their outfield will have all of Werth, Morse and Harper by the deadline, so they probably won't be looking for a CF this season. You never know though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they're looking for a CF...maybe Avery could be part of a deal? I assume their outfield will have all of Werth, Morse and Harper by the deadline, so they probably won't be looking for a CF this season. You never know though.

I could definitely see that, though we might need to do some work to sell them on him. If they're contending, might be tough to get by defensively with Morse at one of the corners along with a below average CF (be it Werth or Harper). I could see Morse getting a lot of time at 1B vs LHP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correa all the way. I've said for years,(but not recently), that you don't pick a pitcher in the top 10, when an all star bat is sitting there. Injury factor alone says a "tie in talent" goes to the bat. The only exception to this rule is if you have a Strasburg - Beckett type guy sitting there. Before anyone suggest that Gausman/Apple is that type of pitcher, let me point out that "every expert" that i've read the last few months has said that no one was a lock at 1-1 in this draft. In the strasburg draft, everyone knew months in advance that this type of talent was going 1-1. Either way I hope like hell the guy we pick becomes a STUD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said other because I like Giolito. If he's the best player, he's the best player. I don't think a single one of us would not want Strasburg right now if he had just come off surgery and missing a whole year. So, it's no different for me with Giolito. If we say we're taking BPA, then take BPA. That guy is Giolito. That being said, my next three guys would be Buxton, Correa, and Gausman in that order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Hi Puck- From a marketing standpoint the Orioles will eventually reach a relative saturation point which I agree is around 2.5m then it's about leveraging money from the fan experience-winning being a chief component of that.   
    • I doubt it.   wavetrapper joined about 10 days before OOO was banned.   He might have some similar views but seems better at claiming some unique expertise or superiority.   
    • Yes, it's possible.   But we don't know the extent to which the "old school" stuff is still taught.   I wouldn't assume it is ignored or underemphasized.   But, perhaps it is.   Nobody was asking that question last year or the first 2.5 months of this season, though.   I doubt the approach was any different when we were playing .650 ball than it is now.
    • Sports Guy- Isn't attendance becoming more of a  legacy statistic similar to Avg v. OPS?  It's a very different era than 1965 when there were few suites or "premium" seating and hardly any amenities beyond a beer and hot dog.  Today a seat and it's attachment rate are not comparable between say NY and KC-and we've seen the leverage of corporate sponsorship with TRP.  In the Warehouse I would think growing attachment rate and corporate partners would at some point have comparable priority as a revenue driver.  Seat sales account only ~20% of revenue and shrinking,  The revenue tilt is upgrading fans/corps. to a premium seat at an average of 4X the price.   Although this slide is from '22 it details the discrepancy between teams that can leverage premium seating and suites.  Playoff revenue is also likely in this slide which benefits teams like Houston. There is no real way I have found to judge revenue other than Forbes-just food for thought.  
    • The Mountcastle injury hasn't felt like a huge deal since we have a similarly-performing O'Hearn to slot into the same position.  But I think the lineup misses him. He is better than Eloy, Rivera, and the other guys his ABs are getting distributed to. And better defensively than O'Hearn.
    • There could be some interesting stuff to talk about here, or individual cases where what you're saying is true, but I think the short answer is no. Analytics are going to be more accurate overall than the old-school axioms-- the axioms that are provably true are probably still coached.   On point 1 we definitely have some players struggling to make adjustments and some of that may be that they're coached to hunt barrels at the expense of contact. The O's are built to maximize power and you can see that in their results (1st in SLG but 9th in AVG). Maybe a different approach could help some guys break out of a slump more easily, but it's hard to know because there are always struggling players no matter the coaching approach. Were the the Showalter O's missing old-school wisdom when they let Adam Jones continue whiffing on low and away sliders?  Point 2 I probably buy the least because pitching analytics across MLB have been so generally effective in helping players maximize their game. Probably there are ways the O's could be using their data better. Not every decision and result will be perfect. But analytics is golden for pitchers.  On point 3, is there any reason to think the O's are generally weak on defensive fundamentals compared to most teams? Gunnar had his recent error binge but that's all I can think of and that seemed more like a personal thing to me. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...