Jump to content

This team won't finish above .500 and they should be sellers!


zero1

Recommended Posts

Guest rochester

Wow. I assumed we lost when I saw the OP (thank you Mr. Obvious) so I checked the box... Matusz again ughhh but then I saw the we left 21 LEFT ON BASE!?!?! 21?!?!? Really?!?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 243
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The O's showed us something when they gave Moyer his release. Its says that O's management have a lot of confidence in Tillman, Gonzo and Britton.

Has anyone noticed that Pearce has 2 HR, 11 RBI 269/333/462/795 in 46 at bats and is playing a good corner OF defensively? SS and all but he has been a good fill in for Reimold so far. I fully expect this team to break out of their slump vs Cleveland and Seattle (except King Felix).

As hard as the poor defense is to watch at times, it does not appear to lose the O's that many games.

Looking forward to watching Hammel tomorrow night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I assumed we lost when I saw the OP (thank you Mr. Obvious) so I checked the box... Matusz again ughhh but then I saw the we left 21 LEFT ON BASE!?!?! 21?!?!? Really?!?!?

I think you must have misread. We didn't GET 21 men on base let alone leave them there.

We did strand a ton of runners, many at 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very good post. Rep to you, sir.

...and I concur with all of these.

Remind me again, where are we in the standings??? How's that in comparison to last year at this time? Did you even expect to be here? Now relax and refocus. The season is not lost. Yet.

Yeah I mean the "WE NEED TO BE SELLERS" attitude is def reactionary, but it is smart when you're in the middle of the pack to have everyone available for the RIGHT PRICE.

In the end this is the best start to a season I can remember in the last 10 years, still has some issues clearly, so smart trades that may hurt the team a bit this year but have potential to make a stronger team next year wouldn't be unwelcome IMO...I don't want to be selling for pieces that won't be helpful for 3-4 years though. Lots of nice players in their prime or coming into their prime (Hammel, Chen, Arrietta maybe turning the corner, Wieters, Jones, Markakis, Hardy, Roberts is past his prime) that if surrounded with solid talent could make a legit in the next couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reactionary or not, I believe the OP is correct. It's the problem with getting out to a really fast start, and getting a little lucky on the way. O's already blew it by giving Adam Jones a contract based on being a .900 OPS player when he's going to end up near .800 OPS this season, just like he has for his career up til the two months of aberration. And speaking of aberration, the talent level on the O's just does not have the legs to get this done. 162 games is to big a sample size and we are going to be fortunate to be .500 by the end of the year. We *should* be sellers, even if we are still "hanging in there". These are the sorts of seasons that tack 5 years onto a season-losing-streak because right about this time everyone believes we have a chance, when really we probably don't. Standard disclaimer: I hope I'm wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me crazy, but I was actually a little encouraged by tonights performance.

Yes, I would have liked Matusz to keep us in the game. He was bad, but not terrible. Wasn't anything close to good, don't get me wrong.

I was more worried about not being able to have any chances to score vs Wilson, and we had plenty. Granted we didn't come through in many of them, the fact that we were able to put ourselves in those spots against such a tough pitcher was a bit encouraging after our recent offensive slump. Like a poster earlier said... we can't hit THAT bad in those spots for much longer. Something has got to give. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me crazy, but I was actually a little encouraged by tonights performance.

Yes, I would have liked Matusz to keep us in the game. He was bad, but not terrible. Wasn't anything close to good, don't get me wrong.

I was more worried about not being able to have any chances to score vs Wilson, and we had plenty. Granted we didn't come through in many of them, the fact that we were able to put ourselves in those spots against such a tough pitcher was a bit encouraging after our recent offensive slump. Like a poster earlier said... we can't hit THAT bad in those spots for much longer. Something has got to give. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

Agreed. Through five innings Matusz gave up 3 runs. The rest came in the sixth against Matusz on a home run and against the B-Team (putting that generously) of the bullpen. I'm not all that concerned.

Even if we do no trades at all this season we could conceivably get Lindstrom, Markakis, and Britton back in the next few weeks. That could provide a pretty good boost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Through five innings Matusz gave up 3 runs. The rest came in the sixth against Matusz on a home run and against the B-Team (putting that generously) of the bullpen. I'm not all that concerned.

Even if we do no trades at all this season we could conceivably get Lindstrom, Markakis, and Britton back in the next few weeks. That could provide a pretty good boost.

I'd normally agree, but he was getting hit pretty hard all night. Sure a few base knocks were "lucky" weakly hit balls, but there were plenty of sharp hit balls that went for outs as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is 73 games worth of statistics reactionary?

This is totally a reactionary thread. Like somebody said, we won't hit .030 all year with RISP. Our avg. is .247 for the year w/RISP; granted it's not good but if we had hit exactly that way over the last week, we would have about 9 hits in 37 ABs instead of 1. Sure, some of those could have come in games that we won already (like this past Sunday) but don't you think that could have turned at least one of the L's to a W??

Maybe we'll hit a good stretch hitting with RISP that will offset this bad stretch. Besides, those relievers aren't going to get you much. No GM is going to give you first rate prospects for Ayala, Lindstrom, and O'Day. And don't say that a boatload of mid-level prospects is what the org. needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is totally a reactionary thread. Like somebody said, we won't hit .030 all year with RISP. Our avg. is .247 for the year w/RISP; granted it's not good but if we had hit exactly that way over the last week, we would have about 9 hits in 37 ABs instead of 1. Sure, some of those could have come in games that we won already (like this past Sunday) but don't you think that could have turned at least one of the L's to a W??

Maybe we'll hit a good stretch hitting with RISP that will offset this bad stretch. Besides, those relievers aren't going to get you much. No GM is going to give you first rate prospects for Ayala, Lindstrom, and O'Day. And don't say that a boatload of mid-level prospects is what the org. needs.

If, if, if, maybe, maybe, maybe.

Did you see the stats I posted about the offense? Hitting with RISP isn't their only weakness. Getting hits, getting people on base, striking out, grounding into double plays, etc. are bigger issues at this point.

I get that the team has a good W/L record to this point but looking ahead do all the posters claiming this thread is reactionary really think they are going to sustain this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game tonight was just a perfect example of what is wrong with this team. It's not a reactionary thread at all.

.246 batting average - 11th in AL

.308 on base percentage - 12th in AL

93 home runs - tied for 3rd in AL

307 runs - tied for 8th in AL

.721 on base + slugging percentage - 8th in AL

585 strike outs - 2nd in AL

79 double plays grounded into - 1st in AL

If you think those are the stats of a good offense please tell me how. Like I said, without the longball the offense would be horrible. They can't get on base and when they do they lead the league in double plays and are second in strikeouts. Even with the 3rd most HR in the league they are 8th in runs scored. The offense is bad.

If you want me to bring up the pitching stats to prove what I said about the pitching please let me know and I will.

Except you'll be dancing around the YaYa Tree if they win tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I assumed we lost when I saw the OP (thank you Mr. Obvious) so I checked the box... Matusz again ughhh but then I saw the we left 21 LEFT ON BASE!?!?! 21?!?!? Really?!?!?

Yes, 21. And LAAAA of A near Disneyland north of LA left 19 on.

6-26partbox.jpg

And if WE had 2 on with one out, it counts as TWO if we make the 2nd out. Counts as two AGAIN if we make the third out.

I got yer strawman right 'ere!

WhoTH started this worthless thread? I'm out of (neg) rep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • And what is the data on Cy Young award winning pitchers in their age 30 and up seasons? Side Note: Last season's best Orioles starting pitcher, Kyle Bradish, is only 2 years younger than Burnes. I don't think you can assume Grayson will remain healthy either based on how violent his velocity is and the injury history that he has from the minor leagues. With all that said, I agree that it is crucial to ask these questions and think hard about these things and try to make a healthy rational decision. Pros and Cons. Cost benefit analysis. We're lucky to see a Cy Young award winner playing for the Orioles even once in a generation, and considering how rare that is, we should consider the value in it and balance the upside with the downside. Some pitchers are built sturdier than others. Look at former Orioles pitcher Jamie Moyer (he was almost 50 years old before he retired). Look at Nolan Ryan. Could Burnes be one of those enduring pitchers? He's had a very good career track record of health.
    • That is the big question. I had assumed it would be pretty long, especially with him wearing Cal Ripken Sr's old number and him being the consensus top prospect in Baseball. But if there's been no progress in all that playing time, and it's starting to cost us games, I don't know how the team can take the brunt of that for too long. Especially in a chase for a championship inside the toughest division in baseball.  The Front Office has surprised me before by looking like they were being patient with a guy only to suddenly option him one day without warning they would.  If we're being perfectly honest Jackson looks like a boy playing amongst men out their right now and he looks like he belongs in the minor leagues with a reset for now until he gathers up experience like Westburg and Norby, or at least as much as Henderson did. So, we will probably watch Jackson ride the bench vs Ragans tomorrow. What happens after that is something we will just have to wait and see. I'm willing to cut him some slack, but if it continues to cost us runs and games, then there's not much room for patience.
    • Hicks was a big blessing to the team--we're very lucky we got him when we did. There's no way the Cowser we saw last year could have matched what Hicks provided, even on defense and on the basepaths. You cite BABIP, but drawing 35 walks in 236 plate appearances was a huge self-earned positive.
    • I had to think about it because Adley has always been a high priority for me. He's the franchise Catcher we never had. And in my opinion, the Catcher position is the Quarterback of a Baseball team. It's that impactful of a position and you need a good one to compete for championships. But with that said, Burnes is the Ace we've been waiting for since Mussina turned coat, and his contract is up at the end of the season. He's also one of the most reliable and durable pitchers in baseball. I think we should do what we can to keep him happy and make a business deal with him to keep him an Orioles pitcher.   If you're assuming that Rodriguez or Bradish will take over the Ace role, I think you've seen enough pitching injuries this year to tell you that you can't assume that will happen. You need to make sure any one of your top 3 starters can assume the #1 spot if pressed. Timing dictates Burnes as our biggest priority to work on. With Gunnar, he might be a future MVP and I've been one of his biggest fans since the moment he was called up. But his agent is Scott Boras, so good luck getting him to agree to an extension before free agency. And on that note, you'll have Scott Boras with a conflict of interest when you're trying to sign both Gunnar Henderson and Jackson Holiday long term and they both want to play shortstop.
    • People keep talking about Norby's flawed defense, meanwhile Holliday is looking pretty bad out there. Small sample size, I guess! But how long is the leash?
    • the Royals gave us the business tonight...except for the slam by Adley...we stunk to high hell tonight...especially the pen...Akin and  Tate...they both came up small.
    • I know this isn’t the question that you asked, but my recollection is that you worked on the business side for the Orioles at some point, so I think you might be able to weigh in on this idea: do you think there are business reasons to extend a Gunnar or an Adley? I know you’re view is generally that extensions are overrated by the fanbase, but that largely seems related to the idea that you are paying for past-peak years (if I’m off base here, it wasn’t intentional—just my recollection). I tend to think that from a business standpoint, an extension for a young player would not make a material difference concerning the amount of tickets sold, revenue generated, etc. and would really just make some people on X happy, but I don’t really have anything to support that opinion.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...