Jump to content

Baltimore being serious players for Dickey


Greg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 334
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Yeah, I am just surprised that he was traded. Is something wrong with him?

Doesn't take to instruction well.

Has not maintained his college velocity.

Rumors are he has an abrasive personality.

His pitching strategy is to get hitters to chase balls out of the strike zone. This has not worked with MLB hitters leading to excessive walks and high pitch counts.

I would love to keep him in the minors until he was willing to listen to Peterson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a thread about him a few weeks ago. It was known that he was available. I figured he would go cheap as well. Would have been a great buy low opportunity.

I made that thread! And I am disappointed too. You have to think they would have taken Schoop over Gregorius, and maybe there was potential for a Hardy trade there too. Bauer's a really good prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blah blah blah .... We can make this excuse for every deal/move that happens.

Yes, and you can complain every time another team acquires a player we like. Or, you could actually think about individual cases. Were you willing to move Bundy, or at the very least, Gausman and more for Dickey? No? The end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No thanks. I was at the game where he 1-hit us. He was flat out nasty. I've never seen a knuckler throw so many strikes.

Yea, know what you mean. Since the Mets are my favorite NL team, I drove all the way up from SC for that series. While I didn't mind seeing the one hitter by Dickey. It was a bummer to see the O's lose the entire series. That was the beginnig of a long slump for the O's. I often thought about that series as we battled the Yankees down the stretch within a couple of games. Have to say I did meet alot of nice and knowledgeable Mets fans. Stood around shooting the bull with them until the gates were locked a couple of nights. Citi field was a pretty nice park behind OPACY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blah blah blah .... We can make this excuse for every deal/move that happens.

This post is pretty childish. don't you think?

Aside from the rudeness of your post, I can't imagine that you really believe that the Orioles should give up more value than d'Arnaud for a year of Dickey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is that hard to figure out really. The Blue Jays are the huge early favorite, impossible not to be. However, the Yankees be default should be assumed to be the favorite. The Red Sox, the early favorite for the cellar. Tampa and Baltimore for 3rd/4th.

Red Sox were pencilled in as the WS winner when they went out and spent all that money on AG, CC, etc. There are no guarantees that Toronto is going to win even the division, let alone get into the playoffs. If the team who looked best on paper won every year, we wouldn't have to play the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red Sox were pencilled in as the WS winner when they went out and spent all that money on AG, CC, etc. There are no guarantees that Toronto is going to win even the division, let alone get into the playoffs. If the team who looked best on paper won every year, we wouldn't have to play the games.

Exactly. Look at the 2012 Angels for another example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. Look at the 2012 Angels for another example.

I agree. I love the assumption that X team is going to win because they signed or traded for Y and Z. The Orioles were in the playoffs last year and the Angels, Red Sox, Dodgers, Mets, etc., were home watching it on TV. And the Rangers with Mr. Hamilton lost their one game playoff with the O's. I would be willing to slot the Dodgers in the postseason right now, but several of the teams that are making headline grabbing deals now will be watching the playoffs on tv in 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • No one would use the word "underachieve" to describe someone who didn't meet expectations due to injuries or circumstances beyond their control. Like that's just not what that word means in normal usage.  But technically, sure, Tiger Woods achieved less than was expected of him. Lol. 
    • This is a different team. Corbin Burnes would have made a difference IMO and we have now acquired him.  I am not dogmatic in believing that it has to be Miller and nothing/nobody else. I am saying that there is a serious argument to be made that Miller or another elite backend bullpen weapon is the piece to take us over the top when the Fall get's here. With a team this good who has legit WS aspirations with a strong argument to be made that we have the best team in the AL, I would hate for us to pin our WS hopes on a pitcher like Craig Kimbrel at this point in his career. IMO he is not good/reliable enough. If we have to get into a game (in October) where it turns into a battle of the bullpens, I would prefer not to have bring a knife to a gun fight.  
    • I appreciate this deep cut non-#10 Tejada. 
    • LOL.  Technically, he underachieved because of injury but I think most people equate underachiever with a lack of effort.  
    • I'm not sure if there are any hunters here, but it can be a pretty demanding full-body workout. I suspect Markakis wasn't sitting in a tree stand. I walk miles in rough terrain, good times.
    • I understand your argument, but I think your word choice of "underachieved" isn't helping. When it comes to a guy like Tiger, it's hard to call that guy an underachiever, especially when his work ethic is known and undeniable.  The guy can barely walk and he's still out there trying...that's not an underachiever. Underachieving, IMO (and I think what a lot of people think of when they hear the word) is when someone doesn't live up to to their potential, or work hard to maximize their potential...outside of being injured.   Plenty of things can de-rail a career, I don't think that means that individual is an underachiever.  I don't think Griffey is an underachiever, I don't think Trout is, either.  I just think they haven't had the careers they might have had if they were able to stay healthy. When debating these things, it's helpful to have a definition of which to work with.  So while I agree with you that guys like Tiger, Trout, Griffey and others haven't had the careers they were supposed to have, that doesn't mean they were underachievers.  They just got de-railed...now some of that was their own doing, some of that is just the tolls of playing their sports.  
    • Well deserved. I would have liked to have seen him finish his whole career Baltimore, but mostly have seen him be able to play in the 2012 playoffs. I also appreciate that because of him I know what a kinkajou is.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...