Jump to content

Would you put Machado in the category of Harper/Trout?


ChaosLex

Does Machado belong in the same category as Harper or Trout?  

132 members have voted

  1. 1. Does Machado belong in the same category as Harper or Trout?



Recommended Posts

One of the Baltimore writers (can't remember if it was Roch or Melewski, but I'm leaning towards the latter) said he belongs in the conversation yesterday on Twitter. If someone wanted to dig up the tweet in question, I'd be much obliged.

What say you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Are you thinking of Ken Rosenthal? There's a thread discussing his article here: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/132478-Rosenthal-Article-Machado-20-excelling-as-young-star

If Manny finishes the 2013 the way he started it, then there is no question is belongs in the category of Harper/Trout. He may even be in his own category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you thinking of Ken Rosenthal? There's a thread discussing his article here: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/132478-Rosenthal-Article-Machado-20-excelling-as-young-star

If Manny finishes the 2013 the way he started it, then there is no question is belongs in the category of Harper/Trout. He may even be in his own category.

No, it was a tweet I saw yesterday. Could've been from Rosenthal although I could've sworn it was Melewski. Hmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've actually pondered this myself the past few days. I don't think he's there quite yet just because of what those 2 have already accomplished at this level. But he's made himself part of the conversation.

Let's see how he finishes the year. He's basically had 1 hot month offensively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it was a tweet I saw yesterday. Could've been from Rosenthal although I could've sworn it was Melewski. Hmm...

Melewski tweeted Monday about an MLB network segment that was going to discuss the issue. Is that maybe what you saw? It wasn't the prettiest of tweets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the Baltimore writers (can't remember if it was Roch or Melewski, but I'm leaning towards the latter) said he belongs in the conversation yesterday on Twitter. If someone wanted to dig up the tweet in question, I'd be much obliged.

What say you?

They may have been referring to the MLB Network.
Bill Ripken thinks Machado should be in the same conversation as Harper and Trout.

<iframe src='http://mlb.mlb.com/shared/video/embed/embed.html?content_id=26783717&width=400&height=224&property=mlb' width='400' height='224' frameborder='0'>Your browser does not support iframes.</iframe>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By category with Trout/ Harper, I assume you mean best young position players in baseball. When you take into account everything: age, stats, position, etc, I don't think the question is does he belong in the group. I think it is pretty obvious that Machado belongs in the group. I think the question is becoming how would you rank the group. I am not saying Manny is better than Harper/ Trout, although I think you can make that argument when you consider the position they are all playing (and this would be 100 fold more so if Manny was playing shortstop). All that aside, the best part about Machado is just getting the privilege to watch him play day in and day out. I think he is my favorite player to watch play the game since Ken Griffey Jr. He just makes it look easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • There's probably enough excess depth to pull off at least two of those moves. That might be enough to bring home at least one trophy, in a scenario where they just refuse to increase payroll from here. Can't hope for better in that case.
    • I never said that Urias can bring back a starting pitcher on his own. Not sure why you ask that question leading off your post. If you're simply stating that Urias only makes sense to trade if he brings back a starting pitcher, I totally disagree with that. And yes, I do know that Urias doesn't have enough value to bring back a starting pitcher. But I have no idea why you'd lead off a response with that kind of question, though. It's not applicable to what I said. I also disagree that Urias would need to be part of a package. He may be part of a package, but he can be traded on his own as well.  I simply said the Orioles need to trade Urias. I have full faith that Elias would get decent value for him. And it doesn't necessarily need to be pitching, although there's a good chance Elias would try to land pitching in return. And there's added value in opening up playing time for Ortiz and Westburg that a Urias trade would make possible as well. To answer your other question, I'd trade Norby, Prieto, Hall, and Stowers. But I'd trade Urias, Mateo, and Santander first. I'd trade Mountcastle too, but he might have the least perceived value to other teams of any of those guys.
    • Are you actually making the point (I don't think you are) that starting pitching is irrelevant in the post season? Or that we should be okay with the worse rotation (by a good amount) entering into the AL postseason because "how much does it actually matter"?
    • How much does it actually matter?  In the playoffs, how often does the team with the best rotation on paper actually win the series?    
    • Kinda slow around here lately.   Maybe a Dragon Ball Z reference will spice things up.  Heh. https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/todd-monken-lamar-jackson-unlock-super-saiyan-version
    • What is Snell really? This isn't 2018 anymore. he's nothing better than the "5 and dive" guys that we already have. We don't need another one IMO. We need a real impact starter. I think we can and should set our sights a lot higher than the Blake Snell of 2023.
    • Anything is possible during this transitional time, but as I wrote earlier, I think they could gamble as you said. They spread things out in past drafts, and it was wise because they added quality talented depth. They can gamble a little here, and I think they did that last year as well when you think about McLean and the Walters, Young and another that escapes me right now. Gambling with the first pick is a little different, though.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...