-
Who's Online 57 Members, 0 Anonymous, 146 Guests (See full list)
- O's84
- Dunk35
- e16bball
- RarityFlaherty
- Spy Fox
- nevadaO
- Cokeman
- Sports Guy
- Malike
- KojiSplit
- Aristotelian
- AdamK
- The B&G
- turtlebowl
- Fiver6565
- Gurgi
- Bird Lady
- deward
- Royle
- RZNJ
- G54377
- Tony-OH
- kaj21206
- Cavspider
- frankwhite
- oriole
- Ripken
- Orioles West
- Moose Milligan
- Frobby
- Jskins2190
- helloharv
- ChipTait
- PeteCanes
- scbalt52
- GBO'sFan
- Orioles5258
- Orioles33
- glenn__davis
- elextrano8
- MurphDogg
- Too Tall
- doctorbj
- Roy Firestone
- Osornot
- 86this
- Bleed Orange
- ScGO's
- spleen1015
- BobP
- CaptainRedbeard
- OsFanSinceThe80s
- Bemorewins
- TheWall
- DrungoHazewood
- mall-O-cup
- Babkins
-
Posts
-
It'd be three starts in an 11 day period, right? With starts on day 1, 6, and 11 of the set. I'm guessing that's what they do, and the 6-man rotation gets the axe for now. -
It’s not a model to replicate. As you’ll note, I referred to that group as a “trash pile.” As you’ll also note, I join you in hoping they make a significant move to upgrade the bullpen. The point is that you seem to be treating the current bullpen as something of a disqualifier from playoff success. We *can’t* win with this group, status quo. But I think that’s a hard position to defend when this group as currently constituted is better than the one that helped hoist the trophy last year. I don’t disagree with any of this. As we compare to the Yankees, Holmes is clearly the best reliever on either team at present, and Weaver might well be the second best. It would be a significant benefit to this team if we could match that talent level in the late innings. But as it also relates to the Yankees, I did just watch us take a short series (3-1) against them in the Spring. A series in which our bullpen pitched 12.2 innings and allowed a total of 1 run (0.71 ERA), to go with 12 Ks against 1 BB. Their bullpen was excellent too, of course, but as we both agree — that’s only one of many factors involved in how we match up with any given team. The bullpens pitched to a draw in that series, and it’s entirely plausible that that would be the case again in the Fall. Where I’m getting stuck is just the rhetoric of it all, the notion that we’re just accepting defeat if we don’t change X or add Y. That we can’t win with a group like we have. That the FO must be indifferent to winning if they don’t add a certain player or make a certain change. I am in total agreement that adding a Holmesian reliever would increase our odds of winning the tournament. Significantly. Entering the playoffs with a reliever of that level added to the roster might well increase our trophy likelihood by several percentage points. As long as we keep it in that perspective — a change that might increase our odds, say, from 12% to 16% — rather than some sort of binary “can win” vs. “can’t win” disqualifier, then I’m right there with you. -
Can you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot or that was game 7 of the WS? It may have been runner interference by the letter of the law. I’d have to read the rule. However, that is just a horrible call. How about a little common sense? It didn’t affect Henderson’s ability to make the play. I file that under minimal, incidental contact. No harm, no foul. The crew chief should have had some balls and overruled it. Good for us but a game shouldn’t end on a BS call like that. -
Double edged sword there though because in that case those players are too valuable to trade anything for. I definitely agree a top reliever is needed…just not so sure the vets are trade chips -
He threw 10 innings as a RP last year. In 2021 when he was a RP he threw 57 innings to a 4.11 ERA with 9 HR. He had a 7.2 K/9 as a RP last year for us. -
-
They have no value at moment, but Hays might be on the verge of a heater, and Santander is a guy that could get hot for two weeks and be back over .800 OPS
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
-
Popular Now
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.