Jump to content

Should the Orioles have given Miller 4/$36M ?


TonySoprano

Should the O's have paid the man?  

128 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the O's have paid the man?

    • Yes, they should have been aggressive.
      53
    • No way, bullpen arms are too unreliable year-to-year
      75


Recommended Posts

Pretty close though. Miller had 1.8 for the year and .9 in 2 months with the O's. Markakis had 2.1 in 6 months. Most people including myself, think Markakis is more easily replaceable than Miller. That's how they come up with their opions, IMO.

Well I am sure their were 2 month periods in the season where Markakis was hitting like crazy. So you are going to pay a guy based on two months and forget that their is a whole season and a whole career?

And set up guys are a lot easier to find than everyday right fielders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'm wondering if this was Dan's biggest blunder?

We should have kept Miller without a doubt. The guy was clutch.

I'm going to hate seeing him come out to shut down games against us in 2015 considering how many times we play those dirtbags in a season. I don't get the reluctance to sign proven guys. Miller wasn't a question mark, he put up the goods, which is why we traded away a solid pitching prospect in the first place.

What did he give us - 21 innings for a good prospect only to watch him go to one of our toughest rivals? That doesn't make sense at all.

DD is a master GM, no one can argue he isn't, but he's only human and prone to big mistakes from time to time. This was a huge mistake.

MSK

Ryan Webb and Brad Brach say hi! You don't have to pay top dollar for decent pen arms. They practically grow on trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha! Maybe in WAR but if you watched both pitch, you should know the answer.

I am sure their were 2 month periods in 2012 where Patton pitched as well as Miller. Not taking anything away from Miller. I would have given him a 2 year 8 million dollar deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

relief pitchers go up and down so fast. Just a year ago, nobody would have considered signing Miller for anything than 2 year/10 mil. Thats one position that isn't smart to invest long term contracts into.

We'll grab a couple of failed starters in the offseason and likely try them as replacements, and we'll probably hit on one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually Patton was better down the stretch in 2012 than Miller was with the Os last season. Patton didn't give up a run in his last 22 appearances that season. The last run he gave up was on July 2nd. Miller didn't even join the Orioles until August of last year and gave up runs in two games. People have no logic. Another bad signing by the Yankees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue the opposite, that it's easier to find a RF like Markakis than a LH reliever like Miller.

Than how come we haven't found a guy like Markakis for left field in how many years but we have had plenty of good set up men in many years. For example Daren O Fay who has had 5 years better than Millers career year and was better last season as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually Patton was better down the stretch in 2012 than Miller was with the Os last season. Patton didn't give up a run in his last 22 appearances that season. The last run he gave up was on July 2nd. Miller didn't even join the Orioles until August of last year and gave up runs in two games. People have no logic. Another bad signing by the Yankees.

Second time you've said that and I have to disagree there. 9 mill per is 8 or 9% of our budget (for 4 years.) It's 2 or 3% of theirs and they have NO qualms over eating that contract. Makes sense for them to take the chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it all. We are talking about a guy with negative lifetime WAR coming off a career year in which he had less WAR than Markakis. A lot of people on here are not logical and I have no idea how they come up with their,opinions.

The fact that you care about his lifetime WAR is not logical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that you care about his lifetime WAR is not logical.

You mean only two months of his career are important? I get he was a starter for a while but his years as reliever were not spectacular. Hunter has more total WAR over the last two seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Second time you've said that and I have to disagree there. 9 mill per is 8 or 9% of our budget (for 4 years.) It's 2 or 3% of theirs and they have NO qualms over eating that contract. Makes sense for them to take the chance.

Well they keep signing guys to big long term contracts to guys who aren't producing ... Their budget isn't endless and with the starting pitching they have lost and their weak line up,they should be filling other holes. So yeah it is a bad signing for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...