Jump to content

Regretting Not Signing Andrew Miller?


Rene88

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 688
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The logical reason would be that most of his wealth is tied up in three entities: His law firm, the Orioles, and MASN. Of those three there are rumors that one is struggling (we know they have reduced the workforce) and one is tied up in litigation. So while his assets have substantial value one has to question the liquidity.

I don't see why anyone should expect the ownership to be happy with a ROI in the 2.5% range which is more or less what he is being suggested.

Details... details... Most of the fanbase would probably vote for the team to be run as a public trust or a non-profit. Even more would be for it as a wealthy guy's vanity project, pouring his own money in to operate at a loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Details... details... Most of the fanbase would probably vote for the team to be run as a public trust or a non-profit. Even more would be for it as a wealthy guy's vanity project, pouring his own money in to operate at a loss.

Well the city could also use eminent domain...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was absolutely filthy tonight shutting down the Red Sox. Why he was almost as good as Boxberger was against the O's.

Edit: Boxberger makes $521,400.00. Miller makes $9,000,000.00. For those without a calculator, Boxberger makes a little less than 6% of Miller's salary.

So what is the takeaway?

A. Value exists in major league baseball for those who are willing to expend the effort to find it.

B. Peter Angelos is a selfish profiteer who cares nothing about the Orioles fan base, otherwise cost would be no object in such a clear-cut case of obviousness.

Yes this is a litmus test. So are you pink or blue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was absolutely filthy tonight shutting down the Red Sox. Why he was almost as good as Boxberger was against the O's.

Edit: Boxberger makes $521,400.00. Miller makes $9,000,000.00. For those without a calculator, Boxberger makes a little less than 6% of Miller's salary.

So what is the takeaway?

A. Value exists in major league baseball for those who are willing to expend the effort to find it.

B. Peter Angelos is a selfish profiteer who cares nothing about the Orioles fan base, otherwise cost would be no object in such a clear-cut case of obviousness.

Yes this is a litmus test. So are you pink or blue?

Miller has been unhittable for about a year and a half. History is replete with guys that have had wonderful months, both as replacement players and bullpen guys. History is not replete with guys that have been unhittable for over a year. There always seems to be an excuse for this team NOT to spend money. Relief pitchers are fickle and injury prone. Guys are getting old and not worth the investment. I would like someone arguing against signing Markakis, Cruz, Miller, Kemp, etc. to tell me when IS a good time to spend money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller has been unhittable for about a year and a half. History is replete with guys that have had wonderful months, both as replacement players and bullpen guys. History is not replete with guys that have been unhittable for over a year. There always seems to be an excuse for this team NOT to spend money. Relief pitchers are fickle and injury prone. Guys are getting old and not worth the investment. I would like someone arguing against signing Markakis, Cruz, Miller, Kemp, etc. to tell me when IS a good time to spend money?

I think that is fair. I think the answer is more along the lines of total money for the team than any particular person that you name above. Personally, I would have spent money for Miller but I honestly think it's a mistake to assume he would have signed for us at the money that the Yankees got him. That said, I would have made a run so that if the Yankees still took him (and I think they would have) they would have paid filthy money. All of the others, I do not think would be worth it.

I would also say that I would spend on Manny and Chris Tillman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was absolutely filthy tonight shutting down the Red Sox. Why he was almost as good as Boxberger was against the O's.

Edit: Boxberger makes $521,400.00. Miller makes $9,000,000.00. For those without a calculator, Boxberger makes a little less than 6% of Miller's salary.

So what is the takeaway?

A. Value exists in major league baseball for those who are willing to expend the effort to find it.

B. Peter Angelos is a selfish profiteer who cares nothing about the Orioles fan base, otherwise cost would be no object in such a clear-cut case of obviousness.

Yes this is a litmus test. So are you pink or blue?

Boxberger is right handed. So therefore a better closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like someone arguing against signing Markakis, Cruz, Miller, Kemp, etc. to tell me when IS a good time to spend money?

Never? Or Always. Or the Orioles are (and have been) spending in line with what their base can support?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller has been unhittable for about a year and a half. History is replete with guys that have had wonderful months, both as replacement players and bullpen guys. History is not replete with guys that have been unhittable for over a year. There always seems to be an excuse for this team NOT to spend money. Relief pitchers are fickle and injury prone. Guys are getting old and not worth the investment. I would like someone arguing against signing Markakis, Cruz, Miller, Kemp, etc. to tell me when IS a good time to spend money?

A year and half ago (243 games) Miller was on the DL, he missed the whole second half of the 2013 season. I guess you are right...can't get a hit off a guy on the DL.

Up until last season Miller's career was full of question marks. Maybe the contract turns out great for the Yankees, the first month has. But to think signing him to that kind of contract with his past history is a no brainer isn't even close to being accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was absolutely filthy tonight shutting down the Red Sox. Why he was almost as good as Boxberger was against the O's.

Edit: Boxberger makes $521,400.00. Miller makes $9,000,000.00. For those without a calculator, Boxberger makes a little less than 6% of Miller's salary.

So what is the takeaway?

A. Value exists in major league baseball for those who are willing to expend the effort to find it.

B. Peter Angelos is a selfish profiteer who cares nothing about the Orioles fan base, otherwise cost would be no object in such a clear-cut case of obviousness.

Yes this is a litmus test. So are you pink or blue?

Did you forget the part where Baltimore has to have a lead in the ninth, they need to tell Zach Britton he is not a lefty specialist, and your last two guys in the pen are lefties that are better against lefties which are maybe 22 percent of the batters they face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you forget the part where Baltimore has to have a lead in the ninth, they need to tell Zach Britton he is not a lefty specialist, and your last two guys in the pen are lefties that are better against lefties which are maybe 22 percent of the batters they face?

Miller was actually better against RHB last season.

Since they both transitioned to the bullpen they have shown an ability to get out both left and right handed batters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was actually better against RHB last season.

Since they both transitioned to the bullpen they have shown an ability to get out both left and right handed batters.

And yet the natural effect is that the would be better against the lefties. Unless they are far superior hitters. I'd take Miller or Britton against a lefty 10 times out of 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A year and half ago (243 games) Miller was on the DL, he missed the whole second half of the 2013 season. I guess you are right...can't get a hit off a guy on the DL.

Up until last season Miller's career was full of question marks. Maybe the contract turns out great for the Yankees, the first month has. But to think signing him to that kind of contract with his past history is a no brainer isn't even close to being accurate.

This. A lot of this. Miller was a question mark until 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller has been unhittable for about a year and a half. History is replete with guys that have had wonderful months, both as replacement players and bullpen guys. History is not replete with guys that have been unhittable for over a year. There always seems to be an excuse for this team NOT to spend money. Relief pitchers are fickle and injury prone. Guys are getting old and not worth the investment. I would like someone arguing against signing Markakis, Cruz, Miller, Kemp, etc. to tell me when IS a good time to spend money?

Almost no one is every unhittable for a year then is totally not worth a long term deal. Never. Ever, really.

It's not like Jose Mesa had 46 saves and an otherworldly 1.13 ERA in 1995, then followed it up with five years of a 4+ ERA. That never happened.

Tim Burke never went 7-0 with a 1.19 in 91 innings in '87, following that up with a replacement level season in '88.

BJ Ryan certainly didn't have a 1.37 one year and a 12.46 the next.

Armando Benitez may have had a 1.29 ERA with 47 saves in 2004, but no way did he have a 4.61 the rest of his career.

The Orioles stupidity goes back to '97-'98 when Randy Myers had a team record in saves and a 1.51 ERA, because he certainly didn't have a 4.92 ERA in '98 then retire.

Jim Kern might have pitched to a 1.57 in '79 in 143 innings with a ton of Ks, but it's a total lie that he had an almost 5.00 ERA in '80.

And there's no way Tug McGraw had 1+ ERA jumps following big years three separate times.

Bryan Harvey in no way had a 1.60 ERA followed up by an injury-shortened season, then a 1.70 followed up by, basically, retirement.

Ken Tatum never had a 1.36 ERA as a rookie for the Angels, followed up by run-and-a-half jumps each of the next two seasons.

None of that ever happened, you're right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • I've made it clear that if they don't sign Santa and Burnes I'm ok with it as long as the money is allocated to other players they feel that fits their profile better .You know you have people on here like SG who only hears what he wants to hear. I need to learn to ignore that guy. 
    • Oh mr know it all. Who most times is wrong. Lol
    • I also think Santander will age better than Trumbo, despite my repeated comparisons of the two players. But I don't know that he will age better than Trumbo and all of the other one dimensional sluggers who were enjoying the retired millionaire sports star lifestyle by their mid-30s, and I don't want the Orioles to be on the hook when the world finds out in 2 or 3 years. Re-signing Santander to a 4 year, $80 million dollar deal is something the DD/PA regime would have done. Hopefully the ME/DR regime is smarter than that (and I think they are). 22nd percentile is really bad, man. And it's unlikely to improve in his 30s.
    • Looks like Baseball Fandom was at the game today!
    • But that is not what you said. You said he’s a bad fielder, just not quite Trumbo-tier. Thus, you were stating he is close to as bad a fielder as Trumbo was, which is not correct. Generally speaking, no player makes up the loss of offensive value with defensive value as the age. It is usually one of the first things to go. I was not making any sort of argument that he was going to make up declining offense with defense, just pointing out that you made a preposterous statement.
    • At least relative to the rest of the league Santander has an interesting profile because he is comfortably above-average at making contact; his whiff rates are much better than Trumbo's so he's not really as much of a TTO player as you would think.  This gives him hope that he will age a little bit better than someone like Trumbo.  Though he's still got a good shot of being out of the league in 3 years.
    • It's not the money, it's the years.  I wouldn't mind signing him for a year or two, even at what I'd consider to be stupid money.  But what I DON'T agree with is signing him for any more than 2-3 years as I don't think he's going to age well.  And I expect him to get more than 3 years from someone, so I'm a hard pass.  Can we afford him?  Money wise, sure.  But I don't want to see us stuck with him 4-5 years down the road when his skillset has greatly diminished, but he's still playing every day because we owe him a lot of money and a lot of loyalty.  Let some other club take that risk, get the QO pick and move on.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...