Trumbo an Oriole (For Clevenger Done Deal)

[Bahama O's Fan]

I don't think we are going to see Davis back. I think Trumbo goes to first, Matt DH's a lot and we bring in an OF and SP.

[weams]

Please.

DD could simply have a willing media member ask this......How would you utilize Caleb Joseph if MW accepts your QO,

Dan could have answered it by specifically talking about Caleb and how the O's have faith in him if MW leaves and he is the starter. He could have then gone on to talk about how it was important to the organization that their catcher of the future get some playing time regardless of if MW took the QO or not. He could have added at this point there is ways they would be able to creatively use both and mention the fact MW played some DH and 1B.

Nothing in here could be remotely interpreted as breaking the rules. What are GM's not allow to even say the players name or how they would use other players? That is ridiculous. There are ways to get that message out there without coming out and sending an email with it in black an white.

What willing media member?

[weams]

Please.

DD could simply have a willing media member ask this......How would you utilize Caleb Joseph if MW accepts your QO,

Dan could have answered it by specifically talking about Caleb and how the O's have faith in him if MW leaves and he is the starter. He could have then gone on to talk about how it was important to the organization that their catcher of the future get some playing time regardless of if MW took the QO or not. He could have added at this point there is ways they would be able to creatively use both and mention the fact MW played some DH and 1B.

Nothing in here could be remotely interpreted as breaking the rules. What are GM's not allow to even say the players name or how they would use other players? That is ridiculous. There are ways to get that message out there without coming out and sending an email with it in black an white.

I see your point, but Qualifying Offered Players are a unique subset of union employees. I am not aware of what the rules might be regarding talking about their usage if they accept. I assume that the mlb has a posture on this.

[weams]

Please.

DD could simply have a willing media member ask this......How would you utilize Caleb Joseph if MW accepts your QO,

Dan could have answered it by specifically talking about Caleb and how the O's have faith in him if MW leaves and he is the starter. He could have then gone on to talk about how it was important to the organization that their catcher of the future get some playing time regardless of if MW took the QO or not. He could have added at this point there is ways they would be able to creatively use both and mention the fact MW played some DH and 1B.

Nothing in here could be remotely interpreted as breaking the rules. What are GM's not allow to even say the players name or how they would use other players? That is ridiculous. There are ways to get that message out there without coming out and sending an email with it in black an white.

My belief is that you are allowed to say, "We offered a contract, we hope he accepts. We will obviously have roster decisions to make if he does."

[DrungoHazewood]

I see your point, but Qualifying Offered Players are a unique subset of union employees. I am not aware of what the rules might be regarding talking about their usage if they accept. I assume that the mlb has a posture on this.

Nobody had to say anything. If we know it, they know it. Wieters will be sharing his primary position with a pretty good player, and as a 1B/DH he's not very good. Boras and Wieters were fully aware of this and still, apparently, think he'll be much more valuable a year later.

[SteveO]

You keep quoting rWAR, but you know that by fWAR Wieters was worth more in 2013 than Joseph's career. The difference, I believe, comes down to bb-ref incorporating some framing data that's frankly unbelievable, well over a win of negative value. By fWAR Wieters is more valuable per game than Joseph over the last two seasons.

This is not specifically directed at you DrungoHazewood. Your observation is certainly valid and one I had not considered tbh. Just an observation that includes myself.

I love how we quote stats and values when they suit our purposes and have no issue with them (myself included)when they work in our favor but when those stats tells us something we do not like, we tend to find reasons why they are not valid. Again just an observation because thinking about it though, you have an excellent point if Bbref is putting that much value in pitch framing.

[Mayor McCheese]

Caleb is our catcher of the future?

Even if Matt left, didn't DD mention they would be looking at upgrading the catcher position?

[SteveO]

Nobody had to say anything. If we know it, they know it. Wieters will be sharing his primary position with a pretty good player, and as a 1B/DH he's not very good. Boras and Wieters were fully aware of this and still, apparently, think he'll be much more valuable a year later.

In reality though. If MW catches say even just 80-90 games and gets in more games at DH and 1B then really any team looking at him is gonna look at his overall offensive numbers and value them at the level they have for the position he will play for them (catcher).

So long as MW plays good defense, can play multiple games in a row without issues, then where his numbers come from really has little bearing on a team that would consider signing him next year as they would know he would be getting those AB as a catcher for them.

[weams]

Nobody had to say anything. If we know it, they know it. Wieters will be sharing his primary position with a pretty good player, and as a 1B/DH he's not very good. Boras and Wieters were fully aware of this and still, apparently, think he'll be much more valuable a year later.

Evidently. I would not have bet on that outcome. Not at all. I thought it had no chance.

[weams]

Caleb is our catcher of the future?

Even if Matt left, didn't DD mention they would be looking at upgrading the catcher position?

Yes. He did.

[SteveO]

Caleb is our catcher of the future?

Even if Matt left, didn't DD mention they would be looking at upgrading the catcher position?

I understood DD to be talking about getting a better guy to split time with CJ

I doubt though he has 15.8 million penciled in his budget for that.

Matt is a very good player, he just is not as valuable to this team as the money he is earning IMO because we have a guy who can do the job quite competently at a mere fraction of the price.

If our SP was set and the OF was set and 1B was set and MW had taken the QO, I would be right there with everyone thinking it's great. After all its not my money. Its the fact that none of those positions are settle and we lost that much of budget that concerns me and will have some impact on this teams ability to sign guys of consequence for those positions that concerns me.

[SteveO]

Yes. He did.

Ok show me where DD says he is gonna upgrade the C position without using the words veteran back up, veteran platoon as the context. Show me anything that DD said that would indicate he was uncomfortable with CJ as a starter?

Saying he wanted to upgrade is like saying he had no intention of starting CJ and that notion is ridiculous. The O's were absolutely and rightfully going to start CJ with a veteran guy (who cost a hell of a lot less than 15 million) as the back up.

[weams]

I understood DD to be talking about getting a better guy to split time with CJ

I doubt though he has 15.8 million penciled in his budget for that.

I'm certain that he did not. And I am not certain that Steve Clevenger ever had a secure place on the team.

[mdbdotcom]

I'm certain that he did not. And I am not certain that Steve Clevenger ever had a secure place on the team.

That rumor about Salty signing with the O's as soon as MW turns down the QO seems like it was ages ago.

[Stotle]

I agree here. Little to argue with IMO.

I think its ok though to say, yes we should have offered but to also feel like it is a disaster that he accepted. We gambled and lost. It happens, we can say it was a bad thing without necessarily having to find a scapegoat or having to convince ourselves that it is somehow a good thing he took the QO. Just my opinion.

Maybe its just me, it feels like there is an awful lot of people trying to convince themselves that this is a good thing, simply cause like us, they believed it was the right thing to do given the circumstances. It is possible to make a right choice and have it end poorly, happens in real life all the time and baseball is no exception.

The only way I would blast DD if he had indications that MW would accept and still choose to offer. Other than that, it was the right choice with an unfortunate outcome.

I think you can call it a bad thing or unfortunate thing that Wieters accepted. But one can't make the statement that the QO was the right move but accepting it ruins Baltimore's chances in 2016.

Drungo's analysis is generally the right thinking, in my opinion, but "losing" can't mean Baltimore is prevented from competing. If that's the case then the QO is the wrong move, even if Wieters would likely turn it down, because you can't risk an entire season on a dice roll.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk