Jump to content

Gallardo - Roch: deal is DONE (signed)

weams

By weams
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 873
  • Created
  • Last Reply
murph Hangout Grand Counsel

murph

Posted
Posted
Being all in, doesn't mean signing damaged goods. Good chance it gets done and the O's are being super cautious. But it's not done and there's a chance it won't get done.

Next red flag is if you hear about the Orioles wanting to restructure the contract.

Really "all-in" would have been Heyward and Price, right? This going to be interesting to see how it plays out. Hearing that the shoulder might be an issue sorta sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
25 Nuggets Hangout Grand Counsel

25 Nuggets

Posted
Posted
Really "all-in" would have been Heyward and Price, right?

...or at least Cespedes or Upton when they were available, on top of Davis. I mean I like Fowler, but he's not those two.

Fowler (and theoretically Gallardo) are being signed to second tier.... no, perhaps even third tier contracts. Which is nice btw. It's an interesting narrative that begins with Wieters' surprise signing of his QO, leading to the Trumbo trade for the third string catcher. That's 50 HR right there that cost us Steve Clevenger and a possible one-year delay of a draft pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SilentJames Hangout Veteran Council

SilentJames

Posted
Posted

At the end of the day The Orioles docs, for better or worse, have been right more then they have been wrong in this regard.

The fact we haven't seen some massive proclamation and denial from Gallardo's camp (a'la Balfour) tells me that he doesn't necessarily doubt whatever it is came up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted

My real concern with Gallardo has always been his declining peripherals and - if not an actual injury - extensive wear and tear being the cause.

You sort of can't ignore the 4-year malevolent trends in velocity, K/9, K/BB, WHIP.

The one thing that stands out to me from last year's stats is the .360 BABIP on a pitch that Fangraphs identifies as 'FA'. I don't know what pitch that is - it's not in their glossary. I assume that it's a FB of some kind. He threw it 8.7% of his pitches last year and got hammered on it. The LD% off of that pitch was 31.8%.

All of that is either good news or bad news. If he's healthy and there's some tweak to make to that one pitch he could reverse some of these negative trends. OTOH, that pitch might be the canary in the coal mine w.r.t. chronic wear and tear or an injury.

Fingers crossed that the medicals steer us correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scOtt Hangout Grand Counsel

scOtt

Posted
Posted
I interpreted it as the physical.

I think there may be some truth to the theory that they wanted to hold on Gallardo's physical to make sure they also had Fowler in the fold.

That maybe the concerns over the shoulder were enough to make them hesitant to give up pick 14, but willing to roll the dice for pick 28.

:scratchchinhmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CaptainRedbeard All-Star

CaptainRedbeard

Posted
Posted
My real concern with Gallardo has always been his declining peripherals and - if not an actual injury - extensive wear and tear being the cause.

You sort of can't ignore the 4-year malevolent trends in velocity, K/9, K/BB, WHIP.

The one thing that stands out to me from last year's stats is the .360 BABIP on a pitch that Fangraphs identifies as 'FA'. I don't know what pitch that is - it's not in their glossary. I assume that it's a FB of some kind. He threw it 8.7% of his pitches last year and got hammered on it. The LD% off of that pitch was 31.8%.

All of that is either good news or bad news. If he's healthy and there's some tweak to make to that one pitch he could reverse some of these negative trends. OTOH, that pitch might be the canary in the coal mine w.r.t. chronic wear and tear or an injury.

Fingers crossed that the medicals steer us correctly.

FA is 4-seam fastballs, FT two-seamers, SI sinkers, FC cutters. Keep in mind that isolated numbers on fastballs are usually bad - they have high contact rates. Pitchers only throw them so frequently in order to throw strikes.

That said, Gallardo's 4-seamer has lost velocity, so it'd be no surprise if it's a very underwhelming pitch now. I believe that he's moved more toward throwing two seamers, similar to what Ubaldo has done as he aged and lost velocity on the four seamer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scOtt Hangout Grand Counsel

scOtt

Posted
Posted
My real concern with Gallardo has always been his declining peripherals and - if not an actual injury - extensive wear and tear being the cause.

You sort of can't ignore the 4-year malevolent trends in velocity, K/9, K/BB, WHIP.

The one thing that stands out to me from last year's stats is the .360 BABIP on a pitch that Fangraphs identifies as 'FA'. I don't know what pitch that is - it's not in their glossary. I assume that it's a FB of some kind. He threw it 8.7% of his pitches last year and got hammered on it. The LD% off of that pitch was 31.8%.

All of that is either good news or bad news. If he's healthy and there's some tweak to make to that one pitch he could reverse some of these negative trends. OTOH, that pitch might be the canary in the coal mine w.r.t. chronic wear and tear or an injury.

Fingers crossed that the medicals steer us correctly.

It's what I do.

[video=youtube;Ozeuu0PaOxg]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BohKnowsBmore Hangout Grand Counsel

BohKnowsBmore

Posted
Posted
Really "all-in" would have been Heyward and Price, right? This going to be interesting to see how it plays out. Hearing that the shoulder might be an issue sorta sucks.
...or at least Cespedes or Upton when they were available, on top of Davis. I mean I like Fowler, but he's not those two.

Fowler (and theoretically Gallardo) are being signed to second tier.... no, perhaps even third tier contracts. Which is nice btw. It's an interesting narrative that begins with Wieters' surprise signing of his QO, leading to the Trumbo trade for the third string catcher. That's 50 HR right there that cost us Steve Clevenger and a possible one-year delay of a draft pick.

Well, to be fair, I'm not sure we're doing a true "all in" strategy. Supposedly our window closed last year. Now it's open til 2018. That said, we don't really have any contracts that would cause us to blow it up at that point. I mean, if we stink we have a lot of guys we can sell in the 2018 pre-season/2018 deadline range, but beyond that we have what? Davis. This team could easily re-tool. We still have Bundy, Harvey and Gausman under control for that timeline and promising guys like Cisco and Reyes. I understand why the FO wouldn't quite say eff it let's crush the payroll for the next 8 years and concede every possible draft pick/prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BohKnowsBmore Hangout Grand Counsel

BohKnowsBmore

Posted
Posted
Those guys were overpaid (like Davis probably). The Orioles spent 200+ million this winter, more than any other club. Can't complain.

Which guys? Hard to say that about Fowler. Last three seasons: 2.0, 1.8, 2.2 rWAR and 2.2, 1.4 and 3.1 fWAR. At $7MM per win, that's easily $15MM per. Good chance he'll be worth more based on defense moving to COF (considering his offensive profile plays there still).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazysilver03 Hangout Grand Counsel

Crazysilver03

Posted
Posted
Those guys were overpaid (like Davis probably). The Orioles spent 200+ million this winter, more than any other club. Can't complain.

Pretty sure the Cubs spent more than the O's but it is crazy to think that the O's are mentioned in the same sentence as "spent the most"

Edit : wow the O's did out spend every club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • sportsfan8703
      Os vs KC in WC round

      By sportsfan8703 · Posted

      We played all our Saturday games at home at 4pm. That should help us.  I don’t know if that was the full reason we made the switch this year, but it had to factor in. We didn’t do so well in the day games last year in the playoffs.  Also, don’t be surprised to see McCann get a big hit in game 1 and possibly just start this entire series versus the speedster Royals.  Let’s go. We owe these “guys” big time paybacks even if it’s 10 years later. 
    • Jagwar
      Os vs KC in WC round

      By Jagwar · Posted

      They also smacked him around for 7 ER on 9 H in 1.2 innings. He can be beaten, though he certainly had a great September.  
    • Jagwar
      Looks like the Detroit Tigers (Update: O's play KC in 1st round of playoffs)

      By Jagwar · Posted

      I understand why posters would want to avoid Skubal in a game 1, but the Royals starters are not going to be a cakewalk. Probably a deeper starting staff with Ragans, Lugo and Wacha.
    • Roll Tide
      Orioles made it through rough terrain…by Roch

      By Roll Tide · Posted

      Interesting article …. Pretty surprising stat with all the guys that we lost to injury       https://www.masnsports.com/blog/orioles-made-it-through-rough-t
    • Brian88
      2024 Week 4: Ravens vs Bills on SNF

      By Brian88 · Posted

      The same thing was happening was MacDonald was the DC and when Wink was the DC, that makes me put most of the blame on Harbaugh 
    • Hallas
      Can Cowser still win Rookie of The Year over Gil/Wells ?

      By Hallas · Posted

      dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • e16bball
      Can Cowser still win Rookie of The Year over Gil/Wells ?

      By e16bball · Posted

      Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...