Jump to content

Darren O'Day Expects A Happy, Healthy 2017


PressBoxOnline

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

He was pretty average last year.

His WAR was only .6 for last season, but he was also hurt and spent time on the DL and only got into half of his normal average.

Not sure, a 3.77 ERA, with 3 saves for a setup man is average.

He has only two sub 2.0 WAR years, racking up 4 straight with the Birds.

I suspect he gets some innings under his belt and his strength back. he will be just fine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

His WAR was only .6 for last season, but he was also hurt and spent time on the DL and only got into half of his normal average.

Not sure, a 3.77 ERA, with 3 saves for a setup man is average.

He has only two sub 2.0 WAR years, racking up 4 straight with the Birds.

I suspect he gets some innings under his belt and his strength back. he will be just fine.

 

I was also looking at ERA+ and FIP.

And injuries are part of the reason I don't like signing players over 30 to long term deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, webbrick2010 said:

Eventually dedicating so much payroll to non-performing/under-performing veterans past their prime will bury this team below .500

I have bee amazed that Buck has somehow won with the few younger performing players that we have

It is the eventually part that Dan is banking on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I don't want to make too many excuses for O'Day's performance yesterday, but look at this pitch f/x chart of Holliday's leadoff walk.   The ump really gave him nothing to work with yesterday:

&batterX=73&innings=yyyyyyyyy&sp_type=1&s_type=3&league=mlb&pnf=&zlpo=&cache=1

I thought so to when I was watching on replay and you could see that he was frustrated after consistently hitting the same spot and still not getting the call.  I thought his performance wasn't anything special, but a lot better than some here are giving him credit for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I was also looking at ERA+ and FIP.

And injuries are part of the reason I don't like signing players over 30 to long term deals.

I dont think O'Day has shown himself to be injury prone, I think its very likely he will bounce back and earn his money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/10/2017 at 2:16 PM, Can_of_corn said:

Yes the deal Markakis signed with the O's.

I was not in favor of the deal Markakis didn't sign with the O's.

In retrospect it looks like the O's made a mistake letting Markakis go.  He's been solid with the Braves and is blazing so far this season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CheeryO said:

In retrospect it looks like the O's made a mistake letting Markakis go.  He's been solid with the Braves and is blazing so far this season.  

I wouldn't have signed Cruz either.

Sometimes you get them wrong.  You go in with a good process and hope for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I wouldn't have signed Cruz either.

Sometimes you get them wrong.  You go in with a good process and hope for the best.

Also, unless you're the Yankees or the Dodgers you can only pay so many players an 8 figure salary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, CheeryO said:

In retrospect it looks like the O's made a mistake letting Markakis go.  He's been solid with the Braves and is blazing so far this season.  

It wasn't even in retrospect. I thought it was stupid to let him go. Granted, having Smith feels like having Markakis, but he's not the same. Would love to somehow get him back from Atlanta if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...