Jump to content

Pedro back. (Will he opt out?)


oriolesacox

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, wildcard said:

The O's can't platoon at LF, RF and DH while keeping a UIF and BC.   There are not enough spots on the 25 man roster.  If Trumbo hits lefties the way he has in his career he is a lot more valuable to the O's than Pedro.

How is that relevant to my assertion that the O's overpaid for Trumbo?

Given how we have seen the market unfold you don't think 2/22 with an option gets it done?  Maybe even less?

Not as if another team was bidding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 385
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

This is one of those concepts where your Bayesian prior has to be "he's a gonna be terrible".  Seriously, we know it's stretching credibility to think a guy who wasn't good enough to really play third, and didn't impress anyone at first, is going to be anything but a poor outfielder.  He's slow, and he's never played a professional inning in the outfield.  We know he's not even stood in an kind of a game since at least 2008.  Just knowing that I'd pencil him in as a -15 outfielder and then kind of adjust from there with observations and data.

I'm actually going with the idea that the O's are running a kind science experiment to determine the outer limits of modern defensive metrics and tracking systems.  Kind of a baseline of data, what does happen when you put someone fully unqualified to be a major league outfielder in the outfield.  Similar to observing pitchers hitting.  The next iteration will be one involving no second baseman but four outfielders.  All in the name of science.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird to see so many people on this board who "don't get it" or think it's a bad deal. It literally has zero impact on anything; Mancini and Sisco are the only position players who need reps and they have C and 1B/DH on lockdown. There aren't any prospects being blocked in the outfield and if there were they'd play at Bowie anyway. Alvarez is simply going to get outfield reps and if he's any good at it and the O's need a bat in the event they lose Trumbo or Kim or Smith, they have a guy who can DH or maybe play the outfield in a pinch. Or they don't bring him up and bring someone else up; either way, it means diddly squat. It's a minor league deal. I swear people on this board just beg to be up in arms about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Enjoy Terror said:

Weird to see so many people on this board who "don't get it" or think it's a bad deal. It literally has zero impact on anything; Mancini and Sisco are the only position players who need reps and they have C and 1B/DH on lockdown. There aren't any prospects being blocked in the outfield and if there were they'd play at Bowie anyway. Alvarez is simply going to get outfield reps and if he's any good at it and the O's need a bat in the event they lose Trumbo or Kim or Smith, they have a guy who can DH or maybe play the outfield in a pinch. Or they don't bring him up and bring someone else up; either way, it means diddly squat. I swear people on this board just beg to be  up in arms about anything.

Who thinks it's a bad deal?

Main thing I am seeing is pessimism he can make the switch to corner outfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jabba72 said:

 

I think Tavaraz and Santander deserve a shot. They both unquestionably have more range than Trumbo, Kim and now Alvarez in the OF.  Now it seems like a sure thing they wont be in Baltimore. 

They will both be dl'd. Alvarez will make this club. I don't think he would have signed if he wasn't told that. I could be wrong. I love the guy personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, El Gordo said:

The point is Buck's judgment and experience is superior to yours. If he feels Rickard is one of our better defenders then he is right and you are wrong.

You realize how silly this comment is, right? By that logic we can never question any of Buck's decisions. I guess we should be praising him for not bringing Britton into the wild card game -- Buck has more experience than us, so clearly he was right and we were wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, PaulFolk said:

You realize how silly this comment is, right? By that logic we can never question any of Buck's decisions. I guess we should be praising him for not bringing Britton into the wild card game -- Buck has more experience than us, so clearly he was right and we were wrong.

You can question any decision you want, but your opinion lacks validity over his, when it comes to evaluating a player's skill levels. It's like some amateur chef criticising Paul Bucose's recipe for bouillabaisse. I see a difference in questioning an in game decision like not bringing in Britton, and questioning his evaluation of a players ability. He sees that player every day for 6 months on and off the field and he has access to proprietary numbers and advice from other experts. I'll take his judgment any day over some fan's eye test, based on far less experience and information. Never confuse a right to your opinion with an entitlement to foolishness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Cowser had a 4.0 fWAR in 2024. You ready to lock him up for 7-8 years or longer?
    • I think he already had and it was Bradish.  Midling prospect who turns out to have #1 level stuff.  Injuries are a bitch.
    • Cell service restored, power back on, not a single shingle missing from the roof. 
    • They need players who are better than some they have
    • Probably neither - it may be more a function of lining up with players.  The Astros extensions aren’t really comparable. The first Altuve extension was ridiculously team friendly. Altuve had less than $1MM in career earnings ($15K signing bonus as amateur). He had a good 2012, making the all-star team. However, he struggled in the first half of 2013 with an OPS in the six hundreds.  He fired Boras in May, presumably because he wanted to sign an extension that Boras would have been vehemently opposed to.  The deal announced in July bought out his four remaining years of team control for $12.5MM and gave the Astros control over what would have been his first two FA years via club options that totaled $25MM. The second Altuve extension occurred after he rehired Boras and was basically about buying out his grossly undervalued club option years.  It was needed to reverse the mistake of the first extension. The Bregman extension was reached in ARB-3 negotiations. Neither of these situations are at all comparable to a potential Gunnar extension this offseason. First of all, Boras had NEVER extended a pre-arb player with seven figures in career earnings (Carlos Gonzalez was below that threshold).  He is philosophically opposed to it. Second, there are two potential comps that would starting points for a deal: Tatis Jr and Witt Jr.  Boras would reject either of those deals; he would want to do better given his distaste for pre-arb extensions, his strong preference for “record-breaking” deals, and the fact the Gunnar has more career WAR (at least fWAR) than either of those players when they signed their extensions.  When teams are successful in getting a lot of early extensions done, it’s often a case of having a lot of players amenable to an extension. That generally covers attributes such as not signing a large draft or IFA bonus (i.e., relatively “poor” players), players with geographic ties to the team (big part of Atlanta’s success), not having Boras as their agent, and being more risk-adverse from a financial perspective.  The team’s risk tolerance also plays a role as you can get burned if they turn into Grady Sizemore.
    • I think the main reason they’re not big contributors for the Tigers right now is that they were all jettisoned from the team right around the time the Tigers got good. Canha was traded to SFG at the deadline, Urshela was DFA’d on August 15, and Baez shuffled off to season-ending hip surgery on August 22. They were 62-66 when Baez was shut down — they’re 28-11 since.
    • Their rebuild has not been better but their players don't melt under pressure.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...