ESPN and the O's Face of the Franchise

[theocean]

4 hours ago, esmd said:

LOL at the Marlins write-up:

Marlins' face: none

Nothing against him personally, but the guy known as "Mr. Marlin" is Jeff Conine, who had 16.7 WAR with the franchise. This is a faceless franchise because in every single instance the team has produced a star-level player, he's left via trade or free agency. (There's also the tragic case of Jose Fernandez.) Stanton is the team's all-time WAR leader, but we'll eventually remember him as a Yankee. Don't believe it? Well, which team do you associate Miguel Cabrera with? It's not the Marlins.

It begs the question - would you trade the Marlins success since 1993 (2 World Championships but no franchise pride) for the Orioles success since 1993 (Cal and 2131, 6 playoff trips, three ALCS appearances, but no Championships)?

Quite honestly, I'd rather have the O's since 1993. If you win the Series without any heart and soul attached to it - it doesn't mean as much. You can't take the heartbeat out of the game. 

[tntoriole]

1 minute ago, theocean said:

Quite honestly, I'd rather have the O's since 1993. If you win the Series without any heart and soul attached to it - it doesn't mean as much. You can't take the heartbeat out of the game. 

I have never seen such a terrible place to see a baseball game as Miami stadium.   Completely lifeless fans, electronic flashing advertisements, sullen ushers.. worse even than Tropicana.  

[OFFNY]

o 

 

This is the face of the franchise:

 

 

 

o

[TonySoprano]

This is the face of the Marlins.

[sportsfan8703]

31 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

This is the face of the Marlins.

This is the strategy that a lot of people want around here. How effective can it be if 5-10 other teams are doing it?  

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, sportsfan8703 said:

This is the strategy that a lot of people want around here. How effective can it be if 5-10 other teams are doing it?  

Ask the Cubs and the Astros.

For the record most of us were not in favor of a full rebuild until we reached the present point. 

Trading Britton after the 2016 season for instance is not advocating a full rebuild.

 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Ask the Cubs and the Astros.

For the record most of us were not in favor of a full rebuild until we reached the present point. 

Trading Britton after the 2016 season for instance is not advocating a full rebuild.

 

That would be selling high on a pitcher not likely to duplicate a once in a lifetime season.  Especially when so many teams needed closer help.  

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

That would be selling high on a pitcher not likely to duplicate a once in a lifetime season.  Especially when so many teams needed closer help.  

Yep and when you still had O'Day, Brach and Givens in the pen.

[DirtyBird]

7 hours ago, esmd said:

LOL at the Marlins write-up:

Marlins' face: none

Nothing against him personally, but the guy known as "Mr. Marlin" is Jeff Conine, who had 16.7 WAR with the franchise. This is a faceless franchise because in every single instance the team has produced a star-level player, he's left via trade or free agency. (There's also the tragic case of Jose Fernandez.) Stanton is the team's all-time WAR leader, but we'll eventually remember him as a Yankee. Don't believe it? Well, which team do you associate Miguel Cabrera with? It's not the Marlins.

It begs the question - would you trade the Marlins success since 1993 (2 World Championships but no franchise pride) for the Orioles success since 1993 (Cal and 2131, 6 playoff trips, three ALCS appearances, but no Championships)?

Dontrelle Willis, for sure

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, OFFNY said:

o 

 

This is the face of the franchise:

 

 

 

o

You know what?    That’s the best possible answer.  

[atomic]

I saw Brooks play but it was at the end of his career when he wasn't very good.   I would day you would have to be over 55 to see Brooks as face of franchise.   For me it was Palmer.   Now it is Adam Jones.   Never cared to much for Cal.  Never understood the point of the streak.  

[theobird]

It will always be Brooks for me. Takes nothing away from Palmer, Eddie, Cal or Frank. I also loved all of those guys. But I am a certified old guy, and was brought up by my old school Dad who was all about defense first. Dad always said, i"f you can't play defense then you can't play."

[El Gordo]

8 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

I think nationally, it is Cal.

To O's fans, it is Brooks.

Just my opinion, obviously both are great choices.  But Brooksie is a one in a million person along with being a one in a million player.  Not that Cal's not a good guy, he's just - different.

Yep Brooks.

[esmd]

I mentioned Eddie Murray in my initial post, and out of curiousity, decided to check his stats.  Eddie had a career total of 68.3 WAR, well short of Cal's 95.5.  I was actually shocked at how big the difference was.  Also, Eddie only played roughly half of his career here, his WAR as an Oriole was 56.1 plus whatever portion of the 1996 season he would get as an Oriole (.2 total, so be generous and give him .1).  I was surprised that other than the 1990 and 1995 seasons, he really wasn't that effective as a player, at least in terms of WAR.  Makes the trade look a little less awful.

[atomic]

5 minutes ago, esmd said:

I mentioned Eddie Murray in my initial post, and out of curiousity, decided to check his stats.  Eddie had a career total of 68.3 WAR, well short of Cal's 95.5.  I was actually shocked at how big the difference was.  Also, Eddie only played roughly half of his career here, his WAR as an Oriole was 56.1 plus whatever portion of the 1996 season he would get as an Oriole (.2 total, so be generous and give him .1).  I was surprised that other than the 1990 and 1995 seasons, he really wasn't that effective as a player, at least in terms of WAR.  Makes the trade look a little less awful.

Easier to get high WAR at shortstop than at first base. Especially in those days when most shortstops were light hitting.