NEED one of the Big Three Pitchers Left

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

If you are drawing a distinction between what someone who works for the oddsmakers actually thinks and what the oddsmakers think will balance the wagers (and leave room for the house to take its cut), then fine.    Otherwise, please explain.  

If it’s the former: to me, that still means the public thinks our odds are much better than most posters here (including me) seem to think. And by and large, the public aren’t Orioles fans.

Of course that is what I mean.

I know the fans aren't generally Oriole fans, but what they generally are is not very informed.  Most bets are on the small side and I am betting not heavily researched.

[sportsfan8703]

Boston and New York are such heavily net public teams that it means that Vegas probably thinks are chances to win the division are more like 10-1. 

It’s like how every year the cowboys are one of the top teams to win the SB no matter what. 

[weams]

Or this dude. 

 

[Bahama O's Fan]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Or this dude. 

 

Realistically if you were the Rays what would it take to get him?

[weams]

Harvey and Mountcastle. 

[backwardsk]

4 hours ago, weams said:

Harvey and Mountcastle. 

Swap Harvey for Mancini and I'd be interested.

[clapdiddy]

11 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

Swap Harvey for Mancini and I'd be interested.

I doubt they would be, though.

[Number5]

7 hours ago, Frobby said:

 

Vegas actually thinks our chances are better: 12-1 to win the division and 40-1 to win the AL pennant.   http://www.masnsports.com/steve-melewski/2018/02/the-latest-odds-and-cortes-with-a-nice-debut.html

Vegas odds-makers don't really care about the Orioles chances of winning the division or pennant, per se.  They think the betting will break nicely at 12-1 and 40-1 to  provide them with a nice profit at low risk.  Vegas odds are about profiting on both sides of the betting, not predicting the actual sports results.  They generally tend to be close to what they think will actually happen, but not exactly, and not always.  Vegas loved the Cubs, for example, for decades because they were massively over-bet by the public, meaning they would still receive the action on the Cubs even though the real chances of the Cubs winning were much less than the odds dictated.  I'm not sure if it is still the case, but the 49ers in football used to always be over-bet, as well.

 

*Edit - Sorry, I see this has been already discussed.  I didn't read the whole thread before replying. 

[backwardsk]

22 minutes ago, clapdiddy said:

I doubt they would be, though.

Maybe not.  Though if someone said they were going to give Odorizzi and Dickerson away like they did I wouldn't have believed it.

[now]

13 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Of course that is what I mean.

I know the fans aren't generally Oriole fans, but what they generally are is not very informed.  Most bets are on the small side and I am betting not heavily researched.

Speaking of "uninformed," I'm reminded of the RedSox announcer today saying the Orioles didn't have good pitchers, or words to that effect. Certainly that was conventional wisdom, as of two weeks ago (if you don't count the bullpen); but our rotation has improved to the respectable range with Cashner and a (hopefully) healthy Tillman. That would make four decent starters, meaning we only lack established depth. 

[OFFNY]

o

 

3 of the 5 examples that Fagan alludes to occurred during the collusion era (Tim Raines, Rich Gedman, and Doyle Alexander), but I still found the article interesting.

 

Could Jake Arrieta and/or Mike Moustakas Join These Post-Opening Day Signees?

(By Ryan Fagan)

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/mlb-free-agent-hot-stove-offseason-jake-arrieta-mike-moustakas-roger-clemens-tim-raines-smoltz/xrvluohm4zli10b8hs8o0xq1f

 

o

[OsFan1987]

9 hours ago, Number5 said:

Vegas odds-makers don't really care about the Orioles chances of winning the division or pennant, per se.  They think the betting will break nicely at 12-1 and 40-1 to  provide them with a nice profit at low risk.  Vegas odds are about profiting on both sides of the betting, not predicting the actual sports results.  They generally tend to be close to what they think will actually happen, but not exactly, and not always.  Vegas loved the Cubs, for example, for decades because they were massively over-bet by the public, meaning they would still receive the action on the Cubs even though the real chances of the Cubs winning were much less than the odds dictated.  I'm not sure if it is still the case, but the 49ers in football used to always be over-bet, as well.

 

*Edit - Sorry, I see this has been already discussed.  I didn't read the whole thread before replying. 

While this is kind of true its not quite that simple. First of all your run of the mill sportsbettor doesnt move lines. Pro sports bettors do ( you see it all the time in football, it called reverse line movement 70% of the money on one side but moves a different way thats because the odds makers, know where the money is coming from. The joes are the 'bad side' and the pros are on the sharp side). Therefor towards the end of the spring training the line listed by these sites will be very close to what the Pros and what the oddsmakers think the true lines will be.  And the big thing is-- the myth that Vegas/Oddsmakers want even money... Thats true if they aren't sure.. But if they are sure of something they will stick there neck out there and hang a line that causes them to have a lot of risk. AKA the Mcgregor/Mayweather fight. The Vegas casinos would have literally lost billions had Mcgregor won, but that didn't bother them b/c they thought Mayweather was a much much bigger favorite than the public did. 

[sportsfan8703]

I think we need another SP. Castro is already banged up. I don’t dislike Wright, he could be a really good MR. He should be nowhere near the rotation. Cortes should be in the TJ Macfarlamd rule 5 role at best. TJ had to earn it. So does Nestor. Mesa is a huge stretch. Ynoa, Asher, Aquino, are all best used for spot starts. 

Cobb and Lynn are still out there. The rumor is that Cobb turned down 3/42 from the Cubs earlier this offseason. I’d throw that deal out to both of them. This offseason has worked out pretty well for bargain shopper DD. Make it happen. 

This team is built for a one year window and then see what happens. You don’t invest the money that we already have just to go into the season with question marks for a guaranteed 35 starts. We’d probably go 10-25 with the current #5 options in those games. That’s killer. 

[Os84]

Quote

The Orioles aren’t done attempting to upgrade their roster, with a source confirming yesterday that they remain in contact with the agents for pitchers Alex Cobb, Lance Lynn and Jake Arrieta. They’re not sitting back and saying they have no interest.

Stay within striking distance. That’s been the mindset.

The club moved on from the trio and intensified its pursuit of Cashner and left-hander Jason Vargas after early indications that the years and money wouldn’t work. However, three of the top four starters on the market - minus Yu Darvish - remain unsigned and the Orioles are monitoring it.

There’s a sense within the industry that all three pitchers are coming down from their initial contractual goals, though one person told me yesterday that Arrieta’s is “still high.” And while the ideal scenario for the Orioles is a deal below three years, they aren’t refusing to guarantee that amount, according to a source.

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/02/orioles-remain-open-to-signing-a-starting-pitcher.html

[now]

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

We’d probably go 10-25 with the current #5 options in those games. That’s killer. 

Remember most teams are scrapping for decent starts from #5. Not a given ours are much worse (tho they were last year).