OK, time to grade the offseason moves

[DrungoHazewood]

16 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I gave it a B, but would really have said its on the cusp of B-/C+.

To begin with, I would have given the offseason an F before we acquired Cobb.    We simply hadn't done enough to address the pitching.   I said all along that if Cashner was our biggest pitching acquisition of the offseason, it would be a waste of money because we weren't going to compete.

Now, I do feel we have a decent shot at the playoffs -- maybe only the 2nd wild card, but I'd gladly take that right now and then hope to go on a run in the playoffs.

Maybe more importantly, at least for right now I feel like we will be pretty competitive on a nightly basis.   Last year there were so many games where we were behind multiple runs in the first few innings.     I feel like this year I'll be watching a lot more games where we have a reasonable chance to win.

I'm still very ambivalent about the decision not to trade Manny and others, and of course I have no idea what was offered.    But, at the same time, I'm looking forward to watching Manny in 2018.

In any event, I'm ready for an interesting season.

I concur with the most part, but then I start thinking that Alex Cobb can't be the difference between an F and a B.  I get that there's a pretty large difference between whomever the 5th starter was going to be and Cobb.  But an F means fail.  Like, the team went significantly backwards in the offseason.  They got a bit better without Cobb, but what does that mean in the context of a 75-win team?  What does a single starting pitcher mean to a team that's likely 20+ wins behind the Yanks?

Darn you, making me think this through.

[SteveA]

Just now, oriole said:

I give it a B. Tillman should be on a minor league deal. If the reported trade offer from the Cubs (Montgomery, Russell, Almora) for Manny was legit then that definitely should have been done. I don't like the Cashner signing.

Heres what I do like...Cobb is a fantastic signing. I'm actually liking the Rasmus signing too. I think the rule 5 picks were an interesting route. I especially like it considering some of the veteran role players were willing to sign minor league deals and that gave a lot of flexibility. Even though one of my knocks was not trading Manny...I'm only human and can feel two ways about one thing. I'm happy we get to watch him play for one more year. 

 

Id have rather seen Cobb, Chatwood, Dickey as FA additions. I think Cashner will be Gallardo 2.0 and Tillman should have been on a minor league deal after last year. Overall I am pleased though.

I agree, the Rasmus signing could be a really good one.   If he is committed to playing, he is the perfect player for our need (outfielder who can play defense and bats LH).

[DrungoHazewood]

Just now, oriole said:

I think Cashner will be Gallardo 2.0.

At least Cashner's strikeout rate freefall was plausibly because of a conscious decision, as opposed to a shoulder held together with construction cement and a C clamp.

[Number5]

1 minute ago, spiritof66 said:

I gave the off-season a B. I wonder whether those who graded  it an A were overreacting to things looking a lot better than they did five weeks ago (before the Cashner signing) or two days ago.

I don't know where this team is going in 2018 -- and that's a good thing . But I also have no clue where it's headed after 2018 -- and that's not such a good thing. 

No, they consider an "A" grade to mean excellent and within the realm of realistically possible.  Some folks don't need for both the cure for cancer to be found and the end of world hunger before an A grade is earned.  But that's just the way I see it. 

[SteveA]

4 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I concur with the most part, but then I start thinking that Alex Cobb can't be the difference between an F and a B.  I get that there's a pretty large difference between whomever the 5th starter was going to be and Cobb.  But an F means fail.  Like, the team went significantly backwards in the offseason.  They got a bit better without Cobb, but what does that mean in the context of a 75-win team?  What does a single starting pitcher mean to a team that's likely 20+ wins behind the Yanks?

Darn you, making me think this through.

I think a factor in the rise in optimism is not just the Cobb deal.   Watching some of our young hitters this spring -- Santander, Sisco, Mullins, Mountcastle -- has been very enjoyable.   More than anything else it has gotten me off the ledge in terms of thinking that 2018 is the last year we could realistically compete for a while.   Now we add a good pitcher on a 3 year deal, we expect Harvey to be part of the 2019 rotation, and we are looking at Bundy/Gausman/Cobb/Harvey in 2019-20, with a bunch of good young bats coming up to take some of the sting out of losing Manny.   2019 and beyond is no longer an unfathomable abyss... and the Cobb deal coming on the heels of a good spring by a bunch of young position players and Harvey, play a big part in making that seem possible.   There could be Life After Manny.

[Moose Milligan]

46 minutes ago, theocean said:

What is going all in to you specifically?

That's the thing, they really can't because the payroll is already high enough, littered with bad contracts that would prohibit them from doing anything.   Which is why I wanted them to trade Machado and anyone else they could.

I guess this is "going all in" as much as they can, which again...to me, is whatever.  I don't understand how this organization can sit in the warehouse, look at the Sox, look at the Yankees and then look at us and say we're ready to contend after the offseason that we had.  They'll do a good job of selling it to the fans but I still don't see how this team wins more than 75 games.

 

[El Gordo]

42 minutes ago, canonfaz said:

B- for me. Happy with Cobb, but I would have preferred to trade Manny.

I don't get this thinking. If you are trading Manny then you are rebuilding and it makes no sense to sign Cobb Cashner. If you aren't, then you are going for it and it does make sense.

[Frobby]

17 minutes ago, SteveA said:

 

But there's no way I can give it an A because it appears we have probably blown our chance of keeping Schoop by not extending him this offseason.   And it doesn't appear we even tried. 

I might argue that our chances of extending Schoop, or even Manny, are greatly improved now that they can see we’ve addressed the pitching problems in an aggressive way that extends beyond 2018.    Money is what players want most, but I think players also want to feel like they have a chance to win.    Six weeks ago, the situation was very bleak, and if I were a player, I’d have been questioning the team’s commitment to win.    But now they’ve got two starting pitchers under control for four years (Cobb and Bundy), one under control for three (Gausman), and another for two or possibly three (Cashner).    And, now we’re in position not to have to rush our minor league talent.    

Now, will the O’s get a dialogue going with Schoop (or Manny) in the next month or two?    Remember, we signed Jones about six weeks into the 2012 season, when he was due to be a free agent after the 2013 season, so we can hope the O’s will get off their keisters now that their free agent work is largely done.   

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

They'll do a good job of selling it to the fans but I still don't see how this team wins more than 75 games.

 

They won 75 games last year.  

They added Cashner (4.80 FIP) and Cobb (4.15 FIP), to replace guys with 5.60 and 6.80 ERAs.
Manny had his worst year as a regular, at 3.5 wins.  He could/should be back to 5+.
Davis hit .215/.309/.423.  He could do better.
Trumbo "hit" .234/.289/.397.  He or his replacements could be better.
Jones is 32, but he mightn't slip much.
Hardy's .578 OPS has been jettisoned.
Rasmus is a good player.
Joseph's defense might offset the loss of Castillo's offense.  Maybe.
Schoop will probably regress, but he's still just 25.
Mancini might not turn into Joe Charboneau.
Gausman and Bundy might turn good stuff into better results.

I'm not going to try to pretend this is a 90-win team that'll keep pace with Boston and New York, but it's not going to take a confluence of insane good luck to win more than 75.

[BohKnowsBmore]

32 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I concur with the most part, but then I start thinking that Alex Cobb can't be the difference between an F and a B.  I get that there's a pretty large difference between whomever the 5th starter was going to be and Cobb.  But an F means fail.  Like, the team went significantly backwards in the offseason.  They got a bit better without Cobb, but what does that mean in the context of a 75-win team?  What does a single starting pitcher mean to a team that's likely 20+ wins behind the Yanks?

Darn you, making me think this through.

How many teams are signing multiple of the top available options in FA in a given offseason, though?  

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

How many teams are signing multiple of the top available options in FA in a given offseason, though?  

I don't know.  Not many?  But that doesn't change my opinion that one pretty good pitcher can't turn a total failure of an offseason to an above average one.  Either the F or the B can't be right if both of those grades hinge on Alex Cobb.

[spiritof66]

32 minutes ago, Number5 said:

No, they consider an "A" grade to mean excellent and within the realm of realistically possible.  Some folks don't need for both the cure for cancer to be found and the end of world hunger before an A grade is earned.  But that's just the way I see it. 

Bah -- grade inflation strikes again!  

[Frobby]

40 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I concur with the most part, but then I start thinking that Alex Cobb can't be the difference between an F and a B.  I get that there's a pretty large difference between whomever the 5th starter was going to be and Cobb.  But an F means fail.  Like, the team went significantly backwards in the offseason.  They got a bit better without Cobb, but what does that mean in the context of a 75-win team?  What does a single starting pitcher mean to a team that's likely 20+ wins behind the Yanks?

Darn you, making me think this through.

I know it sounds ridiculous that Cobb could be the difference between an F and a B, but remember, my B is really a B- bordering on C+.     And F would have been because I don’t see the point in spending on Cashner and others if you aren’t going to finish the job.     

[interloper]

8 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't know.  Not many?  But that doesn't change my opinion that one pretty good pitcher can't turn a total failure of an offseason to an above average one.  Either the F or the B can't be right if both of those grades hinge on Alex Cobb.

You're taking it a bit literally methinks.

[oriole]

38 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I think a factor in the rise in optimism is not just the Cobb deal.   Watching some of our young hitters this spring -- Santander, Sisco, Mullins, Mountcastle -- has been very enjoyable.   More than anything else it has gotten me off the ledge in terms of thinking that 2018 is the last year we could realistically compete for a while.   Now we add a good pitcher on a 3 year deal, we expect Harvey to be part of the 2019 rotation, and we are looking at Bundy/Gausman/Cobb/Harvey in 2019-20, with a bunch of good young bats coming up to take some of the sting out of losing Manny.   2019 and beyond is no longer an unfathomable abyss... and the Cobb deal coming on the heels of a good spring by a bunch of young position players and Harvey, play a big part in making that seem possible.   There could be Life After Manny.

"Life After Manny" haha I like that