Why we could be "good again" sooner than many expect

[wildcard]

24 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

Why not try to be a bit positive? I will cheer for the team. It may be a while but hang on. It's going to be better.

Its one thing to say " I am a O's fan and I will stick with them".  Its another to try to blow smoke up our butts with thoughts of an early return to contention.  

When I look at the O's infield  and top pitching prospects they are far away from arriving in the majors. And most fans that have been through this before know that when they arrive it can takes years before they are ready to help with contention.   How many years did Tillman and Gausman ride the Minor league shuttle.  And how long did we have to wait for Bundy to get passed injuries.   Hunter Harvey???  

The O's ownership and management had to pick a path.   Keep the younger established players and try for a short rebuild.  Or tear it down and take more time like the Astros, Cubs, Phillies.  Well O's mgmt picked their path when they trade Gausman and Schoop.  

To add to that the ownership, GM and Field Manager are in flux.  Who ever starts a long journey like this does always finish it.  Detours along the what add time to being back in contention.

Let's not fool ourselves.   We are not that far from hearing "You have to trust the process.  Be patient."

[99ct]

34 minutes ago, NedFromYork said:

I agree a quick retool WAS possible two years from now if they had kept Gausman and Schoop, still would have had Bundy, Cobb, Gausman in the rotation.  But now, no way.  I was all for trading Machado, Britton, and Brach, and wish there was a way to trade AJ and find a home for Trumbo, but was not in favor of trading Guasman and Schoop.  Oh well.

Schoop and Gausman are not the difference between a total retool and a quick reload. If you thought a reload was possible with Schoop and Gausman, then it would probably still be possible now. The reality is we were screwed either way.

[Bradysburns]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

What makes you think that Bundy will not be traded?    

With the O's trade everyone that is making money approach  I don't see this team contending until 2023.    If that is true Bundy and Givens will be on the block this off season.

The infielder Grenier, Carmona, Encarnacion , Adam Hall will probably not be ready to contend until that time.

Grayson Rodriguez and DL Hall will probably not be established in the rotation and knowledge about the league until 2023.

Orioles.com profile is not sure whether Tate is a starter or a reliever and the same could be said for Hunter Harvey's durability.

#3's, 4's and 5s  Akin,  Oritz may be ready sometime next year to make it to the majors but they have to learn the league which could mean 2020 before they are competitive. 

I think we should not think this process will be a short one.  2023 contention sounds about right.

If they jettison Bundy then I agree, the calculus changes big time. 

And not all of these guys will be up next year, either, of course. 

But I would hope for an interesting team as early as 2020. And by interesting, I mean taking more series than they should from the Yankees and Sox... and looking good doing it. I'm talking about potentially stellar outfield defense... some fun on the base paths. Lots of contact, doubles, and maybe even a triple. 

In terms of the infield, Grenier's supposedly a very plus defender. Davis has been a plus defender. Carmona and Encarnacion are both considered plus defenders. Caleb Joseph has performed well in stretches. 

I guess we'll see. Baseball's a funny game. 

[FlipTheBird]

16 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

If they jettison Bundy then I agree, the calculus changes big time. 

And not all of these guys will be up next year, either, of course. 

But I would hope for an interesting team as early as 2020. And by interesting, I mean taking more series than they should from the Yankees and Sox... and looking good doing it. I'm talking about potentially stellar outfield defense... some fun on the base paths. Lots of contact, doubles, and maybe even a triple. 

In terms of the infield, Grenier's supposedly a very plus defender. Davis has been a plus defender. Carmona and Encarnacion are both considered plus defenders. Caleb Joseph has performed well in stretches. 

I guess we'll see. Baseball's a funny game. 

Granted, the O's are impressively slow, but triples in Camden Yards are just a rare feat in general, due to the structure of the ballpark.

I think Bundy's time will come, and hopefully he does bring back some well-regarded prospects.

[Natty]

4 hours ago, wildbillhiccup said:

So who's hosting the house party when Chris Davis' contract expires? 

The Angelos family.

[wildcard]

32 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

If they jettison Bundy then I agree, the calculus changes big time. 

And not all of these guys will be up next year, either, of course. 

But I would hope for an interesting team as early as 2020. And by interesting, I mean taking more series than they should from the Yankees and Sox... and looking good doing it. I'm talking about potentially stellar outfield defense... some fun on the base paths. Lots of contact, doubles, and maybe even a triple. 

In terms of the infield, Grenier's supposedly a very plus defender. Davis has been a plus defender. Carmona and Encarnacion are both considered plus defenders. Caleb Joseph has performed well in stretches. 

I guess we'll see. Baseball's a funny game. 

When do you expect to see Grenier, Carmona and Encarnacion in the majors? And when will they be good?

[Hallas]

3 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Cobb, Cashner, Bundy.  10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag.

In all fairness, if Jeff Ballard can go 18-8 with a 3.43 ERA over an entire season, then 1 of these three surely could.

 

[foxfield]

8 minutes ago, wildcard said:

When do you expect to see Grenier, Carmona and Encarnacion in the majors? And when will they be good?

Come on now.  We're cookin.  You know a watched pot never boils.  It's gonna be ready.

 

When it's ready.

[Moose Milligan]

12 minutes ago, Hallas said:

In all fairness, if Jeff Ballard can go 18-8 with a 3.43 ERA over an entire season, then 1 of these three surely could.

 

A decent point but that was a vastly different time.  Jeff Ballard couldn't do that today.  Cobb, Bundy, Cashman certainly could back then.

[Hallas]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

A decent point but that was a vastly different time.  Jeff Ballard couldn't do that today.  Cobb, Bundy, Cashman certainly could back then.

Jeff Ballard probably couldn't do that again if we redid the 1989 season.

If we're trying to compare apples to apples, his ERA+ was 110, so it would be roughly a 3.9 ERA in today's run environment.  I think that for that trio in 2019, if they get some good breaks and our defense isn't complete butthole, it's doable.  Likely?  Maybe not.  But crazier things have happened.  Like Jeff Ballard.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Hallas said:

Jeff Ballard probably couldn't do that again if we redid the 1989 season.

If we're trying to compare apples to apples, his ERA+ was 110, so it would be roughly a 3.9 ERA in today's run environment.  I think that for that trio in 2019, if they get some good breaks and our defense isn't complete butthole, it's doable.  Likely?  Maybe not.  But crazier things have happened.  Like Jeff Ballard.

IIRC, he struck out like, 25 batters for the whole season or something ridiculous like that.

You make some good points though.  I dunno, I just feel that overall the hitters are better athletes, more well conditioned than the 80s, etc.  I am not sure how that's measured today.  They try to measure it with ERA+ but there's no metric that measures the conditioning that athletes partake in today vs. the 80s.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Hallas said:

Jeff Ballard probably couldn't do that again if we redid the 1989 season.

If we're trying to compare apples to apples, his ERA+ was 110, so it would be roughly a 3.9 ERA in today's run environment.  I think that for that trio in 2019, if they get some good breaks and our defense isn't complete butthole, it's doable.  Likely?  Maybe not.  But crazier things have happened.  Like Jeff Ballard.

Whats the average OPS for balls put into play for the years 2018 and 1989?

I'm guessing it is a LOT higher in 2018.  Ballard walked 2.4/9 and struck out 2.6/9.

 

[Hallas]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Whats the average OPS for balls put into play for the years 2018 and 1989?

I'm guessing it is a LOT higher in 2018.  Ballard walked 2.4/9 and struck out 2.6/9.

 

I can't find the OPS on balls in play.  BABIP was .283 in 1989, and .296 today.  I'm also not sure how relevant OPS on balls in play is.  Maybe SLG on balls in play.  I was able to calculate this on my own.

1989 SLG on balls in play: 0.355

1989 SLG overall: 0.375

2018 SLG on balls in play: 0.383

2018 SLG overall: 0.409

I guess that's not a trivial difference.  But it's not terribly  big either.  Quality-of-contact does seem to be higher in 2018, and accounts for most of the increase in total OPS between the years.  One of the balancing factors here is that in 1989, a lot more people hit triples.

Walk rate is actually pretty similar both years.  Batting average was 6 points higher in 1989.

(if there are any inside-the-parkers in either of these seasons then they would have been counted as non-BIP because that isn't recorded as a stat.)

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Hallas said:

I can't find the OPS on balls in play.  BABIP was .283 in 1989, and .296 today.  I'm also not sure how relevant OPS on balls in play is.  Maybe SLG on balls in play.  I was able to calculate this on my own.

1989 SLG on balls in play: 0.355

1989 SLG overall: 0.375

2018 SLG on balls in play: 0.383

2018 SLG overall: 0.409

I guess that's not a trivial difference.  But it's not terribly  big either.  Quality-of-contact does seem to be higher in 2018, and accounts for most of the increase in total OPS between the years.  One of the balancing factors here is that in 1989, a lot more people hit triples.

Walk rate is actually pretty similar both years.  Batting average was 6 points higher in 1989.

(if there are any inside-the-parkers in either of these seasons then they would have been counted as non-BIP because that isn't recorded as a stat.)

My point was that there is more of a damage per ball put into play now.  A guy just isn't going to make it with a K rate under 3.  Defenders are better and positioning is improved and yet BABIP is up and slugging is up.

 

[Hallas]

53 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

My point was that there is more of a damage per ball put into play now.  A guy just isn't going to make it with a K rate under 3.  Defenders are better and positioning is improved and yet BABIP is up and slugging is up.

  

He wouldn't have a K rate under 3 in today's game.  It wouldn't be much higher than 4, mind you.

I was semi tongue-in-cheek when I referenced him as an example of outliers.  I don't think he was a product of his time, because if we replayed the 1989 season with the same stadiums, players and everything, I'm pretty sure his ERA would be a lot closer to 5 than 3.  Which it was every other season he played.  There's a reason he was a AAAA level pitcher every season not 1989.