Who are the starting pitcher candidates for the last two rotation spots?

[Can_of_corn]

I think that if an agent misrepresents his player's position to try and gain some incremental advantage it is going to harm his reputation with the entire industry.  Do you think an agent is going to try that for a Diaz or McKenna?

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I think that if an agent misrepresents his player's position to try and gain some incremental advantage it is going to harm his reputation with the entire industry.  Do you think an agent is going to try that for a Diaz or McKenna?

Boras doesnt always make the right decisions for his clients, and it doesnt seam to hurt his reputation.

But, in theory, you are correct, most agents wouldnt want to hurt their rep.

[ChosenOne21]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think that if an agent misrepresents his player's position to try and gain some incremental advantage it is going to harm his reputation with the entire industry.  Do you think an agent is going to try that for a Diaz or McKenna?

I honestly don't know enough about the process to answer that question, so I'm going to bow out of the discussion

[BohKnowsBmore]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Lots of folks wanted to send Schoop down to get the extra year, how did that turn out?

You send a guy down for an extra three weeks and he's a super two.  How many guys do you want to pay arb 4 prices for?

If you think they are a keeper you lock them up early.  That's the smart way to do it.

 

The key is optionality.  You don't have to pay Arb-4 prices if you don't think they're worth it when you get to that point (as the other poster mentions, you can simply non-tender if you so choose).

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

The key is optionality.  You don't have to pay Arb-4 prices if you don't think they're worth it when you get to that point (as the other poster mentions, you can simply non-tender if you so choose).

And then while you have not lost anything you also haven't gained anything.  You work to game the system to no advantage.

I don't recall a single instance of a team burning itself by not gaming team control.  If a player is just a guy I think you are wasting your time and causing acrimony when it isn't needed.

 

[Redskins Rick]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Lots of folks wanted to send Schoop down to get the extra year, how did that turn out?

The fandome here in OH rans the gamut of the highly educated superfan, causal baseball fan and Oriole supported to the trolls.

There is always lots of opinions about the correct course of action on every subject from here to eternity. Just not always right opinion.

[Luke-OH]

I'm against service time manipulation because the principal of it. I think sometimes there is value in doing it, but that value is somewhat overblown. Regardless, I don't think it's the right way to treat a team's prospects. 

[BohKnowsBmore]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

And then while you have not lost anything you also haven't gained anything.  You work to game the system to no advantage.

I don't recall a single instance of a team burning itself by not gaming team control.  If a player is just a guy I think you are wasting your time and causing acrimony when it isn't needed.

 

Schoop was brought up in this thread already.  He certainly would have had more value with an additional year of team control attached to him and I don't believe him missing from the lineup in early 2014 would have hurt that team that much (that said, there's no way to test the counterfactual of whether his development would have been altered by not taking his  lumps at the big league level).

I think your assertion that you "haven't gained anything" is contingent on the worst-case scenario happening and ignoring the potential upside associated with the better-case scenario.  

I don't think you should necessarily have your core team building thesis be to game service time, but it seems a bit silly to me to burn clock on the top of your prospect group just for the heck of it (we're almost certainly not contending this season in any way).

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

Schoop was brought up in this thread already.  He certainly would have had more value with an additional year of team control attached to him and I don't believe him missing from the lineup in early 2014 would have hurt that team that much (that said, there's no way to test the counterfactual of whether his development would have been altered by not taking his  lumps at the big league level).

I think your assertion that you "haven't gained anything" is contingent on the worst-case scenario happening and ignoring the potential upside associated with the better-case scenario.  

I don't think you should necessarily have your core team building thesis be to game service time, but it seems a bit silly to me to burn clock on the top of your prospect group just for the heck of it (we're almost certainly not contending this season in any way).

The O's were "Burned" by maybe getting a slightly reduced return for Schoop? 

I think the Brewers' treatment of Schoop once he got over there showed how highly they thought of him.

 

You wouldn't be burning their clock for the heck of it.  You would have deemed them ready to play in the majors.

It isn't as if I am hollering for them to promote everyone ready or not just so I can watch them play this season.

 

 

 

[wildcard]

Look at what Luhnow/Elias did with George Springer.   In 2013,  Springer was BA  #37 prospect before the season.  He played 73 games at AAA for a 978 OPS and  62 games at AAA for a 1.057 OPS (PCL), but he was not called up to the majors in Sept.   BA made him the #18 prospect  pre -2014.    The Astros keep him in the minors until April 16th.   

That is called roster management .  Working the service time.

[Redskins Rick]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

The O's were "Burned" by maybe getting a slightly reduced return for Schoop? 

I think the Brewers' treatment of Schoop once he got over there showed how highly they thought of him.

 

You wouldn't be burning their clock for the heck of it.  You would have deemed them ready to play in the majors.

It isn't as if I am hollering for them to promote everyone ready or not just so I can watch them play this season.

 

 

 

You think the Orioles got the short end of the stick on the Schoop trade???????

[Can_of_corn]

15 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

You think the Orioles got the short end of the stick on the Schoop trade???????

Were did you get that from?

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Were did you get that from?

I guess from the way you wrote the statement about the Os betting slightly less than they should of, for Schoop.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I guess from the way you wrote the statement about the Os betting slightly less than they should of, for Schoop.

But I used the eye roll emoticon.

The prior posted suggested the O's got "burned" with a lower return due to him having less team control.  I was disagreeing.

[Il BuonO]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But I used the eye roll emoticon.

The prior posted suggested the O's got "burned" with a lower return due to him having less team control.  I was disagreeing.

Just spare the use of the emoticons.

Just kidding.  Always, always, always use emoticons. When I was going for sarcasm and didn’t use emoticons I was hit with an infraction. 

?