What other records will this team set

[atomic]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The '62-63 Mets lost 231 games.  The O's would have to lose 116 this year to tie.  I guess that's not impossible.  

 

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You're comic gold.  You failed to mention that the Orioles have allowed fewer runs than the Red Sox.  The Sox are on pace to allow 1066, coming off a World Series win.  Their collapse, which will certainly continue the rest of the year just like all the Orioles' paces, is unprecedented in modern baseball.  They may just contract the Red Sox in a few weeks.

The Mariners are on pace to score almost 1300 runs.  That's going to be a record that will stand for a long time.  The problem is that they're also on pace to be a -324 defensive team, which is kind of like having Ty Wigginton play every position.

The Rays are going to allow just 338 runs this year, which is something even the deadest of the deadball teams couldn't touch.  That's amazing.  Coming into the season I didn't even realize they had a staff of Walter Johnsons.

I love April.  And by "love" I mean "love to laugh at".

The difference is the Orioles have been playing better than they should be.  They will get worse the other teams will be getting better. 

[Aglets]

7 minutes ago, atomic said:

Nope they are the worst.  Find a team worse in the last 50 years.  Ridiculous comment on your part.  

What metric do you use to judge how bad a team is?   Other than just your personal feelings that change on a whim of course depending on the point you need to make.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 minutes ago, atomic said:

Nope they are the worst.  Find a team worse in the last 50 years.  Ridiculous comment on your part.  

Since it's April 11th it's hard to say.  There have been 46 teams with a winning percentage lower than .375 in the last 50 years.  To say the O's are definitely worse than all of them on April 11th is premature.  Unless your point isn't to make an objective assessment of the team, but rather to show you're the smartest and most disagreeable guy in the room.

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, atomic said:

The difference is the Orioles have been playing better than they should be.  They will get worse the other teams will be getting better. 

What's "should be"?  What analysis have you done that shows this team should be the worst team of the past 50 years?  Why do you disagree with, for example, Baseball Prospectus and their assessment that the Orioles will end up as a .392 team, with 63 or 64 wins and approximately the 75th-worst record of the past half-century?

[atomic]

9 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What's "should be"?  What analysis have you done that shows this team should be the worst team of the past 50 years?  Why do you disagree with, for example, Baseball Prospectus and their assessment that the Orioles will end up as a .392 team, with 63 or 64 wins and approximately the 75th-worst record of the past half-century?

The 2003 Tigers had 7 players with at least 1 WAR.  I don't see 7 players on the current roster that will have 1 WAR.  They also had 4 team WAR. I don't see the current roster getting 4 WAR.  Sure you might get positive WAR from Cobb, Cashner, Mancini, Villar and maybe a couple of other players.  But the negative WAR players on this team is going to bring it down to zero.  I see this as close to a replacement level team as could be.  

[DrungoHazewood]

26 minutes ago, atomic said:

The 2003 Tigers had 7 players with at least 1 WAR.  I don't see 7 players on the current roster that will have 1 WAR.  They also had 4 team WAR. I don't see the current roster getting 4 WAR.  Sure you might get positive WAR from Cobb, Cashner, Mancini, Villar and maybe a couple of other players.  But the negative WAR players on this team is going to bring it down to zero.  I see this as close to a replacement level team as could be.  

So you've done a cursory, superficial analysis and saw that met your objective.

BP says 64 wins.  Fangraphs says 57.  Vegas said something like 59.  You say 40 or so.  Not terribly surprising.

[foxfield]

1 minute ago, atomic said:

The 2003 Tigers had 7 players with at least 1 WAR.  I don't see 7 players on the current roster that will have 1 WAR.  They also had 4 team WAR. I don't see the current roster getting 4 WAR.  Sure you might get positive WAR from Cobb, Cashner, Mancini, Villar and maybe a couple of other players.  But the negative WAR players on this team is going to bring it down to zero.  I see this as close to a replacement level team as could be.  

Oh I hope they film your head exploding when the names above are traded or put on IL for the remainder of the year...

 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

45 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So you've done a cursory, superficial analysis and saw that met your objective.

BP says 64 wins.  Fangraphs says 57.  Vegas said something like 59.  You say 40 or so.  Not terribly surprising.

I don’t really care how the team does this year. I want Elias to build a stable organization from top to bottom that will be well positioned for a sustained run of winning.

Adding some players in an effort to save face by winning 67 games is short sighted thinking. Especially if you cost yourself the #1 pick in the 2020 draft that features a can’t miss talent like Bryce Harper. 

[atomic]

55 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

So you've done a cursory, superficial analysis and saw that met your objective.

BP says 64 wins.  Fangraphs says 57.  Vegas said something like 59.  You say 40 or so.  Not terribly surprising.

Well we shall see. These are my opinions after evaluating the roster.  How many guys are replacement guys. Rule 5 I would say is below replacement.  The guys we have picked up on waivers or signed after they were DFAd I would register as replacement level as that is what they are.  Guys like Davis and Wright have pretty much given as below replacement level.   I mean you show me the list of WAR on guys that will get the team to 64 wins. They would need a total of 16 WAR to get there.  I can't see there is any way of that happening.  But maybe you can show me your math.  

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

  But maybe you can show me your math.  

Just look at Fangraphs for an example.  They project the team to 13-14 wins over replacement.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I don’t really care how the team does this year. I want Elias to build a stable organization from top to bottom that will be well positioned for a sustained run of winning.

Adding some players in an effort to save face by winning 67 games is short sighted thinking. Especially if you cost yourself the #1 pick in the 2020 draft that features a can’t miss talent like Bryce Harper. 

I don't like that MLB incentivizes finishing last.  But they do.  So they have to expect rebuilding teams to go where the incentives lead.  If they wanted everyone to try to win each and every year they wouldn't automatically give the highest pick to the worst team.

[LookinUp]

2 hours ago, Aglets said:

What metric do you use to judge how bad a team is?   Other than just your personal feelings that change on a whim of course depending on the point you need to make.

Height?

[atomic]

4 hours ago, Aglets said:

What metric do you use to judge how bad a team is?   Other than just your personal feelings that change on a whim of course depending on the point you need to make.

Look at the players.  How many have a chance to be contributors better than replacement level.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Davis, Martin, Bundy, Wright are going to be below replacement level.  Pulling guys after guy off of waivers who isn't going to lead to a great team.  I am not sure why anyone thinks this isn't going to be a terrible team.  Mullins so far doesn't look like a major league player.  Rickard was another Rule 5 guy.  Alberto hasn't hit in his career.  

If Cobb has injury issues looks like Cashner is our ace. The guys in the bullpen we thought we could count on Bleier, Castro and Givens have not looked good.  Ruiz had a .711 OPS in his third full season in AAA.  Sucre has been a replacement level player his whole career.  

Maybe Nunez hits well enough to play DH.  And you have Mancini and Villar playing very well.  Who knows maybe they have career years.  But the rest of the offense will bring them down.

The pitching looks abysmal.  I really don't see any track records on our pitchers other than Cobb to say this guy will be providing a lot of value to the club. Maybe we get a couple of relievers pitching well.  Anyway you slice it this is not a good ball club. 

[atomic]

Now team is on pace to give up 1121 runs this year.  It seems very doable as that is only 6.8 runs per game. 

[Moose Milligan]

@atomic when this team gets good you're not allowed to enjoy it.