Must Read: Review of the Baysox rotation

[Aristotelian]

9 hours ago, Aglets said:

Now do Gunnar Henderson.....have you guys seen what he's doing in the GCL lately!??!!??!?!

Maybe they can give him a shot over this Martin schmuck in ST?!!?!?!

I'm dying to know if it will be 2023 or 2024.

We've got a kid in the DSL with an OBP over .500, playing SS.

[scarey1999]

For those that don’t read the minors forum, Baumann lit it up at Bowie again tonight. CG shutout 4H, 2BB and 7K over 97 pitches. 10/6 GO/FO.  ERA to 1.86

Pitching his way right into the opening day 2020 roster.  

[Just Regular]

I'd guess we get a little taste of the best of the batch in the second half next year.  This could be the last month that nothing positive happens in terms of the enjoyment I hope to get from the major league club starting to have access to more talented players.

Sept. 2019 - Akin

Apr. 2020 - the sheer joy of a new season regardless

May 2020 - the Mountcastle/Diaz winner

June 2020 - the loser

July 2020 - whatever current Bay Sock makes the AAA All-Star team

I may be selling July/August 2019 Santander short if he can sustain Singletonian type things.  

[Sessh]

4 hours ago, Philip said:

Yes that’s exactly what I’ve been wanting all season, even if the guy thrown into the fire lights up like cigarette paper.

My response to your comment t’other day emphasized that.

(Its a digression, but when we got off the plane I was happy to see that Shepherd did well in his debut. Hope he remains for a while.)

No, your standards are unreasonable. It's either instant success or goodbye and you seem perfectly willing to burn through the entire minor leagues in one season which is about as impatient and reckless as it gets. Your approach seems to be more suited to food or wine tasting. Also, Shepherd was more lucky than good; eight baserunners in four innings. Maybe he'll do better next time.

1 hour ago, scarey1999 said:

For those that don’t read the minors forum, Baumann lit it up at Bowie again tonight. CG shutout 4H, 2BB and 7K over 97 pitches. 10/6 GO/FO.  ERA to 1.86

Pitching his way right into the opening day 2020 roster.  

Yup, in Norfolk.

[HowAboutThat]

2 minutes ago, Sessh said:

No, your standards are unreasonable. It's either instant success or goodbye and you seem perfectly willing to burn through the entire minor leagues in one season which is about as impatient and reckless as it gets. Your approach seems to be more suited to food or wine tasting. Also, Shepherd was more lucky than good; eight baserunners in four innings. Maybe he'll do better next time.

Yup, in Norfolk.

 

2 minutes ago, Sessh said:

No, your standards are unreasonable. It's either instant success or goodbye 

Not so, and you have no reason to make such a claim. I don’t care whether you agree with me, but you need to attack the right thing and at the moment you’re attacking a straw man. I’ve already refuted you once.

I’ll say again that I’m happy to give a guy a chance. I want to give as many chances as possible, including Tayler and Shepherd and Phillips etc etc. But it’s important to look at his entire time. If a guy has been terrible in another system and then comes to us, we don’t need to give him an equal amount of time in our own system. Phillips has been consistently bad. So I see no reason to keep him. That’s not unreasonable at all. Yac, too. I was happy to send Wright away two years ago, but they kept him til recently.

If guy has been bad in another system but has something in his approach that might be fixable then sure, investigate him. But other teams have good analysts and coaches too. That’s why Armstrong’s Apparent success is rare and unexpected. But “immediate” is unjustified hyperbole on your part.

I've made my point again and now we’re done.

[sportsfan8703]

19 hours ago, wildcard said:

When do you think Elias will promote them to the majors?

I saw your Twitter:

When do you will think we will see these three  and others like Baumann, Sedlock, Tate, and Harvey in the majors?

Majors?  When do you think he’ll promote them to AAA?  

The answer on AAA will be because AA is in a pennant chase?  My answer, it’s a fun story, but what is that worth?  

Hold guys down for 2-3 months in AA so in September they can lose a best of 5 series because the team they are going against just happens to have Noah Syndegaard rehabbing for a start?  Or someone like him. That happens a lot in the minor league playoffs. What do the players really learn?

IMO, we should let the Bowie group each get 5ish starts in AAA this year. Diaz should be promoted too. 

The only answer I’d entertain with the SP is that we’re keeping them at a level to get a good baseline of statistics to use analytics to help them out. 

[Jagwar]

14 hours ago, interloper said:

Is there a point to all this urgent questioning? Are you building towards something? All these guys are kind of fringey mid-rotation upside guys. I'm not sure I see what the big deal is. 

A "fringey mid-rotation upside guy" would be the #1 starter on this team.

[Aglets]

9 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

We've got a kid in the DSL with an OBP over .500, playing SS.

Man when my pre-schooler is in high school our team is gonna be so staaaaaaaacked!

[Frobby]

17 hours ago, wildcard said:

If the O's add Mountcastle to this offense they probably have a league average offense. 

Do you actually believe this?   Right now the O’s are 12th in runs, OPS and several other offensive categories.    3/4 of the way through the season, they are 63 runs below average on offense.    Do you really think adding Mountcastle is going to move them all the way to average?

The team has a .718 OPS.    League average is .763.    You could disregard Chris Davis and Richie Martin entirely and the team OPS only moves to about .740.

This team’s offense is much better than the pitching, and better than I expected.    But they are not one rookie player away from average.

 

[Sessh]

11 hours ago, Philip said:

 

Not so, and you have no reason to make such a claim. I don’t care whether you agree with me, but you need to attack the right thing and at the moment you’re attacking a straw man. I’ve already refuted you once.

I’ll say again that I’m happy to give a guy a chance. I want to give as many chances as possible, including Tayler and Shepherd and Phillips etc etc. But it’s important to look at his entire time. If a guy has been terrible in another system and then comes to us, we don’t need to give him an equal amount of time in our own system. Phillips has been consistently bad. So I see no reason to keep him. That’s not unreasonable at all. Yac, too. I was happy to send Wright away two years ago, but they kept him til recently.

If guy has been bad in another system but has something in his approach that might be fixable then sure, investigate him. But other teams have good analysts and coaches too. That’s why Armstrong’s Apparent success is rare and unexpected. But “immediate” is unjustified hyperbole on your part.

Then there's no point in claiming guys at all if we're not going to do our own analysis and our coaches do their own tinkering. It is unreasonable to not allow our system and our coaches ample time to work with these players and come to our own conclusions as opposed to relying on the conclusions of others after four innings of work. No point in making claims at all, then. We could just skip the waiver process entirely and take their word for it immediately. Yacabonis came up in our system and was given multiple chances, but only got worse and worse. Completely different than the stuff you advocate for like using the same strategy with guys in Bowie who were not waiver claims or giving up on guys after four innings of work.

Other teams do have good analysts and coaches, but they're wrong all the time just like any others. Armstrong's success is neither rare nor that unexpected since it happens all the time either through waivers, the rule 5 or even trades. Waiver claims are made in part because we think that team made a mistake. If we don't think they made a mistake, no point in making the acquisition at all. Four innings is pretty immediate, no hyperbole needed nor have you refuted that.

On a rebuilding club like this one, this is the kind of stuff you do. You stick with guys as long as possible, you work with them, you exhaust all avenues of possibility before releasing guys because we don't have the luxury of just leaning on better players and won't have it for many years. So, don't be surprised if guys like Phillips, Scott and Shepherd are here a lot longer than you think they should be. I'm not saying either of those three are or will be any good, but no reason not to allow ample time.

[LookinUp]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Do you actually believe this?   Right now the O’s are 12th in runs, OPS and several other offensive categories.    3/4 of the way through the season, they are 63 runs below average on offense.    Do you really think adding Mountcastle is going to move them all the way to average?

The team has a .718 OPS.    League average is .763.    You could disregard Chris Davis and Richie Martin entirely and the team OPS only moves to about .740.

This team’s offense is much better than the pitching, and better than I expected.    But they are not one rookie player away from average.

 

I haven't done the math, but if removing them raises the OPS by .022, then you'd need two guys with an OPS that's essentially the opposite of those two (e.g., maybe .900?) to replace them on the roster for a league average offense, right? So adding one Mountcastle might raise the OPS by another .005-.015. We'd still need another pretty big bat who can play SS to be league average without any other improvements on the team. 

If, for example, Hays, Mountcastle and Diaz are all promoted and playing outfield with Santander mixed in, Mancini plays first and Nunez DH's/plays 3B, we're getting closer.