Jump to content

Millar wants to return

Frobby

By Frobby
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
Considering that the O's are third in runs scored, and 13th in runs allowed, I have a feeling that MacPhail is going to focus his energies on how to prevent runs from scoring, rather than how to score more runs.

With Payton gone, there's room for Montanez or Reimold even if Millar is retained. Plus, we have a pretty strong long-term candidate for 1B in Brandon Snyder, but he's a year away.

In that context, I won't be shocked if Millar is back.

Synder is more than a year away IMO as he hasn't even made it to Bowie yet. To count on him as being our future 1st baseman is foolish.

We've got plenty of pitching in the minors, and most of this high powered offense is gone after 2009 with expiring contracts of Huff, Hernandez, Roberts and Mora. So there is a need for offense for the future. Brandon Snyder isn't going to provide it all himself.

If we sign a FA pitcher like Burnett and Bergesen and Berken can make an impact in the rotation which I think they can, we can easily go to middle of the pack in pitching, combined with a stellar offense this team could win 85-90 games. Then when Matusz and Tillman enter the picture, the rotation will finally match the hitting and that's when we can start competing.

Without that high powered offense though, we'll be like the Toronto Blue Jays. That's why we still need to add a bat like Tex, Dunn or Burrell and why Millar is unacceptable at 1B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply
bluedog Perennial All-Star

bluedog

Posted
Posted
http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article_perspectives.jsp?ymd=20080821&content_id=3344893&vkey=perspectives&fext=.jsp

Read the rest of the article. I really makes you appreciate why Millar is considered such a good clubhouse guy.

If we lose the Tex sweepstakes, does it make sense to bring Millar back? What's the alternative? Moore or Costanzo?

Huff is the alternative with Oscar Salazar taking Millar's roster spot and either Montenez or Reimold taking Payton's spot and playing DH or LF (with Scott going to DH).

This saves the O's money, gives them a really strong bat against lefties off the bench and clears room for Montanez / Reimold to play full time. If they can drop the bullpen down to a more reasonable size, then they can get all three guys on the squad.

Resigning Millar would be a significant step backwards IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
You're a very, very smart guy so you must realize that your question isn't logical. We're 61-65 with great chemistry because our pitching hasn't developed as planned. I would think that would have become obvious as we've shuttled pitchers back and forth to AAA like we're running an airline rather than a ballclub.

If this team didn't like each other and didn't play hard, our record could easily be the in same ballpark as the Nats' record. Are you telling me that because the Nats are in last place and we're also in last place that you don't care that our chemistry may have helped our last place record to be 61-65 instead of 45-83? Well, you may not care, but I care. I care a helluva lot.

The Mariners are 46-81. Do you really believe the Mariners are that bad from a talent standpoint when they've essentially lost nobody from last year's team that almost made the play-offs? There is no freaking way. Clearly that team has got some major clubhouse problems that have led them to seriously underachieve. The same is true of the Cleveland Indians IMO.

You guys can pooh-pooh the value of chemistry all you want, but you're just wrong IMO. I can't prove it because the "chemistry" variable can't be isolated. I can't prove the earth is round or that the sun is the center of our solar system either, but that doesn't mean those things aren't true.

Bottom line is chemistry doesn't outweigh talent. It doesn't outweigh the need to bench vets that have no future here for young guys that do.

In other words, chemistry doesn't outweigh the future of the team.

Chemistry is important when you have a team that has a chance at contending...We are even remotely there yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dipper9 Hangout Grand Counsel

Dipper9

Posted
Posted
Bottom line is chemistry doesn't outweigh talent. It doesn't outweigh the need to bench vets that have no future here for young guys that do.

In other words, chemistry doesn't outweigh the future of the team.

Chemistry is important when you have a team that has a chance at contending...We are even remotely there yet.

Aside from Reimold, who in the minors would you want called up now that the vets are blocking? Currently, we know RF, CF (when Jones returns), 2B will be on this team for many years to come, this assuming we extend Roberts, which I think they will. Either we sign Tex or Huff takes first next year. SS we have tried everyone AND their brothers. There are no third baseman ready to come up. And at catcher, the Orioles think Wieters can use more time in the minors. So aside from giving Mora and Millar a few days off here and there, who besides Reimold are they really, truly blocking that will have a future with us? I don't count Moore or Salazar as future pieces of this team, but maybe that's just me???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
osfan83 Major Leaguer Rising Star

osfan83

Posted
Posted
Yes, I do realize that the O's will be 'smart' enough to start 37 year old Melvin Mora with his expiring 2009 contract, everyday at 3rd, while putting 25year Nolan Reimold in AAA, and tell everyone with a straight-face that they are rebuilding.

Bingo! How does a team that is two years into "rebuilding" go into 2009 with Millar, Mora, Roberts, and who knows what at SS, plus maybe Hernandez. If those 4 are in our OD starting line up, then, call it whatever you want...but it ain't rebuilding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mackus Hangout Grand Counsel

Mackus

Posted
Posted
Bingo! How does a team that is two years into "rebuilding" go into 2009 with Millar, Mora, Roberts, and who knows what at SS, plus maybe Hernandez. If those 4 are in our OD starting line up, then, call it whatever you want...but it ain't rebuilding.
It certainly can be rebuilding if we don't have any younger options at those positions that those guys are blocking.

Rebuilding doesn't only have to do with your MLB roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
It certainly can be rebuilding if we don't have any younger options at those positions that those guys are blocking.

Rebuilding doesn't only have to do with your MLB roster.

Then you make the moves to get those guys...You trade your older players to accomplish your long term goal.

To me, rebuilding doesn't come with being short sighted. You can't have be both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
osfan83 Major Leaguer Rising Star

osfan83

Posted
Posted
It certainly can be rebuilding if we don't have any younger options at those positions that those guys are blocking.

Rebuilding doesn't only have to do with your MLB roster.

OK, but when I reference rebuilding I'm talking about the Major League club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mackus Hangout Grand Counsel

Mackus

Posted
Posted
Then you make the moves to get those guys...You trade your older players to accomplish your long term goal.

To me, rebuilding doesn't come with being short sighted. You can't have be both.

Playing Mora, Huff, Millar, and those other guys isn't neccesarily short-sighted.

We've traded away all of our big assets except for Roberts, and the offers for him haven't been all that great. Sherrill might be able to get us one prospect similar to Jason Donald, but even that might be a stretch (although probably wasn't in July, I think he's the only guy we missed the boat on trading). There isn't any market for guys like Mora or Huff or Hernandez.

You always advocate buying and selling. Well, buying, selling, and holding pat can all be done at the same time as well. We can try to sell off any average veterans of value like Huff or Bradford or Sherrill, hold pat on moving guys that are capable of either helping us on the field or in trade (Roberts), and buy on guys that are young MLBers or close to ready prospects (Greene, for example).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
Playing Mora, Huff, Millar, and those other guys isn't neccesarily short-sighted.

We've traded away all of our big assets except for Roberts, and the offers for him haven't been all that great. Sherrill might be able to get us one prospect similar to Jason Donald, but even that might be a stretch (although probably wasn't in July, I think he's the only guy we missed the boat on trading). There isn't any market for guys like Mora or Huff or Hernandez.

You always advocate buying and selling. Well, buying, selling, and holding pat can all be done at the same time as well. We can try to sell off any average veterans of value like Huff or Bradford or Sherrill, hold pat on moving guys that are capable of either helping us on the field or in trade (Roberts), and buy on guys that are young MLBers or close to ready prospects (Greene, for example).

I don't think we can/will buy and sell if we keep BRob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mackus Hangout Grand Counsel

Mackus

Posted
Posted
I don't think we can/will buy and sell if we keep BRob.
Yeah I pretty much agree with that. And I don't see us trading Roberts (and don't think we should for what offers I'd expect to get for him).

I can see Sherrill being moved, but I think his value will be far lower than it was in July. He's the one guy who I think we missed the boat on trading. Everybody else we could get similar offers in the offseason (not necessarily good offers, just similar to the offers being made in July).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cindyluvsbrady Hangout Grand Counsel

cindyluvsbrady

Posted
Posted
Bottom line is chemistry doesn't outweigh talent. It doesn't outweigh the need to bench vets that have no future here for young guys that do.

In other words, chemistry doesn't outweigh the future of the team.

Chemistry is important when you have a team that has a chance at contending...We are even remotely there yet.

I strongly disagree:eek:

We are NOT that far from contending!

I also think chemistry can be priceless!:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Tony-OH
      4/25: Bowie Wins, Only Team Above .500

      By Tony-OH · Posted

      Thank goodness a minor league system is not judged on wins and losses, because they are putting many Ws up of late. Delmarva is pretty much an embarrassment right now from the hitting side. The first real wave of international position prospects have been left wanting after the first month or so of the season. The Shorebirds are scoring a league low 2.29 runs per game and slashing a league worse .182/.259/.263/.523. The Tides pitching outside of Povich and McDermott to a lesser extent has been pretty bad minus a few decent relieves in Vespi, Krook and Charles.  Elias/Sig's thought on being able to identify pitching talent through pitch shapes and spin rates through the draft after the 10th round has been a pretty big failure. Armbruster was the flag ship pitcher and he's been a flop this year so far, though I had already seen major red flags from him last year. Not surprisingly these guys struggle at the high levels and why they were available that late. Glad to see Elias made a change in his draft philosophy last year and went after some younger, higher ceiling guys like Forret vs 21-year old juniors in those later rounds.   
    • EdwinRip
      Speculating on how the O's handle the pitching logjam

      By EdwinRip · Posted

      Akin currently has a FIP of 1.11. He’s struck out 15 and walked 3 in 10 innings without yielding a homer.  I consider that well.
    • Yossarian
      My annual head first slide thread

      By Yossarian · Posted

      There are several advantages to a head first slide.    With a head first slide, the mass of your body (torso) is lunging forward, not pulling backward - you get to the bag quicker. When you tuck a leg to slide, your foot tends to raise up and not hit the front of the bag, whereas, with your hand you can hit the front of the bag and maintain contact with it. You can adjust the direction of your slide going head first and even switch which arm you extend to touch the bag (swim move) to avoid a tag.  Both can have their place.  I was taught to slide with the right leg tucked going into second base.  That way, your face/chest/crotch are not exposed to the throw from the catcher if the fielder misses the throw, and you're facing the outfield and can find the ball easier if there is an errant throw so you can decide quicker if you can take another base. 
    • Filmstudy
      Time Gunnar's triple

      By Filmstudy · Posted

      Briefly, here is the method I use with a DirecTV DVR for all sorts of timing in football analysis: 1. From a recording on your DVR, hit pause at some point shortly before the ball is released by the pitcher 2. While still on pause, use the FF button to advance the video 1 "frame" at a time.  On 1080i, the screen is redrawn 30 times per second, so each click is 1/30th of a second.  On 720p or 1080p, it's 60 frames per second.  So timing should be accurate to either 1/30th (0.033) or 1/60th (0.017) of a second 3. Advance the video to the point of contact--It is easy to go forward, but difficult to go backward, so you need to advance slowly to fin the closest point 4. From that point, count the number of FF clicks until Gunnar hits 3rd base, you should actually be able to see the image move with each click, so it's easier to count these than you might think 5. Divide clicks counted by 30 to get seconds for the event.  For example, if you get 322 clicks, it's 10 and 22/30 seconds (10.73 sec).  This assumes the MASN broadcast is in 1080i. I've been using this method for more than 15 years and you can confirm calibration with an NFL game where the clock is on the screen.  Since you don't have that in baseball, you just have to know whether it's 30 or 60 clicks per second and you'll know that by whether it's an 11 or 22-second triple.
    • Malike
      Time Gunnar's triple

      By Malike · Posted

      Wait, Drungo isn't allowed to make jokes? I thought that post was hilarious given the context. I think better of him for it, though I've always thought highly of him.
    • Aristotelian
      My annual head first slide thread

      By Aristotelian · Posted

      By the way, something they absolutely need to legislate is the size of the oven mitt. I forget who it was, one of these guys had one that was basically giving him 18 inch fingers.
    • Aristotelian
      My annual head first slide thread

      By Aristotelian · Posted

      You can also slide to the side of the bag and reach back... I'd like to see data both on safety and success rates for each one before making a call.  Either way, I agree, a team probably shouldn't on their own put themselves at a competitive disadvantage by voluntarily imposing rules on itself. So if this is a problem, then the proper way to deal with it would be to change the rules like they have with catcher's interference (which I support). 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...