Are we witnessing a change in Elias' thinking?

[wildcard]

A year ago Elias seemed to be focused on getting a high draft choice over winning.   Now,  not so much.   Maybe he sees the reality that his team has progressed enough that a top 5 draft draft choice in 2021 is unlikely.

Bailey's and Rucker's return would probably would not have happened a year ago.  Not when Elias describes both as talented young players with major league futures.  So why did he send them back now?   Yes it might be because they had to spend the whole season on the major league active roster which limits the team flexibility but it also could be because:

1.  Elias believes that Akin, Kremer and Zimmerman are close to the majors.  Elias says they still need some AAA experience but says they should be in the majors soon.   Soon being in a few months?

2) Means, Cobb and Wojo give the O's some starting stability.

3) Leblanc, Milone and Eshelman could be a good starting bridge to the younger starters.

4) There seems to be depth in the relief core.   Harvey, Givens, Bleier, Castro, Carroll, Fry, Scott, Sulser, Stewart and Eshelman

5) The offense looks improved with Davis, Hays, Mountcastle all looking to be improved over last year.  Plus some hope that Ruiz, Alberto and Santander may put up better offensive numbers this year.

6) The defense is stronger with Iglesias, Hays, Alberto, Davis playing bigger roles.

7)  The bench looks stronger with Valaika, Martin, Williams, Velazquez and Holaday  in the organization and available during the season.

With all this Elias could be seeing the O's as moving from bottom dwellers to a team on the raise.  That has little to do with he ST record and a lot to do with improved talent at the major league level.

What do you think?

 

[weams]

No. I think the entire purpose of 2020 is to help develop an elite talent pipeline.  And 2021. 

[DirtyBird]

No. Bailey and Rucker are just dime a dozen pitchers.

[joelala]

Love your optimism and enthusiasm as always, Wildcard, but I think you’re misreading the tea leaves a bit. 

As was said, pitchers like those two are plentiful (in our own org nonetheless) so why take up a year long roster spot with one or both?

We are going to be a very bad MLB team this year record-wise, but I’m really looking forward to watching some of the young guys you mentioned in your post get their shots.

 

[thezeroes]

By removing the two Rule 5 players, the Forty has two open spots for  players in camp or Waiver Claims between now and the end of ST.

 

[SteveA]

I don't know.  You say he wouldn't have returned Bailey and Rucker last year.  But he DID return 2 of 3 Rule 5 guys last year.  Drew Jackson and Pedro Araujo, the latter of whom only needed a couple weeks to complete his Rule 5 status, were gone from the 40.  I think it's more likely that Bailey and Rucker, after 3 weeks of measurement and evaluation, were deemed to be guys who don't help is enough long term.

I don't see any evidence yet that he will promote the Zimmerman's and Akins' of the world any faster than he has in the past.  When that evidence shows up, THEN I will believe it.

In the mean time, I see not much different from last year.  While we wait on pitchers to develop, we pick up filler guys with ML experience.  Last year it was Straily and Karns,  this year Leblanc and Milone.  How is that any different, other than the fact that last year's guys were failures and these guys are not failures yet?

And if they fail, this year we will be filling the gap with Eshelmen, Hess, etc...  Same ol same ol.

So right now the only differences I see are:

   1) To he first wave of young pitching (Akin, Zimm) is a year closer to being ready.  But we still don't know how close and we don't know that Elias has changed or does up his timetable for them in any way.

   2) The filler guys (Milone, Leblanc, Stewart) might turn out to be better than last year's.  (Or they might not!). But if they do it isn't evidence Elias has changed, just that he did a better job this year picking those guys.

We are a year closer, which is good.  But I don't know if the plan has changed in any way.  He'll bring up talent when he thinks the talent is ready, and no sooner.  It's just that we have some possible talent that is closer to being ready this year.

[wildcard]

6 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I don't know.  You say he wouldn't have returned Bailey and Rucker last year.  But he DID return 2 of 3 Rule 5 guys last year.  Drew Jackson and Pedro Araujo, the latter of whom only needed a couple weeks to complete his Rule 5 status, were gone from the 40.  I think it's more likely that Bailey and Rucker, after 3 weeks of measurement and evaluation, were deemed to be guys who don't help is enough long term.

I don't see any evidence yet that he will promote the Zimmerman's and Akins' of the world any faster than he has in the past.  When that evidence shows up, THEN I will believe it.

In the mean time, I see not much different from last year.  While we wait on pitchers to develop, we pick up filler guys with ML experience.  Last year it was Straily and Karns,  this year Leblanc and Milone.  How is that any different, other than the fact that last year's guys were failures and these guys are not failures yet?

And if they fail, this year we will be filling the gap with Eshelmen, Hess, etc...  Same ol same ol.

So right now the only differences I see are:

   1) To he first wave of young pitching (Akin, Zimm) is a year closer to being ready.  But we still don't know how close and we don't know that Elias has changed or does up his timetable for them in any way.

   2) The filler guys (Milone, Leblanc, Stewart) might turn out to be better than last year's.  (Or they might not!). But if they do it isn't evidence Elias has changed, just that he did a better job this year picking those guys.

We are a year closer, which is good.  But I don't know if the plan has changed in any way.  He'll bring up talent when he thinks the talent is ready, and no sooner.  It's just that we have some possible talent that is closer to being ready this year.

Kremer?   

[HowAboutThat]

It’s possible, but consider:

Wojo and Cobb certainly don’t offer starting stability. Cobb is an injury risk and Wojo may be terrible. At their best, yes indeed, but that remains to be seen. Milone and LeBlanc are old and don’t really offer much. The “Bridge to the future” line is just spin used when hiring old players without significant upside.

The relief core should include Handhold and Carroll, but the bullpen is so malleable that it doesn’t really mean much for present or future: just take the current best 7.

However this is where I’m surprised that Bailey and Rucker didn’t stick. They both pitched well enough to justify a spot. That they were returned means either 1) they wont ever be good enough, which is a valid reason to send them back or 2) they will be good, but not enough soon enough.

The second possibility supports your claim that Elias may see the progress as happening sooner than expected. Two valid pitchers at the cost of a years roster spot is  a small price to pay, so the choice to not pay it means he’d rather have guys who are better now. But Phillips, Blach, Shepherd, Ortiz, Tate are better now? Hardly.

Your comment about better offense and better defense is certainly possible, but I thought that would be the case last year and look what happened.

 

[HowAboutThat]

11 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

By removing the two Rule 5 players, the Forty has two open spots for  players in camp or Waiver Claims between now and the end of ST.

 

We certainly need rosters but but we didn’t need to create them by sending back the rule five guys. There are several other pitchers With longer track records of being horrible who could have been dumped to open up spots, and who will be dumped to open up spots. It didn’t need to be Bailey or Rucker.

[SteveA]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Kremer?   

Sorry forgot to mention him.  Doesn't change my point in any way.

Elias has shown to be deliberate in the development process and brings guys up when he feels they are ready, regardless of what is going on at the MLB level.  I see no evidence that has changed in any way.

If a starter gets hurt before he feels Akin or Zimmerman or Kremer is ready, we'll see a Hess or Blach just like we did last year.

[sportsfan8703]

Counting Wojo as a “dependable” rotation piece is not a slam dunk. For that matter, neither is Cobb. 

Millone, Leblanc, and Eshelman, were some of the hardest hit pitchers in the MLB last year.  Now we’re adding that to OPACY and 

I think the bats are ready to not be a top 5 worst team in baseball. The defense has improved, but the pitching has huge holes for a 162 game season. 

[bobmc]

57 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I don't know.  You say he wouldn't have returned Bailey and Rucker last year.  But he DID return 2 of 3 Rule 5 guys last year.  Drew Jackson and Pedro Araujo, the latter of whom only needed a couple weeks to complete his Rule 5 status, were gone from the 40.  I think it's more likely that Bailey and Rucker, after 3 weeks of measurement and evaluation, were deemed to be guys who don't help is enough long term.

I don't see any evidence yet that he will promote the Zimmerman's and Akins' of the world any faster than he has in the past.  When that evidence shows up, THEN I will believe it.

In the mean time, I see not much different from last year.  While we wait on pitchers to develop, we pick up filler guys with ML experience.  Last year it was Straily and Karns,  this year Leblanc and Milone.  How is that any different, other than the fact that last year's guys were failures and these guys are not failures yet?

And if they fail, this year we will be filling the gap with Eshelmen, Hess, etc...  Same ol same ol.

So right now the only differences I see are:

   1) To he first wave of young pitching (Akin, Zimm) is a year closer to being ready.  But we still don't know how close and we don't know that Elias has changed or does up his timetable for them in any way.

   2) The filler guys (Milone, Leblanc, Stewart) might turn out to be better than last year's.  (Or they might not!). But if they do it isn't evidence Elias has changed, just that he did a better job this year picking those guys.

We are a year closer, which is good.  But I don't know if the plan has changed in any way.  He'll bring up talent when he thinks the talent is ready, and no sooner.  It's just that we have some possible talent that is closer to being ready this year.

$50 K buys a lot of "cacahuate" (AKA PB) in the DR so why not?  Agree with the remainder of your post and LOL'd a lot!  

[BRobinsonfan]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

A year ago Elias seemed to be focused on getting a high draft choice over winning.   Now,  not so much.   Maybe he sees the reality that his team has progressed enough that a top 5 draft draft choice in 2021 is unlikely.

Bailey's and Rucker's return would probably would not have happened a year ago.  Not when Elias describes both as talented young players with major league futures.  So why did he send them back now?   Yes it might be because they had to spend the whole season on the major league active roster which limits the team flexibility but it also could be because:

1.  Elias believes that Akin, Kremer and Zimmerman are close to the majors.  Elias says they still need some AAA experience but says they should be in the majors soon.   Soon being in a few months?

2) Means, Cobb and Wojo give the O's some starting stability.

3) Leblanc, Milone and Eshelman could be a good starting bridge to the younger starters.

4) There seems to be depth in the relief core.   Harvey, Givens, Bleier, Castro, Carroll, Fry, Scott, Sulser, Stewart and Eshelman

5) The offense looks improved with Davis, Hays, Mountcastle all looking to be improved over last year.  Plus some hope that Ruiz, Alberto and Santander may put up better offensive numbers this year.

6) The defense is stronger with Iglesias, Hays, Alberto, Davis playing bigger roles.

7)  The bench looks stronger with Valaika, Martin, Williams, Velazquez and Holaday  in the organization and available during the season.

With all this Elias could be seeing the O's as moving from bottom dwellers to a team on the raise.  That has little to do with he ST record and a lot to do with improved talent at the major league level.

What do you think?

 

Sorry, but a 31 year old pitcher (Wojo) with 47 total games and a 5.76 career ERA does not a stable starter make.

 

[Legend_Of_Joey]

105.7 had a good point yesterday.

With the new roster rules, 3 batter minimum, and IL/Norfolk Shuttle rules, tying up 2 “immovable” spots for the whole year might have been a factor.

Now, why not keep 1? Dunno. Maybe Elias tried working out a trade for one or both but it didn’t happen, or could still happen later on. Send them back now, give them experience in their own camp and see if you can still trade for them.

[Camden_yardbird]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

A year ago Elias seemed to be focused on getting a high draft choice over winning.   Now,  not so much.   Maybe he sees the reality that his team has progressed enough that a top 5 draft draft choice in 2021 is unlikely.

Bailey's and Rucker's return would probably would not have happened a year ago.  Not when Elias describes both as talented young players with major league futures.  So why did he send them back now?   Yes it might be because they had to spend the whole season on the major league active roster which limits the team flexibility but it also could be because:

1.  Elias believes that Akin, Kremer and Zimmerman are close to the majors.  Elias says they still need some AAA experience but says they should be in the majors soon.   Soon being in a few months?

2) Means, Cobb and Wojo give the O's some starting stability.

3) Leblanc, Milone and Eshelman could be a good starting bridge to the younger starters.

4) There seems to be depth in the relief core.   Harvey, Givens, Bleier, Castro, Carroll, Fry, Scott, Sulser, Stewart and Eshelman

5) The offense looks improved with Davis, Hays, Mountcastle all looking to be improved over last year.  Plus some hope that Ruiz, Alberto and Santander may put up better offensive numbers this year.

6) The defense is stronger with Iglesias, Hays, Alberto, Davis playing bigger roles.

7)  The bench looks stronger with Valaika, Martin, Williams, Velazquez and Holaday  in the organization and available during the season.

With all this Elias could be seeing the O's as moving from bottom dwellers to a team on the raise.  That has little to do with he ST record and a lot to do with improved talent at the major league level.

What do you think?

 

I think the projected roster has amassed something like 5 WAR less than the next worst roster, and that Elias has not made any appreciable attempts to add talent to this organization out side of the Rule 4 draft and some leftover international signees.