It's time for the OH to turn the page

[Sports Guy]

I mean, stranger things have happened.  Not unusual to see relievers succeed out of nowhere but we have a total of 15 innings this year between 2 players, who have had zero ML success despite being older, and we are already penciling them into future BPs?  
 

I just don’t see the logic there.  You can be happy with what you see out of them without going overboard about their future prospects within the organization.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Younger version of those players.  CF- Hays, RF- Santander,  Not two Hardy but Iglesias at SS,  Nunez has already homer 31 and drove in 90. If they surround him with better hitters he could improve - 1B.   Mountcastle, Rutschman in the system.   Plus Alberto, Ruiz, Severino, Sisco

I know you won't provide any evidence to support this assertion but maybe you could ask someone else to?  I'd be really interested since I've never seen any evidence that is how things work.

[eddie83]

Just now, wildcard said:

Younger version of those players.  CF- Hays, RF- Santander,  Not two Hardy but Iglesias at SS,  Nunez has already homer 31 and drove in 90. If they surround him with better hitters he could improve - 1B.   Mountcastle, Rutschman in the system.   Plus Alberto, Ruiz, Severino, Sisco

Yes I did have a typo with Hardy but he was twice the player back then that Iglesias is now....  Hays matching Jones’ production would be welcome.

If all this pans out then Elias built a championship roster off waiver claims.  

[eddie83]

Best evidence from a season like this may be the Orioles ability to get the most out of their talent.

Not the actually talent they are putting on the field now.  

[DrungoHazewood]

3 hours ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

Certainly Cobb is a different case merely for payroll savings, but some of the other guys, Santander, Nunez, Iglesias... do we stand pat hoping (thinking/knowing) the rebuild is becoming fruitful or do we deal if offered?  To me, that's the question.

Those players are relatively cheap, they're not going to bring back a top prospect in a deal, and could play some role on the next good O's team.  I guess Iglesias i on the fringe of that last statement.  So there's not much reason to trade them, I think Elias stands pat on those players.

[DrungoHazewood]

37 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I know you won't provide any evidence to support this assertion but maybe you could ask someone else to?  I'd be really interested since I've never seen any evidence that is how things work.

I mean, players definitely improve when you surround them with better players.  They would have anyway, but putting better players around them didn't sabotage the development.

[Moose Milligan]

39 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I mean, stranger things have happened.  Not unusual to see relievers succeed out of nowhere but we have a total of 15 innings this year between 2 players, who have had zero ML success despite being older, and we are already penciling them into future BPs?  
 

I just don’t see the logic there.  You can be happy with what you see out of them without going overboard about their future prospects within the organization.

There isn't any.  It's based on wishes, hopes and feelings.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

I think there are more players here that can play on a contending team,  Santander, Hasy, Alberto, Ruiz, Nunez, Iglesias, Mountcastle. 

Luis Sojo has three rings.  Lew Ford started a playoff game for the O's.  So, sure.

 

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Sulser and Lakin are going to be part of the future?

 

59 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Yes, I believe that.  

 

54 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Based off of what?

Performance over their last 14 pitches.  Duh.

[Philip]

I’ve been asking myself what would Dan do? Of course, he would do what he’s told, but what would he probably have been told to do?

 i’ve been asking myself what would Dan do? Of course, he would do what he’s told, but what would he probably have been told to do?

Sacrifice the future for the present, so he’d trade Zach Davies for Gerardo Parra.

Sometimes it worked out: the Norris trade was fine. Other times not so much.

Either way, I think everybody can agree that that’s not going to happen this year.

[Yardball85]

3 minutes ago, Philip said:

I’ve been asking myself what would Dan do? Of course, he would do what he’s told, but what would he probably have been told to do?

 i’ve been asking myself what would Dan do? Of course, he would do what he’s told, but what would he probably have been told to do?

Sacrifice the future for the present, so he’d trade Zach Davies for Gerardo Parra.

Sometimes it worked out: the Norris trade was fine. Other times not so much.

Either way, I think everybody can agree that that’s not going to happen this year.

Eh, trading Hader for Norris wasn't really fine.  Norris had a good 2014, but it cost us.

[Philip]

11 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

Eh, trading Hader for Norris wasn't really fine.  Norris had a good 2014, but it cost us.

The problem with Norris wasn’t getting him, it was keeping him.

If I recall, he made 11 or $12 million in arbitration, was a complete disaster, and was released about three months into the 2015 season.

I am always an advocate of trading guys at their peak, and I think he should’ve been traded in the off-season, but the trade itself worked and no mistake.

Edited August 11, 2020 by Philip

[Yardball85]

Just now, Philip said:

The problem with Norris wasn’t getting him, it was keeping him.

If I recall, he made 11 or $12 million in arbitration, was a complete disaster, and was released about three months into the 2015 season.

I am always an advocate of treating guys at their peak, and I think he should’ve been traded in the off-season, but the trade itself worked and no mistake.

It is at best debatable IMO that one year of Norris was worth 6 years of Hader.  

[Ripken]

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

It is at best debatable IMO that one year of Norris was worth 6 years of Hader.  

And a first round draft pick.

[Philip]

6 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

It is at best debatable IMO that one year of Norris was worth 6 years of Hader.  

Of course, but we did not know that at the time. Even Houston turned right around and traded him again, do you think they would’ve done that if they’d known what he would become? Yes you’re exactly right, but That’s why there’s a risk in trading a prospect who is still developing. Trading Davies, on the other hand, was inexcusable