Jump to content

Santander may odd man out in 2021 or 2022


ofan239

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

Lots of things about this season are silly.

 

 

 

34 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

Yep, but it sure beats having no season at all. Ive actually enjoyed it quite a bit.  

 

o

 

And for that same reason(s), I would like to see the Orioles have an MVO for the 2020 season ...... it obviously won't be as meaningful as having an MVO for a full 162-game season, but if they are going to have a 60-game season with 7-inning doubleheaders and a runner starting at 2nd base for all extra-inning games, I don't find the notion of the team proclaiming an MVO to be any more (or less) sillier.

 

o

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the starting outfield gigs are going to those players that 1) can play defense ( pitching and defense still wins championships ) 2) can produce at the plate (obp, power , hit ) 3) can stay healthy 

It seems that all of the guys that are in the mix meet one or two of these criteria but I don’t believe any one of these players exhibit all three .  Of all them I think Austin Hays has a chance to meet all three but he’s gotta stay healthy . I really like Mullins game a lot and I really like the tools he brings atop the lineup. But his arm is very weak for center field and the jury is still out whether he will hit enough . Mountcastle can hit / hit with power but his defense is suspect  in the of for a contending team . Santander’s range is ok but I don’t think he’ll ever have an obp above .320 because of his approach at the plate . All these players have some kind of deficiency .  Hayes , Mullins and Mountcastle may end up being the best overall combination. ( combination of speed power and good defense ). It’ll be interesting to see how it shakes out .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OFFNY said:

 

 

o

 

And for that same reason(s), I would line to see the Orioles have an MVO for the 2020 season ...... it obviously won't be as meaningful as having an MVO for a full 162-game season, but if they are going to have a 60-game season with 7-inning doubleheaders and a runner starting at 2nd base for all extra-inning games, I don't perceive the notion of the franchise proclaiming an MVO to be any more (or less) sillier.

 

o

Can’t really disagree with you there, though I think some of these rule changes may stick.  

Here’s a WashPost article about the doubleheader rule:  https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/09/11/mlb-seven-inning-doubleheaders/%3foutputType=amp

And here’s a Boswell column about the extra inning rule:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/08/06/mlb-extra-innings-rules-are-so-fun-they-should-be-kept/?_gl=1*13odtuh*_ga*Wk4zcnZNaXRXMGpEWUJETHFTQi1xdnQ2eTQ2d1lLZjA2RG5pV1hITkIxZVMtSHJvbG82cUFNUmhBak1XaHppZw..
 

As for MVO, I guess we need to see what happens in the final 21.67% of the season.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d be giving reps to Mountcastle at third more then first but that maybe wishful thinking.  I just see a team that has a great defense in the outfield and a below average third baseman or a few guys playing out of position.  
 

C- Severino

1B Mancini

2b Alberto

ss- Iglesias 

3B Mountcastle

Lf- Hays 

Cf- Mullins

RF Santander

Dh Stewart

Bench Sisco, Valika Martin Ruiz 

 

That outfield can run down some balls.  I always would rather have a strong outfield then anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

I think you’re wrong.    I expect Elias to rely on these two in 2021.    As to your views on Hays, I strongly disagree with your opinion.   He will be a very good player if he can stay healthy.  

We shall see. Hope you’re right re: Hays, but I don’t see it. What has you so bullish on him? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, luismatos4prez said:

With Hays, McKenna, and Mullins fighting for time in CF and Diaz, Santander, Mountcastle, and Stewart fighting for time in LF/RF it seems very unlikely that Elias would spend any of his low budget on a Jose Iglesias type center fielder.

He only got Iglesias because the SS options in the organization were so dreadful.

If Mike's going to get some free agents, they should be starting pitchers or infielders.

Good points here. If McKenna is indeed someone the FO sees as a potential contributor that does crowd things a bit more in center

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bpilktree said:

I’d be giving reps to Mountcastle at third more then first but that maybe wishful thinking.  I just see a team that has a great defense in the outfield and a below average third baseman or a few guys playing out of position.  
 

C- Severino

1B Mancini

2b Alberto

ss- Iglesias 

3B Mountcastle

Lf- Hays 

Cf- Mullins

RF Santander

Dh Stewart

Bench Sisco, Valika Martin Ruiz 

 

That outfield can run down some balls.  I always would rather have a strong outfield then anything else.

Well that’s absurd.  Clearly infield defense is more important. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, joelala said:

We shall see. Hope you’re right re: Hays, but I don’t see it. What has you so bullish on him? 

For one thing, he’s an excellent defender.    Very good range and a hose for an arm.   Did you see the throw he just made to 2B from the LF corner?

Second, I believe in the bat.   He’s not as good a hitter as Mountcastle, but I expect him to be a .280 guy with solid power.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ArtVanDelay said:

Well sure, but it’s common knowledge that C and SS are the most important defensive positions, with 2B and 3B being in the next tier along with CF. 

I’m sort of playing devil’s advocate.   But with more and more balls being hit in the air, the old assumptions about which positions are most important defensively could shift.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Well that’s absurd.  Clearly infield defense is more important. 

Not at more this isn’t 20 years ago with launch angle.  Look at the starters we have.

Means 197 ground balls 392 flyballs career. 
Lopez  335 ground balls 363 flyball career

Akin 23 ground all’s 33 flyblalls 

Kremer 7 ground balls 17 flyballs.  
Asher 181 ground balls 418 flyballs

Cobb has better groundball to fly ball but over last 4 years is 1:1.

We have flyball pitchers so you want guys that can run stuff down.  A grounder through hole a single a ball in gap double or triple.  


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

For one thing, he’s an excellent defender.    Very good range and a hose for an arm.   Did you see the throw he just made to 2B from the LF corner?

Second, I believe in the bat.   He’s not as good a hitter as Mountcastle, but I expect him to be a .280 guy with solid power.   

Missed the throw, I was cooking, I’ll have to find it.  He’s certainly a very good defender and I love the way he plays but that style of play may be a detriment to his body; he has proven he cannot stay on the field. I think .260 is a more realistic expectation, but sure, if he can stay healthy he’s a good player worthy of playing time. But he can’t stay healthy, so it’s moot to me. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, joelala said:

Missed the throw, I was cooking, I’ll have to find it.  He’s certainly a very good defender and I love the way he plays but that style of play may be a detriment to his body; he has proven he cannot stay on the field. I think .260 is a more realistic expectation, but sure, if he can stay healthy he’s a good player worthy of playing time. But he can’t stay healthy, so it’s moot to me. 
 

 

He's not costing much right now. If you believe that health is his issue, then what's the downside in continuing to give him a shot? If he gets hurt, he goes on the IL and we've got plenty of guys who need to get an opportunity. Way early to give up on him at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

He's not costing much right now. If you believe that health is his issue, then what's the downside in continuing to give him a shot? If he gets hurt, he goes on the IL and we've got plenty of guys who need to get an opportunity. Way early to give up on him at this point.

I guess I don’t want to give up on him, he’s just frustrating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Great post.  I like your optimism, and I'll try to believe this team can turn things around just in the nick of time like some classic Hollywood baseball movie.
    • I think Elias has mostly done an excellent job with one exception -- he seems like he treats the bullpen like an afterthought.  I doubt that will happen again this coming offseason. I don't really blame him for the current offensive struggles overall.  Just too many injuries late in the season.  That said I don't understand how we went from dealing Austin Hays, Connor Norby and Ryan McKenna just so we could land the right handed bat of, gulp, Austin Slater.  
    • Man this team has no shot. Right now they may not even make it. 
    • Most of these guys are only playing because of injuries to starters.  But Austin Slater I'm guessing was brought in to replace the traded Austin Hays.  The problem is that Slater has shown little ability to hit lefties this year, after hitting them pretty well up to this season.  This must be why two teams dropped him before the O's picked him up.  I know he was let go much earlier in the season, but is Ryan McKenna actually worse than this guy?  I don't understand how the front office went from releasing McKenna to later trading Hays and Norby -- thinking their right handed bats could adequately be replaced by someone like Slater.  
    • I'm willing to give Elias some rope because of the strict limitations he was under with JA but he better not be so damn conservative again this year and let every serviceable FA out there sign with other teams while he's busy picking up reclamation projects again. Minus Burns of course.  
    • I agree completely that it’s irrelevant whether it worked.  But I don’t agree that bunting is clearly the right decision in either scenario, and I think that decision gets worse if it’s intended to be a straight sacrifice rather than a bunt for a hit. To be clear, the outcome you’re seeking in tonight’s situation, for example — sacrifice the runners over to 2nd/3rd — lowers both your run expectancy for the inning (from 1.44 to 1.39) and your win expectancy for the game (from 38.8% to 37.1%). It increases the likelihood of scoring one run, but it decreases the likelihood of scoring two runs (which you needed to tie) and certainly of scoring three or more runs (which you needed to take the lead).  And that’s if you succeed in getting them to 2nd/3rd. Research indicates that 15-30% of sacrifice bunt attempts fail, so you have to bake in a pretty significant percentage of the time that you’d just be giving up a free out (or even just two free strikes, as on Sunday). The bunt attempt in the 3rd inning on Sunday (which my gut hates more than if they’d done it today) actually is less damaging to the win probability — decreasing it only very slightly from 60.2% to 59.8%. More time left in the game to make up for giving up outs, I guess, and the scoreboard payoff is a bit better (in the sense that at least you’d have a better chance to take the lead).   At the bottom of it, these things mostly come down to gut and pure chance. The percentages are rarely overwhelming in either direction, and so sometimes even a “lower-percentage” play may work better under some circumstances. You would have bunted both times. I wouldn’t have bunted either time. Hyde bunted one time but not the other. I don’t know that anyone is an idiot (or even clearly “wrong”) for their preference. Either approach could have worked. Sadly, none of them actually did.
    • Wasn't Hyde always thought of more or less as a caretaker? I'm on the fence about him coming back. I totally get the injuries and that needs to be taking into consideration but man this collapse some heads have to roll who's I'm  mot sure 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...