Offseason target: Tyler Glasnow

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Exactly... perfect fit for us. Look, you can keep posting ridiculous Matt Chapman threads and fantasize about bringing in All Star level guys. In the real world, the Orioles are in the midst of a rebuild. We will not (and should not) be trading Gunnar Henderson level prospects and we will be cautious about spending money in free agency. I have suggested $20M AAV in free agency as a possible framework for improving the club this offseason (but even that I feel is probably pushing it). What combo of SP and 3B would you sign within that framework? I know, your answer is to trade guys and spend $60M but that's just magical thinking.   

Ok got it.  You are accepting of an awful, laughing stock team and keep wanting to add sh** talent.  I’m happy for you that you are accepting of that.

I’m not.  So, we don’t need to discuss it further.  Just no point in going in circles.

[RZNJ]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I’m not suggesting trading a bunch of top guys for these players.  We have talked about Gunnar and 3-4 guys in the 10-20ish range.

Thats not franchise crippling and if it is, we are doomed anyway.

And again, these trades, particularly Chapman, are only ones you do if the ownership commitment is there to do more. Without that, these moves are hollow.

We didn't think Finley, Harnisch, and Schilling would be franchise crippling either.

Henderson was hot **** until he slumped at Aberdeen.    I love how you keep saying if we aren't that deep then the system is overrated or we are doomed either way.    Those statements don't justify trading future pieces for short term pieces.    You have no idea of Henderson becomes and all-star 3B or Stowers becomes a 35 homer RF.     Maybe neither happens but you don't take that chance on a player who MIGHT help you contend for a wildcard in once specific year, 2 years from now.

 

[Aristotelian]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Ok got it.  You are accepting of an awful, laughing stock team and keep wanting to add sh** talent.  I’m happy for you that you are accepting of that.

I’m not.  So, we don’t need to discuss it further.  Just no point in going in circles.

You are right, I will put you back on ignore and end the discussion, just don't put words in my mouth. I have proposed $20M AAV spending increase in free agency and welcome discussion from the reality based community on upgrades within that framework. 

[RZNJ]

13 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Ok got it.  You are accepting of an awful, laughing stock team and keep wanting to add sh** talent.  I’m happy for you that you are accepting of that.

I’m not.  So, we don’t need to discuss it further.  Just no point in going in circles.

Ok.  Applause!  Applause!   You are better than us because you refuse to accept losing any longer.   So your answer is to gamble on 2023 as THE YEAR at the possible expense of the following years.   Let's make a bunch of short term moves because YOU are tired of losing.

[Aristotelian]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

We didn't think Finley, Harnisch, and Schilling would be franchise crippling either.

Henderson was hot **** until he slumped at Aberdeen.    I love how you keep saying if we aren't that deep then the system is overrated or we are doomed either way.    Those statements don't justify trading future pieces for short term pieces.    You have no idea of Henderson becomes and all-star 3B or Stowers becomes a 35 homer RF.     Maybe neither happens but you don't take that chance on a player who MIGHT help you contend for a wildcard in once specific year, 2 years from now.

 

When was the last time a 60 win team traded their own top 10 prospects for a veteran? At least with Glenn Davis we were contending and there was an argument that he was the missing piece. 

[Moose Milligan]

7 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

We didn't think Finley, Harnisch, and Schilling would be franchise crippling either.

 

Man, I wonder what this franchise would have done in the 90s with those 3.

Granted, they might not have all developed here as they did elsewhere.  But I think the 90s look way different for this franchise if we don't make the Glenn Davis trade.

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

When was the last time a 60 win team traded their own top 10 prospects for a veteran? 

This is a very good question.   I do remember the 2004 Orioles trading Denny Bautista for Jason Grimsley, at a time when Bautista was considered to be perhaps our top prospect.   That team went 78-84 and was 28-37 when it made the trade.   That trade was absolutely panned here.   Then that winter we traded John Maine (and Jorge Julio) for Kris Benson, at a time when Maine was a top 5-10 prospect for us.   But we were much better than a 60-win team at the time, though below .500.   

[Sports Guy]

26 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

You are right, I will put you back on ignore and end the discussion, just don't put words in my mouth. I have proposed $20M AAV spending increase in free agency and welcome discussion from the reality based community on upgrades within that framework. 

Thank you

[Sports Guy]

25 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Ok.  Applause!  Applause!   You are better than us because you refuse to accept losing any longer.   So your answer is to gamble on 2023 as THE YEAR at the possible expense of the following years.   Let's make a bunch of short term moves because YOU are tired of losing.

I don’t view it as hurting future seasons. We will keep adding depth in the draft, keep developing what we have, etc…
 

Even if Gunnar ends up being a beast for another franchise or Stowers is for real, it doesn’t mean we can’t still be really good.  Teams trade players from their top 15 prospects all the time And still end up being good in the short and long term.

Do you believe in Elias or not?  If you do, you should believe that he can replenish guys in the 10-20 range.  It’s not hard.  He probably just drafted a few more.  
 

The intl aspect of things should be bearing its fruits in 2-3 years.  That is more talent.  This is what happens when you do all of the things you guys want him to do.  You build consistent success and within that success, you trade assets and then you replace them.

This really isn’t that difficult.  This is exactly what Elias is trying to accomplish.  This is exactly what several teams are doing now.

I just don’t get why you don’t think the team can win in 2023 and beyond even if we trade some Players to do it.

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

I don’t view it as hurting future seasons. We will keep adding depth in the draft, keep developing what we have, etc…
 

Even if Gunnar ends up being a beast for another franchise or Stowers is for real, it doesn’t mean we can’t still be really good.  Teams trade players from their top 15 prospects all the time And still end up being good in the short and long term.

Do you believe in Elias or not?  If you do, you should believe that he can replenish guys in the 10-20 range.  It’s not hard.  He probably just drafted a few more.  
 

The intl aspect of things should be bearing its fruits in 2-3 years.  That is more talent.  This is what happens when you do all of the things you guys want him to do.  You build consistent success and within that success, you trade assets and then you replace them.

This really isn’t that difficult.  This is exactly what Elias is trying to accomplish.  This is exactly what several teams are doing now.

I just don’t get why you don’t think the team can win in 2023 and beyond even if we trade some Players to do it.

If you trade a player who "becomes a beast" and has 6 years of control starting in (let's say) 2024 for a player who is gone after 2023, how can you say it doesn't hurt the team in the future?   Because you have tunnel vision.   Yes, the idea is to keep infusing the system with talent to replace a Gunnar Henderson after 3-5 years with another Gunnar Henderson.    That still doesn't mean it's a good idea do deal Henderson for a 2 year rental when the team's system is not at full throttle.    Yes, if Elias is that good,  trading Stowers and Henderson shouldn't cripple the future of the franchise.  That doesn't make it the smart thing to do.

[Sports Guy]

35 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

We didn't think Finley, Harnisch, and Schilling would be franchise crippling either.

Henderson was hot **** until he slumped at Aberdeen.    I love how you keep saying if we aren't that deep then the system is overrated or we are doomed either way.    Those statements don't justify trading future pieces for short term pieces.    You have no idea of Henderson becomes and all-star 3B or Stowers becomes a 35 homer RF.     Maybe neither happens but you don't take that chance on a player who MIGHT help you contend for a wildcard in once specific year, 2 years from now.

 

Did losing those 3 cripple the franchise?

They sucked in 1991.  They won 89 games in 92 and 85 in 93.  In the strike year, they were in second place.  In 1995, the strike shortened season, they went 71-73 and finished 3rd.  They went to the playoffs in 1996 and 1997.

I don’t see how that is a crippling move.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, RZNJ said:

If you trade a player who "becomes a beast" and has 6 years of control starting in (let's say) 2024 for a player who is gone after 2023, how can you say it doesn't hurt the team in the future?   Because you have tunnel vision.   Yes, the idea is to keep infusing the system with talent to replace a Gunnar Henderson after 3-5 years with another Gunnar Henderson.    That still doesn't mean it's a good idea do deal Henderson for a 2 year rental when the team's system is not at full throttle.    Yes, if Elias is that good,  trading Stowers and Henderson shouldn't cripple the future of the franchise.  That doesn't make it the smart thing to do.

I didn’t say it doesn’t hurt the team.  Im Saying you can still win in spite of that happening.

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

I didn’t say it doesn’t hurt the team.  Im Saying you can still win in spite of that happening.

I don’t view it as hurting future seasons.   

  Ok.  You are saying we should be able to overcome it.  I'm saying I don't want to have to overcome it for the sake of a few more wins in 2023.

[Sports Guy]

And btw, you say what if Gunnar becomes a beast.  Well the odds are that he won’t be as productive of a player as Chapman is this year, in a down year.  
 

And what if Chapman gets back to an MVP level with player and we do make the playoffs on 2023?  Will Gunnar becoming a beast bother  you then

ARe you upset we made the Miller/ERod deal?  
 

Sometimes trades just work out well for both sides

[Sports Guy]

47 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I don’t view it as hurting future seasons.   

  Ok.  You are saying we should be able to overcome it.  I'm saying I don't want to have to overcome it for the sake of a few more wins in 2023.

Well that’s fine.  You don’t believe in the FO and existing talent as much  as I do.  That’s fine but that’s where the separation is.