The Marauding Delmarva Offense

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Which means he isn't doing it to best prepare the players....right?

Aside from possibly Rutschman, one has got nothing to do with the other.  Tanking really has nothing to do with Rutschman either.  Service time yes.  But no prospects are being slow played with the objective being to keep the ML team from winning games.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Aside from possibly Rutschman, one has got nothing to do with the other.  Tanking really has nothing to do with Rutschman either.  Service time yes.  But no prospects are being slow played with the objective being to keep the ML team from winning games.

Why are you quoting me?  I'm not the one that said it.

 

[LTO's]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Which means he isn't doing it to best prepare the players....right?

I suspect that if the farm was run the way you would like, as in every good prospect is fast tracked no matter what, the big league team would be sacrificing value on a regular basis. 

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why are you quoting me?  I'm not the one that said it.

 

Because you basically agreed with your passive aggressive question.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Because you basically agreed with your passive aggressive question.

What if I did?  Wouldn't you be better served ignoring your odd fascination with me and engaging with the other poster?

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, LTO's said:

I suspect that if the farm was run the way you would like, as in every good prospect is fast tracked no matter what, the big league team would be sacrificing value on a regular basis. 

I don't think so.  I'd be less aggressive with pitchers for instance.  I'd also be very open to extending young players.

 

[RZNJ]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

What if I did?  Wouldn't you be better served ignoring your odd fascination with me and engaging with the other poster?

He can respond as wevgll. It's plain to see I disagree with him. You are hardly fascinating.  Far from it.  I disagree with you a lot but it's uh usually over the same few things because you're like a broken record.

[owknows]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think so.  I'd be less aggressive with pitchers for instance.  I'd also be very open to extending young players.

 

I don't dislike your suggestion of extending young players. (assuming the new terms of the CBA will make that a viable strategy.

Remains to be seen whether it will work long term.

Offer 'em half now what they might get in three years... Probably get quite a few takers

The risk of course, is that you end up paying long term money for 5 months of hot streak on occasion

The reward only really plays out if you're right 70% of the time.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, owknows said:

I don't dislike your suggestion of extending young players. (assuming the new terms of the CBA will make that a viable strategy.

Remains to be seen whether it will work long term.

Offer 'em half now what they might get in three years... Probably get quite a few takers

The risk of course, is that you end up paying long term money for 5 months of hot streak on occasion

The reward only really plays out if you're right 70% of the time.

I question your math.  One big hit can pay for a lot of misses.

[owknows]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I question your math.  One big hit can pay for a lot of misses.

I think you're expecting a much bigger early signing discount than I am.

 

 

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I question your math.  One big hit can pay for a lot of misses.

 

2 minutes ago, owknows said:

I think you're expecting a much bigger early signing discount than I am.

 

 

That’s pretty much what these decisions boil down to.   But I’d agree with C_o_C that 70% sounds high.   It would be an interesting topic to analyze.  

[Can_of_corn]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

That’s pretty much what these decisions boil down to.   But I’d agree with C_o_C that 70% sounds high.   It would be an interesting topic to analyze.  

It depends on what type of deal you can get.

One Longoria/Acuna type hit can pay for a ton of misses.  Of course signing a guy like that to a long term team friendly deal is the dream.
 

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, interloper said:

I don't think they are doing that as much as it may seem. I really think a lot of this could also boil down to the lost year in 2020 and they want to ease guys in. I get that folks don't agree with that, I'm just offering another angle of why they're being conservative. 

Anyway. 

But he was easing guys in before the lost year…see Adley for example in 2019.

I’m not saying Westburg (the example you used) should have started at Bowie immediately…but he never should have seen Delmarva and spent the amount of time he did there.  
 

It’s just not necessary.  You are drafting advanced guys early for a reason.   For most picks, I don’t have an issue with it.  But there will be guys where I don’t see the need to be that conservative.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

It depends on what type of deal you can get.

One Longoria/Acuna type hit can pay for a ton of misses.  Of course signing a guy like that to a long term team friendly deal is the dream.
 

The Acuna deal was borderline insane given what he’d already done in the majors.    The Longoria deal at least was signed before anyone knew how he’d do in the Show.  It certainly turned into a big winner very quickly.   

[Aristotelian]

Is it me or is there way more pointless arguing on the board lately? I was wondering how an innocuous post on our A club offense would have five pages. I am not pointing fingers because I have been guilty as much as anyone.