Jump to content

The Biggest Fallacy: We Need a 1B or DH


Anonymous

Recommended Posts

I respectfully and fully disagree with the OP. If our goal is to have a halfway decent 2009 season, than yes Huff is fine for 1b. If winning in the next 5 years is more important, and it better be, Tex is definately a better solution. Who cares if we win 70 or 80 games in 2009? The goal is contention and sooner rather than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I respectfully and fully disagree with the OP. If our goal is to have a halfway decent 2009 season, than yes Huff is fine for 1b. If winning in the next 5 years is more important, and it better be, Tex is definately a better solution. Who cares if we win 70 or 80 games in 2009? The goal is contention and sooner rather than later.

If you're not prepared to compete in 2010, you're not landing Tex in the first place most likely. We aren't currently situated to compete by 2010 so many changes have to be made to turn this ship around faster and for the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first point is excellent: leverage is extremely important in determining how and when to spend on big contracts.

Then you lose it with the second point. You completely negate the logical point in the first part by adopting the very course of action you claim isn't prudent to the pitching context.

If you don't see our minors as being better than what it's been, then you're not paying attention. And if you're not paying attention, just admit it and move on. Quit pretending to be informed.

The minors may be better than "what they have been" which was IMO TERRIBLE, but that doesn't automatically translate into an improved finished product at the major league level. You may argue that it does (which I haven't seen yet) based on odds or whatever but that doesn't mean all that much as a gamble is a gamble. I am not pretending to be anything. What you see is what you get with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest fallacy is the notion that we should not be trying to sign real talent when it's available. Teixeira is a player that can bring us many things we need, so we should have evrey intention on bringing him here. He's still young, he's very productive, he's a GGer at a position that's virtually empty on our depth chart, he knocks the snot out of the ball every year, and the list goes on. There are a half-dozen or so big-time, game-changing FAs out there this winter, and we should be at least talking to every one of them. We're not in any kind of position to say that we "don't need" any of these guys. You just have to remember, you pay for what you get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really cannot stand how nearly every thread OldFan posts in devolves into this mess. The overall level of discourse is dropped down a notch everytime this happens.

Then stay away from threads I am in if it bothers you so much. There are a lot more around that I am not in than those that I am in. Do a little research and you will find this to be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things. One, I don't view Texiera as a HOF caliber player, although he might be. Two, I could see spending that kind of money on him if I were the Angels, Yankees, or Boston as they are already in playoff contention. The Orioles however, need pitching so badly that spending their wad on a firstbaseman is simply an unwise use of resources. I think they should hold onto their wad and try to purchase an ace pitcher each of the next two or three seasons or several number two starters. I simply don't see anything coming up from the minors any better than what they usually trot out there in the Cabrera's, Olsons, and Liz's variety which are inferior quality.

Tex has 203 HR in 5 seasons. Barring injury he should be a cinch for 500. That's HOF threshold, especially in the post steroids era. Also he has 989 H's in 5 years. If he can play for 10 more he has a shot at 3000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're not prepared to compete in 2010, you're not landing Tex in the first place most likely. We aren't currently situated to compete by 2010 so many changes have to be made to turn this ship around faster and for the long term.

I don't believe that Tex is primarily going to make his decision on where to sign based on a competitive bias. Players who retain Scott Boras as their agent generally go wherever they get the biggest contract. Boras is not in the business of leaving dollars on the table, so he will do everything in his power to get Tex to take the best economic deal offered.

If the O's put the best deal on the table by a significant margin, I believe our ability to compete in 2009 / 2010 will only have a minor affect on the negotiations and that Tex will come to Baltimore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The minors may be better than "what they have been" which was IMO TERRIBLE, but that doesn't automatically translate into an improved finished product at the major league level. You may argue that it does (which I haven't seen yet) based on odds or whatever but that doesn't mean all that much as a gamble is a gamble. I am not pretending to be anything. What you see is what you get with me.
I simply don't see anything coming up from the minors any better than what they usually trot out there in the Cabrera's, Olsons, and Liz's variety which are inferior quality.

Which is it? And what do you see?

Chris is right - these conversations drag down the entire board. I'm going to get out of this one now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tex has 203 HR in 5 seasons. Barring injury he should be a cinch for 500. That's HOF threshold, especially in the post steroids era. Also he has 980 H's in 5 years. If he can play for 10 more he has a shot at 3000.

If you read the entire sentence, I said he might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said evidence shows the MEDIAN age of peak performance is 27...based on back tracking throughout the history of the game.

Players with the caliber of an ARod are much more likely to continue to play well through their later years...because they are GOOD/Great players.

An average player such as Aubrey Huff, who even at 25,26,27 wasn't anything special...is going to age as gracefully, cause their skills diminish that much faster.

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP

+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+

2000 23 TBD AL 39 122 12 35 7 0 4 14 0 0 5 18 .287 .318 .443 91 54 0 1 1 1 6

2001 24 TBD AL 111 411 42 102 25 1 8 45 1 3 23 72 .248 .288 .372 74 153 0 0 2 0 18

2002 25 TBD AL 113 454 67 142 25 0 23 59 4 1 37 55 .313 .364 .520 135 236 0 2 7 1 17

2003 26 TBD AL 162 636 91 198 47 3 34 107 2 3 53 80 .311 .367 .555 145 353 0 9 17 8 19 MVP-24

2004 27 TBD AL 157 600 92 178 27 2 29 104 5 1 56 74 .297 .360 .493 124 296 0 5 6 6 9

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is it? And what do you see?

Chris is right - these conversations drag down the entire board. I'm going to get out of this one now.

Do I really need to rattle off the entire list of minor league pitching prospects? That is what I see. I think they are better than in the past but I still have a problem as to whether they will transfer from sucess in the minors to the majors. Afterall, both Olson and Liz seem to do well at TRiple A but not so at the major league level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tex has 203 HR in 5 seasons. Barring injury he should be a cinch for 500. That's HOF threshold, especially in the post steroids era. Also he has 980 H's in 5 years. If he can play for 10 more he has a shot at 3000.

Exactly correct.

By any statistical measure, Tex is on pace to have a HOF career, assuming he stays healthy and continues to produce at his career average for another 8 years. Any team that offers him 18 - 20 million a year for the next 8 years clearly expects him to produce at his current level throughout that span.

Ergo any team willing to offer him the money and years it will require to sign him sees him as a hall of fame type player.

This really is simple math & logic. It's not some arbitrary "feeling" about whether he's a HOF caliber player or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that Tex is primarily going to make his decision on where to sign based on a competitive bias. Players who retain Scott Boras as their agent generally go wherever they get the biggest contract. Boras is not in the business of leaving dollars on the table, so he will do everything in his power to get Tex to take the best economic deal offered.

If the O's put the best deal on the table by a significant margin, I believe our ability to compete in 2009 / 2010 will only have a minor affect on the negotiations and that Tex will come to Baltimore.

I agree with your analysis here, but I'm not sure the O's will significantly outbid the contenders. I do agree with your position that they could if they wanted to, not sure they'll want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tex has 203 HR in 5 seasons. Barring injury he should be a cinch for 500. That's HOF threshold, especially in the post steroids era. Also he has 980 H's in 5 years. If he can play for 10 more he has a shot at 3000.

He's played 6 years. His 162 game average:

612  101  177  40  2  36  121   2  1  79 124  .290  .378  .541  134  331   0   4  11   9  14

He'd need to average 36 HRs for about 14 years - or 8 more years - in order to reach 500. He'd need to average 177 hits for 11 more years in order to reach 3000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...