I'm already over this offseason.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, owknows said:

So it is your contention that AAA has no developmental value whatsoever...?

And that all players would do just as well going to the majors straight from AA?

If not... I don't see this entire line of discussion as anything but sophistry

If you actually read what I wrote you would see that isn't what I said.

Of course I think you did read it and are instead purposely misrepresenting my views.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

owknows,  Everyone on the board already knows what you just explained.  They have seen it a hundred times.  And its not just done to me.  Most posters just stay out of fray now.    I refuse to argue a point the way you are doing any more.  I have been on the OH for twenty years.  SG and Corn have been on the board for for a good part of that time, except for when SG was banned for while.   

Its Tony's board.  He sets the rules.  He allows what you wants to allow.   I enjoy posting on the OH.  It the best place to talk O's baseball.  But I don't enjoy arguing with posters who just like to argue for arguing sake. When it turns to that,  I have better things to do.

Im not arguing for arguments sake.

You made a statement that the guys were rushed.  That’s wrong. They weren’t rushed.

You are always looking for some kind of an excuse or spin on why things will be great.  That’s fine but you choose to post that stuff on a message board and you have a lot of posts and when you do that, your point will be challenged.

If you don’t want discussion/argument or whatever word you want to use, you may not want to post at all (not that I want you to stop).

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

If you actually read what I wrote you would see that isn't what I said.

Of course I think you did read it and are instead purposely misrepresenting my views.

It’s what he does.  

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

It’s what he does.  

Its what a lot of us do.

[owknows]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s what he does.  

You can address me directly.

You don't need to be afraid.

[UMDTerrapins]

I love it when the Hangout goes full barbershop. 

 

[Just Regular]

I liked the Groundhog Day one.   I guess Mike Elias needs to perfect the talent pipeline to the degree of an Adley Rutschman ice sculpture before we can move forward to tomorrow.

[now]

1 hour ago, Just Regular said:

I liked the Groundhog Day one.   I guess Mike Elias needs to perfect the talent pipeline to the degree of an Adley Rutschman ice sculpture before we can move forward to tomorrow.

Sure beats stepping in the same old puddle day after day. 

[Frobby]

Here’s my take: some guys need substantial AAA time to be prepared for the majors, some don’t.   You can pick out 20 successful pitchers and you’ll find a mix of guys who pitched a lot of AAA and guys who pitched little or none.   I like to err on the side of getting more AAA experience, especially since they use the major league ball now, but it’s not  always necessary.  

I don’t think Akin was rushed at all.   He had a full season of AAA.   You can argue about the others.   I’m not giving up on any of them.   Not every good pitcher has instant success.   As I mentioned the other day, Jose Berrios had an ERA over 8.00 in 14 starts his rookie year.   I want to see all these guys gets their shots again next year.   Not necessarily all at once.   
 

[wildcard]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Here’s my take: some guys need substantial AAA time to be prepared for the majors, some don’t.   You can pick out 20 successful pitchers and you’ll find a mix of guys who pitched a lot of AAA and guys who pitched little or none.   I like to err on the side of getting more AAA experience, especially since they use the major league ball now, but it’s not  always necessary.  

I don’t think Akin was rushed at all.   He had a full season of AAA.   You can argue about the others.   I’m not giving up on any of them.   Not every good pitcher has instant success.   As I mentioned the other day, Jose Berrios had an ERA over 8.00 in 14 starts his rookie year.   I want to see all these guys gets their shots again next year.   Not necessarily all at once.   
 

Akin has a fastball.  The O's had him spend time developing his off speed pitches at AAA in 2020.   He pitched to a 4.73 ERA at AAA in 2020 which does really make it hard for him to jump to  the much harder majors.   He had some success with his curve in Sept of 2020 in the majors.  

However in 2021 only his fastball was successful.  All the off speed stuff got hit.  Just because he spent time at AAA does not mean his off speed stuff was developed enough to start in the majors.  I am not saying Elias should not have tried in the majors in 2021 but it was pretty appearance that the off speed stuff was not ready.  Maybe that is rushed and maybe its something he can't do anything about.

Tony thinks he is a reliever.  But even for that he will need more than a fastball.  Elias seems like he will give him another change in 2022.  But there are pitchers that are passing him.

[UMDTerrapins]

43 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Here’s my take: some guys need substantial AAA time to be prepared for the majors, some don’t.   You can pick out 20 successful pitchers and you’ll find a mix of guys who pitched a lot of AAA and guys who pitched little or none.   I like to err on the side of getting more AAA experience, especially since they use the major league ball now, but it’s not  always necessary.  

I don’t think Akin was rushed at all.   He had a full season of AAA.   You can argue about the others.   I’m not giving up on any of them.   Not every good pitcher has instant success.   As I mentioned the other day, Jose Berrios had an ERA over 8.00 in 14 starts his rookie year.   I want to see all these guys gets their shots again next year.   Not necessarily all at once.   
 

Agree with all of this. It seems that Akin, Kremer, Wells, Zimmerman, and Lowther are getting prematurely lumped together as group of failed starter prospects. Each of them needs way more innings before we can properly assess if they can succeed at the ML level. That's a whole lotta development to throw away just because none of them found immediate success. Every pitcher is different. The odds are against guys like these who don't have overpowering stuff, but each of them have enough ability/minor league success that they need opportunity. It feels like a lot of people look at our 2022 rotation as Means/Rodriguez (when available) locks, Bradish/Baumann possible starters who could end up in the bullpen, Hall in AAA, and then nothing else until you get to Rom/Pinto/Baumler. And therefore we should be acquiring two established ML starters. If we acquired one solid #3 starter with no attrition, we'd be leaving open two slots in the rotation for Bradish, Baumann, Akin, Zimmerman, Wells, Kremer, Lowther. Two slots for seven guys. That sounds like healthy competition for starts, with losers in the bullpen or AAA, and depth to cover inevitable injuries. And Hall/Rom/Smith are additional depth. As much as I want to start winning games, I don't want to see a few of these guys become like Zach Davies somewhere else (yes I know they're different situations) because we got itchy at the 11th hour of their development. So for me, I'm all about acquiring a #3. But stay the hell away from Harvey-like signings. We have too many arms to evaluate at the ML level. If we're going limit the number of slots in the rotation for all of the evaluations we need to make, it needs to be for an acquisition who is going to dependably provide quality ML starts. And under the category of every pitcher must be evaluated individually, I'd trade Means if the return was really good. 

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

Agree with all of this. It seems that Akin, Kremer, Wells, Zimmerman, and Lowther are getting prematurely lumped together as group of failed starter prospects. Each of them needs way more innings before we can properly assess if they can succeed at the ML level. That's a whole lotta development to throw away just because none of them found immediate success. Every pitcher is different. The odds are against guys like these who don't have overpowering stuff, but each of them have enough ability/minor league success that they need opportunity. It feels like a lot of people look at our 2022 rotation as Means/Rodriguez (when available) locks, Bradish/Baumann possible starters who could end up in the bullpen, Hall in AAA, and then nothing else until you get to Rom/Pinto/Baumler. And therefore we should be acquiring two established ML starters. If we acquired one solid #3 starter with no attrition, we'd be leaving open two slots in the rotation for Bradish, Baumann, Akin, Zimmerman, Wells, Kremer, Lowther. Two slots for seven guys. That sounds like healthy competition for starts, with losers in the bullpen or AAA, and depth to cover inevitable injuries. And Hall/Rom/Smith are additional depth. As much as I want to start winning games, I don't want to see a few of these guys become like Zach Davies somewhere else (yes I know they're different situations) because we got itchy at the 11th hour of their development. So for me, I'm all about acquiring a #3. But stay the hell away from Harvey-like signings. We have too many arms to evaluate at the ML level. If we're going limit the number of slots in the rotation for all of the evaluations we need to make, it needs to be for an acquisition who is going to dependably provide quality ML starts. And under the category of every pitcher must be evaluated individually, I'd trade Means if the return was really good. 

I think trading Means and leaving Grayson without a veteran in the rotation is not a good move.   So acquire the veteran starter first then maybe it makes more sense to trade Means.  Frankly, I don't think it going to happen.

[UMDTerrapins]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I think trading Means and leaving Grayson without a veteran in the rotation is not a good move.   So acquire the veteran starter first then maybe it makes more sense to trade Means.  Frankly, I don't think it going to happen.

I don't disagree with that conceptually, but I don't think it's going to happen simply because I don't think other teams will pony up the kind of return we'd need to justify trading Means, and for the same kinds of concerns that make me open to trading him.....that I don't trust he'll be able to perform at the same level he's presently seen as being. 

[SouthernBird]

The Orioles will be a terrible team until they move to a better city. 

[Camden_yardbird]

On 11/27/2021 at 1:01 PM, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Funny how the Rays have managed to consistently be good in the AL East since 2008 without spending like the Yankees and Red Sox.

Yes the Orioles have it harder in the AL East, but it's not an impossible task to win if you are a well run organization and have a plan like the Rays. 

The Rays are one of the least healthy organizations in MLB.  They frequently have the lowest fan turnout, they are usually rumored to be moving.  They have very low cable revenues.

Competitively they are run very well.  And the Franco extension certainly looks great now.