Bashing The O’s

[geschinger]

8 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I mean, the O's could have signed Lyles, Davies and Ed Rod. Even one more guy. Payroll is $60 million and they probably win 70 games. Young guys compete for innings. Don't block position players.

I understand the logic if they did that. I understand people wanting them to do that.

It is a alternative and also a legit approach.  I think Detroit is taking an approach similar to this albeit with bats and arms - but similar in scope.

[Tony-OH]

41 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

First of all, as I explained, there was obvious sarcasm used in the Valaika comment. We had some good players.  Of course, apparently even though those are good players, we don't have a foundation yet so we can't go out and get other good players.  I am still trying to figure out that logic too.

Secondly, the argument being made is that we are n the same spot as the 2014 Astros.  That's wrong and my post outlines why its wrong.  We are at least a year behind that and while you can try to blame the pandemic, the bottom line is there is a lot more to it than that, including the team trying to manipulate service time as much as possible and giving the wrong players chances.  

I'm not focused on the Astros, I'm focused on where we are as an organization. 

Are you telling me you don't think we have a foundation of good players? I disagree. 

By the end of the year, our lineup could look like this:

1B - Mountcastle
2B - Urias/Mateo
SS - Mateo/Urias/Ortiz
3B - Westburg
LF - Hays
CF - Mullins
Rf - Stowers
C- Rutschman

Our Rotation could be:

1. Means
2. Rodriguez
3. Hall
4. Bradish
5. Lyles/T. Wells

Our bullpen could be: 

1. Lopez (97-99 MPH)
2. Bautista (97-100 MPH)
3. Tate (96-98 MPH)
4. Scott (96-99 MPH) - LHP
5. Perez (95-97 MPH) - LHP
6. Baumann (96-98 MPH)
 

Now all of these guys may not work out, in fact, chances are they all won't, but that's where next year's off season will allow us to augment this core.

I guess I just see an exciting core that is ready to show up this year and that doesn't even include Mayo, Cowser and Henderson who may not be far behind. 


 

[Tony-OH]

15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I wanted 2 starters.  ERod/Stroman and another cheap guy like Davies(I don’t think I ever actually wanted Davies but just using him as an example).  Add them to GRod and whoever ends up earning the other starts out of the group of arms we often talk about. 
 

Why would they have been wrong?  Wouldn’t you say in a year or so, when we are “attempting to win”, that it’s very likely we will need to add at least one starter?  Why do we have to wait to add that starter?

BTW, these questions are more general and not necessarily directed at you.

I would not have been upset had the Orioles went in that direction this year i guess, but does that mean you don't give these innings to the T.Wells, Lowther, Zimmerman, Bradish now? I want to see what these guys do at the major league level. If that means we win a few less games than we would with Davies/Erod I'm ok with this THIS year. Next year we'll know what we have in them and we can then decide what starting pitching needs to be acquired.

2023 is the year we should be contenders. 2022 is a transition year. We are no longer in the 2021 play and pitch AAAA guys or sign washed up Matt Harvey's and hope they eat innings. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I'm not focused on the Astros, I'm focused on where we are as an organization. 

Are you telling me you don't think we have a foundation of good players? I disagree. 

By the end of the year, our lineup could look like this:

1B - Mountcastle
2B - Urias/Mateo
SS - Mateo/Urias/Ortiz
3B - Westburg
LF - Hays
CF - Mullins
Rf - Stowers
C- Rutschman

Our Rotation could be:

1. Means
2. Rodriguez
3. Hall
4. Bradish
5. Lyles

Our bullpen could be: 

1. Lopez (97-99 MPH)
2. Bautista (97-100 MPH)
3. Tate (96-98 MPH)
4. Scott (96-99 MPH) - LHP
5. Perez (95-97 MPH) - LHP
6. Baumann (96-98 MPH)
 

Now all of these guys may not work out, in fact, chances are they all won't, but that's where next year's off season will allow us to augment this core.

I guess I just see an exciting core that is ready to show up this year and that doesn't even include Mayo, Cowser and Henderson who may not be far behind. 


 

Of course I think we have a foundation.  It was argued in here the other day that we don’t.  That’s my whole damn point.  People say we have good players but then say we don’t have a foundation.  People say we have a great system but no one wants to bring up players because we aren’t ready to win.  People say you can’t sign players because we aren’t ready to win.

Well how do we get ready to win if never play good players?  If we are giving 1700 at bats to the Pat Valaika all stars and giving a bunch for starts to players with no future and who aren’t good, how do you expect us to be in position to win?  If all you want to do is sit around and hold onto prospects until they fail and then trade them, how do you get good players for them?  If all you want to do is keep fan favorites who aren’t part of the future, how do you get better?  
 

I don’t get any of this line of thinking.  It’s all wrong and there is no consistency.

Im the one who said we could contend next year.  I actually believe in these guys and want additions made now to make the team better.  
 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I would not have been upset had the Orioles went in that direction this year i guess, but does that mean you don't give these innings to the T.Wells, Lowther, Zimmerman, Bradish now? I want to see what these guys do at the major league level. If that means we win a few less games than we would with Davies/Erod I'm ok with this THIS year. Next year we'll know what we have in them and we can then decide what starting pitching needs to be acquired.

2023 is the year we should be contenders. 2022 is a transition year. We are no longer in the 2021 play and pitch AAAA guys or sign washed up Matt Harvey's and hope they eat innings. 

They signed Lyles, who is essentially Matt Harvey in a lot of ways.

And yes, I’m fine with not giving all of the starter innings right now.  They aren’t all going to get them anyway and they will likely be rotated until someone shows they are good.  There would still be 2 spots in the rotation plus the pEn and it’s not like we will only use 5 starters the whole year.

So yes, give me the better talent and let the other guys sort it out.  We will be lucky to have 3 homegrown guys in the 2023 rotation.

[Aristotelian]

31 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

First of all, as I explained, there was obvious sarcasm used in the Valaika comment. We had some good players.  Of course, apparently even though those are good players, we don't have a foundation yet so we can't go out and get other good players.  I am still trying to figure out that logic too.

Secondly, the argument being made is that we are n the same spot as the 2014 Astros.  That's wrong and my post outlines why its wrong.  We are at least a year behind that and while you can try to blame the pandemic, the bottom line is there is a lot more to it than that, including the team trying to manipulate service time as much as possible and giving the wrong players chances.  

I definitely agree that we are a different team than the 2014 Astros. However, I don't know that we are treating players differently. 

Springer made his debut in 2014 at Age 24 on April 16, after spending the first two weeks in AAA. Rutschman is also on track to debut at Age 24 as soon as he gains an extra year of service time. I don't think we are doing anything unusual with him. 

I don't know what you mean by giving the wrong players chances. It is true that many of our prospects have not performed but they were all promoted on what I think most would consider a reasonable timeline. We used 2019-21 seasons to try a lot of waiver wire guys and came up with Tyler Wells, Urias, and Mateo. Would have been nice to hit on a few more but it's tough when you are looking at players that other teams don't value. 

[forphase1]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Me?

Adley, Grayson, Moutcastle, Mullins, Hays.

 

Adley - He is already under control for what will likely be his best seasons, and as a catcher his good years are likely to be shorter than other position players.  I'm not sure that I want much more than maybe a year or two longer of an extension versus what we already have with him.  I'm probably more on the side of ride him hard as a catcher for these next 5 years or so, then let someone else pay big money for his decline.  I wouldn't say an extension is a horrible idea if the price is right, but I wouldn't lock him up for a super long time.  He's already 24, 6-7 years is all I'd really want him for, especially if he's going to be pricey at the end.

Grayson - This is one I think we should extend ASAP considering our lack of depth at pitcher.  I'm not talking stupid money, and honestly I'd rather see a bit what he does this year against some MLB hitters, but I'd agree to extending him if we could get it done right.  More time would be good to evaluate, but he's the most likely one IMO.

Mountcastle - I love the guy and think we have enough information on him to know what we are going to get year in and year out.  I'd be willing to extend him at a reasonable price, as his position and skillset isn't super valuable or hard to find.  Good hitting first basemen are not really rare, so I'd certainly support extending him if the price was reasonable.  I think his skillset will keep him valuable for quite a while, he's only 25, and I think he'd be good for a while.  

Mullins - What Mullins did last year was incredible.  What he did prior to last year was questionable.  I'd be willing to extend him, but only at the right price and not at the premium he'd probably want based on last year.  While I think he's solved some things and is clearly better than he had shown prior to last year, I'm not sure he's the MVP caliber type player we saw for much of last year.  He's only 27, and while speed is one of the first things to go, I think he's going to be serviceable for a while.  All that said, he's not a free agent until 2026, so we have control for his 27, 28 and 29 seasons already.  I wouldn't mind signing him until his age 32-33 season if the price is right, but again I want to see a bit more to know just who we have before giving him a huge extension moneywise.  

Hays - I absolutely love Hays and love what he brings to the table.   When he's on the field.  Which is why I'd hesitate to extend him, he can't stay healthy.  I don't care how talented you may be, if you can't play you aren't helping the team.  If he can stay healthy and productive for 130-140 games this year, then I'd be much more willing to sign him for a longer contract, and maybe lock him up for his early 30s.  But for me to extend him right now, I think it'd need to be very team favorable extension.

 

Point being all of these guys have flaws with either 1) not enough MLB experience to risk a long deal yet (AR, GRod) 2) Too much inconsistency in their history to trust a long term deal (Mullins or 3) injury concerns (Hays).  The only one I'd want to extend at this moment is Mountcastle, and unfortunately he's the most replaceable of the bunch as far as bat and position goes.  There are quite a few guys in the minors that hopefully will warrant serious extension consideration in the next few years too.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

First of all, as I explained, there was obvious sarcasm used in the Valaika comment. We had some good players.  Of course, apparently even though those are good players, we don't have a foundation yet so we can't go out and get other good players.  I am still trying to figure out that logic too.

Secondly, the argument being made is that we are n the same spot as the 2014 Astros.  That's wrong and my post outlines why its wrong.  We are at least a year behind that and while you can try to blame the pandemic, the bottom line is there is a lot more to it than that, including the team trying to manipulate service time as much as possible and giving the wrong players chances.  

Or, the team being in a worse starting position than the 2011 Astros when Elias took over in 2018.   

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

Or, the team being in a worse starting position than the 2011 Astros when Elias took over in 2018.   

You mean when Elias was brought over to head amateur scouting. 

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You mean when Elias was brought over to head amateur scouting. 

Right.   I’m saying the state of the Orioles as of Oct. 2018 was worse than the state of the Astros as of Oct. 2011.   And, some key pieces were further along.  For example, Grayson Rodriguez was drafted the summer before Elias took over, but he was a high school kid.   George Springer was drafted by the Astros the summer before Luhnow took over, but he was a college guy.   Hence, it’s not surprising that Springer reached the majors three years after he was drafted, while it will be at least four for Grayson.  

[Sports Guy]

20 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Or, the team being in a worse starting position than the 2011 Astros when Elias took over in 2018.   

All the more reason to be more aggressive with promotions, free agent signings, trades, using your money to your advantage, etc….but nah, that would mean not manipulating players service time and ownership opening their wallets.  
 

It’s far easier to just be terrible and convince the fan base that “this is the right thing to do”. 

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Right.   I’m saying the state of the Orioles as of Oct. 2018 was worse than the state of the Astros as of Oct. 2011.   And, some key pieces were further along.  For example, Grayson Rodriguez was drafted the summer before Elias took over, but he was a high school kid.   George Springer was drafted by the Astros the summer before Luhnow took over, but he was a college guy.   Hence, it’s not surprising that Springer reached the majors three years after he was drafted, while it will be at least four for Grayson.  

Funny that you aren’t using Adley as the comp here.  You pick the HS kid but not the college one.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Funny that you aren’t using Adley as the comp here.  You pick the HS kid but not the college one.

I picked the HS kid because I was discussing what was already in the system when the new GM took over.   

[Three Run Homer]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I'm not focused on the Astros, I'm focused on where we are as an organization. 

Are you telling me you don't think we have a foundation of good players? I disagree. 

By the end of the year, our lineup could look like this:

1B - Mountcastle
2B - Urias/Mateo
SS - Mateo/Urias/Ortiz
3B - Westburg
LF - Hays
CF - Mullins
Rf - Stowers
C- Rutschman

Our Rotation could be:

1. Means
2. Rodriguez
3. Hall
4. Bradish
5. Lyles/T. Wells

Our bullpen could be: 

1. Lopez (97-99 MPH)
2. Bautista (97-100 MPH)
3. Tate (96-98 MPH)
4. Scott (96-99 MPH) - LHP
5. Perez (95-97 MPH) - LHP
6. Baumann (96-98 MPH)
 

Now all of these guys may not work out, in fact, chances are they all won't, but that's where next year's off season will allow us to augment this core.

I guess I just see an exciting core that is ready to show up this year and that doesn't even include Mayo, Cowser and Henderson who may not be far behind. 


 

We have a foundation of good position players in the system.  We do not have enough pitching in the system to be good this year or in the future.   We lost 110 games last year because our starting pitching was 1930s-Phillies-bad, which in turn was because we threw a bunch of young guys into the major league rotation who had not yet shown that they could even handle AAA.  We are doing the same thing this year.   

If Elias doesn't want to use high draft picks on pitchers, then he needs to do something else to bring pitching in the organization, either free agent signings or trades.   Right now, he's doing nothing, which could mean that he's biding his time, but which could also mean he doesn't understand the problem.  

[wildcard]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I'm not focused on the Astros, I'm focused on where we are as an organization. 

Are you telling me you don't think we have a foundation of good players? I disagree. 

By the end of the year, our lineup could look like this:

1B - Mountcastle
2B - Urias/Mateo
SS - Mateo/Urias/Ortiz
3B - Westburg
LF - Hays
CF - Mullins
Rf - Stowers
C- Rutschman

Our Rotation could be:

1. Means
2. Rodriguez
3. Hall
4. Bradish
5. Lyles/T. Wells

Our bullpen could be: 

1. Lopez (97-99 MPH)
2. Bautista (97-100 MPH)
3. Tate (96-98 MPH)
4. Scott (96-99 MPH) - LHP
5. Perez (95-97 MPH) - LHP
6. Baumann (96-98 MPH)
 

Now all of these guys may not work out, in fact, chances are they all won't, but that's where next year's off season will allow us to augment this core.

I guess I just see an exciting core that is ready to show up this year and that doesn't even include Mayo, Cowser and Henderson who may not be far behind. 


 

Hmm,  Almost sound like something I could have written.   Of course Tony says it better.