Tanner Scott and Cole Sulser traded to Marlins

[Sports Guy]

Watch it be one of the best pens in baseball.

[NCRaven]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Watch it be one of the best pens in baseball.

Who knows?  It could happen.  Reliever performance is ridiculously unpredictable.

[SteveA]

43 minutes ago, Hazmat said:

Shawn Armstrong has made the Marlins opening day roster.  So now the have Bleier, Pop, Sulser, Scott and Armstrong in their pen.  

I think Pop was optioned.   See my latest post in the "Tracking Ex-Orioles" Thread on the MLB board.

[OriolesMagic83]

12 hours ago, Hazmat said:

Shawn Armstrong has made the Marlins opening day roster.  So now the have Bleier, Pop, Sulser, Scott and Armstrong in their pen.  

If I was in charge of trying to build a great bullpen, it probably wouldn't involve acquiring a lot of pitchers on the O's ML roster the last couple of years.

[Tony-OH]

On 4/5/2022 at 10:45 AM, Sports Guy said:

The roster they put out for most of last year and the players they used was absolutely a total tank job..just as the previous few years.

When you are tanking, you are actively trying to lose games. That’s not really up for debate.

The debate is, are they smart by doing it.  But there is no debate what the intention is and I have no idea why people want to fight back on it.  Again, Elias himself is admitting to not trying to win.  He is publicly stating, wins don’t matter right now.

i do think you are right that up until this season, the Orioles were tanking at the major league level. 

Whether it was smart or not is the actual debate. We'll know by next year in my opinion. 

Right now, I'm happy overall with the state of the farm system and their international presence, but I have concerns on their ability to develop and or identify pitching talent. when you are year four and talking about bringing in Matt Harvey, it tells me you've been unable to develop or identify good starting pitching talent.

When you constantly treat your young pitchers like Fabergé eggs and never let them pitch in competitive games to well after almost every organization would, it makes you wonder. Baumler held back 17 months after surgery despite pitching in spring training games. Hall held back almost 12 months after his injury, never had a surgery, now has to stay in purgatory.

Pitchers unable to rarely pitch more than 80 pitches at the minor league level. Pitchers who have failed almost across the board at the major league level. Pitchers in the minors pushed into roles as starters when it's clear they are not set up for that role at the high levels (Peralta/Sedlock/Akin, etc).

I just have concerns and until some young pitchers come out of the system and start pitching well at the major league level, I will continue to have concerns on how the Orioles develop pitching.

[Aristotelian]

I think there is a difference between intentionally losing games (tanking) and prioritizing long term development over winning in the short term. I think the Orioles have done the latter, perhaps pushing the envelope in doing so. If they wanted to lose games intentionally Chris Davis would still be playing.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

I think there is a difference between intentionally losing games (tanking) and prioritizing long term development over winning in the short term. I think the Orioles have done the latter, perhaps pushing the envelope in doing so. If they wanted to lose games intentionally Chris Davis would still be playing.

Yea there is a difference.  The Os are doing and have done both. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Yea there is a difference.  The Os are doing and have done both. 

Of course that doesn't mean that they are not trying to win each game, at the individual game level.

That would be a totally different kettle of fish.

[Aristotelian]

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Of course that doesn't mean that they are not trying to win each game, at the individual game level.

That would be a totally different kettle of fish.

I don't think they were intentionally losing at any level. I think they were trying to accomplish other developmental goals such as evaluating cheap sources of talent and saving money for the future. Losing a ton of games was a byproduct but not the intention. Some think it was a deliberate effort to get a higher pick. I can see how it looks that way but there are other possible explanations. 

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I don't think they were intentionally losing at any level. I think they were trying to accomplish other developmental goals such as evaluating cheap sources of talent and saving money for the future. Losing a ton of games was a byproduct but not the intention. Some think it was a deliberate effort to get a higher pick. I can see how it looks that way but there are other possible explanations. 

There aren’t other explanations.  This was the publicly stated goal.  I don’t get why this is controversial around here.

The Orioles have publicly said, winning games isn’t what they are trying to do. They were absolutely, positively, 100% not trying to win games. 
 

You can say they were prioritizing long term development but you can development long term players AND win games.  They aren’t mutually exclusive things.

[Can_of_corn]

33 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I don't think they were intentionally losing at any level. I think they were trying to accomplish other developmental goals such as evaluating cheap sources of talent and saving money for the future. Losing a ton of games was a byproduct but not the intention. Some think it was a deliberate effort to get a higher pick. I can see how it looks that way but there are other possible explanations. 

I think that accumulating draft capital was 100% part of the plan.

Elias is a draft guy he was going to play into that strength.

[Aristotelian]

32 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There aren’t other explanations.  This was the publicly stated goal.  I don’t get why this is controversial around here.

The Orioles have publicly said, winning games isn’t what they are trying to do. They were absolutely, positively, 100% not trying to win games. 
 

You can say they were prioritizing long term development but you can development long term players AND win games.  They aren’t mutually exclusive things.

 

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think that accumulating draft capital was 100% part of the plan.

Elias is a draft guy he was going to play into that strength.

I think there is a difference between not trying to win and intentionally losing. Intentionally losing would mean deliberately putting out inferior players to get higher picks. I think they were evaluating sources of cheap talent, while refusing to spend money or service time, and within those constraints putting out the best guys they could find. 

I think getting high picks were a predictable part of the strategy but I don't think they intentionally lost more games in order to move up in the order. Ultimately there is no way to prove that either way without getting in Elias's head so I will just agree to disagree. Feel free to have the last word. 

 

[NCRaven]

I'll admit that there's s subtle difference between not trying to win and actively trying to lose any particular game.  But the results are pretty much the same either way.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

 

I think there is a difference between not trying to win and intentionally losing. Intentionally losing would mean deliberately putting out inferior players to get higher picks. I think they were evaluating sources of cheap talent, while refusing to spend money or service time, and within those constraints putting out the best guys they could find. 

I think getting high picks were a predictable part of the strategy but I don't think they intentionally lost more games in order to move up in the order. Ultimately there is no way to prove that either way without getting in Elias's head so I will just agree to disagree. Feel free to have the last word. 

 

As I said before I don't think Hyde was ever told to lose games.  I don't think he ever made a move because he thought it would lead to a loss.  I don't think the players were ever told to lose or ever intentionally played below their capabilities.

I do believe that Elias built teams in such a way as to both be inexpensive and noncompetitive. 

The collection of high draft picks was part of the design on the plan.  It was a goal not a happy by product.

[Aristotelian]

38 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

As I said before I don't think Hyde was ever told to lose games.  I don't think he ever made a move because he thought it would lead to a loss.  I don't think the players were ever told to lose or ever intentionally played below their capabilities.

I do believe that Elias built teams in such a way as to both be inexpensive and noncompetitive. 

The collection of high draft picks was part of the design on the plan.  It was a goal not a happy by product.

That is very fair. I think we all agre Let me just put it another way. Let's say Kremer, Lowther, and Akin pitched to a 4.00 ERA and Tanner Scott figured out his control and put up a Britton '14 type of season. The O's are on track in July to win 70 games. Would Elias shut them down to ensure 60? Within the constraints stated above, I think Elias put out the best guys he could find.