Jump to content

Means to Have TJ surgery


TonySoprano

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Orioles0615 said:

I mean I can easily see this as another excuse not to spend money. 

Lol, that is some next level conspiracy thinking. There is no way a player voluntarily goes under the knife and misses a year (plus) without medical necessity verified by multiple doctors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Lol, that is some next level conspiracy thinking. There is no way a player voluntarily goes under the knife and misses a year (plus) without medical necessity verified by multiple doctors. 

huh? I mean a Means surgery will be another excuse used this offseason to not sign any free agents next year. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NelsonCruuuuuz said:

Agreed. Isn’t he a FA after next year? Why not try to lock him up given the circumstances?

Well I agree with this sentiment, but I don't know if the Orioles are going to want to spend money on a player coming off a serious injury.

In fact as other posters are speculating this might be used as an excuse to not sign free agents in advance of the 2023 season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Well I agree with this sentiment, but I don't know if the Orioles are going to want to spend money on a player coming off a serious injury.

In fact as other posters are speculating this might be used as an excuse to not sign free agents in advance of the 2023 season. 

Of course, because they don’t want to spend any money. This is the guy you try to lock up with a team friendly deal given the risks and history with Baltimore. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NelsonCruuuuuz said:

Of course, because they don’t want to spend any money. This is the guy you try to lock up with a team friendly deal given the risks and history with Baltimore. 

It would also buy some goodwill with the fanbase. I'd rather see money spent on John Means instead of signing the next Ubaldo Jimenez. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are rebuilding, risks must be taken because players get hurt no matter what.  It would have been a risk trading him last year or the year before, but that may have turned out well.  It would be a risk to sign him to a long term deal now but this is when you get a bargain that he is right now. 
If not, then you see where he fits in to the squad after rehab .. maybe Grayrod and D Hall and others have stepped up and he can add to a rotation to win or be dealt for other needs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • I'm certainly not "fixated" on this. The real issue is the budget. How high will Rubenstein be willing to grow the payroll?
    • It will be retired with the first big $$ free agent or extension signed under Rubenstein.
    • I have no idea what you are arguing. 
    • Cool, nice work there.   So? Are we owed a large market? Does DC not deserve their own team? Should the fans of Baltimore just become Redskins fans and not tried to get their own team when the Colts left?  (sorry to bring up football again but come on, that fits). I laid it all out a couple months ago, MLB has more teams bringing home the hunk of metal than other sports since 2000.  The competitive balance is fine.  It's harder?  Yea?  OK it's harder.
    • The Cowboys have an owner with deep pockets. I agree 100% … There is some cap manipulation that happens. At the end of the day they have a $255 million limit they are required to operate under. The Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, etc can decide each year how much they want to add to the luxury tax fund as opposed to not being able to fit a potential move under the cap. Here are the 2024 payrolls for the NFL and MLB   https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2024/04/03/mlb-team-payrolls-2024-highest-lowest-mets/73139425007/ Highest $305 million vs $60 million  https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/_/year/2024/sort/cap_maximum_space Highest $259.5 million vs $217 million these numbers will likely get tighter once they make additions before the trade deadline.  If you can’t see the difference I’m just wasting my time. The biggest driving force in MLB beyond the ability of some to spend lavishly is the tv markets. The club controls so much of their tv revenue that it’s an unfair game. The moved that created the Orioles didn’t have much of an effect on the Senators tv market which was likely nonexistent then. Plus MLB is allowing contract manipulation like Othani’s contract. Instead of $700 divided by length 10 years, Somehow he only counts as like $46 million which is laughable. Plus they are paying $85 million in luxury tax fees in 2024.    The Orioles were a large market team when the Expos moved to DC. They could afford to spend with the Yankees, Red Sox , and Blue Jays. Could the Orioles afford to pay $85 million in luxury tax fees? Could the Yankees? I know the answer to both.  What grounds ? Who cares ? The impact was astronomical …It made it very difficult to compete in the AL East without tank a thon! It split their tv market in half. Obviously MLB papered over that long enough to get an agreement done.    They turned a large market team into 2 small/mid market teams. The Orioles and Nationals payrolls combined place them only 11th in baseball. Obviously they could afford to spend more. But it’s doubtful either will ever be top 10 for more than a season  or two as they try to hang onto a window.     
    • Thanks for the detailed explanation of all of the issues.  Sounds like a mess.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...