Jump to content

Santander to play some first base?


seak05

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

His sprint speed has tanked in the last few years.

 

Exactly. You can look at his awful burst numbers that his speed has really fallen off. If he can play 1st base, that also improves his value as well and if he plays it well enough, it makes Mountcastle expendable this off season. Mountcastle typically ends the year strong offensively so if that happens again, he could have pretty good value this offseason is trades for starting pitching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NCRaven said:

Have to admit, Ryan hasn’t been very beastly lately. 🙁 Fan club meetings have been pretty quiet this past month.

Yep. Pretty disappointed. Not shocked, but I was definitely rooting and hopeful that Mountcastle was turning a bit of a corner. But just looks like it was another of his hot-cold cycles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, tntoriole said:

Hmmm 7 seasons in minors 6 in majors …. 9 games at first in A ball at Lynchburg 

 

A few grounders and he will be to go lol 

This (and Odor to 3B) seems like something they should have worked on in ST, not in August. Maybe if they've been practicing for weeks I guess that makes it better, but I think Brad Pitt's phrase is going to be tested in an extreme way pretty shortly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Mountcastle has been deemed the new Oriole Hangout whipping boy but let's stop just a second.

Folks don't like Mountcastle's approach and OBP.  Santander has a career OBP of 302 which is lower than Mountcastle's career OBP.

Mountcastle also has the higher career OPS+ of the two.

He's also younger and cheaper.

Yes this current stretch is very painful to watch but Santander is not the answer at first base.

  • Upvote 3
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 not saying we can’t trade for Scott. Or that we shouldn’t trade for someone. More that we basically already have one reliever we don’t have to trade for. But a guy who will likely have a relatively high whip due to command issues but have a well above average k rate… I also just don’t love rentals in general. Hit or miss as to whether they perform well anyway (hey jack flaherty) and then it’s gone. If you don’t win that year it’s all for nothing. For the right cost I’m okay with it, but I don’t want to give up a major prospect for a rental unless it’s the piece that puts us over the top 
    • They are not in a rebuild. And I don't want to waste time imagining that the team is bad and trading our best young players. As a matter of fact, I hope we don't have to do that for years to come. I envision adding good players not how can we get rid of the good ones that we have. I have waited my whole life to finally have a team this good. I don't mind at all trading good prospects. And have no delusional expectations that we can get value without surrendering value. Nor am I in love with the notion that we have to have a cheap, homegrown team. As a matter of fact, I want and expect the org to spend much more money on payroll than it is doing currently. Lastly, what happened with Gausman is in the past and under a totally different administration (ownership + front office). We were selling then. We are buying now.
    • Is there a reason it should be? He’s still walking 5.5+ batters per 9. He’s still got things he can work on. No rush to get him up unless it’s as a reliever down the stretch or a spot start. 
    • I mean Tanner Scott at least has a Major League track record. How much do you think Scott will really cost? Also, we have more position players and prospects that we could ever use. I understand maybe not wanting Scott, but I don't understand the logic of not wanting surrender any prospects (even some good ones). We almost have to at some point. Otherwise, you have 25 year old top level prospects like Kjerstad, who is in his prime now and killing it at AAA but has no place on the Big League roster. Stowers is even older and has contributed relatively nothing to the Orioles and is now age 26.
    • Way to avoid the question.  If the O's were in rebuild mode and had Gray Rod in the exact position he is now, what kind of prospect package would you want?  Fans here are notorious for not wanting to give up any good prospects for other team's best players but then want the world for their own less than perfect players.  When Gausman was about to be traded here (way less an impressive pitcher than Gray Rod is now), posters here were convinced that the O's would get 3 top 100 prospects for him.  The O's got none 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...