If the Orioles are to be contenders in 2023…

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Hello? Starting pitching is absolutely a glaring need. 

You could look at it this way: Kremer, Bradish, Voth and Wells all had solid seasons.   Grayson is coming.   Hall is available and has major upside.  So is SP a “glaring need?”   It’s certainly safer to have at least one more good to excellent starter.  But the need isn’t as “glaring” as in past seasons.  

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You could look at it this way: Kremer, Bradish, Voth and Wells all had solid seasons.   Grayson is coming.   Hall is available and has major upside.  So is SP a “glaring need?”   It’s certainly safer to have at least one more good to excellent starter.  But the need isn’t as “glaring” as in past seasons.  

Yes it’s a glaring need.  You can’t assume all of those guys match what they did.

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes it’s a glaring need.  You can’t assume all of those guys match what they did.

I don’t, as you know.  But I actually assume Bradish will be better than his overall 4.90 ERA for 2022.  

[tabletop]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You could look at it this way: Kremer, Bradish, Voth and Wells all had solid seasons.   Grayson is coming.   Hall is available and has major upside.  So is SP a “glaring need?”   It’s certainly safer to have at least one more good to excellent starter.  But the need isn’t as “glaring” as in past seasons.  

Even with those guys doing well they were 21st in starter ERA, 22nd in FIP, and 25th in fWAR last season.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, tabletop said:

Even with those guys doing well they were 21st in starter ERA, 22nd in FIP, and 25th in fWAR last season.

Let me be clear here: I’m playing devil’s advocate and nitpicking on the word “glaring.”

Grayson is obviously a big factor.  If he’s what we hope he can be, that dramatically strengthens our rotation over 2021.   Hall’s a big factor too, though I’m less confident of how he’ll pan out as a starter.   Could be a big asset, or could warrant a change of roles to the BP.  In an oprimistic but not crazy scenario, those two guys are enough to dramatically change the numbers you cited.  

So, I could argue that getting another good pitcher is the safest course, but the need isn’t “glaring.”   

Personally, I would like to sign the best pitcher we possibly can sign, whoever we decide that is.   And maybe a second guy too.  

 

[Moose Milligan]

I think one of the rallying cries I heard for Francona to be named Manager of the Year this year is that Cleveland started something like 23 rookies this year.  So if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for us, IMO.  Especially since we have a better ranked system.

 

45 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You could look at it this way: Kremer, Bradish, Voth and Wells all had solid seasons.   Grayson is coming.   Hall is available and has major upside.  So is SP a “glaring need?”   It’s certainly safer to have at least one more good to excellent starter.  But the need isn’t as “glaring” as in past seasons.  

Means should be coming back at some point too.

 

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Means should be coming back at some point too.

Good point.  

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

You could look at it this way: Kremer, Bradish, Voth and Wells all had solid seasons.   Grayson is coming.   Hall is available and has major upside.  So is SP a “glaring need?”   It’s certainly safer to have at least one more good to excellent starter.  But the need isn’t as “glaring” as in past seasons.  

Even if you assume those guys repeat their ERA from last year, you still need to replace Lyles' innings. Grayson will have an innings limit even in the best case scenario, and Wells has a history of injuries and may not even be a starter. "Glaring" is perhaps a slight overstatement but it's an obvious weakness with a lot of risk. 

[Moose Milligan]

10 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Even if you assume those guys repeat their ERA from last year, you still need to replace Lyles' innings. Grayson will have an innings limit even in the best case scenario, and Wells has a history of injuries and may not even be a starter. "Glaring" is perhaps a slight overstatement but it's an obvious weakness with a lot of risk. 

I think that's a solid assessment.  It's easy to believe that these guys that are still young and have upside will progress towards that upside in 2023.  

I'd like them to add two starters that have proven track records and fill in with G-Rod and his innings limit, Kremer and Bradish.  Voth as a long man/swing guy and Wells, too.  Still doesn't account for however Hall fits in the picture.

But this is good.  Too much talent, not enough spots.  It's going to force some guys to rise up and grab spots.  If they add two good starters our rotation could be very formidable.

 

 

[wildcard]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Hello? Starting pitching is absolutely a glaring need. 

I agree adding a starter, a big bat and a backup catcher is pretty glaring IMO.

[btdart20]

Play our best talent.  Don’t mortgage the future so we can be perennial competitors.

Competitive teams develop and trust their young talent all the time.  Maybe not to the degree we’ll be hoping for in 2023.  But we have to build a team.  We can’t buy a team.  The mess we were in when Elias got here was because we mortgaged the future and came up empty.  

[Camden Yards]

Any interest in Cody Bellinger? Still only 27 with some big years and playoff experience. Had two bad years but huge upside. Low risk high reward candidate who can play center, corner OF, 1B, or DH. What type of contract will he get?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/dodgers-to-non-tender-cody-bellinger.html

[RZNJ]

21 minutes ago, Camden Yards said:

Any interest in Cody Bellinger? Still only 27 with some big years and playoff experience. Had two bad years but huge upside. Low risk high reward candidate who can play center, corner OF, 1B, or DH. What type of contract will he get?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/dodgers-to-non-tender-cody-bellinger.html

No, and here's why.   He was great in 2019.   Good in 2020.  Horrific in 2021.  Not so good in 2022.   If you are looking for a rebound to greatness there's always a small chance but where does it get the Orioles?   You don't want to commit more than one year to Bellinger and Bellinger may not want to commit more than one year to any team.   So, you are looking at a one year contract with incentives.   In the meantime, Bellinger is going to, most likely, be taking AB's away from a similar type player in Kyle Stowers.   What the best-case scenario?   Even in a best-case scenario, low probability outcome, Bellinger is here for one year and helps the team and then goes to the highest bidder next year.    I'd rather just give the AB's to Stowers.   I think his floor offensively is close to what Bellinger did last year but I think his ceiling is as good or better than Bellinger's good 2020.    Also, the Dodgers are pretty smart and they are ready to move on.   That's another point against.

Edited November 19, 2022 by RZNJ

[Camden Yards]

Well the Dodgers do not always get it right.

https://www.mlb.com/press-release/astros-acquire-cuban-if-of-yordan-alvarez-from-dodgers-193027276

[btdart20]

48 minutes ago, Camden Yards said:

Any interest in Cody Bellinger? Still only 27 with some big years and playoff experience. Had two bad years but huge upside. Low risk high reward candidate who can play center, corner OF, 1B, or DH. What type of contract will he get?

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/11/dodgers-to-non-tender-cody-bellinger.html

As a short leash bench/4th OF, sure