“Lessen the pressure on Stowers and Vavra”

[RZNJ]

Just now, eddie83 said:

The evidence supports he is not trading for an arm or out bidding anyone in the FA market. Elias himself talked about how the market is playing out. 
 

I think it’s educated speculation. 

What evidence?  At the winter meetings Elias said something like "We are wide open to trading for a pitcher".   As to the FA market he said something like "We have offers out there and realize you have to pay the going rate".

The evidence you, Roch, and Connolly are using is that he hasn't signed or traded for that pitcher yet.

[Aristotelian]

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Did Elias use the term “less pressure” or is that Roch’s interpretation?   Either way, I agree it’s pretty clear the O’s don’t want to rely on Stowers and Vavra.   I can’t tell if they just don’t believe in them, or whether they’re just risk-averse here with two players who could be solid offensively but aren’t seen as sure things in the way that Adley and Gunnar are.  

Roch's interpretation. There was nothing new in that article, just a spin on what we already know. I don't get it, how could their be any less pressure on Stowers and Vavra than there already is? 

What's really disturbing to me, following the mea culpa about recirculating the "liftoff" quote, he now floats the name of Harold Castro. "Name a position he plays it," says Roch, but he's got -3.4 dWAR. Roch says he is .290 hitter but his actual average is .284, so that's some creative rounding. He's got little power and 3% BB rate. I really hope this is not the type of player we are looking at to fill out the roster. I'd rather roll with Vavra and Stowers and see how they adjust to the "pressure." 

[DrinkinWithFermi]

6 minutes ago, turtlebowl said:

I guess we will see but just because they drafted him doesn't mean they are handing a position to him.  Also, if you hit like Barry Bonds in his prime they would probably accept an average fielder but in my opinion decisions on this group coming up will really be weighed heavily by their defensive abilities. 

There are so many signs of this. We have been told that the O's brass are going to free agent pitchers and trying to sell them on their team emphasis on defense.  We saw decisions last year in regards to playing opportunities that now seem to point to defense being a big part of that decision.  I just think this is becoming a thing with them as they will not overlook defensive abilities when they are considering who is going to get the bulk of the playing time.  

If this is true you could probably look at the group coming up and see who will get extended opportunity to prove themselves.  Doesn't look like Vavra and Stowers will so it will be interesting to watch moving forward.

If sterling defense was really a dealbreaker, they would have used the pick on someone else. Using a #2 overall pick on a guy you did not expect to be a future core piece, especially one generally regarded as a bit of a reach, would be completely insane.

[eddie83]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I'm all for what's best for the Orioles.  From my vantage point I would have thought giving Stowers regular AB's would have been better than signing a LH equivalent to Hays.   Apparently, Elias disagrees.    I'm just curious as to why.

Guys get hurt, have off seasons etc. We don’t even know what caliber of player he will add. Depth is always needed. 

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, eddie83 said:

Guys get hurt, have off seasons etc. We don’t even know what caliber of player he will add. Depth is always needed. 

I get that.  I keep saying this.  Stowers does not appear to be plan A.    He might get a chance.  He might get 400 AB's.   It doesn't look like he's going to start the season in the regular rotation of AB's UNLESS someone gets hurt or they don't sign the bat they are talking about.   It's fair to wonder why Stowers isn't involved in Plan A.   He raked in AAA and hit well the last month of the season.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

If by 'team leader' you mean a black hole in the lineup and average, at best, with the glove, then yeah, sure.   

That’s not what I mean.  I agree with your characterization of his play.  But he brought a certain amount of swagger and fight that was helpful to the young players.   We heard this over and over.   I happen to believe that there’s more to how a team plays than just adding up numbers on a stat sheet.  Managers have to be careful about cutting the legs out from under someone who is looked up to by his teammates, even when a new player might be a bit better.  Obviously there are limits to that, but pretty much every manager I’ve ever watched takes that into consideration, regardless of how data-savvy that manager is.

And I will say, though I agree with your statement that Odor’s defense was “average at best,” that I think he’s better defensively than Vavra.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

What evidence?  At the winter meetings Elias said something like "We are wide open to trading for a pitcher".   As to the FA market he said something like "We have offers out there and realize you have to pay the going rate".

The evidence you, Roch, and Connolly are using is that he hasn't signed or traded for that pitcher yet.

For me, it's hard to see where that hypothetical trade could actually occur. Burnes, Woodruff, Ohtani, Gallen, and Bieber are not available. I think other teams match up better with the Marlins and that the Mariners will likely want more than Elias would give up for one year of Chris Flexen. There are not a lot of obvious trade candidates after that. The Cubs and Twins are trying to get better so guys like Stroman and Gray aren't going anywhere and the Tigers probably won't sell low on any of their guys. Arizona wants to add pitching so Merrill Kelly probably stays put too.

I guess we might be able to trade for Plesac or Civale from Cleveland but are they meaningfully better than Syndergaard or Manaea, who will only cost money? I don't think so but maybe Elias disagrees.

[wildcard]

14 minutes ago, G54377 said:

If Elias is saying we effectively can't afford a mid level starter (IE like 15-20 million per year), I'm sorry but that is complete BS and a slap in the face to the fans. We have one of the lowest payrolls in the game, and they punted almost half a decade of trying to win. 

I don't think that is what happened.  I think the value judgement was they didn't want to give Taillon 17M at age 34 which would be the last year of his 4 year deal.   Tailon is probably a guy that you only want for 2 years and give a third year grudgingly.  

The fourth year means the when you go to trade him after him 2nd year you have to eat a bunch of his remaining salary.  The 4th year was just a bridge too far.  I think we have to respect that Elias is disciplined enough to back away.

They also have to consider that they have Kremer, Bradish, Grayson, Wells, Voth  and now Gibson with Hall coming in the next year.  How much risk to they have to take on?    Watkins is a fall back with a 4.17 ERA as a starter last season.

I am sure they will keep trying to add a starter.  If Rodon does not get a 6th year they will in on him at 5.   Other than that they will be look for less risk at 3 years or less for the additional starter.

[interloper]

Just now, RZNJ said:

I get that.  I keep saying this.  Stowers does not appear to be plan A.    He might get a chance.  He might get 400 AB's.   It doesn't look like he's going to start the season in the regular rotation of AB's UNLESS someone gets hurt or they don't sign the bat they are talking about.   It's fair to wonder why Stowers isn't involved in Plan A.   He raked in AAA and hit well the last month of the season.

I think part of it might be that they want to platoon Hays, but they're not confident that Stowers is the guy to do that with. They might want a proven bat who hits righties to time-share with Hays. 

Personally, I think Hays is kind of a problem in this offense. It's fun when he gets hot, like Mountcastle. But we have a few OBP-deficient guys that can go cold at the same time for a long time and it's not fun. My gut is that Stowers is also going to be that kind of guy in the big leagues, but it's hard to say because we've barely seen him. 

Would I rather see Stowers get the majority of Hays' ABs next year though? Yes, I probably would. 

[wildcard]

21 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

I’m lost. You brought up them winning a bidding war for Gibson. He chose them over Toronto. What were you getting at? 

I think you just said what I am getting at. They won a bidding war over the Jays.

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

What evidence?  At the winter meetings Elias said something like "We are wide open to trading for a pitcher".   As to the FA market he said something like "We have offers out there and realize you have to pay the going rate".

The evidence you, Roch, and Connolly are using is that he hasn't signed or traded for that pitcher yet.

Didn't he also say something like "We have to be careful trading our ML players"?

That implies to me a degree of reticence in what he's willing to trade for a pitcher.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, wildcard said:

I think you just said what I am getting at. They won a bidding war over the Jays.

I'm not sure two team offering the same terms counts as having conducted a successful bidding war.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I think you just said what I am getting at. They won a bidding war over the Jays.

LMK when they win a bidding war for someone who is actually good.

[eddie83]

18 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

What evidence?  At the winter meetings Elias said something like "We are wide open to trading for a pitcher".   As to the FA market he said something like "We have offers out there and realize you have to pay the going rate".

The evidence you, Roch, and Connolly are using is that he hasn't signed or traded for that pitcher yet.

Elias poured cold water on trades. Poured cold water on the division. Talked about the window of the team. Talked about how the 1st year of a FA arm is usually the best. Talked about how strong the market has been.

 

How much more do you need? 

[Aristotelian]

6 minutes ago, interloper said:

 

Would I rather see Stowers get the majority of Hays' ABs next year though? Yes, I probably would. 

Especially if Hays could be part of a package that helps us get a pitcher. But maybe that doesn't happen til July. It's not Hays vs Stowers but rather Hays vs Stowers plus Hays return.