Eovaldi signed with Rangers per Moose

[Redskins Rick]

15 hours ago, Pickles said:

I mean, it's a theory.

If you sit back and do nothing, its pretty clear to just about everybody, that your main agenda probably isnt winning games.

They got an extra $30 million from Disney and spent $20 million so far. So they really arent changing how their ledger books are in the black or red.

For me, they did these minor deals and so they can then play the card, well, we tried, just couldnt get any of the better players to ink here.

 

[DrinkinWithFermi]

21 hours ago, LookinUp said:

I'm not sure I agree with this.

Internal promotions, more of Adley and Gunnar, Gibson over Lyles, Frazier/McCann over Odor/Chirinos and Givens say we're better than last year.

Add Eovaldi and we're improving still.

Say the deadline hits, we're close to contending and we still are rich in prospects if we want to add a big bat and/or arm.

Signing Eovaldi might just be what it takes to put us into that position at the deadline.

The numbers say that replacing Lyles with Gibson is basically a lateral move and that replacing Odor with Frazier is probably not much more than a minor upgrade. McCann is probably a solid upgrade over Chirinos but he has been pretty terrible for the last two years so even that is not guaranteed. Givens was a nice pickup but he really just fills the hole filled by trading Lopez at the deadline. It's also quite likely that there is some regression from the returning pitching staff and on the health front. 

In light of that, I don't see any reason to think Eovaldi would make the team a markedly better bet to reach the postseason, which in turn makes the idea of burning a high draft pick to sign him seem pretty pointless.

[LookinUp]

1 hour ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

The numbers say that replacing Lyles with Gibson is basically a lateral move and that replacing Odor with Frazier is probably not much more than a minor upgrade. McCann is probably a solid upgrade over Chirinos but he has been pretty terrible for the last two years so even that is not guaranteed. Givens was a nice pickup but he really just fills the hole filled by trading Lopez at the deadline. It's also quite likely that there is some regression from the returning pitching staff and on the health front. 

In light of that, I don't see any reason to think Eovaldi would make the team a markedly better bet to reach the postseason, which in turn makes the idea of burning a high draft pick to sign him seem pretty pointless.

The bolded is the biggest unknown, IMO. We got real contributions from Voth, Watkins, Kreibel, etc. last year. Bautista was awesome. Tate/Perez too. Starters, relievers. It didn't matter. Did the O's figure something out about their general approach to make the whole staff better? If so, it's sustainable. If not, major regression is possible across the board.

I do think Gibson is better than the Lyles we thought we were getting last year, by a good margin. Will his results improve as Lyles' did after he got here? Will Lyles regress in KC? I'd bet on both happening, actually, which would mean Gibson's a pretty substantial upgrade.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

2 hours ago, LookinUp said:

The bolded is the biggest unknown, IMO. We got real contributions from Voth, Watkins, Kreibel, etc. last year. Bautista was awesome. Tate/Perez too. Starters, relievers. It didn't matter. Did the O's figure something out about their general approach to make the whole staff better? If so, it's sustainable. If not, major regression is possible across the board.

I do think Gibson is better than the Lyles we thought we were getting last year, by a good margin. Will his results improve as Lyles' did after he got here? Will Lyles regress in KC? I'd bet on both happening, actually, which would mean Gibson's a pretty substantial upgrade.

Kremer is the biggest question mark for me. Some folks here seem to have him pencilled in as a perennial mid-rotation starter for us but the metrics suggest he was lucky last year and could regress pretty substantially. I'm also not entirely sold on Bradish's second half being a full blown breakout and could easily see him regressing some as well, but he is probably a better bet than Kremer. Grayson is a good bet to perform well, but he's never faced a single MLB hitter so it's possible that there will be growing pains. Wells, Voth, Hall, etc. are all question marks.

As for Gibson, his career averages are so similar to Lyles' 2022 that it's a bit uncanny. If that is what we get from him, that would represent a lateral move. He needs to outperform his 10 year averages to a fairly significant degree to represent a meaningful year-over-year upggrade over what we got from Lyles, and at 35 years old, I don't think I would bet on it.

Does adding Eovaldi to that rotation mix make us a realistic contender? It's debatable, but I personally don't really think so, and at the cost of a top 75 overall pick, I don't want to find out.

[Just Regular]

A Boston media member being cryptic about "an AL East club" along with Angels and Padres in this report.

https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/nathan-eovaldis-market-seems-to-be-heating-up

Do we or the Red Sox need him more?

[emmett16]

I don’t think they are going to give up any picks this year.  Maybe next year.  

[Sports Guy]

13 hours ago, Just Regular said:

A Boston media member being cryptic about "an AL East club" along with Angels and Padres in this report.

https://www.audacy.com/weei/sports/red-sox/nathan-eovaldis-market-seems-to-be-heating-up

Do we or the Red Sox need him more?

And are the Padres really a threat?

[Can_of_corn]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

And are the Padres really a threat?

They have an owner willing to spend.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They have an owner willing to spend.

But do they have the roster space?  I guess they could kick Lugo or Martinez to the pen if they chose to but right now, they are set in their rotation. 

[interloper]

Kinda seems like it's the Angels or the Orioles. Doubt we get him but at this point I could get excited about it. Not the biggest fan but he would strengthen the rotation without a doubt.

Eovaldi

Bradish

Grayson

Kremer

Gibson 

[sportsfan8703]

We pick 17, 53, 63, 86, and 100, in the top 100. We’d lose pick 53 if we signed Eovaldi. We’d have to give up pick 53 to sign Eovaldi. I’m not sure Elias wants to do that, but I guess the thinking would be is that Eovaldi is worth it, and if he has a big year then we could QO him and get a pick back next year. 
 

Eovaldi brings TOR potential and it’s looking like it won’t take a big long term deal to sign him. 
 

Overall, I hope we sign him. My reasoning is that it’s likely just a one year deal and he could at least be a TOR bridge until we get Means back, and we can reevaluate at the deadline.  I’d rather sacrifice the #53 pick then have to trade for a SP now. All things considered, this would clean up the offseason, and bridge the gap that was created by the other offseason moves in our division and the AL. 

[wildcard]

9 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

We pick 17, 53, 63, 86, and 100, in the top 100. We’d lose pick 53 if we signed Eovaldi. We’d have to give up pick 53 to sign Eovaldi. I’m not sure Elias wants to do that, but I guess the thinking would be is that Eovaldi is worth it, and if he has a big year then we could QO him and get a pick back next year. 
 

Eovaldi brings TOR potential and it’s looking like it won’t take a big long term deal to sign him. 
 

Overall, I hope we sign him. My reasoning is that it’s likely just a one year deal and he could at least be a TOR bridge until we get Means back, and we can reevaluate at the deadline.  I’d rather sacrifice the #53 pick then have to trade for a SP now. All things considered, this would clean up the offseason, and bridge the gap that was created by the other offseason moves in our division and the AL. 

I think the O's would lose their 3rd pick in the draft.  

Since Eovaldi was offered a QO this year I don't think he is eligible for another one.

Edited December 26, 2022 by wildcard

[Frobby]

59 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I think the O's would lose their 3rd pick in the draft.  

Since Eovaldi was offered a QO this year I don't think he is eligible for another one.

Correct.   The O’s as a revenue sharing recipient lose their third pick, not their second.  

[emmett16]

On 12/23/2022 at 1:21 PM, LookinUp said:

The bolded is the biggest unknown, IMO. We got real contributions from Voth, Watkins, Kreibel, etc. last year. Bautista was awesome. Tate/Perez too. Starters, relievers. It didn't matter. Did the O's figure something out about their general approach to make the whole staff better? If so, it's sustainable. If not, major regression is possible across the board.

I do think Gibson is better than the Lyles we thought we were getting last year, by a good margin. Will his results improve as Lyles' did after he got here? Will Lyles regress in KC? I'd bet on both happening, actually, which would mean Gibson's a pretty substantial upgrade.

The main difference last year vs. prior years was attacking the zone.  Hitting a baseball squarely is still the hardest thing to do in sports, gotta make the batter earn it.  I tend to think their approach is repeatable, but will only work if the players can execute.  Pitcher that struggle with control will always struggle.  Walks are free runs.  Can’t be giving  stuff away for feee

[RVAOsFan]

Sorry if I missed it but has anyone linked us to him or are we just assuming we are the AL East mystery team?