ESPN’s Bradford Doolittle thinks the O’s currently are a 72-win team

[eddie83]

I will be curious what the Vegas over/under will be set at. 72 will be way low. My guess is about 80. 

[ChosenOne21]

38 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That’s undoubtedly false.

Frazier > Odor
Givens > Vespi/Krehbiel
Gibson > Lyles (maybe)
McCann > Chirinos/Bemboom

It's possible these moves could totally blow up, but I'll bet we get at least 2 more WAR out of them than we got out of the players they're replacing

[eddie83]

I assume he has Boston ahead of the Orioles? What about Minn and LAA?

 

 

[Camden_yardbird]

Balanced schedule this year right?

That should also presumably help.

I can see where this projection comes from but I don't think it's justified.  The bullpen basically performed as well as it could last year and bullpen are volatile.  They rarely go back to black seasons at the same level of performance.

Add in a concern over the lack of SP depth and I get it.  Voth, Kremer, Bradish provided some very good innings last year and I could understand someone saying that's not sustainable.

That said, this writer is smoking something.  There is no way they regress that much.  It's not like they burned out the farm either.  The Orioles farm is built to sustain success.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:

Balanced schedule this year right?

That should also presumably help.

I can see where this projection comes from but I don't think it's justified.  The bullpen basically performed as well as it could last year and bullpen are volatile.  They rarely go back to black seasons at the same level of performance.

Add in a concern over the lack of SP depth and I get it.  Voth, Kremer, Bradish provided some very good innings last year and I could understand someone saying that's not sustainable.

That said, this writer is smoking something.  There is no way they regress that much.  It's not like they burned out the farm either.  The Orioles farm is built to sustain success.

While I think his estimate is low they certainly could regress that much.

Pitching regresses, a few guys get hurt... You see it every year.

[Ripken]

72 sounds low but I think it's likely the pitching regresses a bit from last year.  That, and Elias has (so far) not improved the offense, so any projection over .500 seems rather optimistic. 

[sportsfan8703]

36 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

I will be curious what the Vegas over/under will be set at. 72 will be way low. My guess is about 80. 

Guessing the lines my favorite. I’m thinking it’s going to be closer to 72. I think if the line was 80 then the under would get pounded with 90% of bets. I think the national perception is that we got lucky. Im guessing it’ll be 74.5 I could see that getting the 50/50 type action that Vegas desires. 

[sportsfan8703]

40 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

Frazier > Odor
Givens > Vespi/Krehbiel
Gibson > Lyles (maybe)
McCann > Chirinos/Bemboom

It's possible these moves could totally blow up, but I'll bet we get at least 2 more WAR out of them than we got out of the players they're replacing

Givens for Khreibel/Vespi isn’t an apples to apples swap. Khriebel had a 2.77 ERA though September 10th. That dude was nails for us until he tired out. Vespi is valuable too. They both have options. 
 

Givens is actually the replacement for the whole that the Jorge Lopez trade created and a Jake Reed replacement. Givens also lightens the daily load off of Baker and Khriebel in the 5th/6th/7th/8th inning roles. 

[sportsfan8703]

Of course Gunnar and Grayson make us better on OD, but does that even keep us even to what we were last year considering that TB is healthy, and the the Jays and Yankees made a bunch of improvements?

I still would like to see us add one of Eovaldi/Wacha, and a bat.  Hosmer or Pham for the bat. I think those moves would complete the team and give us a great bullpen, rotation depth/quantity, and a plus bench. The offense will improve with full seasons of Gunnar and Adley, and hopefully bounce back years from Hays and Mountcastle. However, there’s always going to be the question about can our rotation repeat those results?  I think the answer is yes If we sign one more FA SP, get Means back in late May, and rely on a top bullpen that will feature Wells, Voth, and Givens added. 

[PHRESH]

3 hours ago, waroriole said:

I’m not surprised this guy made that prediction. Bradford Dolittle is the worst baseball name I’ve ever heard. 

Dude probably talks to animals when he's not writing this crap. 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

On paper they're undoubtedly better with those additions.

I concede the games aren't played on paper.

You are still wrong 

[btdart20]

36 minutes ago, Ripken said:

Elias has (so far) not improved the offense, so any projection over .500 seems rather optimistic. 

McCann > Chirinos/Bemboom.  20-30+ games are improved.

And I think Frazier is significantly better than Odor.  Especially from an OBP and low K% perspective.

Adley, Gunnar…

Elias has made the offense better.  Maybe not how you (or any of us) would have.  

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, ChosenOne21 said:

Frazier > Odor
Givens > Vespi/Krehbiel
Gibson > Lyles (maybe)
McCann > Chirinos/Bemboom

It's possible these moves could totally blow up, but I'll bet we get at least 2 more WAR out of them than we got out of the players they're replacing

People need to remember that we also are replacing Lopez’s innings that were damn good until he was dealt.  We also don’t know that the arms that came out of nowhere would be as good.

Gibson is far from a definite to be better than Lyles.

McCann and Frazier are likely upgrades but not likely by some big amount.

More than any of this, it depends on the development of young players, so guys turn into pumpkins, etc…

We could sign Eovaldi today and I still don’t think we should say, we are DEFiNTELY better. That’s a stretch and assumes no one struggles.

And again, the one thing Os fans continue to gloss over is how healthy the team was last year. 

I would agree that on paper, we SHOULD be better. But saying it’s definite is absolutely wrong.

[Roll Tide]

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

24. Baltimore Orioles

Projected wins: 72.4
Playoff odds: 6%
Title odds: 0% (no change)
Aggression rank: 19
Improvement rank: 8

While I was hoping for a splashy Orioles winter -- Correa! Jacob deGrom! -- I also understood that the team couldn't operate as if last year's playoff contention was a real thing. Well, of course it was real, and it was spectacular. But the Orioles weren't as good as their record. They were a team still in rebuild mode that had an emergent bullpen and saw the ascension of some key young players, including new franchise face Adley Rutschman. Allowing the new young core to coalesce is probably smart, even as Baltimore tries to be opportunistic in the star market going forward. But a real splash would have been fun.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/35292245/ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-biggest-free-agents-signed

Interesting that Doolittle ranks the O’s 8th in improvement.   As he explains: “The ‘improvement’ rank considers the net impact a team's offseason machinations have had on its 2023 outlook. This is a rating on the moves alone, not on the team's overall chances to be better, an assessment that should also consider aging patterns, improvement of young players, regression factors, etc.”

 

8th most improved ….but less wins?

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 

I would agree that on paper, we SHOULD be better. But saying it’s definite is absolutely wrong.

Very little is ever definite in baseball.  The O’s have a lot of room to be better or worse, depending on the factors you cited and others.