ESPN Top 100

[RZNJ]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You have Seven...no wait Six...years of team control before Adley has the right to pick his own employer.

I don't get why you wouldn't try and maximize the team's chances to win during that time period.

Especially since there is a fair chance that instead of six years, it's four, or five.

I think he's the type of player you accelerate your plan for.

I think we see how well that's worked out for the Angels.   It's baseball.   One player, no matter how good, is not  enough to change the basic plan/time frame for the franchise.

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I think we see how well that's worked out for the Angels.   It's baseball.   One player, no matter how good, is not  enough to change the basic plan/time frame for the franchise.

If you can't see the difference between signing Josh Hamilton and the corpse of Albert Pujols and adding a quality starting pitcher to a market deal then...what am I saying, of course you can't see the difference.  I forgot who I was responding to for a second.

[Sports Guy]

Are there any lists left?  Fangraphs maybe?

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you can't see the difference between signing Josh Hamilton and the corpse of Albert Pujols and adding a quality starting pitcher to a market deal then...what am I saying, of course you can't see the difference.  I forgot who I was responding to for a second.

You could make the case that every team should go for it every year.   One player isn't so important that you should be worried about wasting one of his years or veering away from the game plan.   As for "I forgot who I was responding to" you've already worn that line out but no skin off my nose.   I don't worry about criticism from smug, arrogant, know it alls.  lol

[btdart20]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You have Seven...no wait Six...years of team control before Adley has the right to pick his own employer.

I don't get why you wouldn't try and maximize the team's chances to win during that time period.

Especially since there is a fair chance that instead of six years, it's four, or five.

I think he's the type of player you accelerate your plan for.

That's a fair point.  All I've got is speculation...  A view bigger than one player, no matter how good that single player is?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

You could make the case that every team should go for it every year.   One player isn't so important that you should be worried about wasting one of his years or veering away from the game plan.   As for "I forgot who I was responding to" you've already worn that line out but no skin off my nose.   I don't worry about criticism from smug, arrogant, know it alls.  lol

Could you tho?

Could you have made an actual case that the 2019 Orioles should have "gone for it"? 

You've got an MVP caliber player who you probably won't be willing to extend.  You should have tons of room to add payroll.  You have complimentary pieces in place.  You have a multitude of other well regarded prospects in the high minors.

It should be go time.

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, btdart20 said:

That's a fair point.  All I've got is speculation...  A view bigger than one player, no matter how good that single player is?

Of course.

[Tony-OH]

13 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

If you want an insurance policy, you sign Harrison for 1/3 of the cost and start the young, ML ready players.

You have 3 MiL prospects that are second baseman. You have Urias as well.

The last thing this team needed was insurance.

And not $8 million of insurance when you literally have Urias as insurance there as well. 

Anyways, the key here is that we have a player who is considered widely as Top 100 prospects in all of baseball and who has over 400 PAs at AAA blocked by a guy who is what, the 2nd highest paid player on the team?

Forget Frazier for a bit  (I know that's hard for all of us, me included), but I think this tells us about how Elias likes to build his team.  He truly believes in veteranosity despite all the data and analytics he uses so well. 

On top of it, I think he and Sig think they are the smartest guys in the room and want to prove it by going against the grain and doing something like they did.

Lastly, I think it shows a little bit of the failure of the "move around to all infield positions" development style they've used. It was of no surprise they were going to need a 2B this year. Westburg was the most likely player that could have filled that position so why did he only play 40 games at 2B last year? 

Now I went back and watched a decent amount of his games at 2B and made sure to watch all of his errors and tried to find as many DPs as possible to see how he turns it from 2B. He missed a couple of catches that he should have made from throws from the left side and while he turned the DP effectively, if he's moving away from 1st base as he catches the ball there's not a lot on the throws. 

So for me, he's 45 level second baseman defensively right now, though I think with more time there he could be solid average. Which is completely fine since I believe his bat will play. 

So if it were me running the show, I'd be going into spring training with Westburg penciled into my starting 2B spot, Urias as my backup plan with Ortiz as my tertiary plan and would have felt pretty good that I upgraded over my 2022 contribution at the position. 

I'm thinking that Elias had plans on trading Westburg this offseason, and that plan never materialized for whatever reason. If there's no Westburg, Frazier's signing makes a little more sense though I still would not have liked him at his price tag.

I betcha, and he'll never admit it for a lot of reasons, but I'd betcha a good amount if he had a do over right now as the Orioles roster sits, the Frazier signing would never have happened.

I have to believe that the Frazier signing was the start of a series of signings and deals that were part of a master plan and that something went wrong. This left him with an $8 million Frazier and his major league minimum top 100 prospect who is ready on the same 40-man roster.

 

[Frobby]

30 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Are there any lists left?  Fangraphs maybe?

Yes.  That usually comes out the third week of February.

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

 

I have to believe that the Frazier signing was the start of a series of signings and deals that were part of a master plan and that something went wrong. This left him with an $8 million Frazier and his major league minimum top 100 prospect who is ready on the same 40-man roster.

 

I think that’s entirely possible.  

[RZNJ]

37 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Could you tho?

Could you have made an actual case that the 2019 Orioles should have "gone for it"? 

You've got an MVP caliber player who you probably won't be willing to extend.  You should have tons of room to add payroll.  You have complimentary pieces in place.  You have a multitude of other well regarded prospects in the high minors.

It should be go time.

This might be the time to go for it but I'd disagree that we need to go for it because it's one of Rutschman's years.

[interloper]

17 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think that’s entirely possible.  

Or maybe it's still something that hasn't happened yet, such as a trade of Urias in ST. 

Or maybe it's just depth! 

[LookinUp]

54 minutes ago, interloper said:

Or maybe it's still something that hasn't happened yet, such as a trade of Urias in ST. 

Or maybe it's just depth! 

A lot of things are possible, but there's probably a declining probability with these ideas. Signing an $8 million player purely for depth without an ulterior motive seems quite low probability.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, RZNJ said:

You could make the case that every team should go for it every year.   One player isn't so important that you should be worried about wasting one of his years or veering away from the game plan.   As for "I forgot who I was responding to" you've already worn that line out but no skin off my nose.   I don't worry about criticism from smug, arrogant, know it alls.  lol

No one is saying to veer off the plan. That is such a dumb argument.

The team  is ready to win now, which is exactly the position it should have been in when this started back in 2019. 
 

And now that it is, the idea that they aren’t trying their best to win is wrong.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

No one is saying to veer off the plan. That is such a dumb argument.

The team  is ready to win now, which is exactly the position it should have been in when this started back in 2019. 
 

And now that it is, the idea that they aren’t trying their best to win is wrong.

Being adaptable is supposed to be a good thing right?