Gunnar Henderson 2023

[bpilktree]

Gunnar will be fine but at some point you have to decide if he just needs a break to take the pressure off and reset.  He is starting to chase some pitches the last week or so he was laying off and looks to be pressing now.  We have guys that can come up right now that are producing in minors that are knocking on the door.  I don’t see sending him down as demotion just a chance to reset and he could be back up in two weeks or so.  

[Triple Crown]

Agree with bpilk here. This would be a good time to swap Westburg for Gunnar, just for a breather and Westburg deserves a shot

[Moose Milligan]

2 hours ago, now said:

Good comp with Ripken. I've been thinking also of Mike Schmidt's first full year, age 23, hitting .196/.324/.373; or Barry Bonds, age 21, hitting .223/.330/.416

It’s easy to cherry pick all time greats because they’re memorable. Probably don’t have to look far to find a lot of guys that were once hyped that didn’t pan out. 
 

That’s not to say that Gunnar won’t figure it out but it’s silly to think he will because Mike Schmidt, Cal Ripken and Barry Bonds did. 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

It’s easy to cherry pick all time greats because they’re memorable. Probably don’t have to look far to find a lot of guys that were once hyped that didn’t pan out. 
 

That’s not to say that Gunnar won’t figure it out but it’s silly to think he will because Mike Schmidt, Cal Ripken and Barry Bonds did. 

The whole argument is silly. He’s struggling. 
 

He has warts in his game. 
 

He’s young and he’s learning. Some guys take off immediately. Some need more time.

Either way, he has nothing left to prove in the minors. Sending him back down isn’t going to help him unless there is something going on behind closed doors mentally.

Elias talked about it today. He talked about how switching positions isn’t ideal. He talked about everything on his plate. Going down to get 50 AAA at bats isn’t changing that.

He just needs to learn. 
 

The starters are struggling, Adley can barely get the ball beyond 150ft away from the plate, Hays has been been hurt, Mateo is coming back to earth, etc…sometimes guys are up, sometimes they are down.

it’s a long season. We have people on here who actually believe Mateo will have a 950 OPs the whole year and then we have guys who want Gunnar sent down and are questioning his abilities.

People are obsessed with small sample sizes and can’t get it through their heads that we just need patience and allow things to play out over a long season.

IIrC, during Adley’s struggles early on last year, we had people on here that he needed to be sent down. Those people obviously look like complete fools but yet, here we are again..having the same conversations. 

[Can_of_corn]

If he thinks switching positions isn't ideal why does he have guys up and down the organization doing it?

[Gofannon]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

It’s easy to cherry pick all time greats because they’re memorable. Probably don’t have to look far to find a lot of guys that were once hyped that didn’t pan out. 
 

That’s not to say that Gunnar won’t figure it out but it’s silly to think he will because Mike Schmidt, Cal Ripken and Barry Bonds did. 

I didn't mean to suggest that Gunnar was going to be Ripken, just that the O's showed patience with Cal when he had a significantly tougher month in 1982 than Gunnar has had so far..  That team was focused on competing and developing him at the same time and they started slowly (11-18 in early May).

That said, Weaver sure didn't stick him in the middle of the lineup.  In the May 3, 1982 game, Ripken's low point in terms of batting stats, he hit ninth in the order, below Lenn Sakata and Rick Dempsey.  Then Floyd Rayford pinch-ran (!) for him in the 5th.  No clean-up spots for him - they just left him in the bottom of the line-up to figure it out.

[24fps]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If he thinks switching positions isn't ideal why does he have guys up and down the organization doing it?

And advocating the benefits of both sides of the question in the same interview no less.

[bpilktree]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The whole argument is silly. He’s struggling. 
 

He has warts in his game. 
 

He’s young and he’s learning. Some guys take off immediately. Some need more time.

Either way, he has nothing left to prove in the minors. Sending him back down isn’t going to help him unless there is something going on behind closed doors mentally.

Elias talked about it today. He talked about how switching positions isn’t ideal. He talked about everything on his plate. Going down to get 50 AAA at bats isn’t changing that.

He just needs to learn. 
 

The starters are struggling, Adley can barely get the ball beyond 150ft away from the plate, Hays has been been hurt, Mateo is coming back to earth, etc…sometimes guys are up, sometimes they are down.

it’s a long season. We have people on here who actually believe Mateo will have a 950 OPs the whole year and then we have guys who want Gunnar sent down and are questioning his abilities.

People are obsessed with small sample sizes and can’t get it through their heads that we just need patience and allow things to play out over a long season.

IIrC, during Adley’s struggles early on last year, we had people on here that he needed to be sent down. Those people obviously look like complete fools but yet, here we are again..having the same conversations. 

Just because you don’t have anything to prove in the minors doesn’t mean you still can’t go down if you are struggling at major league level.  Mike Trout came up in the Angels at end of 2011 and struggled some.  He then got out of the gate for 2012 on a slow start wear he admitted he pressed to show people his talent.  They sent him down for 3 weeks and then he played well there and he was brought back up and took off.  He has said that short stint in AAA in 2012 was one of biggest factors in his player development.  

[tntoriole]

Gunnar has been not himself offensively since the season started.. now he seems all tied up , pressing and lost in his approach at the plate. 

He needs to get out of the pressing rut by a few weeks at Norfolk to find his stroke and confidence again. 
 

For those who say no, just let him “figure it out” by falling over and over, is there a timeframe where you might change your opinion?  Allstar break if still way under .200? Later?  Never? 

[Moose Milligan]

7 minutes ago, Gofannon said:

I didn't mean to suggest that Gunnar was going to be Ripken, just that the O's showed patience with Cal when he had a significantly tougher month in 1982 than Gunnar has had so far..  That team was focused on competing and developing him at the same time and they started slowly (11-18 in early May).

That said, Weaver sure didn't stick him in the middle of the lineup.  In the May 3, 1982 game, Ripken's low point in terms of batting stats, he hit ninth in the order, below Lenn Sakata and Rick Dempsey.  Then Floyd Rayford pinch-ran (!) for him in the 5th.  No clean-up spots for him - they just left him in the bottom of the line-up to figure it out.

I agree, he should be hitting 8th or 9th.

Batting him and Mountcastle back to back is criminal.

[Gurgi]

14 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If he thinks switching positions isn't ideal why does he have guys up and down the organization doing it?

Probably because the Orioles tried trading Mateo in the off season but no one wanted to give us our asking price.   Now he is trying to justify messing with the best prospect he have had since Machado.  

[Gurgi]

10 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Gunnar has been not himself offensively since the season started.. now he seems all tied up , pressing and lost in his approach at the plate. 

He needs to get out of the pressing rut by a few weeks at Norfolk to find his stroke and confidence again. 
 

For those who say no, just let him “figure it out” by falling over and over, is there a timeframe where you might change your opinion?  Allstar break if still way under .200? Later?  Never? 

Frankly even though I still think the best answer is leave him out there it has gotten bad enough that I can see us sending him down.  I wouldnt even argue if they sent him down.  

[Moose Milligan]

15 minutes ago, bpilktree said:

Just because you don’t have anything to prove in the minors doesn’t mean you still can’t go down if you are struggling at major league level.  Mike Trout came up in the Angels at end of 2011 and struggled some.  He then got out of the gate for 2012 on a slow start wear he admitted he pressed to show people his talent.  They sent him down for 3 weeks and then he played well there and he was brought back up and took off.  He has said that short stint in AAA in 2012 was one of biggest factors in his player development.  

This is an important point and shouldn't be discredited.  

At some point, it's hard to watch the guy keep flailing away...you know, when he decides to swing.  And while I understand @Sports Guy's KEEP HIM UP FOREVER stance, I also don't think it makes sense to keep running him out there if he's struggling this much for an extended period.  It's not helping him and it's not helping the team.

I think if he's still looking this bad in a couple weeks, they really need to consider sending him down.  He'd be around 150 PAs at that time....and while that's a small sample size across someone's entire career, that's a good chunk of a season where he's been awful and something needs to change for him.

[now]

39 minutes ago, Gurgi said:

Probably because the Orioles tried trading Mateo in the off season but no one wanted to give us our asking price.   Now he is trying to justify messing with the best prospect he have had since Machado.  

Interesting you bring up Machado... who didn't seem to suffer at all from "messing" with his position. Turned it into Platinum in fact. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, now said:

Interesting you bring up Machado... who didn't seem to suffer at all from "messing" with his position. Turned it into Platinum in fact. 

They stuck Machado at third and left him there.