Tyler Wells 2023

[Jim'sKid26]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t necessarily see it as either.  I don’t know what’s going on with Wells or what the plan is.  I certainly don’t think they “owe” him a roster if they don’t think he’s ready to help the team more than some other pitcher on the roster.  But I don’t know what they’re thinking.  

My point is that getting an extra year of control for a young SP who very likely will be in the rotation during the current competitive window is the right thing to do. This is a business and the players are assets. Asset management is what the Front Office does and in this sense should do well given the financial constraints. 

[Frobby]

21 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

My point is that getting an extra year of control for a young SP who very likely will be in the rotation during the current competitive window is the right thing to do. This is a business and the players are assets. Asset management is what the Front Office does and in this sense should do well given the financial constraints. 

No, I don’t agree at all.  Once a guy is on the major league roster, he should be there so long as he’s clearly one of the top 26.   Sending someone down just for service time reasons is unconscionable.  Should the O’s send Adley down for three weeks?  Felix?  

[Jim'sKid26]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

No, I don’t agree at all.  Once a guy is on the major league roster, he should be there so long as he’s clearly one of the top 26.   Sending someone down just for service time reasons is unconscionable.  Should the O’s send Adley down for three weeks?  Felix?  

Of course not. But in this case it's a matter of a couple of days on a guy who is at his all time high in IP and has not been effective. Your premise that he is "one of the top 26," may not be accurate. In this case, you have the opportunity to derive an additional year of control by delaying his rejoining the team by a day or so. That's hardly unconscionable, IMHO.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

Of course not. But in this case it's a matter of a couple of days on a guy who is at his all time high in IP and has not been effective. Your premise that he is "one of the top 26," may not be accurate. In this case, you have the opportunity to derive an additional year of control by delaying his rejoining the team by a day or so. That's hardly unconscionable, IMHO.

Well, that’s why I said in my prior post that they don’t owe him a roster spot if they don’t think he’s ready to help the team more than some other player on the roster.  

[Aristotelian]

13 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

Of course not. But in this case it's a matter of a couple of days on a guy who is at his all time high in IP and has not been effective. Your premise that he is "one of the top 26," may not be accurate. In this case, you have the opportunity to derive an additional year of control by delaying his rejoining the team by a day or so. That's hardly unconscionable, IMHO.

He's definitely not "clearly" one of the top 26. In this case I have no issue with service time being a consideration. Hopefully it is not the only consideration. September is going to be interesting with the extra spot and Voth, Means, and Wells all potentially healthy, but Irvin pitching well.

[Just Regular]

Suppose we clinch the AL East 21 days out - we could option Adley and Felix and it would be shrewd asset management!

Wells started for Bowie tonight and zipped through 2 innings under 30 pitches.     Then he was hooked.

That's a pretty strong sign of scripted practice for a reliever role.

By the big Rays series, Hyde should have Wells and Hall in his middle mix, and we'll see if Means can pitch his way to one of those starts.

[Can_of_corn]

11 hours ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

That's hardly unconscionable, IMHO.

I disagree 

[Gurgi]

5 hours ago, Just Regular said:

Suppose we clinch the AL East 21 days out - we could option Adley and Felix and it would be shrewd asset management!

Wells started for Bowie tonight and zipped through 2 innings under 30 pitches.     Then he was hooked.

That's a pretty strong sign of scripted practice for a reliever role.

By the big Rays series, Hyde should have Wells and Hall in his middle mix, and we'll see if Means can pitch his way to one of those starts.

IF we did this the players Union would record our actions and at the next labor stoppage this would be front and center.  

[ChosenOne21]

I'm all for getting the extra year when you can, but I think being too blatant about it can have consequences--team/player morale, player union filing grievances. Optioning Adley and Felix for three weeks in the middle of the season after you clinch would be waaay too blatant unless they were really struggling hard. Even then they have such a track record that I don't know.

Bottom line is I want the Orioles to have good players for as long as possible. If that means these guys make 40 million in their careers instead of 55 million, I think I can sleep at night with that knowledge.

[owknows]

9 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I disagree 

It's what you were born to do.

[Jim'sKid26]

10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I disagree 

Noted.

[emmett16]

22 hours ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

Of course not. But in this case it's a matter of a couple of days on a guy who is at his all time high in IP and has not been effective. Your premise that he is "one of the top 26," may not be accurate. In this case, you have the opportunity to derive an additional year of control by delaying his rejoining the team by a day or so. That's hardly unconscionable, IMHO.

I think it's a little bit of cutting off your nose despite your face.  The small benefit you'd derive from saving a year would have many more negative consequences.  Messing with a man's money & career is no way to motivate him.  The message that sends to the other players in the system would not go over well.  Agents will get wind of this and advise they draft eligible clients to steer clear of the organization.  I also don't think you can say with a straight face that the bottom 2 to 3 guys in the bullpen are better than Wells, that's a far stretch and no objective arbitrator would agree with that assessment.  

[Jim'sKid26]

2 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

I think it's a little bit of cutting off your nose despite your face.  The small benefit you'd derive from saving a year would have many more negative consequences.  Messing with a man's money & career is no way to motivate him.  The message that sends to the other players in the system would not go over well.  Agents will get wind of this and advise they draft eligible clients to steer clear of the organization.  I also don't think you can say with a straight face that the bottom 2 to 3 guys in the bullpen are better than Wells, that's a far stretch and no objective arbitrator would agree with that assessment.  

If the situation is obvious, then I would agree with you. I am not arguing for blatant manipulation of service time. What I am saying is that a well run organization takes advantage of a situation when one presents itself. In this situation the criteria is completely subjective. As such, service time and the implications thereof for the franchise and its long term health should be taken into consideration. If it's blatant service time manipulation that is not (as you so eloquently described) in the best interests of the organization. If, however, you have the opportunity to "error on the side of caution," in a situation where one of two days makes an enormous difference to the organization you have to factor that in. 

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You cannot be angry that the O's don't have a solid rotation and ignore the opportunity to secure an additional year of the services of one of you best young pitchers. I would also respectfully submit that the bottom 2-3 guys in the bullpen may very well be healthier and capable than Wells at this time. Neither you or I know for sure. 

[Just Regular]

Of course an extension (or a "non" extension merely guaranteeing some of the Arb seasons) whenever could ease whatever pain is felt if Wells falls short of a full year of service this year.     Though Elias would anchor that negotiation on FA affer 2027, not 2026 if the extra year is secured.

In terms of fairness, Wells provided 2.5 seasons of evidence he's a good major league pitcher, and exhausted himself for the Club pitching - probably - beyond his capabilities for endurance (sorry, Tyler).      Generally, all pitchers red line their talents for sharper stuff - as the Rays injury report hints at.    

I'm glad he's getting the refresh and it is clearly the correct choice for the tournament.    Its more an impressionistic thing is Tyler Wells far enough up the talent chain to deserve a veteranosity IL stint and/or not being messed with?    How do you treat a good pitcher equitably when its a known known that very few are good enough to shove 26 weeks and a month, and GM's mostly try to arrange so the world's best pitchers rarely have to?

I don't know if the fresh Tyler Wells can be resuscitated in 2023, but that guy is on the Mount Rushmore of 2023 Orioles pitchers.     The kicker is SigBot perhaps doesn't even forecast Arb4 Tyler Wells to be worth tendering for 2027 anyway, but optionality and control are always attractive just in case.    

[panick]

13 hours ago, Just Regular said:

Suppose we clinch the AL East 21 days out - we could option Adley and Felix and it would be shrewd asset management!

Wells started for Bowie tonight and zipped through 2 innings under 30 pitches.     Then he was hooked.

That's a pretty strong sign of scripted practice for a reliever role.

By the big Rays series, Hyde should have Wells and Hall in his middle mix, and we'll see if Means can pitch his way to one of those starts.

And one of those pitches left the park. 

Apparently Wells can't get through a game(Minor league or Major league) without giving up a home run.