Orioles To Designate Spenser Watkins For Assignment

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

I think that might be true but that Ortiz is n the 40 man probably means as much or more. I think ME doesn't want more than 1 rookie struggling at a time on the MLB club. It's Ortiz's time in the barrel, I hope he gets the chance to show his glove plays at all 3 positions at least, even if his bat doesn't so far.

He has already shown the glove plays. He needs real playing time to show the bat does.

[deward]

7 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

I think that might be true but that Ortiz is n the 40 man probably means as much or more. I think ME doesn't want more than 1 rookie struggling at a time on the MLB club. It's Ortiz's time in the barrel, I hope he gets the chance to show his glove plays at all 3 positions at least, even if his bat doesn't so far.

I think Ortiz would have to be playing a lot more often than he is so far in order to declare that it's his time in the barrel.

[deward]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

He'll get picked up by some random team like the White Sox and throw 7 shutout innings against us next time we face them.

Probably. Then everyone here will lose their minds over it, then Watkins will quietly turn back into a pumpkin after about 15-20 total innings of pitching over his head.

[AnythingO's]

Just now, deward said:

I think Ortiz would have to be playing a lot more often than he is so far in order to declare that it's his time in the barrel.

Well I didn't mean that comment positively. Ortiz will get the same half-assed chance as Vavra and Stowers got. I just hope Ortiz does more with it.

[forphase1]

14 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

I think that might be true but that Ortiz is n the 40 man probably means as much or more. I think ME doesn't want more than 1 rookie struggling at a time on the MLB club. It's Ortiz's time in the barrel, I hope he gets the chance to show his glove plays at all 3 positions at least, even if his bat doesn't so far.

Eh, not sure the difference between a rookie who is struggling (be it Ortiz, Westburg, whoever) versus a 'vet' who is struggling (Mateo).  Given the options, I'd much rather have a struggling rookie who can, at least in theory, get past it like Gunnar seems to have done versus a Mateo who is much less likely to flip whatever magic switch that makes him go from out of the world good to the worst hitter in MLB.  

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Eh, not sure the difference between a rookie who is struggling (be it Ortiz, Westburg, whoever) versus a 'vet' who is struggling (Mateo).  Given the options, I'd much rather have a struggling rookie who can, at least in theory, get past it like Gunnar seems to have done versus a Mateo who is much less likely to flip whatever magic switch that makes him go from out of the world good to the worst hitter in MLB.  

This is the part of this argument I don’t get. 
 

Mateo has proven, over a lot of pro at bats, that he is a below average hitter.

Frazier is showing that while he can help you at times, he is largely not much more than a replacement player. 

Yet, we are ok with playing them because “”we don’t want several rookies” in the lineup at one time?

How does that make any sense?

[Tony-OH]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

This is the part of this argument I don’t get. 
 

Mateo has proven, over a lot of pro at bats, that he is a below average hitter.

Frazier is showing that while he can help you at times, he is largely not much more than a replacement player. 

Yet, we are ok with playing them because “”we don’t want several rookies” in the lineup at one time?

How does that make any sense?

I can understand the argument or opinion due to the fact that you never quite know what you can expect from a rookie making his debut. Typically you would not want them all in the lineup IF the team has better options. IF being the key to that sentence.

Mateo and Frazier are two players that would make up an interesting bench because of their combination of skills. The Orioles have both Ortiz and Westburg ready to play everyday. Personally, I don't think the team plays worse with both of them in the lineup and you can't even use defense because to me Ortiz = Mateo and Frazier's defense has been below average in just about every defensive metric you want to go by so how much worse can Westburg be?

I like Frazier off the bench (regardless of his contract) because I've seen that he's a good contact hitter, tough guy to K, and a good high leverage guy. Those are things that make him valuable off the bench late in games. Mateo's speed and ability to come in and play SS without losing a beat is valuable as well. 

I could see Frazier pinch-hitting for Ortiz or maybe Westburg against a tough righty late in games is a K is the worse thing that could happen. 

 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I can understand the argument or opinion due to the fact that you never quite know what you can expect from a rookie making his debut. Typically you would not want them all in the lineup IF the team has better options. IF being the key to that sentence.

Mateo and Frazier are two players that would make up an interesting bench because of their combination of skills. The Orioles have both Ortiz and Westburg ready to play everyday. Personally, I don't think the team plays worse with both of them in the lineup and you can't even use defense because to me Ortiz = Mateo and Frazier's defense has been below average in just about every defensive metric you want to go by so how much worse can Westburg be?

I like Frazier off the bench (regardless of his contract) because I've seen that he's a good contact hitter, tough guy to K, and a good high leverage guy. Those are things that make him valuable off the bench late in games. Mateo's speed and ability to come in and play SS without losing a beat is valuable as well. 

I could see Frazier pinch-hitting for Ortiz or maybe Westburg against a tough righty late in games is a K is the worse thing that could happen. 

 

Agree with all of this.

And Tony you are bringing up what I feel is another good point…this helps the depth.

When we talk about “you can’t start too many rookies” because they will struggle and the current players are already struggling, that’s an awful argument to me.

However, I do think it’s a very good argument to say you would rather have the vets come in off the bench in key, high leverage moments. For Mateo, that could be defense or base running. For Frazier, a key at bat, as you described.

That makes the Os a deeper and better team for all situations imo.

 

[24fps]

My theory is that Westburg and Cowser stay at Norfolk and rake until the trade deadline and if they're not dealt by then then they get called up.  As long as they don't face ML pitching, then the gamble that they can't adjust stays on the acquiring team.

Farfetched?  Sure, but I'm stumped as to why at least one of them hasn't been called up yet and nothing else makes sense.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I mean, this may be what they say but it’s factually wrong. There is plenty of playing time for both of them if they are actually interested in putting the best and highest upside team out there that they can.

They don’t have to play 6-7 games a Week to justify being up here.

Tell us what allocation of playing time you’d like to see in the next 30 games, roughly speaking.   

[Frobby]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

This is the part of this argument I don’t get. 
 

Mateo has proven, over a lot of pro at bats, that he is a below average hitter.

Frazier is showing that while he can help you at times, he is largely not much more than a replacement player. 

Yet, we are ok with playing them because “”we don’t want several rookies” in the lineup at one time?

How does that make any sense?

I think the possible answers are blindingly obvious.  

1.  Management thinks more highly of the contributions of Frazier and Mateo than you do.

2.  Management thinks more highly of the potential contributions of Frazier and Mateo going forward than you do.

3.  Management is less confident than you are that Westburg and Ortiz will be able to contribute as much or more than  Mateo and Frazier.

It’s really that simple. 

You like fWAR better than rWAR; it’s fine for you to have that opinion, but they differ significantly and maybe the O’s internal metrics on Frazier and Mateo (which I’m sure they have) are more in line with rWAR, or even exceed it.  And maybe they see things in Westburg’s and Ortiz’s performance that make them think they’re not as good, at least right now.   
 

 

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Is it? I thought it wasn't sure and it might be in late June? Honestly, I'm never good at knowing those dates so it would not surprise me. 

The latest the Super 2 cutoff has ever been is June 15.   It’s not impossible for it to fall later than that, but it’s never happened.  

[oriolediehard]

Why is there so much love for Bemboom?  Why to we need 2 extra below .200 hitting catchers?  I don't understand the GM decisions?

[wildcard]

What Watkins being DFA tells me is two things:

1) The cut to his finger was so bad that he can not now and may not for some time return to the pitcher he was last season.

2) This year he is using his last option so he will have no option next  season and not be able to move easily between AAA and the Majors.   So he probably gets DFA'd after the season anyway.

[wildcard]

8 minutes ago, oriolediehard said:

Why is there so much love for Bemboom?  Why to we need 2 extra below .200 hitting catchers?  I don't understand the GM decisions?

Because for a backup catcher Elias values defense  and game calling over offense.