Fangraphs hates our rotation

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

This strikes me as a real “glass half empty” look at things.  

Yeah it was really just for argument's sake. Like, here are all the things that COULD go wrong, so it makes sense to add SP depth. Ideally, more than just depth. I don't really expect the majority of those things to happen, but every player CAN have a question mark. 

Chicago guy was saying we're too content with not adding a starter, but I think like 95% of us want to add at least a #3 SP. 

[Tony-OH]

Let's hope Fangraphs is as accurate as they've been over the last two seasons with their preseason "predictions" for the Orioles and their players.

Nothing to be concerned about in my opinion. 

[Frobby]

11 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Prospects bust so expecting 20 years of service time (or at least quality service time) is simply not realistic.

I can’t really argue with this.   Part of the reasons teams trade good prospects for current talent is because not all good prospects pan out.  Still, the more good prospects a team trades away for a relatively short-term asset, the more lopsided the service time equation is likely to become.   Honestly, if even one prospect significantly pans out, he will likely provide more overall value than a player who is under control for two years.  But, the theory is that getting concentrated value over a two-year period can propel a very good team to a World Series, and that can be worth giving up greater overall value that’s spread over a longer time period.  (In other words, 10 WAR over 2 years can be more of a difference maker than 18 WAR over 6 years.)   My own view is that the team that gets the 18 WAR ends up benefiting more most of the time, but not always.  

[RZNJ]

12 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Fangraphs on the money.  The Orioles’ rotation isn’t bad, but it’s one bad injury away from being in real trouble.  Whether you trade with us, you guys should really acquire a TOR starter.  Banking on exceeding your Pythagorean again without the benefit of Bautista would be incredibly shortsighted IMO.

Thanks for your concern.  We get it.  Almost everyone on the board would like to add a solid starter and Elias has stated he's trying to get one.    Who is your target audience because it seems like we all agree?  We call it preaching to the choir.   On the same note it's not imminent disaster if we don't get that guy.

[DirtyBird]

12 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

There is nothing more dangerous than the arrogance of prior year results.  

A great example is that time the White Sox thought Cease was an ace

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

This strikes me as a real “glass half empty” look at things.  Here’s how I see it:

Bradish - will probably be very good, but after finishing 3rd in the AL in ERA last year, there’s almost nowhere to go but down.  Hoping for more than 165 innings though.  

Rodriguez - way more upside than downside.   He probably won’t be as good as his second half ERA suggests but he’ll be much better than what his overall ERA suggests.  

Means - I don’t know why you say he didn’t look the same.  He looked exactly the same to me.  Maybe a tick lower on the FB, not enough to worry about because that’s not what makes him an effective pitcher.   My big issue with him is he’s never gone through a season without missing at least several starts so I assume that will be the case.

Kremer - on the one hand, he’s outperformed his peripherals two years in a row and could be very mediocre if his actual stats align more with his peripherals this year.  On the other hand, he had a strong second half, is a smart guy and very competitive, so he could have upside as well.  I think the median outcome for him is another year like the last one.   

Wells - I love the guy as a starting pitcher, but he hasn’t shown the ability to get through a full season so I’d prefer him in the bullpen.  Still, having him in the rotation wouldn’t be the worst thing.

Hall - Might be a very good “five and five” type starter, probably would be very good in the pen.  You wouldn’t want him as the only decent option for your no. 5 starter, but he’s not, so it’s okay.  

Irvin - got off to a bad start last year but pitched well after returning to the majors.  Honestly he’s probably better than many teams’ 5th starter.   

And then you’ve got some plausible options in AAA for the second half of the season.  

That’s far from a bad rotation, sort of averagish with some upside as well as some downside.   I think adding a no. 3 or better starter both increases the upside and significantly lowers our downside risk, but I’m not going to freak out if it doesn’t happen.  









 

That's a very fair wrap up of the current rotation candidates. We all would like to see the Orioles get another starter, perhaps one like Cease. But Elias is not going to give up Holliday, Basallo or Mayo for him and the sooner the White Sox get that the faster this deal can get done. 

Honestly, a Kjerstad and Povich headliner deal with maybe a 3rd piece like a Justin Armbreuster would be palatable and fair. I like both Kjerstad and Povich, but if Mayo can be converted to RF, he could be a long term option there once Santander is gone. 

For next year though, this team doesn't necessarily need Kjerstad and he brings enough value to get a TOR-potential type starter in Cease.

[Oriole4Life]

I don't like it all that much either.

Gonna need Rodriguez to develop into the ace we all hope he can be. Also hoping there will be no regression from Bradish. 

Any chance Hall becomes a starter? 

[interloper]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Means - I don’t know why you say he didn’t look the same.  He looked exactly the same to me.  Maybe a tick lower on the FB, not enough to worry about because that’s not what makes him an effective pitcher.   My big issue with him is he’s never gone through a season without missing at least several starts so I assume that will be the case.

All due respect, I don't know if we were watching the same guy. While he managed to gut through his starts with a good ERA, his strikeout rate was down like 4 per 9 from 2022, and he just didn't miss any bats with the changeup. He looked fine overall for a guy coming back from TJS, but to say he looked exactly the same is just plain wrong. It wasn't the same devastating changeup, and he wiggled out of some starts. His hits per 9 was also way down, which is good, but probably means he was lucky when you combine that with the lack of Ks.

All that said, it was only 22 innings, so it's not like the lack of Ks and missed bats means much of anything. But visually, no, he absolutely did not look exactly the same. I am fairly comfortable saying he'll look more like himself in 2024.

Edited January 4 by interloper

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, interloper said:

All due respect, I don't know if we were watching the same guy. While he managed to gut through his starts with a good ERA, his strikeout rate was down like 4 per 9 from 2022, and he just didn't miss any bats with the changeup. He looked fine overall for a guy coming back from TJS, but to say he looked exactly the same is just plain wrong. It wasn't the same devastating changeup, and he wiggled out of some starts. 

All that said, it was only 22 innings, so it's not like the lack of Ks and missed bats means much of anything. But visually, no, he absolutely did not look the same. I am fairly comfortable saying he'll look more like himself in 2024.

I’m not someone who judges games solely on strikeouts.  The game he pitched against the Guardians was a frigging masterpiece. I really don’t care that he only struck out 4 batters in 7.1 innings.   

[interloper]

Just now, Frobby said:

I’m not someone who judges games solely on strikeouts.  The game he pitched against the Guardians was a frigging masterpiece. I really don’t care that he only struck out 4 batters in 7.1 innings.   

I don't either really, but I'm just saying - it wasn't vintage Means out there. It might have been with a few more reps, who knows. Like I said, it doesn't mean much. But I quibble with your use of "exactly" here because an exactly vintage Means is wiping more dudes out with his changeup, and we didn't see that. Fortunately he was lucky with his BAA so it didn't matter. 

[CaptainRedbeard]

Note that these current Fangraphs rankings are only using Steamer. Fangraphs is still rolling out the ZIPS rankings and hasn’t incorporated them for each team yet. Once they do, Fangraphs uses a 50/50 split of Steamer and ZIPS. 

ZIPS likes the Orioles’ rotation much more than Steamer, mostly from Kremer, but is also higher on Means. ZIPS altogether has the Orioles’ current rotation 2.2 fWAR higher than Steamer, which would put them tied for 10th in MLB. When Fangraphs moves to the 50/50 split I expect the Orioles would be around 15th in the MLB with their current group, and they’d of course go higher by adding any SP better than Irvin. 

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, CaptainRedbeard said:

Note that these current Fangraphs rankings are only using Steamer. Fangraphs is still rolling out the ZIPS rankings and hasn’t incorporated them for each team yet. Once they do, Fangraphs uses a 50/50 split of Steamer and ZIPS. 

ZIPS likes the Orioles’ rotation much more than Steamer, mostly from Kremer, but is also higher on Means. ZIPS altogether has the Orioles’ current rotation 2.2 fWAR higher than Steamer, which would put them tied for 10th in MLB. When Fangraphs moves to the 50/50 split I expect the Orioles would be around 15th in the MLB with their current group, and they’d of course go higher by adding any SP better than Irvin. 

Another very good point.  I mentioned the Steamer/ZiPS thing in another context relating to the O’s W/L projections the other day.  The bottom line is, there’s a ton of variability in any of these projections, to the point where they’re almost valueless.  I look at them for entertainment value (and often post comparisons of them) but don’t have much confidence in any of them. 

[maybenxtyr]

12 hours ago, Satyr3206 said:

Trading 2 to 4 players for 1 pitcher is a recipe for disaster. Roughly 20 years of service time against 2 or 3 years. Makes no sense.

What's your solution when the front office doesn't seem to have the funds available for a FA?

[Satyr3206]

2 minutes ago, maybenxtyr said:

What's your solution when the front office doesn't seem to have the funds available for a FA?

I am not against trades. Just lopsided ones.

[CaptainRedbeard]

13 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Fangraphs on the money.  The Orioles’ rotation isn’t bad, but it’s one bad injury away from being in real trouble.  Whether you trade with us, you guys should really acquire a TOR starter.  Banking on exceeding your Pythagorean again without the benefit of Bautista would be incredibly shortsighted IMO.

The Orioles were still a 94-win team by Pythagorean last year. They were an 89-win team by BaseRuns, which knocks them down for their very strong performance offensively with RISP (they didn’t have the same thing happen defensively). 

They didn’t have any major losses in the offseason and can expect more growth from their current young players & prospects debuting in 2024. Even though Fangraphs is low on the pitching, they have the position players as the 5th best group in MLB. Altogether they have the 10th highest projected team fWAR on Fangraphs currently. 

The Orioles need another TOR starter if they want to be firmly considered a top 5 team in baseball. But adding any SP that slots in #3 behind Bradish/Grayson and ahead of (or even just on par with) Means/Kremer still puts them in very good shape. They don’t need to bolster their 2023 team by mortgaging their 2024+ teams through trading OF/1B/SP prospects that they are expecting to rely on as their veteran players hit free agency in the next 2 years (Santander, O’Hearn, Means after this season; Mullins, Hays the year after). 

The Orioles have more IF prospects than they have space to play, so it makes sense for them to get the best SP they can in a trade out of that surplus. But their 2023 team is a contender regardless.