-
Who's Online 68 Members, 0 Anonymous, 189 Guests (See full list)
- ChicagoTerp
- Big Mac
- forphase1
- dystopia
- Chaka Garcia
- TopGunnar
- Orioles West
- orioles119
- SilverRocket
- Jammer7
- yeoledugger
- maybenxtyr
- OrlandoO
- Ripken
- GBO'sFan
- Philip
- elextrano8
- TINSTAAPP
- e16bball
- Frobby
- jamesenoch
- pdiddy
- CaptainRedbeard
- LGOrioles
- Dunk35
- AirWaveGT
- ShoelesJoe
- Surhoffan17
- Bird Lady
- Go_Os
- MacAdoo
- paulcoates
- Allan Bryant
- waroriole
- birds future is BRIGHT
- Bemorewins
- Greg Pappas
- cnmilton
- oriole
- bpilktree
- Warehouse
- kaj21206
- Can_of_corn
- calsmanystances
- KojiSplit
- Sports Guy
- Yossarian
- Winter
- Moshagge3
- wildcard
- interloper
- Chuck Toedan
- owknows
- psagawa
- OsFanInOhio
- Mendoza Line
- pvitek
- woodberry
- murph
- Conway12
- One eyed Bird
- pasadena
- thegardner
- mazarelo
- ShermanObando2
- beardbr
- oriolediehard
- 24fps
-
Posts
-
You bet. See you tonight. -
Difference in trading vets from a team still in rebuild mode versus trading vets from a team with World Series aspirations. We've not seen him trade vets since the rebuild ended. -
By Bemorewins · Posted
Understood. But here's the thing (given the current economic structure of the game) there are three ways to handle payroll for a winning team (as I see them). One is the Rays/Brewers/Guardians way. Where you have maybe one long term substantive contract (mostly done while player is young and before he has made real money or achieved real fame) and most of the time the contract is an exploitive type deal with a kid from another country who comes from a context of poverty (not judging it is what it is). These teams continuously are reloading/retooling/ and have constant roster reshaping and turnover. The goal is to make the postseason and hopeful every once in a blue moon the stars align while you are there and you may be able to go all the way! While these teams are often good, they are rarely great. And are even less willing to do what it takes to get them over the top IMO. The proof is in the fact that this model has never led to championship success (unless you want to use the Marlins of over 20 years ago from 03'). Another model is the "big spenders model", who spend seriously and have World Series aspirations. Some spend all on FA (like the Padres/Mets) and are super aggressive with trades hoping to augment their talent as they chase championships, but rarely does this work because the foundation of the team is usually built so poorly. They may be good for a season or shorter term but struggle to sustain. Then there are teams like the Phillies/Dodgers who do a combo of developing and spending (let's call that the best of both worlds). Obviously this is the most preferable because you get the short and long term rewards. But it may not be realistic to think that the O's could ever do/have what it takes to fully do both. Then there is the Braves and Astros model. Still a higher payroll but minimizing of risks through extending younger players (Braves) or avoiding most long term contracts (Astros) but paying higher salaries on shorter deals. Obviously both franchises have been successful (won WS). Having said all this the reality exists that if/when you do longer term contracts (extensions or FA deals) for franchise/cornerstone/superstar type players, you most likely won't get the best value on the back end (think Paul Goldschmidt this year). That's just the economics of the game. But the thing is, the owners (especially our new group) have the money and then some to write off those things and keep rolling as "the cost of doing business". When examining all winners of the World Series in the last decade a pattern is pretty apparent (with exception of the Astros first championship in 17') you have to spend in order to win. -
By Greg Pappas · Posted
An alternative... also from the Rangers: Nathan Eovaldi. FA after this season but has a $20m vesting option for 2025 if he throws 300 innings combined between '23 & '24. It'll be close. Between Scherzer (40 this month) and Eovaldi (34) who would you prefer? -
That's a fair assessment. I wouldn't be willing to give up a whole lot for him but I'd at least inquire rather than just dismissing the possibility out of hand based on what he did last year (which is not what you were doing). -
By Sports Guy · Posted
They have some stupid contracts for sure. -
By Jim'sKid26 · Posted
Really interesting article on Brecht by Mellissa Lockhart in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5606772/2024/07/03/brody-brecht-mlb-draft-iowa-football-baseball/ Sounds like a kid who is super coachable. "Brecht has big-league stuff, but questions remain about whether he can command his arsenal well enough to be effective against major-league hitters, especially in a starter’s role. Law noted in his mock draft that Brecht is “a college pitcher who’s less polished than his peers, with athleticism and arm strength that point to more upside.” Heller says major-league organizations only have to look at the improvements Brecht made from his sophomore to junior season to see how much room there is for him to continue to grow as a pitcher. “It shows you the aptitude that Brody has and the ability to make adjustments and change,” Heller said. “Not everybody has that. It’s not easy to do and Brody did it in a very short time.”
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.