Any Interest in Aaron Hicks?

[sportsfan8703]

49 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You seem to be operating under the assumption that McKenna is unable to field even routine fly balls to the outfield, and Pillar never misses anything. I'm guessing this error was just an AI deepfake and would never happen if Pillar was an Oriole.

This is about McKenna. Hyde doesn’t trust him to put him into a game as a defensive sub with a lead. Not me. Hyde. 

So if Hyde doesn’t trust McKenna then we should bring in an OF that Hyde does trust to fill the role as late game defensive sub. 

Edited May 1 by sportsfan8703

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

This is about McKenna. Hyde doesn’t trust him to put him into a game as a defensive sub with a lead. Not me. Hyde. 

So if Hyde doesn’t trust McKenna then we should bring in an OF that Hyde does trust to fill the role as late game defensive sub. 

Ryan McKenna has played 284 MLB games, all under Hyde. 161 of them, or 57%, have been in substitute roles where he was either a defensive replacement, PH or PR. The majority of those involve McKenna playing defense in the late innings. If Hyde doesn't trust him to come in late games and play defense, then why has he used him in that role in most of his appearances?

[Moose Milligan]

Whoa, I thought Drungo would be in here prattling about High Pockets Kelly and the Federal League or something.

Instead he's here vanquishing @sportsfan8703with one hand behind his back.  

[Frobby]

58 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

If you don’t like Pillar or Hicks that’s one thing, but if you’re evaluating McKenna for what his role should be as a late game defensive sub, then you have to say that he’s failed to make two routine plays that have directly impacted the game. His calling card and expertise for us is that we need him to be a trusted defensive specialist. 

 

Not to pick nits, but even if you buy that the Friday night play had an 85% catch probability, that’s not “routine.”  By Statcast’s definition, that’s a two-star catch.  It is not comparable to the play in Boston, which truly was routine by anyone’s definition.  

Now, would I want my defensive replacement to make a two-star catch 95% of the time?   Yes, that’s why he’s in the game.   But honestly the degree of heat McKenna is taking is a bit over the top.   And I don’t consider myself a McKenna fan in particular.  
 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Frobby said:

Not to pick nits, but even if you buy that the Friday night play had an 85% catch probability, that’s not “routine.”  By Statcast’s definition, that’s a two-star catch.  It is not comparable to the play in Boston, which truly was routine by anyone’s definition.  

Now, would I want my defensive replacement to make a two-star catch 95% of the time?   Yes, that’s why he’s in the game.   But honestly the degree of heat McKenna is taking is a bit over the top.   And I don’t consider myself a McKenna fan in particular.  
 

Well said.  I don't believe that was an 85% catch probability but he should have had it.

[spleen1015]

21 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

So it’s better to have a top 50 prospect sitting on the bench versus guys that could actually fill a role and be a late game sub?  Keep in mind that they were good enough for two of the best teams in MLB last year. 

This fan base is becoming entitled. I guess for the bullpen it’s Mason Miller/Josh Hader or bust. 

You can't believe that folks would rather have a top 50 prospect instead of 2 scrub veterans? Folks have to be entitled instead?

People don't agree with me so it must be for some irrational reason! Lame.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, spleen1015 said:

You can't believe that folks would rather have a top 50 prospect instead of 2 scrub veterans? Folks have to be entitled instead?

People don't agree with me so it must be for some irrational reason! Lame.

I do think there are times you’d rather have a veteran who fits a certain role on your major league team, rather than a talented rookie who really needs everyday playing time but can’t get it.  Forget the “entitlement” point.

[spleen1015]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I do think there are times you’d rather have a veteran who fits a certain role on your major league team, rather than a talented rookie who really needs everyday playing time but can’t get it.  Forget the “entitlement” point.

Absolutely, but I think it needs to be the right veteran. Even then, someone can have a different opinion and it's just that, their opinion.

[DrungoHazewood]

13 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Whoa, I thought Drungo would be in here prattling about High Pockets Kelly and the Federal League or something.

Instead he's here vanquishing @sportsfan8703with one hand behind his back.  

I mean, for all of Ryan McKenna's virtues he's no Blondie Purcell.

[Moose Milligan]

9 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I mean, for all of Ryan McKenna's virtues he's no Blondie Purcell.

There we go! When was the last time anyone anywhere ever brought up Blondie Purcell?!?

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, spleen1015 said:

Absolutely, but I think it needs to be the right veteran. Even then, someone can have a different opinion and it's just that, their opinion.

Absolutely.  And I trust the Orioles’ judgment on that, even though they’re not always correct.  Their track record the last few years is better than most when it comes to finding value off the discard pile.  

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

There we go! When was the last time anyone anywhere ever brought up Blondie Purcell?!?

The last time Drungo brought him up, somewhere.  

[sportsfan8703]

27 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Ryan McKenna has played 284 MLB games, all under Hyde. 161 of them, or 57%, have been in substitute roles where he was either a defensive replacement, PH or PR. The majority of those involve McKenna playing defense in the late innings. If Hyde doesn't trust him to come in late games and play defense, then why has he used him in that role in most of his appearances?

Trust can be lost.  Hyde didn't trust Mckenna to use him as a defensive sub last night.  This was Hyde's call.  Not mine.  If Hyde doesn't trust him in an April showdown versus the Yankees, then why is Mckenna here in this role?  

[Moose Milligan]

8 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Trust can be lost.  Hyde didn't trust Mckenna to use him as a defensive sub last night.  This was Hyde's call.  Not mine.  If Hyde doesn't trust him in an April showdown versus the Yankees, then why is Mckenna here in this role?  

I think you're grasping at straws now.  

Just because Hyde didn't use him last night as a defensive replacement doesn't mean he doesn't trust him.

We're also aware that it was Hyde's call not to use him last night and not yours.  

[sportsfan8703]

9 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I think you're grasping at straws now.  

Just because Hyde didn't use him last night as a defensive replacement doesn't mean he doesn't trust him.

We're also aware that it was Hyde's call not to use him last night and not yours.  

I'm literally not grasping at straws.  Mckenna didn't get used as a defensive sub in a huge game versus the Yankees.  That's a fact.  

I like Aaron Hicks over Ryan Mckenna.  Hicks has value as a role player, switch hits, and had postseason success last postseason with us.  Mckenna is a defensive replacement that has a history of "lapses" during his minor league career.  Now those lapses are costing us MLB games.  

I forgave Aaron Hicks for playing for the Yankees.  He had a lot of big moments last year, and oddly enough didn't block anyone other than Mckenna.  If your dislike for Aaron Hicks is making you stand up for Ryan Mckenna then there are bigger issues than discussing which player best suits this team.