Jump to content

The Marlins are officially selling. Tanner Scott for Povich?


The Marlins are officially selling. Tanner Scott for Povich?  

143 members have voted

  1. 1. Tanner Scott for Povich?

    • Yes
      1
    • No
      142


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Look at his 2023 numbers. If he were at these levels it would be much more than Povich. He was Josh Hader last season. So we’d be buying low and getting immediate help.

I would trade Povich for him all day. Probably makes sense to throw Baumann in too. 

IMG_5390.jpeg

This is all well and good, but go look at the other 7 years. They all look the same and just one year looks like 2023. That's called an outlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

For what position?  Bats aren’t something we are lacking or need.

We already have one OF in bubble wrap, we don't need a 2nd in Chisholm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

It’s some Splenda to sweeten the deal.

Exactly. Might as well give them Baumann or we will just DFA him. 

I don’t need a reliever’s last 7 years body of work. I need to try and get that 104 K year he had just last year. 

It’s not Mason Miller or bust for us. We could get Scott now then reevaluate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sportsfan8703 said:

Exactly. Might as well give them Baumann or we will just DFA him. 

I don’t need a reliever’s last 7 years body of work. I need to try and get that 104 K year he had just last year. 

It’s not Mason Miller or bust for us. We could get Scott now then reevaluate. 

It was a joke.  No trade value.  No calories.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

There's a big difference between having an ERA below 2 in low A vs AAA.  Let's cool the jets on De Leon until he proves something at a higher level.

He’s better at his age than Povich has basically ever been. Higher K rate, better walk rate, great HR rate and high Gb rate.

As a prospect, he’s better. Doesn’t mean he will be the better pitcher.

Povich has had a good month.  He was inconsistent and unreliable throughout his whole pro career (although good potential) up until this April.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here’s the thing with Povich,

What role does he have on the 2024 and 2025 teams?  He’s not cracking either team’s rotation and he’s not better as a LH RP than Coloumbe, Akin, or Perez. So at best he’s an up/down depth reliever for us. He’s worth more than that. So trade him to a 2nd division team that can try him out as a SP.

He’s in a similar boat as DL Hall. Just without the grade 80 FB. So we used Hall to get Burnes. Now we use Povich to get Scott. 

Edited by sportsfan8703
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Here’s the thing with Povich,

What role does he have on the 2024 and 2025 teams?  He’s not cracking either team’s rotation and he’s not better as a LH RP than Coloumbe, Akin, or Perez. So at best he’s an up/down depth reliever for us. He’s worth more than that. So trade him to a 2nd division team that can try him out as a SP. 

I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that a LHP that misses a ton of bats has no role on this team either this year or next.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Here’s the thing with Povich,

What role does he have on the 2024 and 2025 teams?  He’s not cracking either team’s rotation and he’s not better as a LH RP than Coloumbe, Akin, or Perez. So at best he’s an up/down depth reliever for us. He’s worth more than that. So trade him to a 2nd division team that can try him out as a SP. 

Wells is I believe a permanent reliever now - Burnes and Means are gone.

The first 5 games for the 2025 Orioles perhaps belong to Kyle Bradish, Grayson Rodriguez, Cole Irvin, Dean Kremer and Cade Povich on paper until a trade for Dylan Cease or whatever 2025 rental occurs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DirtyBird said:

Only if the relief pitching is an elite back end, high leverage guy who is clearly better than what we already have back there. Or a solid bullpen piece (Akin caliber) with options.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be someone with options or even any remaining years of control. Someone to pitch in the 7th/8th and maybe the 9th every once in a while. We’ve got good relief pitchers but they all (like most RP) have a penchant for forgetting how to do their job for stretches. It’s good to have back ups for your back ups. And to be honest, and even contradict myself…when Wells comes back, he’ll make a great reliever. So the answer could already be in the organization. I just don’t see guys like Coulombe, Webb, Akin and even Cano pitching lights out over a whole season. And if anything, my concerns over the bullpen being the weak spot on the club is more of a testament to how good this team really is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Matt Bennett said:

Cabrera to the minors? Bender takes Baumann's spot? Though I thought you had said you didn't agree with letting Baumann go. 

I wouldn't trade Maury Povich for Tanner Scott. Cade Povich...OH HELL NO!!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

For what position?  Bats aren’t something we are lacking or need.

If Cedric can no longer hit, stick him CF. Maybe an overreaction but I just dont like what ive seen from Cedric this year and he's borderline unplayable vs a lefty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dunk35 said:

If Cedric can no longer hit, stick him CF. Maybe an overreaction but I just dont like what ive seen from Cedric this year and he's borderline unplayable vs a lefty. 

But we have other options if that happens and we shouldn’t be trading assets for areas we don’t really need. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...