Are we actually 27-14 with the highest runs/game in the AL?

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Pickles said:

You're no better.  LOL.

Never claimed to be.

Not much sense in a "great post, I agree" response, though.

I think there's a fine line between being negative and criticism/second guessing moves that can be blurry at times.  IMO, negativity is like "This team sucks," "We're dead," "this game is over, we can't win".  

Criticism is more along the lines of "Hyde did a terrible job of managing, here's why..." or "Elias shouldn't have made that move, instead he should have done..."

In the middle, the blurry part is like "Mullins sucks, he's hitting .105 for his past 20 games and they need to put Cowser in CF for a bit."  It comes across as harsh/negative cause someone is saying Mullins sucks but it's also stating why he does.  

 

[maybenxtyr]

18 minutes ago, Pickles said:

We could win 11-1 tonight, and there'd be 3 pages complaining about the lineup tomorrow.

The ongoing lineup thread is as bad as the game threads anymore. 

[HowAboutThat]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

I think some people are misinterpreting my OP.  I’m not telling anyone how to be a fan.  I’m just pointing out that (1) for every present negative, there’s a counterweighting positive, and on balance, the positive is winning hands down as reflected in the W-L record, and (2) the current negatives won’t last forever, just like hot streaks don’t last forever.   

I’m surprised that nobody mentioned in six pages that we seem to be getting a whole lot of luck. We’re not blowing teams away, winning 12 to nothing or eight to one. We often winning on what appears to be a lucky fluke. We’re not hitting well,( although we’re pitching and defending well)

It just seems like we’re not overpowering anybody, and we should.

This makes it much easier to complain about personnel decisions or manager choices.

There’s a psychological condition called “the imposter complex,” which is when someone doesn’t give himself credit for his skill, constantly second-guessing his ability and being afraid that he will be found out for the charlatan that he is.

it’s quite possible that there’s a little bit of that going on here, and the weaknesses that were seeing are “proof that were really not that good and we’ve got to do something right away or we will be found out as imposters”

This is a good team, but sometimes it seems as if we’re also a very lucky team, and we’re all worried about what happens when the luck goes away.

[interloper]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Not much sense in a "great post, I agree" response, though.

I do this a good amount actually - I think it's good every now and then! 

[Pickles]

Just now, interloper said:

I do this a good amount actually - I think it's good every now and then! 

I actually force myself to do it now just so I can't be accused of being 100% contrarian.  

[Pickles]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Never claimed to be.

Not much sense in a "great post, I agree" response, though.

I think there's a fine line between being negative and criticism/second guessing moves that can be blurry at times.  IMO, negativity is like "This team sucks," "We're dead," "this game is over, we can't win".  

Criticism is more along the lines of "Hyde did a terrible job of managing, here's why..." or "Elias shouldn't have made that move, instead he should have done..."

In the middle, the blurry part is like "Mullins sucks, he's hitting .105 for his past 20 games and they need to put Cowser in CF for a bit."  It comes across as harsh/negative cause someone is saying Mullins sucks but it's also stating why he does.  

 

Agreed.

But "numbers" "evidence" whatever can always be twisted to make whatever argument you want to make, and people mostly want to make negative arguments regarding the O's chances or the performance of the players or management.  

When was the last time the team was playing poorly and you saw a thread about how the underlying numbers were actually encouraging?

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Pickles said:

Agreed.

But "numbers" "evidence" whatever can always be twisted to make whatever argument you want to make, and people mostly want to make negative arguments regarding the O's chances or the performance of the players or management.  

When was the last time the team was playing poorly and you saw a thread about how the underlying numbers were actually encouraging?

Off the top of my head, it's hard to recall specific details.  But I've seen posts on here about O'Hearn's underlying numbers and how he's not a mirage, for example.  

 

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Off the top of my head, it's hard to recall specific details.  But I've seen posts on here about O'Hearn's underlying numbers and how he's not a mirage, for example.  

 

I think individual posters will have favorite players where things like that will happen.  Cowser, for instance, has been getting some of that treatment during his recent struggles.

I was very positive about the state of the rebuild as it was happening.  But that became an increasingly unpopular position as it continued, despite it looking better and better as it progressed.

And I think a lot of it stems from unrealistic expectations.  And that's kind of the thing I don't get.  We're the Baltimore Orioles.  We're on pace to win 100 games for the second consecutive year.  This is as good as it gets.  

What in the last 40 years suggest we shouldn't be absolutely thrilled with being in this position?

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, Philip said:

I’m surprised that nobody mentioned in six pages that we seem to be getting a whole lot of luck. We’re not blowing teams away, winning 12 to nothing or eight to one. We often winning on what appears to be a lucky fluke.

Nobody mentioned it because it’s an utterly false narrative.  The team has a Pythagorean record based on runs scored and allowed of 26-15, compared to their actual record of 27-14.  That’s a minimal amount of luck.  

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, Pickles said:

I think individual posters will have favorite players where things like that will happen.  Cowser, for instance, has been getting some of that treatment during his recent struggles.

I was very positive about the state of the rebuild as it was happening.  But that became an increasingly unpopular position as it continued, despite it looking better and better as it progressed.

And I think a lot of it stems from unrealistic expectations.  And that's kind of the thing I don't get.  We're the Baltimore Orioles.  We're on pace to win 100 games for the second consecutive year.  This is as good as it gets.  

What in the last 40 years suggest we shouldn't be absolutely thrilled with being in this position?

I agree individual posters have favorite players.  In regard to Cowser specifically, I think more...experienced posters on here realize that he's young and he needs some time to get out of his slump.  But to your point, people like him and want to see him do well, too.  He's a bit of a fan favorite already.

I'm not sure what your points were on the rebuild but there were discussions about the right way/wrong way to go about doing it, when exactly people felt this team was ready to contend, what prospects to call up and when.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here who thinks Elias has done an overall bad job, but there have always been disagreements on roster decisions, signings, etc that might cross the line into the negative territory.

I do believe I see where you're coming from on unrealistic expectations, sort of.  Expectations are through the roof this year and no one wants to see a team like the San Diego Padres of recent years who, despite being loaded with talent, are not winners.  I think there's still a lot of apprehension about knowing that this team is good after it's been bad for so long.  Almost like a knee jerk reflex.

But you are correct, we should be absolutely thrilled with being here right now.  This is as promising as I can ever remember this team being.

[Explosivo]

48 minutes ago, Roy Firestone said:

We are facing Seattle' best 3 pitchers...Kirby and Castillo shut us down last year...lets see how we fare against top pitching while we're already in hitting slumps...

Yes sir Mr. Firestone, it’s never easy but what experience these young bats are gaining. Incremental growth against the best will set us up well for the playoffs if we are so lucky. Until then, pitching and defense will hopefully carry us through and maybe we run into a couple early before their arms settle down in a groove. Can’t wait to see what happens either way though my mind and presence will be at the A&M/Arkansas game again tonight following an incredible walk off win by the Ags last night. The SEC West is still in play for my boys!

[HowAboutThat]

55 minutes ago, Roy Firestone said:

We are facing Seattle' best 3 pitchers...Kirby and Castillo shut us down last year...lets see how we fare against top pitching while we're already in hitting slumps...

This kind of supports my argument. Even though people say we are a good team, I think that a lot of us don’t really think we are. Yes, Seattle has splendid pitching, but… We do too.

So, instead of saying “oh my God we’re facing a fantastic pitching staff”, why aren’t we saying, “oh my God, THEY are facing a fantastic pitching staff”?

And regardless of flaws in our hitting approach, we are a top offense. Seattle is pretty dreadful at the plate.

That’s the imposter complex; the idea that we’re really not that good and it’s all some kind of a charade. 

Edited May 17 by Philip

[Pickles]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I agree individual posters have favorite players.  In regard to Cowser specifically, I think more...experienced posters on here realize that he's young and he needs some time to get out of his slump.  But to your point, people like him and want to see him do well, too.  He's a bit of a fan favorite already.

I'm not sure what your points were on the rebuild but there were discussions about the right way/wrong way to go about doing it, when exactly people felt this team was ready to contend, what prospects to call up and when.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here who thinks Elias has done an overall bad job, but there have always been disagreements on roster decisions, signings, etc that might cross the line into the negative territory.

I do believe I see where you're coming from on unrealistic expectations, sort of.  Expectations are through the roof this year and no one wants to see a team like the San Diego Padres of recent years who, despite being loaded with talent, are not winners.  I think there's still a lot of apprehension about knowing that this team is good after it's been bad for so long.  Almost like a knee jerk reflex.

But you are correct, we should be absolutely thrilled with being here right now.  This is as promising as I can ever remember this team being.

The only people that have seen the organization in a healthier spot are 60 years old or older.  And I can't believe that is the majority of anywhere near it of posters here.

[Explosivo]

6 minutes ago, Philip said:

This kind of supports my argument. Even though people say we are a good team, I think that a lot of us don’t really think we are. Yes, Seattle has splendid pitching, but… We do too.

So, instead of saying “oh my God we’re facing a fantastic pitching staff”, why aren’t we saying, “oh my God, THEY are facing a fantastic pitching staff”?

And regardless of flaws in our hitting approach, we are a top offense. Seattle is pretty dreadful at the plate.

That’s the imposter complex; the idea that we’re really not that good and it’s all some kind of a charade. 

You might be reading a bit too much into what he said. This will be another great test for our young bats. Iron sharpens iron!

[Malike]

I was browsing the OH and heard a bang on the window of the station I am at, went outside to see what it was and found a dead Oriole bird on the ground. Bad omens, man. Bad omens.