Jump to content

Os claim Emmanuel Rivera; DFA Vavra


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

Not sure where he fits unless this is to just ensure Mayo stays in the minors all year. Seems to be a good defender at 3B but can't hit his weight. I guess he's Urias depth? His statcast chart is pretty ugly offensively.

image.png.b15416a4ab6267dc6bc9cb84bb188646.png

Elias seems to really value's slow, right-handed batters who have trouble finding their game power.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Not sure where he fits unless this is to just ensure Mayo stays in the minors all year. Seems to be a good defender at 3B but can't hit his weight. I guess he's Urias depth? His statcast chart is pretty ugly offensively.

image.png.b15416a4ab6267dc6bc9cb84bb188646.png

Elias seems to really value's slow, right-handed batters who have trouble finding their game power.

Dumpster Diving

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, deward said:

I'm assuming this is because they don't really like Soto's defense at 3B?

He gives you a right handed bat instead of Soto a left hander if they want to give Jackson a day off possibly against Valdez.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I don't understand worrying about infield depth to the point the Os feel compelled to make this kind of transaction. If Urias gets hurt, Mountcastle can finish out that game, and then bring up Mayo the next day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bpilktree67 said:

He has went 4 innings on the mound this season so maybe a late reliever instead of Kimbrel or Soto.  

We already have Nick Maton in AAA who can pitch. He pitched the ninth inning twice last week for the Tides. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably irrational, but I'm glad to see Vavra go.  I doubt the roster maneuver means anything more than he did during his time with the O's.  I think it's meaningful that my post is the first one in this thread to focus on the consequences of losing Vavra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, 24fps said:

Probably irrational, but I'm glad to see Vavra go.  I doubt the roster maneuver means anything more than he did during his time with the O's.  I think it's meaningful that my post is the first one in this thread to focus on the consequences of losing Vavra.

Well, we don't know if he's gone. If he's unclaimed on waivers, he will likely stay with the organization and just be removed from the 40 man roster. Like Irvin was last month. 

  • Upvote 1
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

    • Great post.  I like your optimism, and I'll try to believe this team can turn things around just in the nick of time like some classic Hollywood baseball movie.
    • I think Elias has mostly done an excellent job with one exception -- he seems like he treats the bullpen like an afterthought.  I doubt that will happen again this coming offseason. I don't really blame him for the current offensive struggles overall.  Just too many injuries late in the season.  That said I don't understand how we went from dealing Austin Hays, Connor Norby and Ryan McKenna just so we could land the right handed bat of, gulp, Austin Slater.  
    • Man this team has no shot. Right now they may not even make it. 
    • Most of these guys are only playing because of injuries to starters.  But Austin Slater I'm guessing was brought in to replace the traded Austin Hays.  The problem is that Slater has shown little ability to hit lefties this year, after hitting them pretty well up to this season.  This must be why two teams dropped him before the O's picked him up.  I know he was let go much earlier in the season, but is Ryan McKenna actually worse than this guy?  I don't understand how the front office went from releasing McKenna to later trading Hays and Norby -- thinking their right handed bats could adequately be replaced by someone like Slater.  
    • I'm willing to give Elias some rope because of the strict limitations he was under with JA but he better not be so damn conservative again this year and let every serviceable FA out there sign with other teams while he's busy picking up reclamation projects again. Minus Burns of course.  
    • I agree completely that it’s irrelevant whether it worked.  But I don’t agree that bunting is clearly the right decision in either scenario, and I think that decision gets worse if it’s intended to be a straight sacrifice rather than a bunt for a hit. To be clear, the outcome you’re seeking in tonight’s situation, for example — sacrifice the runners over to 2nd/3rd — lowers both your run expectancy for the inning (from 1.44 to 1.39) and your win expectancy for the game (from 38.8% to 37.1%). It increases the likelihood of scoring one run, but it decreases the likelihood of scoring two runs (which you needed to tie) and certainly of scoring three or more runs (which you needed to take the lead).  And that’s if you succeed in getting them to 2nd/3rd. Research indicates that 15-30% of sacrifice bunt attempts fail, so you have to bake in a pretty significant percentage of the time that you’d just be giving up a free out (or even just two free strikes, as on Sunday). The bunt attempt in the 3rd inning on Sunday (which my gut hates more than if they’d done it today) actually is less damaging to the win probability — decreasing it only very slightly from 60.2% to 59.8%. More time left in the game to make up for giving up outs, I guess, and the scoreboard payoff is a bit better (in the sense that at least you’d have a better chance to take the lead).   At the bottom of it, these things mostly come down to gut and pure chance. The percentages are rarely overwhelming in either direction, and so sometimes even a “lower-percentage” play may work better under some circumstances. You would have bunted both times. I wouldn’t have bunted either time. Hyde bunted one time but not the other. I don’t know that anyone is an idiot (or even clearly “wrong”) for their preference. Either approach could have worked. Sadly, none of them actually did.
    • Wasn't Hyde always thought of more or less as a caretaker? I'm on the fence about him coming back. I totally get the injuries and that needs to be taking into consideration but man this collapse some heads have to roll who's I'm  mot sure 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...