Jump to content

Fielder?

Montrealer

By Montrealer
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
Nick signed for 66. This year aside, I think most agree he's a 20-25ish guy. Three of him would be 200. Fielder will get near that.

Nick signed an extension. If he was a FA when he signed that, he would be asking for and getting $100 million+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 396
  • Created
  • Last Reply
scOtt Hangout Grand Counsel

scOtt

Posted
Posted
We need difference making players in addition to Adam and Matt.

Our system doesn't have them.

I agree. Multiple players.

Fair question to you. Whether we traded and signed Fielder or just waited ans signed him, signed and sealed. Do you really think AM is going to spend a significant amount above that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
Nick signed an extension. If he was a FA when he signed that, he would be asking for and getting $100 million+.

Exactly. So the lesson here is to develop and extend your own talent rather than buying the decline years of players developed by someone else, at rates determined by their past performance.

Also, there have been recent studies that suggest players who resign with their own teams outperform those who sign with other teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
Exactly. So the lesson here is to develop and extend your own talent rather than buying the decline years of players developed by someone else, at rates determined by their past performance.

Also, there have been recent studies that suggest players who resign with their own teams outperform those who sign with other teams.

I agree but the talent isn't there.

There's at least a 3-4 year gap before the minors will produce anything for position players besides maybe Bell, and he'll take 2 years to acclimate to the majors.

So what do you do? Continue to lose until then?

You do have a core, do you just let them flounder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
We don't have the prospects in our system to do that now.

So are we just supposed to lose for the next 4 years while we wait for them to develop, if they develop?

We have developed some quality pieces, but they need other quality pieces to surround them, and our system just isn't ready to produce those pieces. Therefore we need to add externally.

I agree. I just think they can add multiple pieces that are reasonble costs and reasonable contract lengths, along with acquiring players in the international market and via trades. Absolutely no need to pay $175M for a $130M player to do this. Several smaller contracts reduce risk, reduce the impact of overpaying to get stars to come to Baltimore, and virtually eliminate the problem of paying Mo Vaughn $25M a year for 2-3 years to drink mimosas on the beach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brendanmdeegan High-A

brendanmdeegan

Posted
Posted
I agree but the talent isn't there.

There's at least a 3-4 year gap before the minors will produce anything for position players besides maybe Bell, and he'll take 2 years to acclimate to the majors.

So what do you do? Continue to lose until then?

You do have a core, do you just let them flounder?

I think we can all agree the core is a lot smaller than we thought/hoped.

There are glaring holes at 3B, 1B, and SS. The OF is in decent shape but we need more pitching still. What you do is continue to stockpile good, pre arbitration players, and supplement them with one or FA/international signings when we are close to contention. We all thought and hoped that would be next year, but it is not. That does not mean you abandon the plan though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
I think we can all agree the core is a lot smaller than we thought/hoped.

There are glaring holes at 3B, 1B, and SS. The OF is in decent shape but we need more pitching still. What you do is continue to stockpile good, pre arbitration players, and supplement them with one or FA/international signings when we are close to contention. We all thought and hoped that would be next year, but it is not. That does not mean you abandon the plan though.

So you continue to lose to maybe have a shot at competing in a few years if those players pan out via the draft/international signings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
I agree but the talent isn't there.

There's at least a 3-4 year gap before the minors will produce anything for position players besides maybe Bell, and he'll take 2 years to acclimate to the majors.

So what do you do? Continue to lose until then?

You do have a core, do you just let them flounder?

See my preceding post. Give me five guys like Blanks and Kila and Chris Davis for a couple $million total and some mid-range prospects, rather than trading half the farm and $150-$200M for Prince Fielder.

What in the world does Fielder get you when you've likely traded back half of his added value (and maybe much more), and given him $25M a year from now until the end of time? You see his added value and upside, but seem to downplay all the very, very significant risks and costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
So you continue to lose to maybe have a shot at competing in a few years if those players pan out via the draft/international signings?

Yes. You have to. What are the other options? Move two steps forward, one step back by trading good players for Fielder, while also expecting Angelos to significantly spend ahead of revenues?

Like it or not, the O's are what they are: dependent on homegrown talent. If you pretend otherwise you're in denial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
Who exactly?

Who cares? The kind of players I'd target are available all the time. I just mentioned Kila, and Davis, and Blanks. You jump at guys like Dunn when his market is down. You take on handfuls of potential Carlos Penas. You get in the international game and sign the Sanos and the Chapmans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
See my preceding post. Give me five guys like Blanks and Kila and Chris Davis for a couple $million total and some mid-range prospects, rather than trading half the farm and $150-$200M for Prince Fielder.

What in the world does Fielder get you when you've likely traded back half of his added value (and maybe much more), and given him $25M a year from now until the end of time? You see his added value and upside, but seem to downplay all the very, very significant risks and costs.

Fielder is a known quantity. This team needs established threats, not maybes if they want to win in the near future.

You get what you pay for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JTrea81 Hangout Grand Counsel

JTrea81

Posted
Posted
Yes. You have to. What are the other options? Move two steps forward, one step back by trading good players for Fielder, while also expecting Angelos to significantly spend ahead of revenues?

Like it or not, the O's are what they are: dependent on homegrown talent. If you pretend otherwise you're in denial.

The O's don't have to be dependent on homegrown talent though, not with their resources.

That's the thing that is so frustrating.

They don't have to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Orioles5258
      Congratulations Yankees

      By Orioles5258 · Posted

      Any jerk wad want to congratulate Duke Basketball or the Steelers? just go ahead and piss me off even more 
    • Aristotelian
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Aristotelian · Posted

      Agreed, they were trying to preserve Burnes there. The division still hadn't been clinched, so try to win the game but within the rest management plan for your ace. Hopefully the fact they used Cano means there aren't any major concerns about his rest, but now you have to wonder.
    • interloper
      9/26: A Weak Effort In New York

      By interloper · Posted

      Yeah both Burnes and Hyde said after the game it's because Burnes is going on regular rest to start the first WC game and so he was shortened up a bit. 
    • Frobby
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Frobby · Posted

      You seem to pine for guys in AAA and then (with one notable exception) judge them very harshly if they don’t perform well instantly in the majors.  This is not the time to start experimenting with Young, and that’s no reflection on him at all IMO.
    • Bemorewins
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      I agree with the part about Elias. He needs to operate with a little more humility (regarding his bullpen approach) and pivot in the offense regarding how he puts a pen together. He needs to get away from the arrogant thinking in believing that we are always "the smartest guys in the room" and can fix other teams junk/unwanted parts. That is fine to do some time (regardless of how much you spend). But you can't construct an entire pen made of castoffs and almost no guys with elite/power/strikeout stuff. Yes it worked great with Felix, Perez/Lopez in 22', Cano in 23'. But the problem is that we are in '24. And some of those lightening in the bottle guys have reverted back to what their talent says that they are - mediocre. We have a pen full of decent/league average/mediocre arms. That's not what you really want heading into October.
    • e16bball
      DH - O'Hearn v. Kjerstad

      By e16bball · Posted

      Also, since there’s another interesting discussion going on here, I think it’s time for Hyde to have an uncomfortable conversation with Adley. I hate everything I’m about to say, because Adley is my favorite Oriole. But we have to acknowledge where we are.  Over the last few months, the only sensible approach with Adley — other than the IL, which apparently he hasn’t been eligible for — has been to keep penciling him into the lineup almost everyday and hoping he figures it out. He has a track record of consistent lifelong excellence, so it’s felt like just a matter of time before he busts the slump and rights the ship.  But he hasn’t. Adley’s line over the last 3 months, almost half a season now, is so bad that it requires a double check to be sure it’s right: .186 / .274 / .278 / .552. A 61 wRC+. And -0.2 fWAR. He has been a below replacement player for 3 months now. He has been the 3rd-worst qualified hitter in baseball over that span, and the 7th-worst overall qualified player. The “qualified” part does make it a little misleading — most of the guys who’ve been this bad have long since been benched. I think you have to consider McCann, at least in Burnes’s starts. He’s been hitting a bit (114 wRC+ since the ASB), and even if he wasn’t on a bit of a heater, his normal baseline is still better than a .552 OPS. If you do continue to play him full-time, you just can’t treat him like he’s *Adley* anymore. You have to treat him like the bad backup catcher he’s been. He has to hit at the bottom of the order. The very bottom. There’s really no reasoned basis upon which you could want to have him get more ABs than guys like Mullins or Urias right now. And you have to PH for him liberally — whichever of Kjerstad/O’Hearn doesn’t start should be looking at Adley’s slot as their most likely opportunity.  As I said, I love Adley. It’s been brutal watching him. But there are 25 other guys on the team who deserve the best shot to win a ring. And that means you can’t just keep stubbornly handing all the ABs to a guy who is desperately lost, on the blind hope that he’ll suddenly find it. 
    • Fiver6565
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Fiver6565 · Posted

      I didn’t post it in the game thread no, but I’m also not looking for credit. I thought it was a bad move at the time to remove Burnes in the first place, and choosing Cano at that point after he’d been bombed by those exact hitters, felt odd and off to me. The only real defense I could come up with was who if not Cano?  But taking Burnes out is essentially admitting that winning that night wasnt your top priority anyway, so why not also rest Cano, who you absolutely need in the playoffs and has pitched a lot?  I just didn’t get it in real time, and I still don’t. 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...