Jump to content

Werth on MASN 2011


hatepaste

Recommended Posts

But this is just two ass-end opposites of stupidity.

By this logic you are saying that no matter what the cost, so long as you get what you want you are justified.

Remember when the Jays made BJ Ryan the highest paid closer in baseball history? How did that work out for them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Well that's how you ensure you get a player. I'm not saying it's a smart contract, but they got the player they wanted.

So you take the approach that the ends justify the means, no matter what. Deal with the high risk of overwhelmingly negative consequences when they happen.

That's one way to run an organization...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olney said he hasn't heard as much hatred towards a deal since Kevin Brown's deal 10 years ago.

GMs are slamming the Nats for this.

GMs slammed the Red Sox for the Manny deal.

And other GMs also don't have to find some way to force talent to play for them.

The Nats had money so they used it.

It's not anything I'd advocate for, but they got their player.

The Nats probably overpaid way too much as I doubt anybody would have matched 6/105 if Boras had shopped it. But they got Boras to sign.

And now they are a prime landing spot for other talent this offseason because they got the first domino out of the way and showed they were serious about winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But this is just two ass-end opposites of stupidity.

By this logic you are saying that no matter what the cost, so long as you get what you want you are justified.

Remember when the Jays made BJ Ryan the highest paid closer in baseball history? How did that work out for them?

I guess there are two ways you can look at this:

1) The Jays took a hail-mary gamble that players like Ryan and Wells would become the superstar core they needed to compete in the AL East. They failed, but at least they took the chance.

2) Wildly overpaying for mediocre/hurt players is the primary reason that they've been stuck in 4th place for a decade. Optimally using the resources they wasted on Wells, Ryan, and others probably would have added 5+ wins a year, pushing them into contention multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now they are a prime landing spot for other talent this offseason because they got the first domino out of the way and showed they were serious about winning.

How many more $100M contracts (or even $50M contracts) are the Nats going to hand out? This is a team that had a $66M payroll in 2010, were 14th in the NL in attendance, and are forced to live with an RSN that is majority owned by the Orioles. We'll see, but I think it's quite unlikely they have the resources to increase payroll much more. This was their big splash, and all it did was increase payroll while holding serve on wins (trading out Dunn for Werth).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess there are two ways you can look at this:

1) The Jays took a hail-mary gamble that players like Ryan and Wells would become the superstar core they needed to compete in the AL East. They failed, but at least they took the chance.

2) Wildly overpaying for mediocre/hurt players is the primary reason that they've been stuck in 4th place for a decade. Optimally using the resources they wasted on Wells, Ryan, and others probably would have added 5+ wins a year, pushing them into contention multiple times.

You can even make the argument that the Jays were in a better position to take a hail mary shot than the Nats are right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many more $100M contracts (or even $50M contracts) are the Nats going to hand out? This is a team that had a $66M payroll in 2010, were 14th in the NL in attendance, and are forced to live with an RSN that is majority owned by the Orioles. We'll see, but I think it's quite unlikely they have the resources to increase payroll much more. This was their big splash, and all it did was increase payroll while holding serve on wins (trading out Dunn for Werth).

Exactly. I mean they are breaking even at best right here. They haven't added anything.

They better hope that Strasburg comes back from TJ quickly and as dominant as he was when he went down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GMs slammed the Red Sox for the Manny deal.

And other GMs also don't have to find some way to force talent to play for them.

The Nats had money so they used it.

It's not anything I'd advocate for, but they got their player.

The Nats probably overpaid way too much as I doubt anybody would have matched 6/105 if Boras had shopped it. But they got Boras to sign.

And now they are a prime landing spot for other talent this offseason because they got the first domino out of the way and showed they were serious about winning.

You are ridiculous. The Nats aren't going to have too much more money to spend!

And the Red Sox were ALREADY GOOD. They finished second in the AL East each of the last three years.

You understand the difference between the Nationals today and the Sox of the early naughts right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GMs slammed the Red Sox for the Manny deal.

And other GMs also don't have to find some way to force talent to play for them.

The Nats had money so they used it.

It's not anything I'd advocate for, but they got their player.

The Nats probably overpaid way too much as I doubt anybody would have matched 6/105 if Boras had shopped it. But they got Boras to sign.

And now they are a prime landing spot for other talent this offseason because they got the first domino out of the way and showed they were serious about winning.

You mean Carlos Pena...the same guy you have been saying is done and is a retread and a waste for the Orioles? Now, he is talent for the Nats?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean Carlos Pena...the same guy you have been saying is done and is a retread and a waste for the Orioles? Now, he is talent for the Nats?

Well although I don't want Pena, the Nats do, and the Werth signing may have increased their ability to go out and get him.

They got the first player, and now they can get the rest of their targets much easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well although I don't want Pena, the Nats do, and the Werth signing may have increased their ability to go out and get him.

They got the first player, and now they can get the rest of their targets much easier.

WHAT?!

So now that the Nats spent money that makes Pena a good pick up? This does not make any sense whatsoever.

The Orioles have plenty of money to pick up Pena if they wish to. Just as much money as the Nats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well although I don't want Pena, the Nats do, and the Werth signing may have increased their ability to go out and get him.

They got the first player, and now they can get the rest of their targets much easier.

So, that's ok?

What if the Orioles want DLee and Reynolds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT?!

So now that the Nats spent money that makes Pena a good pick up? This does not make any sense whatsoever.

The Orioles have plenty of money to pick up Pena if they wish to. Just as much money as the Nats.

He's not judging by production acquired by the team, or by value added. He's judging by you were able to acquire the players you wanted, regardless of whether acquiring those players is stupid or smart or somewhere in between.

Commonly known as action bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • I had hoped that, with so many young players starting or about to start their ML careers, some of them would learn how to bunt in a close game (seemingly all of them) when there's a need to move a runner, including scoring one from third. I long ago accepted, reluctantly, the fact that veterans who can't bunt won't learn even if adding that skill  potentially would help the team. Is there a chance that the incoming generation of Orioles, who we're told, and I believe, have a we-rather-than-me mentality and want to do whatever it takes to win, are willing and able to learn how to bunt.
    • So the Pythagorean winning percentage would be 72%. So we should be 7-3.   
    • So far in 2024 they are both 27.6 ft/sec sprint speed Colton Cowser Stats: Statcast, Visuals & Advanced Metrics | baseballsavant.com (mlb.com) Cedric Mullins Stats: Statcast, Visuals & Advanced Metrics | baseballsavant.com (mlb.com) Cowser has a very strong arm.  With reps and experience he should be able to defend similarly to Mullins this year.  
    • Name Year 0ft 5ft 10ft 15ft 20ft 25ft 30ft 35ft 40ft 45ft 50ft 55ft 60ft 65ft 70ft 75ft 80ft 85ft 90ft Cowser, Colton - LHB 2023 0.00 0.53 0.82 1.08 1.31 1.52 1.72 1.92 2.11 2.30 2.48 2.66 2.83 3.01 3.18 3.36 3.53 3.72 3.91 Mullins, Cedric - LHB 2023 0.00 0.54 0.84 1.09 1.32 1.53 1.73 1.93 2.12 2.30 2.48 2.66 2.83 3.00 3.18 3.35 3.52 3.71 3.90 Colton Cowser Stats: Statcast, Visuals & Advanced Metrics | baseballsavant.com (mlb.com)
    • I may be overly bullish with what I said, but what I meant was I think our lineup will be elite to the point a "defense/speed only" CF is probably OK if it came to it.
    • The point is, that if we extend Gunnar for 12 years and $300 million (I just made up a contract with easy math), he isn’t going to make $25 million next season. He’s going to make something like $2 million because it’s a pre-arbitration year. Then he’ll makes something like $7 million in 2026 $12 million in 2027, and $18 million in 2028. A mid market deal for a player (like 3 years for $45 million or 4 years for $56 million) should not impact the team’s ability to pay those salaries in those years. Extensions are about security. Teams don’t just hand exponentially more to players than they would make in those years when they structure the extension. “The Arb game” has nothing to do with this. It is about how extensions are structured and how a shorter term mid-market deal shouldn’t prevent them from paying those types of salaries in the early years of an extension (i.e., the first 3-4 years of an extension). If you don’t believe me, use the Internet and look up what Fernando Tatis Jr. has been paid in the early years of his extension or what Witt Jr. will make.  Burnes is a completely different discussion, but again I don’t believe the team has any interest in extending him. The Lunhow/Elias/Mejdal Astros provide a decent blueprint to what I think they’ll do with respect to pitching.
    • I don't think you can describe anyone who's still in A ball with 133 career pro PAs at age 22 as having a floor of three wins a season. At this point it's an open question as to whether he tops three wins in any MLB season. If you look for comparable players, say .310-.330 OBP, little power, plus-plus basestealing and CF defense, I think the archetype in recent baseball is Michael Bourn. Who did top out with some really good 5-6 win seasons, but tailed off quickly and only had 5-6 seasons as an above-average regular. Beyond him you're looking at guys like Jarrod Dyson, Dee Strange-Gordon, Ben Revere. But only a handful of years each as average to average-plus MLB regulars. And then lots and lots of players who didn't even reach that kind of level. I think we have a few years before we figure out where on that spectrum Bradfield falls.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...