Photo

BSL: Orioles: Free Agents To Possibly Consider


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#1 BSLBobHarkins

BSLBobHarkins

    Orioles Analyst

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 08:11 PM

BSL: Orioles: Free Agents To Possibly Consider

https://www.baltimor...sibly-consider/


  • BSLChrisStoner likes this

#2 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 84,776 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 16 September 2019 - 09:53 PM

McHugh is the guy.

 

Agree about Kuechel too but it depends on his contract.


@BSLRobShields

#3 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,572 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 16 September 2019 - 11:15 PM

The approach to the FA market would depend on the approach to the season.

 

There's no evidence that the Orioles are interested in moving up in the Win column next year.

 

Most people project and want to see continued losing.

 

If the goal will be another top3 pick, then why exactly would you be targeting anyone in the next FA class?  For that matter, when have the Orioles ever targeted anyone?

 

If Wood wants a 1/8 with the chance to get healthy and recover for a better opportunity in 2021, ok, but why would he want to do that in Baltimore?

 

McHugh...same...I guess the Elias connection is there and the Orioles could promise him starting until the trade deadline and then deal him into the race.

 

The best opportunities for the Orioles to manage their roster would be through trade, but they haven't really shown much interest in that area either.

 

The Orioles are sitting under 60M right now for 2020 salary projection and it feels like they'll be ok with that and waiting out another year.


  • russsnyder likes this

#4 russsnyder

russsnyder

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 03:38 AM

McHugh is the guy.

Agree about Kuechel too but it depends on his contract.


Maybe, but McHugh is dealing with an undisclosed elbow issue and is still on the injured list.

I don't see Keuchel as a good fit. He's going to want too many years and too much money to sign with the Orioles at this point.

#5 russsnyder

russsnyder

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 03:49 AM

The approach to the FA market would depend on the approach to the season.

There's no evidence that the Orioles are interested in moving up in the Win column next year.

Most people project and want to see continued losing.

If the goal will be another top3 pick, then why exactly would you be targeting anyone in the next FA class? For that matter, when have the Orioles ever targeted anyone?

If Wood wants a 1/8 with the chance to get healthy and recover for a better opportunity in 2021, ok, but why would he want to do that in Baltimore?

McHugh...same...I guess the Elias connection is there and the Orioles could promise him starting until the trade deadline and then deal him into the race.

The best opportunities for the Orioles to manage their roster would be through trade, but they haven't really shown much interest in that area either.

The Orioles are sitting under 60M right now for 2020 salary projection and it feels like they'll be ok with that and waiting out another year.

Good post.

I think the Orioles will make some moves to improve the club. It obviously remains to be seen whether or not they are a player in the free agent market.

I think they sign a starting pitcher, ( more likely a guy like McHugh if he is healthy) a shortstop , and bring in some bullpen help. I seriously doubt that the Orioles will be in play for the likes of Betances and Gregorious.

This should be an interesting off season.

#6 weird-O

weird-O

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 17 September 2019 - 06:44 AM

As Dude alluded to, it's going to be a tough sell to get quality players to come to Baltimore for 2020. The O's will need to show the league that they've gathered a core of quality players, at the ML level. Then FAs may start to consider coming to Baltimore. This is just the end of year 1 of the rebuild. It seems unlikely that Elias is going to enter the high end FA market, and start trying to make the playoffs next season. 


Good news! I saw a dog today.


#7 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 113,475 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 07:14 AM

If the goal will be another top3 pick, then why exactly would you be targeting anyone in the next FA class?  For that matter, when have the Orioles ever targeted anyone?

 

 

The goal has never been to lose.  

Simply a willingness to lose vs. making additions that 'could' make you better you now, but not enough to compete. 


The bottom out portion has now ended. 
They've identified what exists internally. 

They've started to build organizational depth. 

 

At the 2020 ML level, you have options at most positions, who are going to get additional time and opportunity to acclimate to the Majors, go through adjustments, and further evaluation. 

 

Beginning with '20 a base group is emerging, and real payroll flexibility is coming. 
 

 

The '20 O's should make a leap into the 70-75 win level. 
A couple of external additions would help that along. 


  • BSLSteveBirrer likes this

#8 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,928 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 17 September 2019 - 09:49 AM

Here's some food for thought.

 

Rob's article advocates trading Mancini in part because he has reached the 'historical peak age.'

 

Bob's article lists a handful of FA candidates that the O's should look at this offseason. Every one of them is older than Mancini.

 

 

Hmmm.......


  • bmore_ken likes this

#9 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,559 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:09 AM

The goal has never been to lose.


I disagree. I think they intentionally tanked this year, trying to have the worst record and get the #1 pick. Tigers just did a better (?) job of it.

Obviously the players and field staff did the best job they could. Those guys weren't throwing games. Upper management is where the tanking decision is made.
  • FFH likes this

#10 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 113,475 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:26 AM

I disagree. I think they intentionally tanked this year, trying to have the worst record and get the #1 pick. Tigers just did a better (?) job of it.

Obviously the players and field staff did the best job they could. Those guys weren't throwing games. Upper management is where the tanking decision is made.




The goal of the FO was never to lose enough to accumulate a Top 3 draft pick.

If they lost enough that that happened, that's certainly fine... that was a possible end result they'd obviously be fine with, but not the goal. 

 

If you want to say their unwillingness to make additions which would have made the '19 O's more likely to win 65 games vs. 50+ is an example of their desire to tank for the top of the draft... fine. 

 

I don't see it that way. 

They knew no addition would make them contenders in '19. 
They were unwilling to make additions which wouldn't move the needle from anything but abysmal to simply bad. 

That imo was the goal. 

 

They were willing to lose. It wasn't the aim. 


  • bmore_ken likes this

#11 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,551 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:31 AM

Targeting the kind of guys mentioned in this article is probably a discussion we should be having next offseason.

 

As it stands, I think Elias is willing to punt on year two of his process and get another top 5 pick before he tries to make any strides in the standings come 2021.

 

It's another 100-loss season next year.


  • bmore_ken likes this

I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?


#12 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 84,776 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:45 AM

Here's some food for thought.
 
Rob's article advocates trading Mancini in part because he has reached the 'historical peak age.'
 
Bob's article lists a handful of FA candidates that the O's should look at this offseason. Every one of them is older than Mancini.
 
 
Hmmm.......


Apples to oranges though.

It’s all about value and trying to take advantage of certain situations.

Also, we are advocating adding guys in positions that are lacking in the organization.
@BSLRobShields

#13 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 12:28 PM




The goal of the FO was never to lose enough to accumulate a Top 3 draft pick.

If they lost enough that that happened, that's certainly fine... that was a possible end result they'd obviously be fine with, but not the goal. 

 

If you want to say their unwillingness to make additions which would have made the '19 O's more likely to win 65 games vs. 50+ is an example of their desire to tank for the top of the draft... fine. 

 

I don't see it that way. 

They knew no addition would make them contenders in '19. 
They were unwilling to make additions which wouldn't move the needle from anything but abysmal to simply bad. 

That imo was the goal. 

 

They were willing to lose. It wasn't the aim. 

Agreed on all points



#14 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,928 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 17 September 2019 - 02:05 PM

Apples to oranges though.

It’s all about value and trying to take advantage of certain situations.

Also, we are advocating adding guys in positions that are lacking in the organization.

Yes its a bit of apples and oranges.

 

I get there are some differences between the two circumstances. But the age question is inconsistent between the two. 



#15 Slidemaster

Slidemaster

    Rookie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 719 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:25 PM

It's likely that nobody of interest is coming here, and frankly I don't really want anyone either.

#16 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,572 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 17 September 2019 - 07:25 PM

The goal has never been to lose.  

Simply a willingness to lose vs. making additions that 'could' make you better you now, but not enough to compete. 

 

I guess you are trying to channel the book here.  I don't know why you think it's an important distinction.

 

The Astros were trying to lose.  So were the Cubs. So are the Marlins. Basically every team that has gone into the publicly announced 'rebuilding' has done so to manage expectations so the ownership and GM gets zero pressure years.  It's simply about managing the expectations of the fanbase.

 

The public view has been there's some great value in terms of creating future opportunity...which is total bunk...so I guess there's at least some value to that understanding where now we're trying to frame it in some other way.

 

If your house is on fire and you don't bother to try and put it out and let it burn to the ground...saying you didn't want to use the water is the same as saying to don't care that the house burns to the ground. (and no, that's not a house analogy to rebuilding, it's still not a house)



#17 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,928 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 17 September 2019 - 08:00 PM

Dude, once again you really should buy a team and run it your way since you clearly know more than the GMs of the Astros, Cubs, and Marlins.



#18 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,572 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:59 PM

Dude, once again you really should buy a team and run it your way since you clearly know more than the GMs of the Astros, Cubs, and Marlins.

 

Steve, someday, if I have a billion dollars, I plan on it.

 

Still feels you are a little confused about the roles of the owners and GM.



#19 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,083 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 18 September 2019 - 08:46 AM

Steve, someday, if I have a billion dollars, I plan on it.

 

Still feels you are a little confused about the roles of the owners and GM.

 

I wasn't aware that there was an MLB regulation forcing differentiation of the two.


@DJ_McCann

#20 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,420 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 18 September 2019 - 09:28 AM

I guess you are trying to channel the book here.  I don't know why you think it's an important distinction.

 

The Astros were trying to lose.  So were the Cubs. So are the Marlins. Basically every team that has gone into the publicly announced 'rebuilding' has done so to manage expectations so the ownership and GM gets zero pressure years.  It's simply about managing the expectations of the fanbase.

 

The public view has been there's some great value in terms of creating future opportunity...which is total bunk...so I guess there's at least some value to that understanding where now we're trying to frame it in some other way.

 

If your house is on fire and you don't bother to try and put it out and let it burn to the ground...saying you didn't want to use the water is the same as saying to don't care that the house burns to the ground. (and no, that's not a house analogy to rebuilding, it's still not a house)

I think this is right,  Are the Orioles trying to lose? NO.  Are they worried about avoiding losing?  My opinion, also, no.

The players are trying to do their best to win games.  I think there have been very few players in the history of sports, who did not want to win.  Front Offices, have decided it is acceptable, to lose, and it has become the practice.   I think it hurts the game and the fan base


  • bmore_ken likes this
@mikeghg




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners