Photo

BSL: Orioles: Free Agents To Possibly Consider


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 russsnyder

russsnyder

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts

Posted 23 September 2019 - 01:26 PM

You will have to overpay to get players here, especially for pitchers.

 

  I understand, but I would not overpay for Wood right now.



#42 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,927 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 23 September 2019 - 01:54 PM

Thats a poor way to look at what is being said.

 

Put it another way.  The team had a 150+M payroll just a few years ago.  It will be around 60M, at the current pace, for next year.  That 60M is with or without Davis on the team.  They could, in theory, spend 100M more on the team in 2020.

 

Either the O's have an unlimited budget or its a potential that the Davis contract becomes an issue.  I get that they have around $100M between what they have on the books for 2020 and what they spent several years ago. That isn't the point. If they don't have an unlimited budget then there could get to a place where they have added a number of pieces but decline to go any higher because they have the Davis contract.

 

Is that likely to happen? Probably not but that does not mean that the Davis contract will never be an issue.



#43 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 84,776 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 23 September 2019 - 02:00 PM

Either the O's have an unlimited budget or its a potential that the Davis contract becomes an issue.  I get that they have around $100M between what they have on the books for 2020 and what they spent several years ago. That isn't the point. If they don't have an unlimited budget then there could get to a place where they have added a number of pieces but decline to go any higher because they have the Davis contract.

 

Is that likely to happen? Probably not but that does not mean that the Davis contract will never be an issue.

 

Well this is kind of the point.  They aren't going to take the payroll into an area to where the Davis contract will matter.


@BSLRobShields

#44 dude

dude

    HOF

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

Posted 23 September 2019 - 11:56 PM

Lets say the O's do enough this next season to get into the 70 W range and decide that they are on the correct trajectory to make a playoff push in 2021. The $17M on the books for Davis absolutely could hinder that. 

 

You just assume that the payroll can be unlimited. If that is the case then yes no contract would ever hinder anything. But that is not the case with any team and for sure the O's. That $17M is a factor. Doesn't mean it would automatically prohibit things but to dismiss it as a non issue is wrong IMO.

 

I think the issue is that you kind of have this blank board, anything can happen view of the options.

 

If you want that approach, ok, I guess.  It's just void of any reality.

 

It's why specifics are important and the whole "we'll know step 2 when we get there" approach is so off.

 

We generally know the [details of every player and team in MLB].  We know what the Orioles will likely have (at some level) and their approach to things like FA.

 

There's no realistic path for the Orioles where Davis' money makes any difference.  There's not even a far-fetched path.

 

We know the potential FAs in 2021.  There is no mystery. Put together the great team you want where it makes a difference in 2021 and we can discuss it.



#45 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,927 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 24 September 2019 - 10:24 AM

I am not arguing that Davis' contract is likely, even remotely likely, to be an issue. I merely point out that it is not a factual statement to say that it flat out won't.  Now if you don't think I can come up with a roster built in 2020 and 2021 where the Davis money is an issue lets make a wager. Case of beer to the winner. I suggest you don't take the bet...lol

 

https://www.mlb.com/...2022-c302396056

 

Pretty easy to come up with a payroll over $200M.



#46 dude

dude

    HOF

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

Posted 24 September 2019 - 04:43 PM

Steve, 

 

Riverdance auditions coming up next week.  I think you're ready.  <<thumbs up>>



#47 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,927 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 24 September 2019 - 07:36 PM

Steve, 

 

Riverdance auditions coming up next week.  I think you're ready.  <<thumbs up>>

Simple question.

 

Do you believe that you could build a roster around the FAs the next two off seasons that would reasonable approach $200M. Yes or no.



#48 dude

dude

    HOF

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

Posted 24 September 2019 - 08:30 PM

Simple question.

 

Do you believe that you could build a roster around the FAs the next two off seasons that would reasonable approach $200M. Yes or no.

 

Yes? 

 

It's actually harder to do than you'd think.  I guess you could give 5 guys 40M each to get there if you wanted. It'd be easier if you included trades because there's more to work with there. Real, market based contracts?  Harder to get there...you'd need to pay relievers. 

 

--------------

I answered it, but that question has nothing to do with the discussion.

 

There's a 0% chance the Orioles do that. 

 

I'm aligned on the 100% case, you are trying to angle me off on the 0% case.  Good work.



#49 dude

dude

    HOF

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

Posted 25 September 2019 - 05:55 PM

Bob wonders if a 3 year deal for Wood at $27-$30M could work.

What do you think? At that price, could be a nice gamble. Could also be a contract that doesn't work out.


I've long been a proponent of adding Wood, but I don't understand how he makes sense now (as an active target).

If his market collapses and you can get him for 1/8 and let him pitch his way into a trade into the race in July, that's fine, but if you sign him for 3 years, are you planning on using him for 3 years?

We know the names of the Orioles' upper level LHed starting pitchers that should get opportunity this year (Akin, Lowther, even Zimmerman has moved up, others not far behind)...and while it's easy to fall into the depth argument, you can't keep everyone.

If you add a guy like Wood on a 3-year deal, it should be because you want to use another pitcher(s) to accomplish some other aspect of the roster....and if that was a plan, no issues with me. I could share another angle on a trade to accomplish other things that would essentially lock in an experienced 3 year starter (better than Wood)...but you could do it to build your 2020 roster and align different opportunity.

...but Elias has already said we're still strategically not doing anything next year so you wind up with a bunch of guys at the top of the system with no-where to go? I just don't understand how that helps do what you want to do.

#50 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 84,776 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 25 September 2019 - 06:41 PM

I've long been a proponent of adding Wood, but I don't understand how he makes sense now (as an active target).

If his market collapses and you can get him for 1/8 and let him pitch his way into a trade into the race in July, that's fine, but if you sign him for 3 years, are you planning on using him for 3 years?

We know the names of the Orioles' upper level LHed starting pitchers that should get opportunity this year (Akin, Lowther, even Zimmerman has moved up, others not far behind)...and while it's easy to fall into the depth argument, you can't keep everyone.

If you add a guy like Wood on a 3-year deal, it should be because you want to use another pitcher(s) to accomplish some other aspect of the roster....and if that was a plan, no issues with me. I could share another angle on a trade to accomplish other things that would essentially lock in an experienced 3 year starter (better than Wood)...but you could do it to build your 2020 roster and align different opportunity.

...but Elias has already said we're still strategically not doing anything next year so you wind up with a bunch of guys at the top of the system with no-where to go? I just don't understand how that helps do what you want to do.


No, Elias said he’s not concerned with wins and losses but he is valuing the idea of adding talent.
@BSLRobShields

#51 dude

dude

    HOF

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

Posted 25 September 2019 - 07:31 PM

No, Elias said he’s not concerned with wins and losses but he is valuing the idea of adding talent.

 

If you want to read his words as being aggressive for injured pitchers on 3 year deals...ok....but I don't think that's what he's talking about.

 

He's talking about adding talent through the draft and IFA and potential trades of current players.  He'll take a Nates Karns shot.

 

If we want to talk about things we can do to build opportunity (to win), then there's lots of ways to do that.  We aren't managing the roster, he still is briefing "accumulating talent".

 

Like I said, if Wood needs a 1/8 to get the work in, we can be players and hold off on an Akin or Lowther for 3-4 months....but that's it.

 

Talking about aggressive use of the FA market seems silly.  They already told you they aren't doing it.

 

Adding Wood on a 3-year deal has the same type of roster consequences that keeping Davis has.  Depth isn't free (in terms of roster rules)



#52 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,558 posts

Posted 25 September 2019 - 08:20 PM

I've long been a proponent of adding Wood


This is too good to not childishly isolate.
  • BSLRobShields and DJ MC like this

#53 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 84,776 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 25 September 2019 - 08:36 PM

If you want to read his words as being aggressive for injured pitchers on 3 year deals...ok....but I don't think that's what he's talking about.

He's talking about adding talent through the draft and IFA and potential trades of current players. He'll take a Nates Karns shot.

If we want to talk about things we can do to build opportunity (to win), then there's lots of ways to do that. We aren't managing the roster, he still is briefing "accumulating talent".

Like I said, if Wood needs a 1/8 to get the work in, we can be players and hold off on an Akin or Lowther for 3-4 months....but that's it.

Talking about aggressive use of the FA market seems silly. They already told you they aren't doing it.

Adding Wood on a 3-year deal has the same type of roster consequences that keeping Davis has. Depth isn't free (in terms of roster rules)


I never said he would add injured starters but your original comment misrepresented what he said. That’s all I’m saying.
@BSLRobShields




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners