Author Topic: ORIOLES  (Read 316048 times)

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1245 on: December 09, 2013, 12:47:18 pm »
I probably wouldn't have announced an increase in ticket prices until I signed a quality free agent or made a blockbuster deal, but that's just me.

Well what you are saying is you would never announce an increase in ticket prices?

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1246 on: December 14, 2013, 02:15:14 pm »

Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN 59m
Two questions O's must now answer: 1. Who's the closer? 2. How could the A's--the Moneyball Athletics--afford what the Orioles could not?

I still think Billy moves him.

One thing I had overlooked on the Johnson pickup - there will be a draft pick compensation attached to him, meaning if it's July and things aren't working out for Oakland, he won't be that expensive to trade, and if they keep him, they'll get a decent draft pick compensation for him when someone overpays for him next year.

They didn't just pick up an expensive contract, they gave up nothing in Jemile Weeks for a first round draft pick too.
27>34

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1247 on: December 14, 2013, 02:21:57 pm »

Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN 59m
Two questions O's must now answer: 1. Who's the closer? 2. How could the A's--the Moneyball Athletics--afford what the Orioles could not?

I still think Billy moves him.

One thing I had overlooked on the Johnson pickup - there will be a draft pick compensation attached to him, meaning if it's July and things aren't working out for Oakland, he won't be that expensive to trade, and if they keep him, they'll get a decent draft pick compensation for him when someone overpays for him next year.

They didn't just pick up an expensive contract, they gave up nothing in Jemile Weeks for a first round draft pick too.

They aren't getting draft pick compensation for Jim Johnson.  They would have to offer 15 million to get that.  No one in their right mind would do that.  And no one would lose a pick to sign Johnson. Only way that could possibly if Jim converts to a starter and has a miraculous season enxt year.   Jim might improve by going from a hitter park to a pitchers park but he isn't becoming a superstar.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 02:24:09 pm by atomic »

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1248 on: December 14, 2013, 03:04:25 pm »
They aren't getting draft pick compensation for Jim Johnson.  They would have to offer 15 million to get that.  No one in their right mind would do that.  And no one would lose a pick to sign Johnson.

39 year old Joe Nathan just got a two year deal at $10m a year.  He saved 94 games in the last 3 seasons.

30 year old Jim Johnson will get a deal near that, for more years.  He saved 101 games in the last 2 seasons.

I think you're making this too personal because he played for your team.

27>34

James Ford

  • Member
  • Posts: 5620
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1249 on: December 14, 2013, 03:37:05 pm »
I love how you guys assume that Jemima Weeks is nothing. He is going to prove you all so wrong this year!

hutch

  • Member
  • Posts: 15418
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1250 on: December 14, 2013, 07:28:55 pm »
They aren't getting draft pick compensation for Jim Johnson.  They would have to offer 15 million to get that.  No one in their right mind would do that.  And no one would lose a pick to sign Johnson.

39 year old Joe Nathan just got a two year deal at $10m a year.  He saved 94 games in the last 3 seasons.

30 year old Jim Johnson will get a deal near that, for more years.  He saved 101 games in the last 2 seasons.

I think you're making this too personal because he played for your team.



Well we watched him last year and he was horrible... I don't think your stats take account of the all important blown saves...

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 2812
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1251 on: December 14, 2013, 11:55:25 pm »
I probably wouldn't have announced an increase in ticket prices until I signed a quality free agent or made a blockbuster deal, but that's just me.

Like those quality free agents your Angels have been signing?   

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1252 on: December 15, 2013, 06:49:39 pm »
Well we watched him last year and he was horrible... I don't think your stats take account of the all important blown saves...

Yes, he blew 9 saves, but he also was taxed more than any other closer in baseball, and 6 of his 9 blown saves were in your shoebox of a ballpark.  He'll love Oakland's cavernous outfield and all the extra foul territory. 

The Orioles had by far the most save opportunities in baseball (84) and were second the year before that (73).  You can blame the pitcher all you want, but at some point your offense has to score enough runs so your closer isn't overworked.  That didn't happen in Baltimore.  The only reason why Johnson won't lead the league in saves next year is because he'll have 15 less chances in Oakland.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1253 on: December 15, 2013, 07:08:19 pm »
Like those quality free agents your Angels have been signing?  

The quality doesn't concern me, but the duration of at least one of them does.  Simply put, the guys haven't performed in the first few years of their deals, which nobody could have predicted.  It was supposed to be 2016 and on that the team was in trouble...

Until this season, the trades have been much more damaging to the Angels than the free agent signings.  I really like what they got for Trumbo, though I'm not yet sold on Freese.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1254 on: December 16, 2013, 06:34:34 pm »
Just going to trust Dan...

Will miss JJ.

Allow me to use the Chicago White Sox as a perfect example of how to handle a closer you have no intention of paying top dollar for and get a quality player under control in return:

Addison Reed to the Diamnodbacks

The White Sox (1) filled a hole at third with a prospect who has six years of control left (2) and dealt a closer with good numbers BEFORE he becomes expensive in arbitration.

Either keep him and pay him or deal him for something useful.  What the O's did was the absolute worst option. 
« Last Edit: December 16, 2013, 06:44:06 pm by vansmack »
27>34

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 2812
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1255 on: December 16, 2013, 09:29:16 pm »
The time to deal him was at the deadline last year.  But they were still in the race (or so they thought) and needed to keep him closing.  Looking back that was the wrong decision.

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1256 on: December 17, 2013, 01:02:45 am »
The time to deal him was at the deadline last year. 

Yep.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: ORIOLES
« Reply #1257 on: December 17, 2013, 01:25:42 am »
Ken Rosenthal tweets that the Yankees are likely to sign Brian Roberts to replace Cano:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/412809051710697472?screen_name=Ken_Rosenthal
27>34