429 replies to this topic

[SonicAttack]

SMH, that's all. Urias is a very minor trade chip, if any, same for Mateo.  Even less for McKenna, Nevin, Wong.  

[BSLSteveBirrer]

The problem is that only in hindsight will we know this was the right call. 

 

Best case scenario - O's hold off for 2-3 weeks. Call him up. They make the playoffs, he does great, but finishes out of the top 2 in ROY so they get him in 2030.

 

Worst case scenario - The O's hold off for 2-3 weeks. Call him up. They fall one game short of the playoffs after struggling in April. He does great and finishes top 2 in ROY so the don't get him in 2030.

 

Most likely scenario is probably closer to best case than worst case.

[Mackus]

I'd say your worst case would be holding him back for 6-8 weeks like they did with Adley, then still losing the year and possibly missing out on division or WC by a game and end up thinking he might've made up that difference.

If they call him up in 2-3 weeks, it'll be hard to think you lost multiple games you would've won with him.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

I'd say your worst case would be holding him back for 6-8 weeks like they did with Adley, then still losing the year and possibly missing out on division or WC by a game and end up thinking he might've made up that difference.

If they call him up in 2-3 weeks, it'll be hard to think you lost multiple games you would've won with him.

Well sure the longer you hold him back the higher the chance that missing the playoffs could be blamed on that decision. But the longer you hold him back the higher the odds you keep him in 2030. 2-3 weeks its very unlikely that impacts ROY. Two months makes it much more likely he falls back in the balloting.

 

To be clear I am all for holding him back for the minimum time needed to hope to have him in 2030. But not a single game more than that (unless he's struggling of course).

[dude]

I was going to start a thread on the main page, but I'll just throw this in here for now.

 

for the record, my answer is the same whether he's on the team or not.  I don't care.

 

I'm guessing there were/are some people that were ready to say something to me had he made the team.  <<shrug>>

 

I don't think the success or failure of the 2024 season hinges on Jackson Holliday.  There's a series of consequences for each consideration with him and you get more (or at least better opportunity) when you do B or C versus A.  If they did A, whatever, that's ok, I think it doesn't do nearly what some seem to want to believe (not that it couldn't) but you have to pay to find out and I'd wait to pay.  Again, whatever they do is fine with me, nobody should be hypocritical about the consequences later.

 

For all of the "Mike Elias said" and "Spring training matters" stuff that has transpired over recent months....can we please that stuff to rest in the future or do we have to do this every time?

[BSLSteveBirrer]

I was going to start a thread on the main page, but I'll just throw this in here for now.

 

for the record, my answer is the same whether he's on the team or not.  I don't care.

 

I'm guessing there were/are some people that were ready to say something to me had he made the team.  <<shrug>>

 

I don't think the success or failure of the 2024 season hinges on Jackson Holliday.  There's a series of consequences for each consideration with him and you get more (or at least better opportunity) when you do B or C versus A.  If they did A, whatever, that's ok, I think it doesn't do nearly what some seem to want to believe (not that it couldn't) but you have to pay to find out and I'd wait to pay.  Again, whatever they do is fine with me, nobody should be hypocritical about the consequences later.

 

For all of the "Mike Elias said" and "Spring training matters" stuff that has transpired over recent months....can we please that stuff to rest in the future or do we have to do this every time?

Are you still sticking with the don't call him up until September approach?

[Mackus]

Are you still sticking with the don't call him up until September approach?

Could call him up mid-August, keep him under 130 AB and still have him rookie eligible in 2025.

Unless he's hurt or struggling, I think that's a really bad plan, but they could do it. I don't think six weeks is enough time for him to adjust and have the best shot at hitting well by the time playoffs roll around. And a draft pick isn't enough value to reduce or playoff odds, even in that small way.

I'd bring him up mid-April.

[Mackus]

Only way I don't bring him up soon is if he struggles a bit but Mayo kills it and looks solid at 3B defensively. Mayo up to 3B and Westburg to 2B is a good alternative. Some consideration also for Norby at 2B and Westburg at 3B. Both those options hinge on defense moreso than offense.

[dude]

Are you still sticking with the don't call him up until September approach?

 

If you're asking my opinion, yes.  

 

..and I'll repeat what I've said.  That approach is not based in Service Time manipulation for anyone that wanted to sue me later.  Just a standard of performance over time.

[dude]

Could call him up mid-August, keep him under 130 AB and still have him rookie eligible in 2025.

 

I don't think this is true.  I believe there's a ML roster component to it also.  We heard this with Stowers, it's what they did and he lost his status.

[Mackus]

I don't think this is true. I believe there's a ML roster component to it also. We heard this with Stowers, it's what they did and he lost his status.

45 days.

[makoman]

45 days.

Season ends the 29th this year it seems like? So August 16thish?

 

FWIW Stowers came up 8/19/2022 for the rest of the year and ended with 52 days according to BR, Gunnar 8/31 and ended with 36 days. Stowers had that brief trip to Toronto earlier in the year which I was never sure if it counted (because it was the weird vax replacement), I guess it did.

[dude]

Season ends the 29th this year it seems like? So August 16thish?

 

FWIW Stowers came up 8/19/2022 for the rest of the year and ended with 52 days according to BR, Gunnar 8/31 and ended with 36 days. Stowers had that brief trip to Toronto earlier in the year which I was never sure if it counted (because it was the weird vax replacement), I guess it did.

 

Full disclosure, there are so many new nuances to the last CBA, it feels like we keep running into things that are in that and that's fine, and when ever that happens, if I'm wrong, cool.  Note update.

 

The previous rules didn't count callups in September against Service days for rookie status, so if you waited until then, those days didn't count for status.  If you got called up before roster expansion, then all of the days counted.  If you get called up earlier, ie if you break that glass, then anything after it counts.

 

I always say SEP based on that, if that's wrong, whatever, I change to the date where he doesn't break his rookie status.

[Mackus]

Full disclosure, there are so many new nuances to the last CBA, it feels like we keep running into things that are in that and that's fine, and when ever that happens, if I'm wrong, cool. Note update.

The previous rules didn't count callups in September against Service days for rookie status, so if you waited until then, those days didn't count for status. If you got called up before roster expansion, then all of the days counted. If you get called up earlier, ie if you break that glass, then anything after it counts.

I always say SEP based on that, if that's wrong, whatever, I change to the date where he doesn't break his rookie status.

I think that September rule is many iterations of the CBA out of date, and possibly was never the case and was just a myth when nobody knew any of the rules. It's not a particularly recent change that all days played, even in September, count as service for players. Couldn't find exactly when that became the case in a quick search, but will look deeper when I get a chance.

[Mackus]

https://legacy.baseb...fo/cba-history/

Didn't find the answer in here, but pretty cool history resource of past CBAs.

[mdrunning]

I think that September rule is many iterations of the CBA out of date, and possibly was never the case and was just a myth when nobody knew any of the rules. It's not a particularly recent change that all days played, even in September, count as service for players. Couldn't find exactly when that became the case in a quick search, but will look deeper when I get a chance.

My understanding is that September play always counted toward service time, but with the new rules regarding roster expansion (implemented after 2020) there just aren't nearly as many players in question. Whereas before a team could add as many as 14 players to its roster for the final month, now they're allowed just two.

 

Still, a player brought up in September could reach the rookie limits of 130 at-bats or 50 IP during that time, but it's highly improbable.

[mweb08]

Only way I don't bring him up soon is if he struggles a bit but Mayo kills it and looks solid at 3B defensively. Mayo up to 3B and Westburg to 2B is a good alternative. Some consideration also for Norby at 2B and Westburg at 3B. Both those options hinge on defense moreso than offense.

I think Mayo vs Holliday should be a legit debate as for first man up. It will be interesting though to see if they envision both coming up quickly and then the playing time breakdown after that.

[BSLRoseKatz]

I don't think I've seen anyone here use this to justify the decision but I've seen a bunch of "he needs more reps at 2B" which is a particularly frustrating talking point because they barely played him at 2B last even if they knew that'd be his most likely spot to get MLB playing time. From the start of August, when it seemed pretty likely Westburg would lock down a spot in the infield going forward, Holliday appeared in 47 games and just 12.8 percent of them were at 2B.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Mayo could beat Holliday up. He has more AAA ABs. Hes older. He had a better ST. Certainly possible.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I don't think I've seen anyone here use this to justify the decision but I've seen a bunch of "he needs more reps at 2B" which is a particularly frustrating talking point because they barely played him at 2B last even if they knew that'd be his most likely spot to get MLB playing time. From the start of August, when it seemed pretty likely Westburg would lock down a spot in the infield going forward, Holliday appeared in 47 games and just 12.8 percent of them were at 2B.

He coulda played more 2b but it also wasnt a lock Henderson would stay at SS. Still possible hes ultimately the long term SS.