67 replies to this topic

[BaltBird 24]

Prior to this year, Wacha hadn't had a WAR above 1 since 2017. Bassitt has been a 2 WAR or higher since 2019.

I was never big on Taillon, but he has a much greater recent track record than Wacha as well.

[mweb08]

I hope you arent this harsh a grader at school

A D- would actually be doing a student a solid on this one.

Elias receives excellent grades from me with his scouting, drafting, and development.

That's enough to bring his overall grade up a lot, but on this test, he's arguably failing so far. I don't particularly like adding Wacha and Gallo is much worse imo, so those moves wouldn't help.

Btw, failing a test doesn't mean you did as poorly as possible. You can get a 50%, which is awful, but of course there's a lot of room to do worse.

[mweb08]

Entering this offseason, the O's had no glaring holes on the roster. Oh and Elias deserves a lot of credit for that. Now I know some are thinking starting pitching, but they did have an option on Lyles, and I don't consider Voth/Wells/Hall with Means on his way back a glaring hole. I do consider it an opportunity though.

While the team lacked glaring holes, they entered the offseason with areas of opportunity to upgrade and what should have been significant inventory in cash and trade chips to do so.

They created the hole by not picking up Lyles' option, which I was good with.

Onto the opportunities for upgrade:

- A SP to take the spot that presumably one of Voth, Wells, or Hall would begin the year in

- An infielder to upgrade over Mateo or Urias with Westburg also factoring in as a potential replacement for one of them

- A corner outfielder / first baseman to upgrade over Hays or Mountcastle (still potentially a situation where those guys could compete for time with this new player and Stowers plus Santander)

- A high leverage BP arm to effectively replace Lopez and move others down a slot in the pen

So far what has been accomplished has been the following:

- They replaced Lyles with a minor upgrade at about the same cost

- They added a second baseman that I consider the 5th best option for playing time between 2nd, SS, and 3B, behind Gunner, Urias, Mateo, and Westburg

- They added a meh relief pitcher

So the rotation has not been meaningfully addressed, they've failed to do anything in the opportunities to upgrade department, but they've added two depth pieces, one of which is presumably currently slated to take opportunity from more deserving / enticing players.

That's despite entering the offseason well over 100 million dollars below where their payroll was the last time they tried to win and having considerable trade chips at their disposal.

Now there's no way of knowing how high the budget is now, so I think what is more fair than an Elias specific grade is an Orioles management grade that encompasses he and ownership. What I do know though is that we shouldn't simultaneously talk of Elias not being able to spend while talking of him probably making big secret offers that get turned down at no fault of Elias.

Based on the above, the Orioles management grade on this offseason to this point is an F to me. There was immense opportunity to upgrade in significant ways, yet all they've done is find a more appealing Lyles and make two depth signings for a team that should have been adding difference making talent which would have pushed guys like Wells and Hays down a peg, thus creating more depth.

There is of course still time to improve upon that grade, but now most of the opportunity resides in the trade market rather than the free agent market.

I greatly preferred primarily focusing on the latter considering the paltry payroll allowing them to substantially upgrade with little to no future detriment. However, they do have a lot of competition (redundancy) now and in the near future that they could trade from so perhaps they'll go that route. I still won't let them off the hook for failing to use what should have been a massive financial advantage this offseason though.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Now its just the bare min and an illusion whereas before it was he's not going to spend period. Keep moving the goalposts. Youve already told me you will still all shit all over him if he finishes with Wacha and Gallo. Agenda much

Lol at me being the one changing the goalposts here. How many “book its” have we gotten from you? And none of them were about Gibson, Frazier or Givens, lol. I know it’s hard for whatever reason, but maybe give it a shot at considering you may have been wrong.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

When it comes to grading I look at this like different subjects in school.  I don't factor in scouting, drafting, and development when grading his offseason moves. Those are different subjects like math, science, english.

 

His offseason grading thus far is D- and that's being kind. Every and I do mean every signing he has made are incremental improvements at best. 

[mweb08]

To add to my long post, I'm not sure how anyone could look at the circumstances and conclude that adding 3-5 (Wacha and Gallo were mentioned by 2025) meh or worse players that don't clearly upgrade any spot (other than 6th BP slot), and think that was a reasonable approach to the off-season.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I think you all undervalue Gibson and Frazier for one. They wont be AS but youll look back at the end of the year and appreciate their contribution.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

At this point a trade feels inevitable.

[mweb08]

I think you all undervalue Gibson and Frazier for one. They wont be AS but youll look back at the end of the year and appreciate their contribution.

I've said I like Gibson more than Lyles, but the upgrade should have been more substantial. You think Gibson is a significant upgrade on Lyles?

Rank the following players in who'd you want to give playing time:
Frazier, Urias, Mateo, Gunnar, Westburg

[BSLChrisStoner]

To add to my long post, I'm not sure how anyone could look at the circumstances and conclude that adding 3-5 (Wacha and Gallo were mentioned by 2025) meh or worse players that don't clearly upgrade any spot (other than 6th BP slot), and think that was a reasonable approach to the off-season.

The 3 added, and the others suggested are all meh, but fine additions in-terms of improving the periphery. 

Gibson replacing Lyles is a wash.
Frazier replaces Odor, and hopefully doesn't play as much. 

Givens adds some additional depth to the pen. Experienced, durable.  

 

Reasonable to think they could all help to some degree.
Reasonable to think Wacha or similar could be better than Wells, or at-least another option... allowing Wells to move to the pen, and further the depth. 

But agreed, none of these are impactful, and agreed they aren't reasonable answers to taking advantage of the payroll flexibility the Orioles should have. 

 

O's might be good enough to make the playoffs with the roster they have, but it would have been an easier road with one impactful SP added. 

 

If they make a trade for an impactful SP, I suspect I'll be annoyed at the player cost vs. just giving up cash for a similar FA.  But I can only assume that between the MASN dispute, and the family stuff; they've put a hard internal cap on what's available to Elias, and that cap is far below what it should be given their resources. 

 

Still... if that's the world Elias is living in, he needs to make it work.   
And he has to decide if he is willing to give up the player capital necessary to get an impactful SP or he wants to largely roll with what he has...  but either way, the expectations of the '23 O's improving on '22 will still exist. 

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I've said I like Gibson more than Lyles, but the upgrade should have been more substantial. You think Gibson is a significant upgrade on Lyles?

Rank the following players in who'd you want to give playing time:
Frazier, Urias, Mateo, Gunnar, Westburg

Frazier I know will play a quality 2b defensively. I dont know how Urias or Westburg will look there. If Mateo is on the team I want him at SS period. No problem handing Frazier reg ABs to start the year over Urias and Westburg.

[Mackus]

Frazier's fine if he actually hits or if they're willing to make him a bench player (or release) if he's struggling along with an 85 OPS+.  If they let him ride longer because they think he's a league average guy, then they're doubling down and that's when the move becomes really detrimental.  I have no faith that they'll eat the money, so I'm concerned.

[You Play to Win the Game]

They are pathetic additions to a young team that is on the upswing. There’s no justifying it.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Frazier's fine if he actually hits or if they're willing to make him a bench player (or release) if he's struggling along with an 85 OPS+. If they let him ride longer because they think he's a league average guy, then they're doubling down and that's when the move becomes really detrimental. I have no faith that they'll eat the money, so I'm concerned.

Define eat the money. They are unlikely to release him at any point. Im not worried about moving him to the bench if need be

[mweb08]

Frazier I know will play a quality 2b defensively. I dont know how Urias or Westburg will look there. If Mateo is on the team I want him at SS period. No problem handing Frazier reg ABs to start the year over Urias and Westburg.

So third it seems like.

He's last for me and pretty easily so. He's been roughly Mateo with the bat over his last 800 plate appearances, doesn't bring the speed, and isn't nearly as valuable defensively even if he's good at 2B. Mateo and Urias are better bets for this year, Gunnar is the clear #1 in this, and it's time for Westburg to play.

Ortiz and Norby are also more attractive if they show they're ready for a promotion.

Like we're both saying though, they may trade from this group. However, if they do, they still should have done vastly better than Frazier as a starter.

[Mackus]

They are pathetic additions to a young team that is on the upswing. There’s no justifying it.

 

Agree they're pathetic as attempts to improve the front of the roster.  I like them just fine (although they all feel like inefficient spending, I just don't care about that) as options to improve the back-end of the roster.  I wouldn't complain about Frazier over Vavra or Givens over Krehbiel.  Especially because we still get to keep Vavra and Krehbiel as fall-back plans.  Gibson in the rotation is harder to accept, but if we added a stud at the front and spent additional money addressing the lineup then its palatable.

 

As presented, yes, I agree.  Pathetic batch of additions to this roster.  Woefully short of even the bare minimum.  Gotta do more.

[mweb08]

Frazier's fine if he actually hits or if they're willing to make him a bench player (or release) if he's struggling along with an 85 OPS+. If they let him ride longer because they think he's a league average guy, then they're doubling down and that's when the move becomes really detrimental. I have no faith that they'll eat the money, so I'm concerned.

He'd only be fine to me if they traded an infielder and he'd be signed to be the 4th IF behind Gunnar, Westburg, and either Mateo or Urias.

If you're going to add an infielder to start though, actually get a meaningful upgrade.

[Mackus]

Define eat the money. They are unlikely to release him at any point. Im not worried about moving him to the bench if need be

 

Release him (or eat it all in a trade).  I'm worried they will avoid improving the team because they aren't willing to properly view his cost as sunk.  That scenario will be moot if he plays well or if nobody behind him appears able to step up and fill the role.

 

His defensive versatility we can't match with a single guy.  Vavra can play 2B and LF but not well enough.  But I do think we could provide everything Frazier can split across multiple guys who will be here or could be here anyway.  McKenna and Ortiz, for example, could be on the roster and available to do a better job of every PA/inning Frazier provides if Frazier can't bounce back at the plate and is just a no-hit quality glove at 2B/LF/RF.

[mweb08]

Agree they're pathetic as attempts to improve the front of the roster. I like them just fine (although they all feel like inefficient spending, I just don't care about that) as options to improve the back-end of the roster. I wouldn't complain about Frazier over Vavra or Givens over Krehbiel. Especially because we still get to keep Vavra and Krehbiel as fall-back plans. Gibson in the rotation is harder to accept, but if we added a stud at the front and spent additional money addressing the lineup then its palatable.

As presented, yes, I agree. Pathetic batch of additions to this roster. Woefully short of even the bare minimum. Gotta do more.

Improving the front of this roster had to be the priority and that in turn would also improve the back of the roster.

[Mackus]

Improving the front of this roster had to be the priority and that in turn would also improve the back of the roster.

 

But doing both externally would be completely fine.  That's my point.  They aren't baffling additions to the team, they're just laughably shy of what we should be doing.

 

Adding these guys isn't the core problem.  The core problem is not making multiple other big additions.