188 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

An upgrade of Gibson or Irvin to Bassitt/Walker/Taillon would've met the minimum, IMO. I'd have strongly preferred Bassitt amongst that group. Maybe a few other "primary" guys could've worked, or a handful or so of possible trade targets.

I'd have pursued two of Verlander, Senga, Bassitt, and Rodon (or one and one of the higher end tesd targets that didn't move). No driving reason the franchise can't do that type of thing, aside from choosing not to.

I do not believe any FAs turned down the O's to take less money elsewhere. I'll buy that they were in the ballpark on Bassitt, but not an equal footing.

[Mackus]

If Gibson & Irvin were acceptable options their names would've been mentioned often in the many threads about possible off-season additions. Nobody mentioned them (maybe not at all?) because nobody wanted any additions of that marginal quality. Everyone wanted better. Accepting them now is pure pandering.

A legitimately good guy with one Gibson, Irvin, or similar indistinguishable clone would've been ok. Two legit good (or better) guys was the ideal goal.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

If Gibson & Irvin were acceptable options their names would've been mentioned often in the many threads about possible off-season additions. Nobody mentioned them (maybe not at all?) because nobody wanted any additions of that marginal quality. Everyone wanted better. Accepting them now is pure pandering.

A legitimately good guy with one Gibson, Irvin, or similar indistinguishable clone would've been ok. Two legit good (or better) guys was the ideal goal.

Lots of talk of picking up Lyles option. Gibson is equivilant at least. IMO he is better. I dont buy the well they wouldve been mentioned if.... Obviously as fans we all have hopes for the highest targets. We all wanted Verlander. The truth is it was likely pipedream from every single angle. Plenty of people mentioned Wacha. Eovaldi, Syndergaard and Ill take Gibson and Irvin at the cost and commitment over all three. Ill take them both over Tallion who some have in the same tier as Bassitt.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Some of the guys you think are quality targets are marginal upgrades and Im telling you that right now in Feb.


As it stands today I have more belief in the SP than the RP or the offense. I think the SP will be consistent and steady even if it doesnt have a stud

[Mackus]

Lots of talk of picking up Lyles option. Gibson is equivilant at least. IMO he is better. I dont buy the well they wouldve been mentioned if.... Obviously as fans we all have hopes for the highest targets. We all wanted Verlander. The truth is it was likely pipedream from every single angle. Plenty of people mentioned Wacha. Eovaldi, Syndergaard and Ill take Gibson and Irvin at the cost and commitment over all three. Ill take them both over Tallion who some have in the same tier as Bassitt.

Yes, talk about Lyles as one option. I said we should pick the option up as a premade backup plan, then add two better guys (real upgrades, not arguably better guys that really are the same general thing) and then deal him.

If we had one of Gibson and Irvin and a better guy, I could be content with that. But both of them is a job poorly done.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Yes, talk about Lyles as one option. I said we should pick the option up as a backup plan, then add two better guys and deal him.

If we had one of Gibson and Irvin and a better guy, I could be content with that. But both of them is a job poorly done.

I get that a C grade probably didnt work for you in your academic career. I respect that, but Cs arent the end of the world.

[Mackus]

I get that a C grade probably didnt work for you in your academic career. I respect that, but Cs arent the end of the world.

If they'd done work to the offense, then the middling effort (and it's not a C grade unless you're grading on a huge curve) might be palatable. Probably not, because we know there are ample resources to have addressed both major needs, but there would be an argument for weighting the resources towards offense.

But you can't go cheap across the board and expect people to think that's ok. It's not ok. It's trash.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Im talking C for Irvin and Gibson additions. Or the SP only.


I said if they added a decent bat it might be a C overall. Running out of time but Mike says he still interested in a bat. D+ overall right now. Bat was the biggest need and they have pretty much failed there. Frazier and McCann are a D- for the offense.

[BaltBird 24]

Where's the area you'd have loved to seen an offensive improvement? SS had the biggest names, but I think they're content with Mateo, Gunnar, Ortiz, Westburg, Norby up the middle.

Corner OF? Maybe could've upgraded on Hays in LF, but probably content with him for now and already have Stowers, Santander with the likes of possibly Beavers and Fabian as fast risers.... not even counting guys like Kjerstad and Haskins.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Ideally LH with some pop in the corner, 1b, or DH.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Just a Dom Smith wouldve been good enough. Not ideal but it wouldve worked for me. Just no excuse not to pick up a bat. It was easier than picking up SP and more of a need IMO

[BSLBobPhelan]

Replace Frazier with Brantley and I think we’d all be a lot happier about it.

[Mackus]

Just a Dom Smith wouldve been good enough. Not ideal but it wouldve worked for me. Just no excuse not to pick up a bat. It was easier than picking up SP and more of a need IMO

 

Why we don't accept excuses for the offense but we are accepting excuses for the starting pitching?

 

Extra back-end guys to have in the mix with Bradish and Kremer and co isn't what the rotation needed.  Two, or even just one, front- or at least mid-rotation arm was the need.  They got two back-end guys.  That's certainly better than one or none of those guys.  But its worse than one mid-rotation guy and far worse than the ideal offseason of one front-end and one mid-rotation.

 

The thing that makes it so easy, is that its always a need.  Everyone could always use more pitching.  So its not like you end up possibly blocking someone and need to move things around like you could if you signed Correa and then Mateo figures out how to make July more regular or if Gunnar's defense gets to the point he's a surefire SS or Ortiz busts the door down or Holliday flies through the system like Machado.  If you sign a #2 type SP, even if Rodriguez and Bradish and Means and Kremer are all legit good and healthy this season, you can still use all of them in a role that matters and/or use some guys in trade midseason.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Not sure how anybody can equate 2 back end starters, when we needed at least one front end and one upper end, with a C? Its a D at best IMO.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

You guys undervalue Irvin and Gibson especially in relation to the 2nd and mid tier FAs. 1 Verlander or Rodon wouldve been ideal and amazing.

[Mackus]

You guys undervalue Irvin and Gibson especially in relation to the 2nd and mid tier FAs. 1 Verlander or Rodon wouldve been ideal and amazing.

 

I can't imagine thinking they are the equivalent of even Walker and Taillon.  Its certainly possible one or both of them outperform one of Walker or Taillon in 2023.  There are ranges for outcomes for each guy and there is overlap between the Walker/Taillon downside and the Gibson/Irvin upside.  But that shouldn't be confused as a likely or expected outcome.  The expectation is for the other guys to be better.  That's why they get more money (or aren't available in a trade for a guy at the back-end of most top-10s).

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I dont know what to say. I dont disagree with what you said if we are talking pure value but IMO they are essentially the same. Minimal real world difference. Tallion or Walker pitching game 1 or game 2 in the playoffs gives me the same outlook about that game as Gibson.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

To put this a different way in betting terms for the 2023 season if you said take Tallion or Irvin and you gave me -110 on both guys I get taking Tallion. If you gave me Irvin at +110 Ill happily take him.

[Mackus]

I don't believe you'd be equally confident in Gibson or Irvin starting any random game as Walker or Taillon. I'll buy that you think the difference in confidence doesn't justify the difference in cost. But there is clearly a marginal upgrade of some size (I'd say pretty significant). And the difference in cost is irrelevant to anything else the Orioles could do. We're nowhere near the limit where a dollar spent on Walker for example means one dollar less to spend elsewhere. If they say that is the case, then we know they are lying.

And that's just Walker and Taillon. Who aren't at the level of the guys we really should've been after.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Taillon had 39% more fWAR (the more projection based WAR) than Irvin last year. It wouldn’t be -110 vs. +110 IMO. One is clearly better than the other. One is under team control and cheap though, that’s the difference. That’s the only thing this all comes down to. Not some preferred baseball strategy or analysis. Money.

This front office would take value over production all day. It doesn’t matter that Taillon is better. What matters is how much is the value - how much they had to pay for that production. And it’s kind of a joke to see this justified with a $64M payroll. Really can’t understand why we can’t find common ground on all this.