186 replies to this topic

[TwentyThirtyFive]

You were asked first and gave the standard dude misdirection response. Again, if Im telling lies I welcome someone else out to call me out on it.


As far as your rebuild agenda yeah I called you out on it first because thats all Jackson Holliday is to you. A talking point about about your tiresome talking points. You say, where did I bring it up, acting like youre asking me a question. You then spend the rest of the post talking about your agenda. Was always going to happen because of course it was.

[RichardZ]

I'm still not sure what you need from me.  I've shared my opinion.  It's funny how worked up some people are about it, but <<shrug>> 

What makes you think I’m worked up? I’m not at all. I simply asked what the rules are for prospects and what you think Mike Elias motivation is for, what looks to be, having Jackson Holliday be a ML player sooner rather than later.

Your answer seems to be, “I’ve covered this and don’t wish to cover it again”.

[BobPhelan]

We are past all the rebuilding and tanking. No one gives a single crap anymore either way. Phelan thinks Elias turned water into wine.

Tastes more like champagne to me. Maybe a Moscato D’Asti.

[Mackus]

Debuted at 21 (a year older), had 3 MiL seasons and twice the Games/PAs and signed a 7/120M extension.


The Corbin Carroll path would have Jackson Holliday debut in September of 2025.

So is 500 PA a requirement or not?

Is X seasons since draft also a requirement?

Is 21+ years old a requirement?

Is sign an extension before debut a requirement? Just talking performance here, as we have been, not team control.

[CantonJester]

What makes you think I’m worked up? I’m not at all. I simply asked what the rules are for prospects and what you think Mike Elias motivation is for, what looks to be, having Jackson Holliday be a ML player sooner rather than later.

Your answer seems to be, “I’ve covered this and don’t wish to cover it again”.

 

Apropos of nothing but the past few pages there’s been more than a few posts by 2035 where he attacks dude’s integrity and/or motives. In other words, he’s making it personal. 

[RichardZ]

Apropos of nothing but the past few pages there’s been more than a few posts by 2035 where he attacks dude’s integrity and/or motives. In other words, he’s making it personal. 

Yeah, I see the dynamic between the two of them but I think Dude and I have gotten to a pretty civil discussion level for the most part. Mackus and I basically asked him the same thing. What rules is Dude using to determine if Holliday should start his ML clock. Age? At bats? Etc.

The second question, which certainly seems fair. If Elias starts Hollidays ML clock on OD (a hypothetical that seems entirely possible if not likely) what does he (Dude) think Elias motivation is?

[dude]

 Mackus and I basically asked him the same thing. What rules is Dude using to determine if Holliday should start his ML clock. Age? At bats? Etc.

 

I feel like I've answered this over and over and some people seem concerned about the number of words they have to read or me repeating things I've said.

 

I would promote a guy to AA as quickly as my assessment of his skills/development reasonably allowed.  The last gate is performance assessment (more than just stats) over essentially a full season (~500 ABs) against advanced competition.

 

I have much longer answers and reasons, etc.  Everything you do within the Team is a risk/reward assessment.  More development time lowers risk, lots of things go into that, but your development is never done (everyone knows that, right?).  It's all about swinging the %s into the range you're comfortable with. There's more reasons (stopping here).

 

I'll quote Mack and answer his questions.

 

The second question, which certainly seems fair. If Elias starts Hollidays ML clock on OD (a hypothetical that seems entirely possible if not likely) what does he (Dude) think Elias motivation is?

 

I think you want the answer to be "Mike Elias thinks Jackson Holliday is the best opportunity for the Orioles to compete in 2024."

 

I think there could be other reasons, but none of them matter.  The consequences are the consequences, which is all I consider.  I was willing to promote him last September going into the Playoffs.  I shared a spreadsheet that was downloaded 13 times (last time I looked).  That's just about allowing the lower % opportunity and maintaining the higher % opportunity....you don't just get the lower % opportunity ("development") for free, especially when we know that consideration carries no future weight.

[dude]

So is 500 PA a requirement or not?

Is X seasons since draft also a requirement?

Is 21+ years old a requirement?

Is sign an extension before debut a requirement? Just talking performance here, as we have been, not team control.

 

So...I didn't do any of that.  If you want to say "These guys did this, therefore, Jackson Holliday could do that" then the age and years of MiL experience should absolutely be a qualifier in that assessment. Jackson Holliday would be (the things everyone is suggesting) the fastest to the MLs for HSer in decades. September of this year would be the fastest HS promotion path.  I'm ok with the fastest path, but you guys are arguing for faster than the fastest path.

 

I wouldn't have done that with Witt or JRod.   Although that's not exactly right.  If I wanted to get them on that timeline, then I would push the MiL edge more (like the Orioles did with Holliday) to get him into the profile I prefer.  Carroll is generally the same as Gunnar, which is fine. 

 

An extension would be the desire (like the Chourio case) to create lower % opportunity (ML time) for the Player and maintain the more developed profile down the road.  If there were discussions in Witt or Rodriguez examples (we don't see publicly, but then it happens, like it did) then no, not a requirement, but I'd at least like to feel like there was some opportunity/consideration for treating the Player well.  Carroll and Henderson are more standard development profile type stuff and I'm not the guy that actually thinks you should manage Service.

 

fwiw, the CBA structure that I've shared (offline) specially gets to managing the risk/reward to incentivize this outcomes of this discussion (among a bunch of other things).

[Mackus]

Yes, you have stated that, certainly the PAs and now claiming other reasons. You are declaring arbitrary requirements that if not met, you wouldn't promote a guy. I think that's a fine approach for 95% of guys, probably more, but there complete refusal to consider the existence of outliers is not good.

[dude]

Nobody has presented anything other than an emotional argument.

 

Whenever he's on the roster, I hope he does great.  He's not the definition of being competitive.  We can win before him, we can with him and and we can win after him.  It's not about any one player, ever.

[RichardZ]

I feel like I've answered this over and over and some people seem concerned about the number of words they have to read or me repeating things I've said.

I would promote a guy to AA as quickly as my assessment of his skills/development reasonably allowed. The last gate is performance assessment (more than just stats) over essentially a full season (~500 ABs) against advanced competition.

I have much longer answers and reasons, etc. Everything you do within the Team is a risk/reward assessment. More development time lowers risk, lots of things go into that, but your development is never done (everyone knows that, right?). It's all about swinging the %s into the range you're comfortable with. There's more reasons (stopping here).

I'll quote Mack and answer his questions.



I think you want the answer to be "Mike Elias thinks Jackson Holliday is the best opportunity for the Orioles to compete in 2024."

I think there could be other reasons, but none of them matter. The consequences are the consequences, which is all I consider. I was willing to promote him last September going into the Playoffs. I shared a spreadsheet that was downloaded 13 times (last time I looked). That's just about allowing the lower % opportunity and maintaining the higher % opportunity....you don't just get the lower % opportunity ("development") for free, especially when we know that consideration carries no future weight.

I want the answer to be what you think Mike Elias’ motivations/reasons for having Holliday on the club OD or soon thereafter are. Sure, my only reasonable conclusion is the one you stated. Do you have an opinion on it?

Besides thinking Holliday is ready and having him start at 2B and gives the team the best chance to be successful in 2024 AND that Elias is willing to give up Hollidays 7th year and a better chance at ROY 2025 for that, I can’t come up with anything else that makes sense. Can you?

[dude]

I can’t come up with anything else that makes sense. Can you?

 

Sure.  Why does it matter.

 

Just FTR, if the opinion is (Elias, others) that Jackson Holliday is an important part of winning in 2024, I'm ok with that (it's not how I'd manage risk, but whatever) and time will tell.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Dude based on how you see things.

 

Which combination of players do you think gives the O's the best chance at winning in 2024 come May 15th.

 

Holliday and Mateo

Holliday and Wong/Urias

Wong/Urias and Mateo

[RichardZ]

Sure.  Why does it matter.
 
Just FTR, if the opinion is (Elias, others) that Jackson Holliday is an important part of winning in 2024, I'm ok with that (it's not how I'd manage risk, but whatever) and time will tell.

Dude

“I do not understand the importance some seem to have in getting him to the Majors faster than any other recent HS player.“

You keep throwing this line on posters when it’s actually the GM it should be directed at. There’s only one reason that makes sense. Elias thinks Holliday makes the Orioles a better team in 2024 and apparently think he could make a difference. So you do understand it. You just disagree with it. Time will tell.

[RichardZ]

Dude based on how you see things.
 
Which combination of players do you think gives the O's the best chance at winning in 2024 come May 15th.
 
Holliday and Mateo
Holiday and Wong
Wong and Mateo

Apparently the answer, if there is one, doesn’t make a difference.

[Mackus]

Nobody has presented anything other than an emotional argument.

Whenever he's on the roster, I hope he does great. He's not the definition of being competitive. We can win before him, we can with him and and we can win after him. It's not about any one player, ever.

We can win without Rutschman too but we shouldn't be considering demoting him just because he's got options and it would delay his free agency.

If you don't think Holliday is better than, or enough better than, Urias/Norby/whatever else to bring him up and start his clock, that's fine. But the argument that even if he is way better than those guys that you wouldn't use him because he doesn't have enough AA/AAA time yet is really arbitrary.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

We can win without Rutschman too but we shouldn't be considering demoting him just because he's got options and it would delay his free agency.

If you don't think Holliday is better than, or enough better than, Urias/Norby/whatever else to bring him up and start his clock, that's fine. But the argument that even if he is way better than those guys that you wouldn't use him because he doesn't have enough AA/AAA time yet is really arbitrary.  dumb.

FIFY

[dude]

Dude based on how you see things.

 

Which combination of players do you think gives the O's the best chance at winning in 2024 come May 15th.

 

Holliday and Mateo

Holliday and Wong/Urias

Wong/Urias and Mateo

 

Let me ask you, if I put the over/under at something like.... 30-doubles, 3-triples, 15-hrs, 90-runs, 80-rbi and 30-sb do you think Holliday would get that? Less?  More? A lot more?

 

That's the deflated version (because Mack got mad at me last time I posted it at 720 ABs) of what Mateo and Frazier did last year.  

 

I think if Holliday produced that and showed up as much in the Years highlight video as Frazier did last year, everyone would be over-the-moon declaring victory....but that's what the guys everyone thinks sucked produced.

 

I think a Mateo/Wong (just using Wong now, Maton, Urias, other) platoon would produce similar numbers in 2024 as Holliday would.  Mateo and Wong are both GG caliber guys.  Mateo adds a lot of running value.

 

I wouldn't expect much difference (Holliday vs Mateo/Wong) in the results in 2024.  There's an outcome where Holliday outproduces 'other'....but there's also an outcome where 'other' outproduces Holliday.  Both of those (for me) are more fringe outcomes.  The one-sigma answer is not much difference, if any.

 

The expectations for Jackson Holliday long-term are much, much, much better.  I would project him in the 2025 lineup like everyone else.  I'm ok waiting, apparently no one else is.  Time will tell.

[dude]

We can win without Rutschman too but we shouldn't be considering demoting him just because he's got options and it would delay his free agency.

 

I don't understand your point here.  I've literally said the exact same thing about Adley.  Don't have to have him to win, glad we have him (would extend him) and if you don't, you have to figure out how to win without him later.

 

I discussed the same thing with Adley in terms of bringing him up and letting spend part of his earlier development years in Baltimore.

 

I have not talked about delaying FA for the sake of delaying FA.  Nearly everyone else has.

[Mackus]

I don't understand your point here. I've literally said the exact same thing about Adley. Don't have to have him to win, glad we have him (would extend him) and if you don't, you have to figure out how to win without him later.

I discussed the same thing with Adley in terms of bringing him up and letting spend part of his earlier development years in Baltimore.

I have not talked about delaying FA for the sake of delaying FA. Nearly everyone else has.

Your take is that no player ever can show that they deserve a spot in MLB without 500 PA at AA/AAA. And that Holliday is one such player who no matter how dominant he is in the minors, you can't promote him until 500 PA. Plus 3 more months in his case since he'll hit 500 by the end of May but you won't consider him until September.

Everyone is trying to make analogies or examples to get you to see how absurd that is. So every post you read is people trying to find some way to get through to you. Literally every person who's ever followed MLB is on one side. You are on the other. But you continue to claim its the other side that's acting irrationally. Making emotional decisions as you say.

I'm done with it, it's no longer interesting.