Photo

What we have to trade


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#21 BaltBird 24

BaltBird 24

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,559 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:11 PM

Maybe they could expand rosters to allow more pitchers so that guys can get more rest between starts. It'd be nice to have a 6 or 7 man rotation without having to severely handicap your bullpen.

Granted, good luck finding 6 or 7 arms you'd want in a starting rotation.

#22 CantonJester

CantonJester

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,396 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:15 PM

Not sure how implement rules to limit max velocity. "You're only allowed 20 pitches per game to exceed 95 MPH."

 

Nah, it’s more about tethering the DH’s ability to remain in the game to how long your SP lasts. 

 

Things like that.

 

Something like that is coming.



#23 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:17 PM

Maybe they could expand rosters to allow more pitchers so that guys can get more rest between starts. It'd be nice to have a 6 or 7 man rotation without having to severely handicap your bullpen.

Granted, good luck finding 6 or 7 arms you'd want in a starting rotation.


But every team would have the same issue finding that many starters. But at least that would be a doable approach. Telling pitchers how many pitches they can throw above some limit is nuts.
  • bmore_ken likes this

#24 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 157,500 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:22 PM

You absolutely have to add 1 high leverage reliever to this mix, to get through multiple playoff rounds imo. 

 

The playoffs will always be a short-sample size, largely luck imo... but if you get to the playoffs with Burnes, Bradish, and Rodriguez healthy... you'll feel good about your shooting your shot. 

 

If you lose Bradish for any length of time, you've got add a starting pitcher of significance imo.  

 

Agree with BaltBird that you can feel fine about Kremer, Irvin, Suarez, Povich for the 4th and 5th spots...  but you'd need one more plus starter. 

 

 

As far as what I'd trade....  well, what am I getting back?

 

Trading Holliday isn't happening. 

 

Trading Mayo is highly highly unlikely. 

 

Trading Basallo or Kjerstad is unlikely, but possible. 
Basallo could headline a deal for a quality starter.  Kjerstad could be enough for a quality reliever. 

Norby would figure to be part of any deal. 

 

Bradfield is an add on in a trade, but not going to bring back a much on his own. He's probably unlikely to be moved.

 

Anyone else could easily be moved, and while they wouldn't garner a ton individually, there are lots of guys who could add quality depth to prospective deals.

 

 

 

As far as guys you'd like to replace...  we mentioned the four options for the 4th and 5th starter above... two of them could add the bullpen, so that has to be factored. 

 

But right now you have Baker, Vespi on the active.. that's two spots there.

In the pen, if you can add one high leverage reliever, you can find room between Tate, Akin, and Perez. 

 

 

If you are going to target 1 quality reliever, and 1 starter...  you probably aren't going to do anything to add positional talent...so, it's about what you have internally.

 

I don't think Mateo is going to have a .722 OPS all year, but he does right now. 
That current offense, with the defense, and speed, means 2nd is currently his. 
When he struggles, then Westburg can take over 2nd... and Mayo (if they believe he can be league average defensively) can come up to play 3rd this year, with Urias getting time defensively in close and late situations. 

 

I still see Mayo (and Kjerstad if he's not traded) ultimately getting time in '25 at 1st and DH... but right now you have Mountcastle and O'Hearn producing and not going anywhere. 

Of course you also have Rutschman getting time at DH, so adding Mayo into the 1st / DH mix here in '24 just doesn't work.
If he's up, he's gotta play a passible 3rd base. 

 

 

In the OF, Cedric is 6 for his last 21 with 3xbh's in this last week... we will see if he can build on that.
If he can't, and Cowser gets more time in CF, then that gives Hays and potentially Stowers more time in LF. 
If Hays and Stowers aren't producing enough in LF (again, if Cowser is in CF); then maybe Kjerstad could get ab's... or O'Hearn / Mayo could stand in the OF... not ideal defensively obviously. 



#25 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,239 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:29 PM

In his last 2 appearances, Mason Miller has a Loss and a Blown Save. Everyone fails.

#26 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:33 PM

Excellent post Chris. Agree across the board. But I'll add one more to the mix. I think we need a RH bat in the OF. We are too limited right now with only Hays being a mighty and Tony a switch. A rh bat that can play defense would give so much more flexibility.

#27 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,239 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:39 PM

You absolutely have to add 1 high leverage reliever to this mix, to get through multiple playoff rounds imo. 

 

The playoffs will always be a short-sample size, largely luck imo... 

 

Do you not see the contradiction of the first 2 things you said here?

 

JFTR, everyone should feel comfortable knowing I have no issues trading players.  Lets Go....but the constant lamenting as if there are prefect answers for anything is absurd.  You always have a chance if you want one.  Nothing you ever do guarantees you anything.

 

Only one team is going to win and looking back at anything (Playoff run) you are going to explain it only with no predictability 20/20 hindsight.

 

Most of this roster has been Buy Low guys that have performed here.

Some people want to go over-pay to buy high and guarantee disappointment.



#28 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,982 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 02:59 PM

Nobody thinks acquiring better players guarantees success. It just increases the odds of success. Everyone understands this except you, dude.

If you want to argue that Tanner Scott isn't better than Nick Vespi, go ahead, but that's not an interesting conversation. The conversation that's interesting is whether the increase in odds with Scott is worth the cost.

#29 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 15 June 2024 - 03:05 PM

Nobody thinks acquiring better players guarantees success. It just increases the odds of success. Everyone understands this except you, dude.

If you want to argue that Tanner Scott isn't better than Nick Vespi, go ahead, but that's not an interesting conversation. The conversation that's interesting is whether the increase in odds with Scott is worth the cost.


Yup

#30 BobPhelan

BobPhelan

    OTV

  • Moderators
  • 14,950 posts
  • LocationBel Air, MD

Posted 15 June 2024 - 03:06 PM

We have top prospects, but very little beyond that. Below Norfolk is largely a wasteland in terms of position players other than Basallo and maybe Etzel. There is some pitching in low minors, but it's unproven against serious competition.

We still have McDermott and Seth Johnson, but we may need them ourselves the way our pitchers are dropping.

I got raked over the coals for saying this before, but I repeat. In position player terms, the last two drafts have been terrible. Look at the numbers.

We don't have enough depth to put together more than one major deal unless we clean out our top prospects. I'd still target the bullpen, but not w/1-year rentals.

Obviously I disagree. The next wave is more pitching oriented than position player but don’t you think that’s ok given the log jam at the top of the ladder?

Beavers, Bradfield, Fabian, Etzel, Horvath, Creed Willems, Bencosme, Leandro Arias, Aron Estrada, Thomas Sosa, plus international guys further down are a fine group. Not to mention top 10 prospect in baseball Samuel Basallo. These guys are also developing. Gunnar wasn’t Gunnar until he was. Started A+ going something like 2-36.

#31 BaltBird 24

BaltBird 24

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,559 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 03:08 PM

Still think it's more important to find a solid #3 SP candidate.

The BP will sort itself out.

#32 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,239 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 15 June 2024 - 03:25 PM

Nobody thinks acquiring better players guarantees success. It just increases the odds of success. Everyone understands this except you, dude.

If you want to argue that Tanner Scott isn't better than Nick Vespi, go ahead, but that's not an interesting conversation. The conversation that's interesting is whether the increase in odds with Scott is worth the cost.

 

You are saying Tanner Scott, so we can discuss the warts of any name...but you want a guy with 20 walks in 28 innings?

 

...and it's not Tanner Scott versus Nick Vespi.....you have (or will have when he comes back) Coulombe, Perez and Akin as the LHers in the bullpen.....if you add Scott, you aren't getting the difference with Vespi, because he's not even part of the final tally...I wouldn't put Scott in front of DC today and Perez was really good the second half last year (after everyone, including me wanted to replace him.)  Akin just threw 3 perfect innings last night against one of the best offenses in MLB so he has some value even as a long guy

 

You want to suggest Scott is an incremental improvement and I'd suggest you can't define it and whatever you think isn't even a guarantee as incremental improvement.

 

fwiw, I have no issues adding Tanner Scott (Baumann and Voth are both doing well in SEA too) so if that's a choice, cool....but you aren't filling a hole by adding Scott.....because there really isn't a hole there.  Try whatever they want, but nothing is free.



#33 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,982 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 03:45 PM

I can't talk to you when you continue to pretend that anyone thinks there are any "guarantees" anywhere.  Its not a good faith conversation.



#34 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,239 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 15 June 2024 - 06:58 PM

Seems like an odd way to try and get out.

 

The challenge is you have to have a spot where you can argue for, define, provide some reasonable perspective that what you do actually helps the Team.  It's harder to do that if you don't have bad players.  It's EASY to argue that you can make a D or a F into a C+.  It's much harder to make that argument for a B over a B-.  The error bars on performance are bigger than the thing you're trying to improve.  That's what I mean by guarantee.

 

Early in the year we didn't know where Means and Bradish would be.  The Team knows more than we do so inaction is OK.  Now, unfortunately, we may be back into kind of a worst case with Means done for the year, Wells a big question mark and Bradish going back on the IL with the elbow.

 

If Bradish is done, they need to get on their horse and figure it out, because that will be a hole they need to improve.  If they think Povich and McDermott is enough depth to back Irvin and Suarez, OK, I think everyone could push back on that....and that's only with Kremer coming back normal.  Just innings with modest performance could be a thing.



#35 mdrunning

mdrunning

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 15 June 2024 - 11:57 PM

Excellent post Chris. Agree across the board. But I'll add one more to the mix. I think we need a RH bat in the OF. We are too limited right now with only Hays being a mighty and Tony a switch. A rh bat that can play defense would give so much more flexibility.

Tommy Pham. 


  • BobPhelan likes this

#36 mdrunning

mdrunning

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 16 June 2024 - 12:02 AM

Maybe they could expand rosters to allow more pitchers so that guys can get more rest between starts. It'd be nice to have a 6 or 7 man rotation without having to severely handicap your bullpen.

Granted, good luck finding 6 or 7 arms you'd want in a starting rotation.

You could do a de facto Rip van Winkle in terms of rest and these guys would still get hurt. Velocity and spin rates are all the rage nowadays, and the UCL simply cannot withstand the torque many modern pitchers are putting on it.

 

Pitching is a very unnatural motion to begin with.



#37 BobPhelan

BobPhelan

    OTV

  • Moderators
  • 14,950 posts
  • LocationBel Air, MD

Posted 16 June 2024 - 07:15 AM

Tommy Pham.


Erick Fedde, Michael Kopech, and Tommy Pham in one trade would be nice.

#38 NewMarketSean

NewMarketSean

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,985 posts

Posted 16 June 2024 - 09:16 AM

Should have added more pitching in the off-season.

You knew Bradish and Means were injured back in March. They didn’t do anything and now Means is out until 2026 and Bradish may be too.

I definitely think they’ll do something at the deadline either way.
I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?

#39 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 157,500 posts

Posted 16 June 2024 - 10:19 AM

There was an argument for signing Montgomery or Snell in March... but I don't think its unreasonable that they didn't. 

They thought both Bradish and Means would be back within a month from the start of the year... and they were. 

 

Should they have known they wouldn't be able to hold up even if they got back? Maybe?

 

Going into Opening Day believing they had Burnes, Rodriguez, Kremer, Wells, Irvin, Bradish, and Means available to start games for them this year is a reasonable plan. 

They might have doubted Bradish / Means / Wells could hold up themselves... but wanted to see how things unfolded prior to making a move. 

Also... while the new ownership may (TBD) have greenlit the $ for a 1 year deal with Montgomery or Snell; the ownership transfer was not yet official and that might have further limited what Elias was able to do.



#40 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 16 June 2024 - 10:23 AM

There was an argument for signing Montgomery or Snell in March... but I don't think its unreasonable that they didn't. 

They thought both Bradish and Means would be back within a month from the start of the year... and they were. 

 

Should they have known they wouldn't be able to hold up even if they got back? Maybe?

 

Going into Opening Day believing they had Burnes, Rodriguez, Kremer, Wells, Irvin, Bradish, and Means available to start games for them this year is a reasonable plan. 

They might have doubted Bradish / Means / Wells could hold up themselves... but wanted to see how things unfolded prior to making a move. 

Also... while the new ownership may (TBD) have greenlit the $ for a 1 year deal with Montgomery or Snell; the ownership transfer was not yet official and that might have further limited what Elias was able to do.

Reasonable thoughts. Unfortunately they struck out with those three.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=