Photo

BSL: Examining The O'Neill Santander Decision


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 BSLRoseKatz

BSLRoseKatz

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,413 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD

Posted 20 January 2025 - 03:34 PM

BSL: Examining The O'Neill Santander Decision

https://baltimorespo...ander-decision/


  • BSLChrisStoner and russsnyder like this

#2 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 62,581 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 20 January 2025 - 03:40 PM

One year deal (with the opt-out) versus a multi year deal for AS. That’s the analysis.
  • bmore_ken likes this

#3 BSLRoseKatz

BSLRoseKatz

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,413 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD

Posted 20 January 2025 - 03:46 PM

One year deal (with the opt-out) versus a multi year deal for AS. That’s the analysis.

 

I mean yeah but even if they signed identical contracts they still differ quite in a bit in recent health/platoon splits/etc where I wanted to highlight that 


  • You Play to Win the Game and BSLSteveBirrer like this

#4 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 62,581 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 20 January 2025 - 04:05 PM

I’m just bitter. Didn’t mean to suggest there wasn’t actual strong analysis in your write up. My bad.
  • BSLRoseKatz likes this

#5 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 20,897 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 20 January 2025 - 04:43 PM

Best outcome for all parties involved is if this ends up being a 1-year deal.


  • makoman likes this

#6 russsnyder

russsnyder

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,720 posts

Posted 20 January 2025 - 05:14 PM

I'm legitimately happy for Santander.

That said, I'm ok with the O'Neill for Santander trade off.
<p>"F IT!, Let's hit." Ted Williams

#7 fishteacher

fishteacher

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,931 posts
  • LocationHarrisburg, PA

Posted 20 January 2025 - 06:06 PM

Gonna miss Santander, not gonna lie, but I am wondering if not brining him back is because they're afraid they got the best out of him and he won't amount do that moving forward?  


I'm here to do two things...chew bubblegum and kick ass, and I'm all out of bubblegum. ~ Roddy Piper
@therealjfisher

#8 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,976 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 20 January 2025 - 06:18 PM

Best outcome for all parties involved is if this ends up being a 1-year deal.

That would mean O'Neil has a really good 2025. That's a good thing.

 

But that means he leaves. That is only a good thing for the O's IF Cowser and especially Kjerstad show they belong as full time corner outfielders. Otherwise they are back looking for another platoon guy in RF next off season.



#9 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,755 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 20 January 2025 - 07:25 PM

Personally, I'm not a fan of the signing.  fwiw, I hope he proves that a bad take.

 

My thoughts aren't consideration of ONeill versus Santander.

 

For some reason, it feel like everyone is acting like 2024 is the only ONeill we are getting.  He had a monster 2021 (so did Ced fwiw) but none of his 2019, 2020, 2022 or 2023 seasons merit the consideration.  Another 2024, great.  one of his other poor seasons, disaster.

 

His performance as a lefty masher in 2024 is noted, but it's not clear (yet) how much he's getting.  If he's only vs LHSP, he may not get to even the better performance without more consistent run.  If he's the everyday RFer, ok, we really need to have him healthy and in a better season.

 

If he has a good+ season, maybe he's a FA and you get a QO.  The opposite of that (most of his other seasons) is he's a dead contract and we're talking about how to get rid of him next year.  We want him to be different than guys like Conforto, Hoskins and Bellinger, so we'll see.

 

Big fan of Tony and what he's done here as a Rule 5 from CLE many years ago.  Wish he was on the Nationals, but good luck to him when the Jays aren't playing us.



#10 BSLRoseKatz

BSLRoseKatz

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,413 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD

Posted 21 January 2025 - 11:05 AM

Personally, I'm not a fan of the signing.  fwiw, I hope he proves that a bad take.

 

My thoughts aren't consideration of ONeill versus Santander.

 

For some reason, it feel like everyone is acting like 2024 is the only ONeill we are getting.  He had a monster 2021 (so did Ced fwiw) but none of his 2019, 2020, 2022 or 2023 seasons merit the consideration.  Another 2024, great.  one of his other poor seasons, disaster.

 

His performance as a lefty masher in 2024 is noted, but it's not clear (yet) how much he's getting.  If he's only vs LHSP, he may not get to even the better performance without more consistent run.  If he's the everyday RFer, ok, we really need to have him healthy and in a better season.

 

If he has a good+ season, maybe he's a FA and you get a QO.  The opposite of that (most of his other seasons) is he's a dead contract and we're talking about how to get rid of him next year.  We want him to be different than guys like Conforto, Hoskins and Bellinger, so we'll see.

 

Big fan of Tony and what he's done here as a Rule 5 from CLE many years ago.  Wish he was on the Nationals, but good luck to him when the Jays aren't playing us.

 

Yeah I was considering mentioning that but Santander also had a better 2024 than 2023/2022 and wanted to stick with looking at their contrasts for a more concise focus



#11 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,755 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 21 January 2025 - 11:52 AM

Yeah I was considering mentioning that but Santander also had a better 2024 than 2023/2022 and wanted to stick with looking at their contrasts for a more concise focus

 

I'm ok with that from the "recent comparison" perspective, but Tony has been much more consistent over the last 3 seasons in terms of both availability and performance.

 

Largely, the O'Neill contract is justified by his 2024 numbers because you wouldn't even consider him on the team for his 2022 or 2023 performance.  

 

I don't view it as O'Neill vs Santander.  If we can't trust Kjerstad in RF, I'm not sure what we're doing.  



#12 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,690 posts

Posted 21 January 2025 - 12:11 PM

dude never ceases to amaze me with his stupid roster building thoughts. No exaggeration. He should get a GM job just for the entertainment alone. 



#13 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 20,897 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 21 January 2025 - 12:37 PM

That would mean O'Neil has a really good 2025. That's a good thing.

 

But that means he leaves. That is only a good thing for the O's IF Cowser and especially Kjerstad show they belong as full time corner outfielders. Otherwise they are back looking for another platoon guy in RF next off season.

 

If he leaves after this season it likely means he was more than just a LHP platoon player. Considering his injury history and batting splits, I'd wager a season in which he would exercise the out and get more money next offseason is unlikely to be repeated in the final two years of the contract. So I'd be fine with the Orioles finding another corner OF next year, and hopefully doing better - be it an outside addition or internal option.



#14 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,755 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 21 January 2025 - 12:47 PM

dude never ceases to amaze me with his stupid roster building thoughts. No exaggeration. 

 

What is the "stupid roster building thought"?



#15 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts

Posted 21 January 2025 - 12:49 PM

Santander's lack of clutch in the postseason bothered me. So small initial gut reaction there is a whatever. But everyone here with a bat seems to be "not clutch" after game 162 is over, so he wasn't the only one. The "we only score via a HR" thing is so tired and old to me. Hope O'neill stays healthy (longshot) and has a good year. And maybe he'll deliver some big hits in October unlike basically everyone else has...
  • weird-O likes this

#16 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,690 posts

Posted 21 January 2025 - 12:53 PM

What is the "stupid roster building thought"?

Pick any of them



#17 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,755 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:04 PM

Pick any of them

 

This is a thread on an article written by a BSL writer, posted on the BSL message board.  I've made 2 posts before your comment.  What was the "stupid roster building thought"?  



#18 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,755 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:06 PM

Are you referring to Burnes last year?

 

Are you referring to adding Castillo and Crochet this year?  You think adding Shane McClanahan is a stupid thought?



#19 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,690 posts

Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:08 PM

Every one of your roster building ideas are either dumb or unrealistic. Ask anyone. It adds up.

#20 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,976 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:29 PM

If he leaves after this season it likely means he was more than just a LHP platoon player. Considering his injury history and batting splits, I'd wager a season in which he would exercise the out and get more money next offseason is unlikely to be repeated in the final two years of the contract. So I'd be fine with the Orioles finding another corner OF next year, and hopefully doing better - be it an outside addition or internal option.

Agree with that. But that also means the O's going in thinking was this was a one year deal and next year they'll be right back in the same box. What is this love affair with one year deals? I just don't get it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors