
BSL: Examining The O'Neill Santander Decision
#21
Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:34 PM
#22
Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:35 PM
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.
Elias is commitment-phobic. This has almost exclusively been his approach to filling the starting rotation, and once the current core position players hit free agency - or are traded just beforehand - it's probably going to be how he fills most of the rest of the roster.
#23
Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:39 PM
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.
I hope I'm not misremembering, but I'm pretty sure he explicitly said a few years back that they see almost all the value in multi-year deals as coming in year 1. They do almost everything based on perceived value, so makes sense that they want to sign up for only the valuable year and avoid the wasteful later years. Of course that vastly limits the pool of players to those that can't get multiple years or those you will occasionally make an exception for.
#24
Posted 21 January 2025 - 01:44 PM
#25
Posted 21 January 2025 - 02:13 PM
#26
Posted 21 January 2025 - 04:07 PM
Every one of your roster building ideas are either dumb or unrealistic. Ask anyone. It adds up.
Well, you brought it up in this thread, so discuss which Idea I shared in this thread is "a stupid roster building thought".
.....and fwiw, if Elias did what I endorsed, you'd be all over it, you know, like Burnes last year or Castillo this year.
#27
Posted 21 January 2025 - 04:12 PM
#28
Posted 21 January 2025 - 04:44 PM
Im good not interacting with your nonsense. Bit I will humor you once. Plenty of people are good with adding Castillo. But of course its never cut and dry with you. Its add this piece and trade this piece and take on this additional contract. Dumb. Unrealistic. Everyone here can promise you that if the Os were to trade for Castillo that Haniger and all the other nonsense wouldnt be included
Wile E you started interacting with me. You are relentless thinking you are bringing some smoke (you never do) but you are just a clueless goof. You aren't ahead, you just aren't smart enough to understand you're getting lapped.
You are the coward running away. I'm not interacting with you, not because I can't, but because it feels like I'm punching a 15 year old. It's not that you get everything wrong. You get some simple stuff right that you probably read somewhere, but you say 1+1=2 and act like you invented math.
It's an Orioles baseball message board, do whatever you want, but it's an Orioles baseball message board.
#29
Posted 21 January 2025 - 04:55 PM
- You Play to Win the Game likes this
#30
Posted 21 January 2025 - 05:03 PM
#31
Posted 21 January 2025 - 05:16 PM
#32
Posted 21 January 2025 - 06:33 PM
Wile E, you need an intervention from your friends. That nobody helps you should alarm you.
This thread....Santander is "just a guy" right? Never be more than that because I don't know Baseball....92.5M dollars later.
#33
Posted 21 January 2025 - 06:43 PM
I like Santander but feel like we just got his career year. Best case for us is a strong year from O’Neill this year and he opts out. I think the presence of O’Neill also allows us to work Kjerstad into RF more often than we would have with Santander. Worst case, O’Neill becomes an oft injured 4th OF/DH on a bad contract.
- BSLChrisStoner likes this
#34
Posted 21 January 2025 - 09:05 PM
Here's my concerns with O'Neill.
'Unacceptable': Marmol questions O'Neill's effort on bases.
That was April of 2023.
We watch STL have their worst season in recent memory, grossly underperforming at 71-91 which is their first season under .500 since 2007 and their lowest win total since a shortened 1995 season (62).
We don't know all of the roster challenges, it's never likely one guy and there's certainly complexity inside of it, but they dump O'Neill on the RedSox for much less than we gave up for a bad Flaherty.
Maybe he's just a change-of-scenery guy, but he posts a .842 OPS in BOS and he's one of the bubble QO guys that didn't get offered...would it not have not been worth it if he had accepted?.
Then Boras works to get him signed before the winter meetings.
------------
Maybe it's all nothing. I root for the laundry so I hope someone can pull this up later and mock it when the Orioles win the WS.
...but we put him on a roster where it's not clear how everyone gets their PT and he's getting paid and replacing guys with friends on this Team.
I'm not a fan of the move. <<shrug>>.
....and like I said, it's not because I'm arguing for Santander (who I like).
#35
Posted 21 January 2025 - 09:17 PM
Here's my concerns with O'Neill.
'Unacceptable': Marmol questions O'Neill's effort on bases.
That was April of 2023.
We watch STL have their worst season in recent memory, grossly underperforming at 71-91 which is their first season under .500 since 2007 and their lowest win total since a shortened 1995 season (62).
We don't know all of the roster challenges, it's never likely one guy and there's certainly complexity inside of it, but they dump O'Neill on the RedSox for much less than we gave up for a bad Flaherty.
Maybe he's just a change-of-scenery guy, but he posts a .842 OPS in BOS and he's one of the bubble QO guys that didn't get offered...would it not have not been worth it if he had accepted?.
Then Boras works to get him signed before the winter meetings.
------------
Maybe it's all nothing. I root for the laundry so I hope someone can pull this up later and mock it when the Orioles win the WS.
...but we put him on a roster where it's not clear how everyone gets their PT and he's getting paid and replacing guys with friends on this Team.
I'm not a fan of the move. <<shrug>>.
....and like I said, it's not because I'm arguing for Santander (who I like).
Replacing guys with friends on the team? There you go again. I think the move has bust potential but it has nothing to do with hustle, chemistry, or replacing friends. It has to do with staying on the field and performing. He’s had two good years and those were years where he was relatively healthy. His main attribute is his performance against LHP. That’s the bare minimum this team needs from him.
- BobPhelan, russsnyder and makoman like this
#36
Posted 21 January 2025 - 09:28 PM
Replacing guys with friends on the team? There you go again. I think the move has bust potential but it has nothing to do with hustle, chemistry, or replacing friends. It has to do with staying on the field and performing. He’s had two good years and those were years where he was relatively healthy. His main attribute is his performance against LHP. That’s the bare minimum this team needs from him.
OK. Hopefully he's excellent.
#37
Posted 22 January 2025 - 10:18 AM
#38
Posted 22 January 2025 - 11:59 AM
Maybe O'neill will have a huge year AND love the Baltimore area so much he chooses NOT to opt out. Jimmy's Famous needs to get to work...
That huge year would be very unlikely to be repeated, imo. No crab cakes. Let him go.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users