160 replies to this topic

[BaltBird 24]

Assuming if the rotation can stay healthy (big if) you'll feel fairly comfortable with whoever is taking the ball on any given night (obviously Sugano is a wildcard here and Morton you'll worry about his age). And you'll have depth with guys like Saurez, Povich, maybe even Rogers behind them if for injury or struggles.

I would prefer a trade for another SP with team control, however. Not sure how available guys like Castillo or Lopez or even Alcantara still are.

[RichardZ]

A “C”. A pessimist could knock each move.

We plugged holes and added depth. Morton needs to evade Father Time for one more year and Sugano needs to be better than we think. I still think this is a 90ish win team. I’m fearful that any major GRod or Eflin injury could be fatal. We have three #5 starters on paper.

[BSLMikeLowe]

C

 

They did slightly better than the bare minimum in replacing what they lost, which would have been to go strictly in-house. But any upgrades those additions account for are few and small, and overall the ceiling for this team would be lower save internal improvements...which I think is likely enough they should still be a legit contender for the postseason.

[BobPhelan]

I’m at a B-/C+ so went with B. Nothing sexy (yet) but I think the team is in a really good spot going into the season.

[Slidemaster]

C. They've done enough to tread water. They're not any better than they were last year, and I expect a similar result.

[CantonJester]

C-/D+. Closer to D than C though.

[SBTarheel]

B.

 

I get that everyone wanted a "splash', and that's totally fair, but the moves they did make addressed some things, replaced, Tony, added some depth to the rotation, added to the bullpen, backup catcher....etc.

 

Assuming the young guys continue to improve, i really like our chances heading into the season (I understand that wasn't the point of this poll, but i do think it matters, big picture in accessing the offseason).

[glenn__davis]

I'll go with C.  Losing Burnes and not really replacing is a big loss.  I do like the Santander for O'Neill swap, assuming O'Neill stays healthy.  Big if.  Don't love the Morton pickup but hopefully that works out better than I expect.  Sugano a total wild card to me.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Offense - Zero upgrade really. O'Neill could be better than Santander but he also might miss a bunch of time.

 

Defense - No real change. O'Neill maybe a bit better than Santander but I think I'd rather have McCann catching then Sanchez,

 

Bullpen - Bit of an upgrade 

 

Starting Pitching - Markedly worse. Going after Morton and Sugano is in no way an upgrade. Could be fine. Could be a disaster.

 

So grade I give is a D+. 

 

But I think the original guidance from Dude was spot on. It really depends on your frame of reference. If I was to really consider my frame of reference then I give them a big fat F.

 

This team had the resources (both money and trade capital) to vastly improve the team not just keep us close (and in this case really worse) than last year's team.

[BaltBird 24]

Crazy to me the amount of D's I see. I understand a C, personally I think it's a B or B- offseason, but D's are crazy.

[russsnyder]

I gave them a B.

Probably a B- if that was offered.

They'll be fine if some young guys ( Holliday, Kjerstad, etc.) step up.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Crazy to me the amount of D's I see. I understand a C, personally I think it's a B or B- offseason, but D's are crazy.

And I think anything over a C- is insane. There is no prize for the team that wins the WS by saving all their minor league pieces or having less of a payroll than they could have spent.

 

You win. You do all you can to put the team in the best position to do so. Not an ok position. The best position you can.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I know its a subjective poll  but I objectively think the answer is a B or C.

[BaltBird 24]

Offense - Zero upgrade really. O'Neill could be better than Santander but he also might miss a bunch of time.

Defense - No real change. O'Neill maybe a bit better than Santander but I think I'd rather have McCann catching then Sanchez,

Where were you looking for upgrades besides a Santander replacement? Everyone else is basically locked in. They felt a need for a lefty mashing RF/LF to replace Santander and they found it in O'Neill.

The rest of your spots are tied up between Adley, Mountcastle/O'Hearn, Holliday, Gunnar, Westburg, Cowser, Mullins, Kjerstad.

Sanchez is probably a better defensive catcher than McCann, too, with more offensive potential.

[SBTarheel]

I gave them a B.

Probably a B- if that was offered.

They'll be fine if some young guys ( Holliday, Kjerstad, etc.) step up.

Exactly. the young guys will continue to improve, and while it's not "offseason moves", it's just as, if not more important to continue to see development with certain guys.

[1970]

I’ve been extremely pessimistic about what’s happened (or mostly what hasn’t happened) so far, but I’ll still give them a C.  I don’t think the pitching is good enough as I think they’re relying too heavily on too many pitchers on the wrong side of 30.  Hopefully Grayson takes a big step forward.  I personally wish they’d get rid of the home run machine (Dominguez).  The C is obviously subject to change should they add another quality starter or reliever (which I’m not confident will happen).

[CantonJester]

Where were you looking for upgrades besides a Santander replacement? Everyone else is basically locked in. They felt a need for a lefty mashing RF/LF to replace Santander and they found it in O'Neill.

The rest of your spots are tied up between Adley, Mountcastle/O'Hearn, Holliday, Gunnar, Westburg, Cowser, Mullins, Kjerstad.

Sanchez is probably a better defensive catcher than McCann, too, with more offensive potential.

 

If Sanchez were a better BUC option than McCann, then why is he about to be on his 5th team in 3 1/2 seasons? 

 

As for the rest of the spots tied up? That’s part of why I see the effort closer to a D than a C. Running back a Mounty / O’Hearn solution at 1B is meh. And circling back to the BUC - if your goal is to get Adley more time at DH, then they really didn’t go about that the right way. A creative three way trade sending a package of decent/not-great prospects to net a BUC and a BP piece might’ve worked better. 

 

I’m OK with O’Neill if it meant the O’s weren’t signing Tony to a 5 year deal. 

 

And objectively speaking, that is my opinion. LOL at claiming somebody’s objective opinion has more weight in late January of the offseason. We’ll see how it all shakes out. 

[weird-O]

I think a grade of C is fair. They let players walk, and replaced them with guys who you'd expect to give the same production. My grading scale doesn't include Burnes, because he wasn't really replaceable. Sugano and Morton are middle to back of the rotation arms that are filling vacancies. That's a C move, it's not especially good, it's not especially bad, it's good enough. "Good enough" tops out at a C    

[RichardZ]

I know its a subjective poll  but I objectively think the answer is a B or C.

So you are the one objective vote? Good to know. Lol

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Where were you looking for upgrades besides a Santander replacement? Everyone else is basically locked in. They felt a need for a lefty mashing RF/LF to replace Santander and they found it in O'Neill.

The rest of your spots are tied up between Adley, Mountcastle/O'Hearn, Holliday, Gunnar, Westburg, Cowser, Mullins, Kjerstad.

Sanchez is probably a better defensive catcher than McCann, too, with more offensive potential.

Santander is better than O'Neill. Now O'Neill could turn out healthy which is what we all hope. But he still won't be a switch hitter.

 

Could have upgraded at CF over Mullins. Or moved Cowser and upgraded in LF.

 

And they for sure could have done better at C if the plan is to DH Adley more.

 

But that's all close. THE issue was not getting some quality SP. So tired of this quantity approach. Yes lots of arms are not a bad thing. 

 

But all thats for discussion. You just totally ignored my main complaint. The O's had the resources to do much better and actually take a solid shot at really improving the team. They flat didn't do that. If you want to argue we are just as good going in as last year. Ok, that's a viewpoint. But so freaking what. They should have set themselves up to be better than last year. They didn't.