71 replies to this topic

[ivanbalt]

This is what you always say when you don't really have a meaningful response.

Don't worry, if the rotation struggles we'll get to hear how it's Hyde's fault for not managing them better.

[glenn__davis]

Compare our 6-10 options to everybody else’s. We have very solid depth at SP.

 

Right.  I mean you can say our 6-10 options aren't great, but nobody's are.  Ours are significantly better than most.  I think it's a defense mechanism fans have to only project out the worst case scenario for your own team.

 

BTW, Povich had an ERA of 2.60 and a K/9 above 10 across 5 September starts.  That's a strong finish in a playoff race.  If he can hone that with any sort of consistency that's a huge plus for this team moving forward.

[makoman]

I’m very happy with our 6-10. And teams very often need to use those guys so that’s good. I’m not dismissing that.

But 1-5 are more important, you hope they get most of the starts, if you’re using 9-10 a lot, things went horribly wrong. And I think every one of those 1-5 guys is a slot or two higher than they should be. Maybe Grod as a 2 is accurate, but Eflin is really a 2-3, etc.

[Mackus]

I’m very happy with our 6-10. And teams very often need to use those guys so that’s good. I’m not dismissing that.

But 1-5 are more important, you hope they get most of the starts, if you’re using 9-10 a lot, things went horribly wrong. And I think every one of those 1-5 guys is a slot or two higher than they should be. Maybe Grod as a 2 is accurate, but Eflin is really a 2-3, etc.

 

Agree.  The depth is as good as anyone can hope for.  We've got a #6 in the bullpen who pitched to league average ERA in over 20 starts last year, a #7 with options at AAA who's been a passable MLB starter most of his career before falling on his face in the second half of last season, and a #8 who is an intriguing prospect with options.  Don't think much of #9-10, but McDermott and Young aren't particular noteworthy to me as SP options but again we're talking 9th and 10th options so you basically are just hoping for sub-6 at that point and think they'd have a shot.  Would seem ridiculous to me if anyone is arguing we needed to do more to acquire better bullpen/AAA depth for SP.

 

But the bigger point is that 1-5 is weaker than it should be.  I think Elias' approach to the rotation in the offseason makes us more likely to need to use our depth.  Guys who have to sign 1-year deals are more likely to need to be replaced for performance reasons than guys that sign 3-year deals or longer term.  Do think he focused on guys that have some history of durability, so credit there.  Morton in particular, but at 41 that skill could disappear at any point.

[glenn__davis]

I’m very happy with our 6-10. And teams very often need to use those guys so that’s good. I’m not dismissing that.

But 1-5 are more important, you hope they get most of the starts, if you’re using 9-10 a lot, things went horribly wrong. And I think every one of those 1-5 guys is a slot or two higher than they should be. Maybe Grod as a 2 is accurate, but Eflin is really a 2-3, etc.

 

I think that's certainly fair, though Eflin did pitch to a 145 ERA+ for us last year.  Can't ask for too much more than that.  Did the Orioles find something in him to take him to another level, or did he just happen to pitch really well for us in a somewhat small sample size?  Probably more the latter but I do recall some chatter from him that they made some adjustments that helped.

 

But sure, one more TOR starter would make everyone more at ease.

[jamesdean]

Pitching could potentially be a problem as far as performance but it did well enough in the 2nd half last year.  The problem was the offense and that's where the improvements need to be.  Right now, I'm not even focused on the pitching.  I want to see some of these young hitters (especially Holiday and Mayo) start to consistently hit major league pitching.  If we get a repeat of 2024, regardless of the sample size, I expect them to continue to struggle in the W-L department. 

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Agree.  The depth is as good as anyone can hope for.  We've got a #6 in the bullpen who pitched to league average ERA in over 20 starts last year, a #7 with options at AAA who's been a passable MLB starter most of his career before falling on his face in the second half of last season, and a #8 who is an intriguing prospect with options.  Don't think much of #9-10, but McDermott and Young aren't particular noteworthy to me as SP options but again we're talking 9th and 10th options so you basically are just hoping for sub-6 at that point and think they'd have a shot.  Would seem ridiculous to me if anyone is arguing we needed to do more to acquire better bullpen/AAA depth for SP.

 

But the bigger point is that 1-5 is weaker than it should be.  I think Elias' approach to the rotation in the offseason makes us more likely to need to use our depth.  Guys who have to sign 1-year deals are more likely to need to be replaced for performance reasons than guys that sign 3-year deals or longer term.  Do think he focused on guys that have some history of durability, so credit there.  Morton in particular, but at 41 that skill could disappear at any point.

Yippee. The O's 6-10 depth is better than anybody else's. Why is it so hard for some to understand that we don't give a flying crap about 6-10. The rotation isn't scaring anyone. Then you have guys saying Bradish and Wells are lurking. Huh? Maybe Bradish pitches late season (and we all hope he does),. But Wells? I doubt we see him in an O's uniform again.

[glenn__davis]

Yippee. The O's 6-10 depth is better than anybody else's. Why is it so hard for some to understand that we don't give a flying crap about 6-10. The rotation isn't scaring anyone. Then you have guys saying Bradish and Wells are lurking. Huh? Maybe Bradish pitches late season (and we all hope he does),. But Wells? I doubt we see him in an O's uniform again.

 

Well, I suppose it's hard for some to understand that you don't give a flying crap about 6-10 because you absolutely SHOULD give a flying crap about 6-10.  Just because they're not as important as 1-5 doesn't mean they're not important.

 

And I'm not really sure why you'd say that about Wells. He's been a very important guy for us the past few years.

[weird-O]

Yippee. The O's 6-10 depth is better than anybody else's. Why is it so hard for some to understand that we don't give a flying crap about 6-10. The rotation isn't scaring anyone. Then you have guys saying Bradish and Wells are lurking. Huh? Maybe Bradish pitches late season (and we all hope he does),. But Wells? I doubt we see him in an O's uniform again.

Why do you think Wells won't pitch for the O's again?

As far as I know, he didn't suffer a probable career ending injury, and he's not a free agent after 2025. 

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Well, I suppose it's hard for some to understand that you don't give a flying crap about 6-10 because you absolutely SHOULD give a flying crap about 6-10.  Just because they're not as important as 1-5 doesn't mean they're not important.

 

And I'm not really sure why you'd say that about Wells. He's been a very important guy for us the past few years.

Its simple. 1-5 are so far more important than 6-10 its not worth discussing. That doesn't mean 6-10 are meaningless. But I am NOT going to give credit to a FO that build solid depth at 6-10 when the  focus should have  been on building a much better 1-5. Does replacing starter #5 who sucks with starter #6 or 7 who also isn't really an MLB caliber pitcher something to be excited about?

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Why do you think Wells won't pitch for the O's again?

As far as I know, he didn't suffer a probable career ending injury, and he's not a free agent after 2025. 

Because he's had 2 TJs. And I don't see him as a starter anyway which was the discussion. IF he comes back and can help the bullpen great but I just don't see him as a starter and certainly not for the O's (or any other ML team).

[glenn__davis]

Its simple. 1-5 are so far more important than 6-10 its not worth discussing.

 

Ok.  That's an opinion, and you're certainly welcome to hold it, but I strongly disagree.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Ok.  That's an opinion, and you're certainly welcome to hold it, but I strongly disagree.

Are you satisfied with 1-5?

[glenn__davis]

Are you satisfied with 1-5?

 

I said earlier I think we'd all prefer one more TOR starter.  Never hurts to have another one.  Tough for me to look at any of the moves that were made and say I would have beaten them.  Maybe Eovaldi, who likely wanted to go back to TEX, maybe Kikuchi.  I would have been interested to see what TB would have wanted from us for Springs.

 

So ultimately no, I wouldn't say I'm satisfied, but saying I'm not satisfied with 1-5 but I'm happy with 6-10 are not mutually exclusive thoughts.  And a DO agree that 1-5 are more important, but saying they're so much more important that 6-10 are not worth discussing, no, not at all on board with that.  Injuries will no doubt happen, as they will to every staff in the league.  You need those next guys up.

[Mackus]

Its simple. 1-5 are so far more important than 6-10 its not worth discussing. That doesn't mean 6-10 are meaningless. But I am NOT going to give credit to a FO that build solid depth at 6-10 when the focus should have been on building a much better 1-5. Does replacing starter #5 who sucks with starter #6 or 7 who also isn't really an MLB caliber pitcher something to be excited about?

You're gonna lose people with the "not worth discussing" part. Quality rotation depth is important and can be worth several wins a year if you end up needing it. Nobody goes through the season with just 5 starters. Your "depth" starters could very easily end up throwing hundreds of innings.

Walk and chew gum. Criticism of the starting 5 is valid. So is acknowledging the quality depth. The weak starting 5 is certainly a much more impactful flaw than the depth is an asset.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

You're gonna lose people with the "not worth discussing" part. Quality rotation depth is important and can be worth several wins a year if you end up needing it. Nobody goes through the season with just 5 starters. Your "depth" starters could very easily end up throwing hundreds of innings.

Walk and chew gum. Criticism of the starting 5 is valid. So is acknowledging the quality depth. The weak starting 5 is certainly a much more impactful flaw than the depth is an asset.

All I am saying. Its just that it seems some are giving more credit for 6-10 than they are worth compared 1-5. I am not sold that our depth is really that "quality."

[Mackus]

I am not sold that our depth is really that "quality."

 

If any of them were good enough to be sold on, then they wouldn't be depth pieces. The depth is as quality as could be hoped for.  That's different than saying they are all known quality MLB pitchers.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

If any of them were good enough to be sold on, then they wouldn't be depth pieces. The depth is as quality as could be hoped for.  That's different than saying they are all known quality MLB pitchers.

Fair assessment

[weird-O]

All I am saying. Its just that it seems some are giving more credit for 6-10 than they are worth compared 1-5. I am not sold that our depth is really that "quality."

When you get 10 or 12 posters all saying 6-10 looks really solid, I can understand why you're getting that impression. You just need to keep it in context. 6-10 is the topic of discussion. But it doesn't mean everyone is in love with 1-5.    

[BSLRoseKatz]

I'd view it as 1-5 is your rotation's ceiling and 6-10 is the floor, you'd obviously prefer both to be high but a decent 6-10 makes it harder for your season to go off the rails