User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 2.0455 seconds
38 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Thanks for the Orioles projections.
Just FYI -- I believe that the links to the previous projections for the Rockies, Indians, Reds, and the White Sox are not functioning properly. Click on them to see what I mean.
Trying to be helpful,
Roel
That has got to be about the broadest range of comps that you could possibly get.
-- MWE
I didn't see a projection for B.J. Surhoff. Are they really not going to bring him back for one more season?
Do you really have enough free time to randomly throw random numbers out to project every player? How do you make up these numbers? One day do you just wake up and say Vlad is gonna hit .285 with 22 homers this year? Just wondering how you get your random totally wrong numbers.
The Troll
Am I horribly missing something in here?
Of all the outfielders with a 2008 ZIPS Projection and of the age 25 or less, Markakis' closest statistical similarity scores belong to (keep in mind this does not take age or outfield position into consideration, only pure stats).
1) Billy Butler (KC)
2) C.Rasum (Stl)
3) H.Pence (Hou)
---------------------
For Reimold (same criteria)
1) A.Jones (Sea)
2) Kroeger (ChC)
3) Dorn (CIN)
---------------------
For Tripp (same criteria)
1) Bruce (Cin)
2) Maxwell (Was)
3) Kroeger (ChC)
vr, Xei
Yes. Team age. A 75 win team with a lot of young, exciting players is one thing. A 75 win team with an average age of 33 is depressing.
Indeed. Not all of the individual projections are awful, but of the players who do project to be decent, you've got one guy (Ray) who isn't playing in 2008, two guys (Bedard and Roberts) who should be playing somewhere else, a couple of middle-aged middle relievers, Loewen (coming off a serious injury), and Markakis. Then you've got some mediocrities at best in Millar, Gibbons, Huff, Hernandez.. all of whom are over 30. Maybe in 2009 or 2010, there'll be a bunch of hope. But for 2008, there are likely no bright spots except RF.
Seriously, does he have the worst projected line for a hitter?
Well, it's a small sample size...
If everything breaks right for the O's, Loewen, Bedard and Cabrera all reach their 15% optimistic projection, and they still finish 3rd. The odds of Bedard going 18-3 or better with an ERA under 2.25 are probably 200-1. Even if he meets his end of the deal, the bullpen and offence will probably saddle him with a 15-7 record.
5.41 22 Troy Patton*
5.81 25 Matt Albers
5.91 23 Garrett Olson*
5.95 23 Hayden Penn
6.00 25 James Johnson
6.12 27 Brian Burres*
6.29 25 Radhames Liz
Odds are that one of these guys hits an optimistic projection around league average. Of course, knowing the Orioles, they'll pick the wrong guy and someone will put up a 2.50 ERA in Norfolk.
The disclaimer and the FAQ should hopefully say it all!
The starting pitching is awful, inconsistent and injury-riddled (well, Loewen anyway).
Player A .276 .349 .405 125 417 56 115 23 2 9 55 43 83 1 2
Player B .287 .363 .437 145 579 93 166 39 3 14 80 70 87 36 7
Since you did the Astros before they acquired Miguel Tejada, would it be possible to get a 2008 Houston projection for Miggi?
Thanks, & keep up the good work!
WIth or without Bedard? With Bedard it looks about average. Without him it looks bad, but there are enough options there that I think it might not be horrible. I think the offense will be worse than the pitching, but if they trade Bedard and Roberts and fully commit to rebuilding, 2008 doesn't matter anyway.
On the other hand, there's just nothing there right now with the offense. Although that Reimold projection is better than I would have thought. If that's reasonable, he should probably be in Baltimore now.
(*) Obviously if they trade Bedard they're going need a grade A prospect to replace him; I'm not disputing that. But for the other four slots in the rotation, there are already lots of options. I don't think it makes sense to waste Bedard/Roberts on acquiring numerous pitching prospects, when they currently have more than they can even take a look at.
Yeah, they're closer than you'd think. Roberts' 10-point AVG advantage accounts for the gap in their rate stats, and the only other real difference is Roberts' speed.
Seems like the Cubs would be crazy to give up Marshall, Gallagher, and Cedeno (Cubs' best SS) for Roberts. Of course, if Roberts is the impetus to slide Soriano down in the batting order, it might be okay.
From what I read/hear from the Baltimore media, that package is a little light for MacPhail's liking and would have to include one of Pie or Colvin, hence the sitzkrieg.
Well, the 45-point difference in OPS understates the difference in their respective offensive contributions inasmuch as it ignores baserunning ability, where Roberts probably has something like a one-win edge.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that the Cubs should get Roberts, even if it takes Colvin (but not if it takes Pie). Beyond the fact that Robert is, all things considered, probably a 2-3 win upgrade over DeRosa, plugging him in at 2B gives the Cubs a solid backup plan for when (not if) Ramirez gets nicked up and if (not necessarily when) Lee, Soriano, or Roberts himself gets hurt. Otherwise, when Ramirez pulls a quad, you're looking at an infield of DeRosa-Theriot-Fontenot-Lee, and that's not going to cut it.
I think I'd trade any three (and possibly any four) of Marshall, Gallagher, Colvin, Theriot, Fontenot, Patterson, and Cedeno to get Roberts, and I actually like some of those guys.
DeRosa's not a bad player, but Roberts is a ~2 win upgrade. Also, having DeRosa around as a super-sub/insurance makes the Cubs a much better team.
Colvin's a college guy who people are irrationally excited about because he hit .299-16-81 between the FSL and the Southern league.
Well he had a K/BB of 101/15-
he's the second coming of Craig Brazell
If you can trade him for more than a year of Brian Roberts you should do it, hell if you can trade for one year of Brian Roberts and he's the difference maker between making the playoffs or not you should do it.
Awesome, Dan. Truly, you are a giant among men.
It's kind of hard to get a big head when people don't even know your name right.
Man, that's a weird sentence.
Right -- Derose could easily get ~500 ABs as a supersub, so Roberts ABs really replace weaker options off the bench. It's hard to understand why this deal hasn't been done, since Gallagher, Murton, and Patterson/Cedeno seems like a very fair deal for both sides. The orioles get some young talent, and the Cubs aren't going to miss any of those guys too much. I'd love to get Pie, but at the end of the day I'd do the deal without him.
That was only a very last build for the last couple weeks of spring training!
Oops, sorry.
And all this time I thought you were somehow connected to Eddie Ainsmith & Rube Schauer.
People in Baltimore always spell Miggi M-I-G-G-Y, too. Look at the man's custom wristbands people!
I guess you're saying that the team underperformed given the talent level but don't forget 1) the incompetence of Perlozzo, and to a lesser extent, Trembley, and 2) the team won something like 10 games after the 30-3 debacle on 8/22. Up to that point, the team was at least competitive. But injuries decimated the starting lineup. Guthrie, Bedard and Trachsel (traded) were gone which gave starts to Liz, Victor Zambrano and a whole bunch of other crap players that I can't remember. Burres turned back into Burres and Walker and Bradford had a bad August. Until late August, the team could get away with a spotty offense behind a strong rotation. Once 3/5 of the rotation was gone and Daniel Cabrera becomes your ace, things got ugly fast.
September Record:
2002: 4-24
2003: 10-16
2004: 18-10
2005: 10-18
2006: 10-18
2007: 10-19
So basically, except for 2004, the O's are a team that mails it in once Labor Day rolls around. Although luckily they've never quite humiliated themselves again like they did in '02.
Any relation to Roger?
Seconded, especially since I don't think Colvin's ever going to turn into anything interesting.
You'd think so, wouldn't you? But that assumes that 1. there were folks worthy of being called up in September 2. Front office types would call them up 3. On-the-field management types would play them
Some or all of those assumptions were violated as often as...traffic laws on Eutaw Street.
Part of that is the unbalanced schedule.
Over the last 4 years, they've played 120 games after Labor Day.
-53 of those games were against the Red Sox or Yankees, and 66 of those games were against a team that went to the playoffs that year.
-Just 14 games against the Devil Rays, and 1 against the Royals.
The Orioles won 51 of those 120 games. Given the difficult schedule, that's actually not bad (42.5%) compared to their overall winning percentage over the last 4 years (45%).
Yes, well, there are a lot of teams that'd like a piece of Pie.
If the Cubs give him up in a Roberts deal, I think they're nuts, unless Roberts can play center.
The O's roster typically looks like AAA roster by September. Why? The O's are traditionally way out of September so the team is trying out a whole bunch of crap players by then to see if they're any good. Any good tradeable players are also gone by September. And, of course, injuries. 2005 was bad as well. Roberts was injuried and Palmiero gate pretty much poisoned the team. Some of the options the O's have used for depth have worked out (see Guthrie and Tike Redman filled in admireably for a couple of months, Gomez has been fine coming off the bench the last few years), but often times, AAA back up players have played like well, AAA back up players.
They are what? You don't think the O's are giving playing time to crappy players to see what they're worth in September?
Again, since when?
Believe or not, the O's have traded players with perceived value at the trading deadline. Not very often mind you but it has happened. See Traschel, Ponson, or Conine (the 2004 trade with FL that is) for example.
Trembley like to say rah rah lame stuff in order to give his players a psychological boost.
ABs:
Moore, 52
Mora, 86
Huff, 88
Millar, 97
What's utes?
Oh, Leicester, Liz, and Olson are part of the utes movement. They all received plenty of playing time. Not to mention Luis Hernandez received some playing time at SS to test him out for a starting role next year. And before these sorry players, we had Fio, Walter Young, and Val Majewski getting their late season cup of coffee. I'm not saying the O's go on full blown youth movement in September. But I do think minor league guys get a bit more play in September for various reasons which is partially responsible for their September record.
should read "big then I'm"...
oh and I apologize for sounding pissy, just trying to type quickly while doing other things.
Good grief, I didn't know that. I hated him before now I definitely don't want to ever see him again.
Liz and Olson each got a couple of starts and were quickly replaced with the likes of Zambrano (not the good one) and Santos. You got me with Hernandez, although if he is a young starter needing developmental time in the bigs than I'm a monkey's uncle's right testicle. And I only haveto '07, thanks. time at the moment to look up stats and confine my argument
Were Liz and Olson replaced? I can't remember and I certainly don't care enough to look it up. I thought our September rotation was Cabrera, Olson, Liz, Zambrano, Santos, and Leicester (my god, I just wrote and it still makes me shudder). I believe Guthrie made 1 (or 2?) September starts but that line up was the rotation for September. In any case, the Traschel trade and injuries pushed these sorry ass minor league guys into playing time and contributed to the O's September collapse. Replace some names and the same sort of thing happens to the O's at end of every season.
The Ponson trade is an example of that; it's also from 2003. Before that, you had a whole series of deals in 2000. But the Trachsel, Conine, and Javy Lopez deals were simply dumping players, not making deadline deals to rebuild.
6 Cabrera
5 Leicester
4 Burres
3 Santos
3 Guthrie
2 Zambrano
2 Liz
2 Olson
2 Birkins
(For the record, our September ERA was 6.89, although that includes relievers.)
Yes, that was actually painful. That's 29 games, and of those 29, 14 of those were not started by any players we were looking at (Leicester, Burres, Santos, Zambrano), and 9 others were by people already in the rotation (Guthrie, Cabrera).
That leaves 6 of 29 starts for 'prospects,' and I guess that depends how one views Birkins.
I certainly understand that the O's have given retrends playing time in September but trying out crappy prospects is also part of the September ritual starting with John Parrish and Rick Bauer then to Walter Young, Fio, Majewski, and now Luis Hernandez, Olson, and Liz.
But the Trachsel, Conine, and Javy Lopez deals were simply dumping players, not making deadline deals to rebuild.
Ok, not sure what we're arguing about anymore though. I just said Traschel and Niner (and Javy fits that bill which created more ABs for Gil) were players with perceived values who were traded which created openings for even more sorry players. Not sure how your point relates to that issue.
With the exception of Cabrera, Guthrie, and Burres, these are all guys pulled from the minor leagues (11 starts, or 38% of starts) strictly for September in order to cover for injuries or the Traschel trade (my original point).
None of Santos, Zambrano, Leicester, or Burres were being tried out to see if they were any good. (Neither were Guthrie or Cabrera, obviously.) That possibly leaves Birkins, and definitively leaves Liz and Olson. IOW, 4-6 of 29 starts actually match that description I challenged.
Young got 9 starts, actually hit pretty well, and disappeared. Majewski got three starts, then disappeared. Hernandez, as I pointed out above, got 7 starts. Fiorentino may be at the border of starting to get looked at. That's not what trying out prospects actually looks like. (What's sad is that it's been so long since the Orioles let a young player have a chance that that people think of this as giving players a tryout.)
Well, I think they're connected. An injury is followed by the Orioles calling up either a vet or one of their sorry prospects.
Young got 9 starts, actually hit pretty well, and disappeared. Majewski got three starts, then disappeared. Hernandez, as I pointed out above, got 7 starts. Fiorentino may be at the border of starting to get looked at. That's not what trying out prospects actually looks like.
Fair enough. Parrish and Bauer though certainly received their of playing time late in the season. Matos, Hairston, and Bechler are other O's (failed) prospects that most likely received playing time in September (too lazy to check up the split stats). Roberts was another failed prospect until 2005 who most likey received some playing time in September. And Matt Riley and Larry Bigbie were also young O's players given a chance (who obviously did a little better than the aforementioned players before sucking as well). I'm sure if I actually did a little research, I could come up with more names of sorry Orioles prospects. Oh, off the top of my head, John Stephens, Kohlmeier, and Josh Towers were all players the O's gave a chance. Except for a short period of time for Kohlmeier and Towers, they all sucked. The O's are willing to give their farm hands a chance, they just suck.
And I think the O's didn't give these guys many starts because they realized Young wasn't any good and Majewski has been injury prone.
None of their "prospects" "earned" a call-up, according to them. They seemed to view the roster expansion as merely a way to get bench depth, a pinch runner, a situational reliever, a spot starter. In my mind, they wasted great opportunities to bring folks up for developmental time or an extended tryout.
Like Knott. House. Moore. And that was just this year. Three guys you could kick the tires on for free, rather than watch the octogenarians get a little longer in the tooth.
Bigbie, Hairston/Roberts, Riley, Towers, Bauer, Parrish, Kohlmeier, and Matos were certainly give a fair chance (as a late season call up or otherwise) in ways beyond "bench depth, a pinch runner, a situational reliever, a spot starter." Unfortunately, these guys weren't any good thus they didn't stick. And lately, Hoey, Ray, Olson, Fahey and golden boy Nick were certainly given a fair chace in the big leagues. Nick and Ray will certainly stick, the others are undecided. I guess Young, Majewski (though that's probably attributable to injuries), John Stephens, Fio, and Werth weren't given extended looks, but these later guys weren't exactly great prospects. Every org favors some prospects over other, thus leading to differences in playing time.
Bigbie, Hairston/Roberts, Riley, Towers, Bauer, Parrish, Kohlmeier, Daniel Cabrera, and Matos: None of these guys were considered "sure thing" prospects back in the day. Actually, Riley probably generated the most attention from the minor league peeps. He was considered a very good prospect for awhile but certainly not a top notch, "sure thing" prospect. Same with Erik Bedard who too was given a fair chance to stick in the rotation and finally matured after a couple of seasons. And even now, Olson and Ray weren't considered great prospects but the O's gave them a chance. Golden Boy Nick obviously fits your description of a guaranteed sure thing prospect who was given a chance. But these other guys were considered solid prospects who were given a fair amount of playing time and sucked except for Roberts (wasn't jack cust given quite a number of bats too, in any case, his base running blunder sealed his fate). Pickering ate his way out of a chance.
Blocked for a year and half by a crappy older player. Given less than 900 ABs spread over 3 years where you do better than the old guy. And you get benched. That's the Oriole definition of a chance for a younger player.
Quit defending the insanity.
The O's have been quite incompetent over the years but not giving their farmhands a fair chance isn't one of their flaws. They need good prospects first. That's the bigger problem. Afterall, this is a farm system that was ranked the near bottom by most minor league pundits until the last couple of years. Bigbie, like the other players I've mentioned, were given plenty of chances. It sucks it didn't work out but I don't miss any of them. Out all of those players I mentioned, I'll take Rick Bauer back, but I really don't miss him either.
I'm sorry, but you have a very odd definition of giving a young player a chance.
They sucked! And they've sucked since they've left the O's!!! Do you expect the O's to keep giving sorry ass players ABs or IPs! Are you really defending John Parrish!
And besides, Parrish has been injured alot. And he was given plenty of chances this year. I never want to see him AGAIN. I literally hid underneath my coffee table everytime he came out of the bullpen. He sucks, sucks, sucks, sucks, and sucks some more. Good riddance.
John Maine?
Are you defending Danys Baez? Because the alternative to the Parrishes and Rileys and Bauers and Parrishes and such hasn't been Mariano Rivera. It's been Zambranos and Drabeks and Daals and DeJeans and such.
Yes, I expect the Os, if they're trying to build a winning team, to give "sorry ass" young players ABs or IPs. Because not all of them "suck," and when you don't play them, you have no way to tell.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main