Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

The Balfour Fiasco and Ken Wienman on the an


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 ziptop

ziptop

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 544 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 09:31 AM

This morning on the Fan, the topic was the great closer Grant Balfour failing his physical and also of course the old saw of Ken Wienman's and others about how the Orioles won't spend money. Now it's unfortunate that Ken Wienman apparently missed the Ryan Sebring shows on the Fan on the topic of the Orioles and spending money because they were by far the best sports discussions (technically shows) that I've heard on the radio in a long long time. He was full of passion and also facts to back up his passion.

 

Now if you know Ken Wienman, he has been relegated to back up status on the Fan doing only fill in slots. He used to have his own shows. Now up until this morning Ken was my favorite on the fan. Nothing defines relief like turning on the radio in the evening and instead of getting a hyped up motormouth who loves to "sing" along with the music and think it's entertainment like hearing the voice of Ken Wienman. What Ken usually does is talk about sports, no screaming and yelling, no putting down of callers, no schtick, no hype, no blowing his own horn.

 

This morning when a caller expressed his displeasure with the Orioles signing a player who couldn't pass a physical and his suspicion that Billy Bean might have known about it, Wienman cut him off, hung up on him and then pretty much ridiculed the guy and patted himself on the back for it. He said that the caller was just going to repeat what he had just said. 

 

Ken what are you doing? You're a marginal player on 105.7 The Fan, you're relegated to only fill in status, where do you get off hanging up on people whose views you think aren't worthwhile? Apparently your bosses think your appearances are less than worthwhile too, you'd think you'd have some sympathy. I can listen to an idiot pretty much anytime I want to on the Fan (especially in the evening), I don't need another one. From you, I was used to and expected more. No more.



#2 Oriole-Bob

Oriole-Bob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 09:44 AM

I've been saying all along the Johnson trade didn't make sense.  Beane outplayed Duquette plain and simple. Johnson is going to have a great season in that pitchers ball park.  Look at Balfour's home/away splits, not so good at all away from home.  He'll have a tough time in Camden yards if they even finalize the deal. 

 

Missed that segment of the Fan this morning.  The only guy i realy like is Jerry Conn.  Scott is such a homer and always afraid to say anything negative about the home team.  Zino, Greg and Ken are just annoying to listen to. 



#3 Struds

Struds

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,932 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 10:21 AM

I've been saying all along the Johnson trade didn't make sense.  Beane outplayed Duquette plain and simple. Johnson is going to have a great season in that pitchers ball park.  Look at Balfour's home/away splits, not so good at all away from home.  He'll have a tough time in Camden yards if they even finalize the deal. 

 

Missed that segment of the Fan this morning.  The only guy i realy like is Jerry Conn.  Scott is such a homer and always afraid to say anything negative about the home team.  Zino, Greg and Ken are just annoying to listen to. 

OB: You know we didn't get Balfour in the Johnson trade, right?  The two transactions are related only in that the O's need to replace Jim Johnson. 

 

I thought I heard on the Fan this morning that the damage spotted by the MRI may have been from the old injuries that cost him a year or two some time ago.  If so, the team may not have lost out on this yet. On the other hand, I very well may have misunderstood what I was hearing.



#4 Oriole-Bob

Oriole-Bob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 10:45 AM

OB: You know we didn't get Balfour in the Johnson trade, right?  The two transactions are related only in that the O's need to replace Jim Johnson. 

 

I thought I heard on the Fan this morning that the damage spotted by the MRI may have been from the old injuries that cost him a year or two some time ago.  If so, the team may not have lost out on this yet. On the other hand, I very well may have misunderstood what I was hearing.

 

The two transactions are not related?? Are you kidding me?   Beane could have easily kept Balfour and saved a couple million over Johnson and still had Weeks. instead he chose to spend more on Johnson and give up a player as well.    Duquette then signs Beane's scraps(Balfour). 



#5 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 10:49 AM

The two transactions are not related?? Are you kidding me?   Beane could have easily kept Balfour and saved a couple million over Johnson and still had Weeks. instead he chose to spend more on Johnson and give up a player as well.    Duquette then signs Beane's scraps(Balfour). 

I remember the famous Aaron Sele debacle. PGA wouldn't approve the deal because Sele's shoulder showed typical wear and tear.  


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#6 Struds

Struds

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,932 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 10:56 AM

The two transactions are not related?? Are you kidding me?   Beane could have easily kept Balfour and saved a couple million over Johnson and still had Weeks. instead he chose to spend more on Johnson and give up a player as well.    Duquette then signs Beane's scraps(Balfour). 

Read it again: "The two transactions are related only in that the O's need to replace Jim Johnson." Doesn't say NOT related.

 

OK, I could have worded it better, by adding the word "directly" in front of related, but my point remains the same.  We traded JJ for Weeks. That was one transaction.  Then DD went looking for a replacement and focused on Balfour.  Your initail post above read to me like you thought Balfour was part of the trade. I was just clarifying.  Now I'm sure I read your post wrong. 



#7 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:06 AM

The two transactions are not related?? Are you kidding me?   Beane could have easily kept Balfour and saved a couple million over Johnson and still had Weeks. instead he chose to spend more on Johnson and give up a player as well.    Duquette then signs Beane's scraps(Balfour). 

from various comments you've made, it looks like you think the O's and A's made a trade of Johnson for Balfour. it's just a coincidence that Balfour signed with the O's after leaving the A's. that's the extent of the connection between the 2 separate transactions. you've made it clear that you believe Beane didn't keep Balfour because there was an injury/problem. what isn't as clear is how the O's signing Balfour equates to Beane outplaying Duquette.  

 

every indication is that Beane didn't want to commit to multiple years with Balfour, because the total expense of the contract would be more than 1 yr with Johnson. it's reasonable that you would suspect that Beane's reluctance was based on health factors.

 

as an aside, losing Weeks in any deal is no loss at all. the guy is entering the prime years for a baseball player, and has yet to establish himself as mlb player. chances are, he never will.      


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#8 Oriole-Bob

Oriole-Bob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:11 AM

from various comments you've made, it looks like you think the O's and A's made a trade of Johnson for Balfour. it's just a coincidence that Balfour signed with the O's after leaving the A's. that's the extent of the connection between the 2 separate transactions. you've made it clear that you believe Beane didn't keep Balfour because there was an injury/problem. what isn't as clear is how the O's signing Balfour equates to Beane outplaying Duquette.  

 

every indication is that Beane didn't want to commit to multiple years with Balfour, because the total expense of the contract would be more than 1 yr with Johnson. it's reasonable that you would suspect that Beane's reluctance was based on health factors.

 

as an aside, losing Weeks in any deal is no loss at all. the guy is entering the prime years for a baseball player, and has yet to establish himself as mlb player. chances are, he never will.      

 

 

I believe Beane chose to spend more on Johnson because he's 6 years younger, a better track record than Balfour, better pitcher as evidenced by his home/away splits and possibly also because of shoulder issues with Balfour.    It was two separate transactions but the end result is both teams swapped closers.  Obviously Beane, Palmer, Ripken and just about anyone else with knowledge of the game has come out and shown that Johnson is of much more value than Balfour.  Sorry but whenever Palmer comes out and says its a stupid trade i'm gonna listen. That guy has forgotten more about baseball than you or I will ever know.



#9 Struds

Struds

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,932 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:22 AM

I believe Beane chose to spend more on Johnson because he's 6 years younger, a better track record than Balfour, better pitcher as evidenced by his home/away splits and possibly also because of shoulder issues with Balfour.    It was two separate transactions but the end result is both teams swapped closers.  Obviously Beane, Palmer, Ripken and just about anyone else with knowledge of the game has come out and shown that Johnson is of much more value than Balfour.  Sorry but whenever Palmer comes out and says its a stupid trade i'm gonna listen. That guy has forgotten more about baseball than you or I will ever know.

It puzzles me that as often as he is right during broadcasts that the O's don't use him and his knowledge.



#10 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 56,488 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:26 AM

I've been saying all along the Johnson trade didn't make sense.  Beane outplayed Duquette plain and simple

Balfour wasn't part of the trade. what are you talking about? The Johnson trade was a salary dump. Plain and simple


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#11 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 56,488 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:29 AM

 Sorry but whenever Palmer comes out and says its a stupid trade i'm gonna listen. That guy has forgotten more about baseball than you or I will ever know.

Palmer has an opinion like everyone else.The trade was about the Orioles not wanting to pay Johnson $10M, not about Balfour


Edited by bmore_ken, 20 December 2013 - 11:31 AM.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#12 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:39 AM

I believe Beane chose to spend more on Johnson because he's 6 years younger, a better track record than Balfour, better pitcher as evidenced by his home/away splits and possibly also because of shoulder issues with Balfour.    It was two separate transactions but the end result is both teams swapped closers.  Obviously Beane, Palmer, Ripken and just about anyone else with knowledge of the game has come out and shown that Johnson is of much more value than Balfour.  Sorry but whenever Palmer comes out and says its a stupid trade i'm gonna listen. That guy has forgotten more about baseball than you or I will ever know.

just to be clear. I'm not criticizing your opinion, I actually share it. I think the trade was awful. Johnson for Weeks? that's pretty lopsided. 

 

where our opinions differ is in Johnson's value. $10M for a closer, who blew ~25% of his save opportunities, is more than I would spend. I've seen the stats for both pitchers. and I know that JJ's stats look better, except for the most important one: saves to opportunities %. Balfour is much better in that regard. all that other stuff is for fantasy baseball. these guys aren't starting pitchers. things like WHIP and ERA don't mean as much for a guy who pitches 1 inning. it's all about coming in and locking down the win. at a 25% fail rate, Johnson is the lesser pitcher.

 

think about it from this perspective. from May thru Sept., how often were you confident and comfortable with Johnson coming into the game to protect the lead? Personally, my comfort factor was pretty low. maybe you felt differently.    


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#13 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 11:50 AM

Palmer has an opinion like everyone else.The trade was about the Orioles not wanting to pay Johnson $10M, not about Balfour

exactly. I think OB is frustrated that the O's gave away JJ, and he's trying to find someone to focus that frustration on. as usual, look to the owner. no matter who is occupying the GM chair for the O's, the M.O. is always the same. they make a move, they color the move as a positive, then they slowly change the setting.

 

for example, when the O's brought back Palmeiro, they originally said he would be a bench player who would primarily be a DH. then the FO played the bait and switch game by talking about all the FA firstbasemen they were negotiating with. a few weeks later, they updated the fans that Raffy would be the DH, because they felt confident in his ability to produce. but they were still going to get someone for 1B. eventually they announced that Raffy would play 1B.

 

this time around, it was "we're moving Johnson to free up money to fill other holes" those holes still need filling, and the market has been reduced to two types of players. 1) the extremely pricey 2) table scraps. the O's don't do pricey.     


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#14 Oriole-Bob

Oriole-Bob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:02 PM

just to be clear. I'm not criticizing your opinion, I actually share it. I think the trade was awful. Johnson for Weeks? that's pretty lopsided. 

 

where our opinions differ is in Johnson's value. $10M for a closer, who blew ~25% of his save opportunities, is more than I would spend. I've seen the stats for both pitchers. and I know that JJ's stats look better, except for the most important one: saves to opportunities %. Balfour is much better in that regard. all that other stuff is for fantasy baseball. these guys aren't starting pitchers. things like WHIP and ERA don't mean as much for a guy who pitches 1 inning. it's all about coming in and locking down the win. at a 25% fail rate, Johnson is the lesser pitcher.

 

think about it from this perspective. from May thru Sept., how often were you confident and comfortable with Johnson coming into the game to protect the lead? Personally, my comfort factor was pretty low. maybe you felt differently.    

 

I'm not going to argue with you guys today i'm too tired :)  The holidays are killing me.  But I will say this, i think Johnson was over worked he blew some saves but still ended up with 50 of them. The fact is he shouldn't have had this many save opporunities the last couple of years. This team never blows teams out, they leave way too many guys on base, starters only pitch 5 innings and the bull pen gets over worked because of all of this.

 

I hope they can close this deal with Balfour because if they don't there is not much left on the market and he is the best available.



#15 Oriole-Bob

Oriole-Bob

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,228 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:04 PM

Palmer has an opinion like everyone else.The trade was about the Orioles not wanting to pay Johnson $10M, not about Balfour

 

Yeah just another opinion.   I'm sure you and Stephen Hawking both have opinions on astro phyics but i'm sure going to put a lot more weight on his opinion than yours.  :)



#16 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:27 PM

I'm not going to argue with you guys today i'm too tired :)  The holidays are killing me.  But I will say this, i think Johnson was over worked he blew some saves but still ended up with 50 of them. The fact is he shouldn't have had this many save opporunities the last couple of years. This team never blows teams out, they leave way too many guys on base, starters only pitch 5 innings and the bull pen gets over worked because of all of this.

 

I hope they can close this deal with Balfour because if they don't there is not much left on the market and he is the best available.

I agree with you on all your points


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#17 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,724 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:34 PM

Sorry but whenever Palmer comes out and says its a stupid trade i'm gonna listen. That guy has forgotten more about baseball than you or I will ever know.

I wanted to comment on it, because it got me thinking about Palmer. he seems to remember every pitch sequence he used against every batter he ever faced. it would be easy to just dismiss it and say that he practices, or looks up info to use. but his comments are on unexpected plays and events that he couldn't possibly try to script. I know a lot of O's fans quickly grow tired of Palmer because he's a self-promoter. but I love it when he does color. 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#18 Struds

Struds

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,932 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 12:43 PM

I'm not going to argue with you guys today i'm too tired :)  The holidays are killing me.  But I will say this, i think Johnson was over worked he blew some saves but still ended up with 50 of them. The fact is he shouldn't have had this many save opporunities the last couple of years. This team never blows teams out, they leave way too many guys on base, starters only pitch 5 innings and the bull pen gets over worked because of all of this.

 

I hope they can close this deal with Balfour because if they don't there is not much left on the market and he is the best available.

Too true. Relax and enjoy the holidays.



#19 reg_indy

reg_indy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,220 posts

Posted 20 December 2013 - 02:30 PM

I wanted to comment on it, because it got me thinking about Palmer. he seems to remember every pitch sequence he used against every batter he ever faced. it would be easy to just dismiss it and say that he practices, or looks up info to use. but his comments are on unexpected plays and events that he couldn't possibly try to script. I know a lot of O's fans quickly grow tired of Palmer because he's a self-promoter. but I love it when he does color. 

 

Best color announcer on the air. Not even close....


Terrell Suggs is doing all that he can fan the flames on the Ravens’ feud with the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Underneath his uniform, the linebacker/defensive end has been wearing a black t-shirt with the letters “YBYSA” on the front and the saying, “You Bet Your Sweet *** I Hate the Steelers” on the back.

"I saw it in a store, and I was like, 'Oh, that’s nice for camp. Get our minds right,'" Suggs said




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users