Jump to content
MemorialStadKid

Per Gammons: "Orioles culture... back to reality."

Recommended Posts

There are holes, no doubt. But the players people want to buy are expensive and not cheap and could blow up the future payrolls.

Johnson gone is a huge plus but it was a year to late.

Detroit did a salary dump with Fister and Fielder but got money or talent out of it. Nats lost talent for Fister, good pitching talent. Seattle and Detroit have more TV money then the O's and Nats. By a good bit, a contract or twoworth.

O's and Nats have the same problem. O's and Nats get the same amount of money from MASN. But O's are in better shape. O's only to make $35m from sales (tickets, food and such). Nats have to make up $50m. With that $25m tv money, O's have a bit more room, but the Nats will spend to match or it set the level for the local spending. As they have DC and Northern VA money. Not to mention, Lerner money. Those two things are the big difference.

O's ability to spend on big deals ended when the Nats moved in. It's just the reality people fail to accept.

Another way to look at it is this way.. MLS has a salary cap. But you are allowed 3 players off the books. It's the owners with the most money that spend for those 3 players. LA Galaxy spend money for Donovan and Keane (at one point Beckham). NY Redbulls and Seattle Sounders are the same way. Columbus Crew, KC Wizards, DC United don't spend that much. Hell, think last I check Crews DPs cost $600,000. Galaxy spent $6m.

Unless I missed it - you left out the actual profits from MASN unless the assumption is MASN isn't profitable.

MASN profits aren't counted in rev share accounting - so by paying low TV fees to the Os (as well as the Nats) Angelos can cry poverty and small market size plus collect a rev share check which we know he's been doing since we're in the competitive balance lottery round every year for the draft since the new CBA created it.

Since DC and BMore = about Chicago in DMA size do you also consider Chicago a small market? They have two baseball teams. And then with Angelos getting all those nice monthly fees from charitable cable subscribers in states who could care less about the Os or Nats - calling the Os a small market team is a half truth at best.

No MASN = small market team. With MASN = quite large with a cheapskate owner.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless I missed it - you left out the actual profits from MASN unless the assumption is MASN isn't profitable.

MASN profits aren't counted in rev share accounting - so by paying low TV fees to the Os (as well as the Nats) Angelos can cry poverty and small market size plus collect a rev share check which we know he's been doing since we're in the competitive balance lottery round every year for the draft since the new CBA created it.

Since DC and BMore = about Chicago in DMA size do you also consider Chicago a small market? They have two baseball teams. And then with Angelos getting all those nice monthly fees from charitable cable subscribers in states who could care less about the Os or Nats - calling the Os a small market team is a half truth at best.

No MASN = small market team. With MASN = quite large with a cheapskate owner.

Good points. All. Sometimes it feels like we would be better off without the RSN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since DC and BMore = about Chicago in DMA size do you also consider Chicago a small market? They have two baseball teams. And then with Angelos getting all those nice monthly fees from charitable cable subscribers in states who could care less about the Os or Nats - calling the Os a small market team is a half truth at best.

Very good point.

From another article...

They are not; they are a team that was fairly close to Washington and by default, picked up some of the hardcore baseball fans in the area. It is interesting to note that if you combine both cities they would be the 4th largest media market behind NY, LA, and Chicago (all have 2 teams) .

http://halfstreetheartattack.com/2013/08/23/debate-the-nationals-the-orioles-peter-angelos-and-masn-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-masn-contract-situation-2/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but he wasn't a blue chip prospect like Jones or Machado so his SSS of success at the Major League level is much more suspect than theirs.

Lough posted a .317 OBP in a full season at AAA as a 26 year old that had never played in a Major League game. That should worry everybody.

Seems to me you are being awfully selective here. Lough had four seasons where he played all or some of the year in AAA and his OBP's were .346, .367, .317 and .391. Why should we focus on the .317? His career OBP in AAA is .348. I think his .311 in the majors last year is pretty indicative of what we can expect, though I hope he can improve that with experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would have taken a lot more than what the Brewers paid to lure him from Milwaukee, based on various comments he made. He was set on returning to the Brewers.

Reimold obviously can't be depended on, but I do think he's a good risk at just north of $1 mm.

Except that he went to Seattle.

edit: didn't read the rest of the thread so nevermind.

I would have liked to have Corey Hart. He would have been exactly what he need in a solid power bat who came on the cheap relative to what other free agents are making. Only a 1 year deal too.

Edited by epic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless I missed it - you left out the actual profits from MASN unless the assumption is MASN isn't profitable.

MASN profits aren't counted in rev share accounting - so by paying low TV fees to the Os (as well as the Nats) Angelos can cry poverty and small market size plus collect a rev share check which we know he's been doing since we're in the competitive balance lottery round every year for the draft since the new CBA created it.

Since DC and BMore = about Chicago in DMA size do you also consider Chicago a small market? They have two baseball teams. And then with Angelos getting all those nice monthly fees from charitable cable subscribers in states who could care less about the Os or Nats - calling the Os a small market team is a half truth at best.

No MASN = small market team. With MASN = quite large with a cheapskate owner.

Amen.

So tired of clowns coming on here trying to convince us that somehow Pete is a pauper who wants to win but can't afford it.

Save your numbers and figures. I have been in business long enough to know there millions of ways to cook the books. The smell test is the only test necessary. If you have a media market the size of Baltimore-Washington and are paying what MASN does for the rights to the O's/Nats then you have to be an idiot and buffoon to lose money. When it come to business Pete is neither.

Pete's tenure as owner/steward of this franchise has been awful. The results on the field back that statement 100%. If Pete wants to treat the O's like his own personal fiefdom and cash cow, as owner that is his right. He does not have the right though to expect this fan base to just take it and love it while they do.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amen.

So tired of clowns coming on here trying to convince us that somehow Pete is a pauper who wants to win but can't afford it.

Save your numbers and figures. I have been in business long enough to know there millions of ways to cook the books. The smell test is the only test necessary. If you have a media market the size of Baltimore-Washington and are paying what MASN does for the rights to the O's/Nats then you have to be an idiot and buffoon to lose money. When it come to business Pete is neither.

Pete's tenure as owner/steward of this franchise has been awful. The results on the field back that statement 100%. If Pete wants to treat the O's like his own personal fiefdom and cash cow, as owner that is his right. He does not have the right though to expect this fan base to just take it and love it while they do.

CLAP CLAP CLAP

Very well stated!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amen.

So tired of clowns coming on here trying to convince us that somehow Pete is a pauper who wants to win but can't afford it.

Save your numbers and figures. I have been in business long enough to know there millions of ways to cook the books. The smell test is the only test necessary. If you have a media market the size of Baltimore-Washington and are paying what MASN does for the rights to the O's/Nats then you have to be an idiot and buffoon to lose money. When it come to business Pete is neither.

Pete's tenure as owner/steward of this franchise has been awful. The results on the field back that statement 100%. If Pete wants to treat the O's like his own personal fiefdom and cash cow, as owner that is his right. He does not have the right though to expect this fan base to just take it and love it while they do.

Good post.

As we discussed in another thread at some point this team will have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to spend the current prices to be in the hunt or be satisfied to be in contention only if several things break just right. We're about to find out this team's philosophy.

No one is advocating Cano/Ellsbury-like contracts but if it means getting a Garza I think you do it even if it. Making a couple of legitimate additions would be a huge psychological lift for this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are holes, no doubt. But the players people want to buy are expensive and not cheap and could blow up the future payrolls.

Johnson gone is a huge plus but it was a year to late.

Detroit did a salary dump with Fister and Fielder but got money or talent out of it. Nats lost talent for Fister, good pitching talent. Seattle and Detroit have more TV money then the O's and Nats. By a good bit, a contract or twoworth.

O's and Nats have the same problem. O's and Nats get the same amount of money from MASN. But O's are in better shape. O's only to make $35m from sales (tickets, food and such). Nats have to make up $50m. With that $25m tv money, O's have a bit more room, but the Nats will spend to match or it set the level for the local spending. As they have DC and Northern VA money. Not to mention, Lerner money. Those two things are the big difference.

O's ability to spend on big deals ended when the Nats moved in. It's just the reality people fail to accept.

Another way to look at it is this way.. MLS has a salary cap. But you are allowed 3 players off the books. It's the owners with the most money that spend for those 3 players. LA Galaxy spend money for Donovan and Keane (at one point Beckham). NY Redbulls and Seattle Sounders are the same way. Columbus Crew, KC Wizards, DC United don't spend that much. Hell, think last I check Crews DPs cost $600,000. Galaxy spent $6m.

Johnson gone is a huge plus . . . if the team actually reallocates those resources into improving the team. Which it does not seem they are intent on doing. Otherwise, replacing Johnson with Hunter is at best a wash, and most likely a negative.

As BrunoCherryTown shrewdly pointed out, Chicago can support two teams and still, each team is a large market team. Baltimore and DC are at least close, combined, to the size of Chicago. One has remained a mid to large market team, yet the Orioles now have to cry poor? Where's the sense in that?

And you mention the Lerner money - are you telling me that PA doesn't have "Angelos money?" He's a poor man who cannot spend any of his money from his successful asbestos litigation practice, bu the Lerners can? No offense, but the more posts you make, the worse your arguments look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Johnson gone is a huge plus . . . if the team actually reallocates those resources into improving the team. Which it does not seem they are intent on doing. Otherwise, replacing Johnson with Hunter is at best a wash, and most likely a negative.

As BrunoCherryTown shrewdly pointed out, Chicago can support two teams and still, each team is a large market team. Baltimore and DC are at least close, combined, to the size of Chicago. One has remained a mid to large market team, yet the Orioles now have to cry poor? Where's the sense in that?

And you mention the Lerner money - are you telling me that PA doesn't have "Angelos money?" He's a poor man who cannot spend any of his money from his successful asbestos litigation practice, bu the Lerners can? No offense, but the more posts you make, the worse your arguments look.

Not to mention the MASN money that's lining Peter's pockets and NOT going back into the Orioles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, not a Gammons fan, but you cannot deny any of this...

SOURCE: http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-balfour-physical-fiasco-brings-orioles-culture-back-to-reality/

That's it right there.

Angelos didn't like the deal, and went out of his way to find a reason to cancel it.

The meddling is here to stay until Angelos goes.

MSK

Why would Angelos not like the Balfour deal? He was getting a legitimate closer and saving $3.5 M? Makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Johnson gone is a huge plus . . . if the team actually reallocates those resources into improving the team. Which it does not seem they are intent on doing. Otherwise, replacing Johnson with Hunter is at best a wash, and most likely a negative.

As BrunoCherryTown shrewdly pointed out, Chicago can support two teams and still, each team is a large market team. Baltimore and DC are at least close, combined, to the size of Chicago. One has remained a mid to large market team, yet the Orioles now have to cry poor? Where's the sense in that?

And you mention the Lerner money - are you telling me that PA doesn't have "Angelos money?" He's a poor man who cannot spend any of his money from his successful asbestos litigation practice, bu the Lerners can? No offense, but the more posts you make, the worse your arguments look.

It remains one of the oldest - and strongest - points for the PASS (Peter Angelos Stockholm Syndrome) crowd. "We don't have the money" is one of the biggest lies ever put forth on the OH. The consistent refrain of Baltimore being a "small market" despite the heavily documented profits of the team from MASN, increased merchandise sales and the profit sharing of MLB.

Astonishing, really.

MSK

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was a salary dump. There are/were 3 or 4 good closers on the FA market this year. Balfour being one of them, Boston signed another and there is Rodney.

All of them were cheaper then Johnson. And personally, I would have dumped Johnson last year.

You realize no one gives a poop about a salary dump unless that money is actually put back into the team, right? Like, no one is excited that we traded Johnson so PA could save $10M for himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You realize no one gives a poop about a salary dump unless that money is actually put back into the team, right? Like, no one is excited that we traded Johnson so PA could save $10M for himself.
PA is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







×
×
  • Create New...