One reason it's hard to swallow a "blow it up" strategy

[Frobby]

I find myself vacillating as to whether the O's should try to build on the current core, or "blow it up." It often depends which side of the bed I wake up on.

I've realized that part of the reason is the relative youth of the team. If most of the guys we were talking about were 30+, the decision would be easy. But they're not. In 2012:

29: Hardy, Johnson
28: Markakis, Reynolds, Reimold, Andino, Berken
27: Strop
26: Wieters, Jones, Davis, Arrieta, Bergesen, Patton
25: Matusz, Hunter
24: Britton, Tillman

It's not like there's no upside in that group. And yet, it's not as if they are a bunch of rookies, either. With the exception of Britton, they have all played at least part-time in the majors since 2009 or earlier. So, it's hard to predict great leaps forward for them, either. In fact, in many cases we expected to see a big leap, and it hasn't come.

Another big problem, IMO, is that we are two years away from seeing any impact help from the farm system. Bundy, Machado and Schoop are that far away, and the guys below them on the food chain either are further away or realistically they are not impact players. So, by the time there is a pipeline of talent coming in, this group is 26-31 instead of 24-29, and some of these guys are no longer under team control (Jones and Reynolds) or they have a year to go (Hardy and Markakis).

So, it is not a simple equation, IMO. But the more I think about it, playing it halfway, which is what we seem to be doing, is a very questionable approach.

[NewMarketSean]

If you have some kind of appreciation for these players, I can see not wanting to blow it up. I mean, that's really the only reason to watch this team -- to watch guys like Adam Jones and Matt Wieters and Zach Britton play. While I like certain players on the team, they are still no better than a 70-win team so I really don't care about "blowing it up". I don't want to blow it up for fun, but if they blew it up strategically, I would be all for it.

At the end of the day I want a winner and don't care about the age or likability of the players.

[srock]

Out of context thread title!

Gold Jerry, GOLD!

[Can_of_corn]

I am still advocating a localized blow up with a contention date of 2014.

Trade Hardy, Jones, Markakis and Johnson for talent that can be ready by 2014 when, hopefully, the O's will have Bundy, Machado, and Schoop ready to go and Wieters, Matusz and Britton as the senior guys.

[srock]

There is not one pitcher in that group who has proven themselves as a productive major league player.

There is a core of position players at or nearing their primes which is great. But if the pitching isn't there, then so what?

[vatech1994]

I am still advocating a localized blow up with a contention date of 2014.

Trade Hardy, Jones, Markakis and Johnson for talent that can be ready by 2014 when, hopefully, the O's will have Bundy, Machado, and Schoop ready to go and Wieters, Matusz and Britton as the senior guys.

This (once you add Guthrie which I know you meant to do)

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

I find myself vacillating as to whether the O's should try to build on the current core, or "blow it up." It often depends which side of the bed I wake up on.

I've realized that part of the reason is the relative youth of the team. If most of the guys we were talking about were 30+, the decision would be easy. But they're not. In 2012:

29: Hardy, Johnson
28: Markakis, Reynolds, Reimold, Andino, Berken
27: Strop
26: Wieters, Jones, Davis, Arrieta, Bergesen, Patton
25: Matusz, Hunter
24: Britton, Tillman

It's not like there's no upside in that group. And yet, it's not as if they are a bunch of rookies, either. With the exception of Britton, they have all played at least part-time in the majors since 2009 or earlier. So, it's hard to predict great leaps forward for them, either. In fact, in many cases we expected to see a big leap, and it hasn't come.

Another big problem, IMO, is that we are two years away from seeing any impact help from the farm system. Bundy, Machado and Schoop are that far away, and the guys below them on the food chain either are further away or realistically they are not impact players. So, by the time there is a pipeline of talent coming in, this group is 26-31 instead of 24-29, and some of these guys are no longer under team control (Jones and Reynolds) or they have a year to go (Hardy and Markakis).

So, it is not a simple equation, IMO. But the more I think about it, playing it halfway, which is what we seem to be doing, is a very questionable approach.

A full rebuild to me means, remove everything of value, mortgage if off for the future, hope to be good in 4 years. I don't think we need to go that far to feel good about the team moving forward. A "half way" approach to me would be trading Jones and Guthrie, and getting back pieces that you feel will be contributing in two years along with Bundy, Machado, Schoop and the core we'd still have of Britton, Weiters, Arrieta... hopefully Matusz and some of the other guys.

I'd feel great about our MiL if a guy like Schoop was our 6th ranked prospect and not our 3rd. That's not to take anything away from Schoop, just that I don't think he's a #3 on most teams with a strong farm. If we can get there, and all we need to do is trade two guys that likely won't be here in two years, I'm all for it. That's not to say I don't understand the extend Jones argument either. I just think we have to look to trade a couple pieces to build back up the farm, and he represents what would net us the best return (short of Wieters).

[Skeletor]

One of the biggest lessons to be learned from the past 10 years in the AL East is that it's possible to reload through the draft and young talent and to stockpile draft picks without gutting your major league roster. The Os have blown that. Start over and start doing things the right way.

[srock]

A full rebuild to me means, remove everything of value, mortgage if off for the future, hope to be good in 4 years. I don't think we need to go that far to feel good about the team moving forward. A "half way" approach to me would be trading Jones and Guthrie, and getting back pieces that you feel will be contributing in two years along with Bundy, Machado, Schoop and the core we'd still have of Britton, Weiters, Arrieta... hopefully Matusz and some of the other guys.

I'd feel great about our MiL if a guy like Schoop was our 6th ranked prospect and not our 3rd. That's not to take anything away from Schoop, just that I don't think he's a #3 on most teams with a strong farm. If we can get there, and all we need to do is trade two guys that likely won't be here in two years, I'm all for it. That's not to say I don't understand the extend Jones argument either. I just think we have to look to trade a couple pieces to build back up the farm, and he represents what would net us the best return (short of Wieters).

I can see riding the half way approach until the All-Star Break. See if the pitching improves itself. Matusz, Britton, Arrieta, et. al. need to become above average Major League starters immediately for this to be a competent baseball team.

Give them that chance.

Then be ready to reload by trading Jones, Guthrie, Johnson, Markakis, and Hardy. If not more.

Caveat: They don't have to be traded in one quick fire sale. It can be a year and half sell off.

[NewMarketSean]

Everyone who is above 26 is pretty much what they are.

I'd even say that if we haven't seen much from guys who are 26, chances are they're going to be what they are, too.

That "core" is chock full of random role players and second-tier guys.

I think we need to face it...all those eggs we put into one basket by trying to develop and win with this group of players has been a disaster. They can still turn it around, but to what point? 75 wins? 80 wins? I don't see this group of players being a vital part of a contending team.

And the fact that the Orioles refuse to trade any of these guys is pretty disturbing.

[Roy Firestone]

I find myself vacillating as to whether the O's should try to build on the current core, or "blow it up." It often depends which side of the bed I wake up on.

I've realized that part of the reason is the relative youth of the team. If most of the guys we were talking about were 30+, the decision would be easy. But they're not. In 2012:

29: Hardy, Johnson
28: Markakis, Reynolds, Reimold, Andino, Berken
27: Strop
26: Wieters, Jones, Davis, Arrieta, Bergesen, Patton
25: Matusz, Hunter
24: Britton, Tillman

It's not like there's no upside in that group. And yet, it's not as if they are a bunch of rookies, either. With the exception of Britton, they have all played at least part-time in the majors since 2009 or earlier. So, it's hard to predict great leaps forward for them, either. In fact, in many cases we expected to see a big leap, and it hasn't come.

Another big problem, IMO, is that we are two years away from seeing any impact help from the farm system. Bundy, Machado and Schoop are that far away, and the guys below them on the food chain either are further away or realistically they are not impact players. So, by the time there is a pipeline of talent coming in, this group is 26-31 instead of 24-29, and some of these guys are no longer under team control (Jones and Reynolds) or they have a year to go (Hardy and Markakis).

So, it is not a simple equation, IMO. But the more I think about it, playing it halfway, which is what we seem to be doing, is a very questionable approach.

Buy some key components. Like some foreign players who have no team
compensation issues. You also couldve picked and paid for a key FA pitcher or
hitter and added "ML ready"talent. That way you still keep your draft picks and
become better overnight.I know its a radical plan and judging by most people's
reaction on this board its irresponsible, but thats how you get better without
rebuilding.
issues

[33rdst]

In my opinion there is a misconception about the number of options the O's have available to them. The conventional thinking says that we have three options.

First, they can "blow it up" as you say and trade off any "assets" they have to increase organizational depth with unproven talent.

Second, they can "go all in" as some would like and sign big time free agents to bolster the squad.

Third, they can keep what they have, hope they continue to develop, and fill in around them with low risk, free agents.

There are really only two options IMO. The first and the third. The "all in' option isn't an option at all because quality free agent hitters and pitchers are not going to sign with the Orioles regardless of what we offer them. The perception that we are not close enough to to winning and the fact that they have better options both in terms of dollars and competitiveness makes this option unrealistic.

The "blow it up" option doesn't appeal to me at this time because,frankly, I want to give Buck another year with this group to see what he can do. Given what they showed us at the end of they year, I'm hopeful that they are on the cusp of becoming a winning team. As DD has said we need improvement in our staring pitching. Whether that comes from our young talent or through a couple of astute trades, improvement in that area will determine if we can win more than we lose.

The one caveat I will mention is that if the team gets off to a horrendous start the blow it up strategy will become a much more viable option for me.

[andrewochs615]

Yea part of me wants them to blow it up and part of me doesn't. However if the get off to a bad start or fail to improve at all this year and lose 90 games again, which is most likely given the way the off season has gone, I think that will be the final straw and then you HAVE to blow it up.

[Singleton]

I find myself vacillating as to whether the O's should try to build on the current core, or "blow it up." It often depends which side of the bed I wake up on.

I've realized that part of the reason is the relative youth of the team. If most of the guys we were talking about were 30+, the decision would be easy. But they're not. In 2012:

29: Hardy, Johnson
28: Markakis, Reynolds, Reimold, Andino, Berken
27: Strop
26: Wieters, Jones, Davis, Arrieta, Bergesen, Patton
25: Matusz, Hunter
24: Britton, Tillman

It's not like there's no upside in that group. And yet, it's not as if they are a bunch of rookies, either. With the exception of Britton, they have all played at least part-time in the majors since 2009 or earlier. So, it's hard to predict great leaps forward for them, either. In fact, in many cases we expected to see a big leap, and it hasn't come.

Another big problem, IMO, is that we are two years away from seeing any impact help from the farm system. Bundy, Machado and Schoop are that far away, and the guys below them on the food chain either are further away or realistically they are not impact players. So, by the time there is a pipeline of talent coming in, this group is 26-31 instead of 24-29, and some of these guys are no longer under team control (Jones and Reynolds) or they have a year to go (Hardy and Markakis).

So, it is not a simple equation, IMO. But the more I think about it, playing it halfway, which is what we seem to be doing, is a very questionable approach.

Yes. Very questionable. I might take a different view if we had a blossoming farm system but, as you note, we have no one who is within 2 years when about half your list will be 30 or older. You also don't get into contract status.

I hate the idea of a longer wait but crossing our fingers doesn't work.

DD's approach kind of shocks me. He's been out of the game for a while. If he has the standard 3 years and fizzles, he's unlikely to get another shot. I expected him to come in guns blazing and either blow it up or give up the farm for a quick surge that he could take credit for and ride off in sunset (or to a better gig) -- not that it would be in our interest.

Instead it's more wandering in the dessert. I'm more pessimistic than I've been for a long time.

[mcneck]

Th problem is the two options are halfway blow it up or stand pat.