Eventually all of the lost players would have hit free agency so you'd have to decide if the value beyond that should be captured in an analysis here. But you could imagine the mid-90s Orioles with all that talent and all the OPACY money and think of something dynastic.
Good questions that have been debated on here quite a bit. I'd say the following:
1. Too many other variables to put into a true timeframe here. Can of Corn and Sports Guy here kind of lead the charge that it shouldn't take 3-4 years of total MLB suckage to build a good system. I tend to agree with them. But you also have to take into account the talent doing the scouting and player selection, player development, etc. I think those things are more important than tanking in MLB. Not to mention your investment and return in international talent. Good organizations find a way to have a good MLB team along with a good system.
2. For some reason I've always seen the Cardinals as a parallel to Baltimore. Not really sure why. Maybe it's because we came from there. Maybe because we're both birds. Who knows. Ideally I'm not a fan of the Tampa model. Don't like the idea of continuously getting rid of good players. If that's what it takes to win then I get it, and they've been successful with it, but I don't think that should be the case with Baltimore. Be smart financially, but we shouldn't need to be misers.
3. The economic landscape wouldn't be nearly so damaging if they'd just get rid of the stupid unbalanced schedule. For Baltimore and TB to have to have a schedule so loaded against NYY, BOS and TOR is ridiculous. Toronto is a sleeping giant financially.
Stewart has looked real good going back to last season. It might make sense to bat him 2nd. Stewart is LH and Mullins is on base a lot this season. Plus Stewart is patient and having good ABs. We could manufacture some more runs with that 1-2 combo.