Jump to content

ReclaimTheCrown

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    1,042
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

196 High-A

About ReclaimTheCrown

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 6/24/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes... I’m way more concerned about an ownership group that can build a winner. moderators: Edited to take away politics and attack other poster
  2. Echo the sentiments of many others that I love Gary Thorne, am thrilled he'll be back in at least some capacity, and hope that will continue next year. I don't mind Scott Garceau, but Gary is truly in another class of broadcaster.
  3. My first, knee jerk reaction was incredulity that a reputable(ish) source could still have Luis Ortiz in our top 30. Then I quickly realized it was NOT the Ortiz acquired from Milwaukee in the Schoop trade, but rather the Luis Ortiz that was an international signing last year. Then my blood pressure returned to normal. Overall a pretty good list, I think, though I feel like some of this year’s draftees are a touch high for me (Westburg being the most glaring).
  4. Every minute of it.....I keep peeking out the window at work to gauge weather, since I plan to set up the projector on my deck and grill out. Going to be awfully ornery if a storm blows through DC tonight.... Go O's!
  5. Clearly my intent was not to “make friends”....just calling out something that seemed in pretty poor taste. Kinda surprised to be the only one, but eh 🤷🏼‍♂️ Not really worried about down votes, lol....
  6. Really? When is the last time you’ve been to a city? Pretty ignorant from the site’s owner, to be honest....
  7. Right. And just wading into the mix here.... I know it's difficult because we have nothing else to talk about (unless we want to dwell on the slow motion train wreck that is the dwindling prospects for a 2020 season due to yet another labor dispute), but some of the knee jerk stuff at this juncture is absolutely ludicrous. Projections for the baseball draft have always been wrought with uncertainty, especially compared with the NFL and the NBA where players go right into the bigs. And this year is even worse. For a publication to declare "Day One Losers" in an environment such as this one, in a draft such as baseball's (where there is so much opportunity to allocate money creatively across rounds) is really kind of silly. Just let the process play out and try not to freak out. I, too, would've preferred we draft Martin but I (like I'm sure countless others on here) have not watched more than a few highlight clips of these guys. Most of us have absolutely no business pretending we can comment intelligently on the relative merits of one of these top prospects vs. another.
  8. Thanks for posting, that’s a good synopsis. Presumably this is bad for the O’s, right? In that our draft position meant that we had a large and flexible bonus pool that we could’ve deployed creatively across a typical 40 round draft to maximize talent acquisition in various points of the draft? And that now, with just five rounds, the whole strategy has to change substantially. I think this also puts us at a comparative disadvantage in non-drafted signees; if there is just a cap (20k per player) on what a player can sign for, but ultimately no regulation on how many players a team can sign (though perhaps that’s still to come), why would a player sign with, say, the Orioles or the Tigers when he could sign with the Yankees or the Dodgers? I think most kids, in a heartbeat, would go to the most prestigious franchises with a better player development track record. I’d be interested in takes from folks that are a little better versed in all that than I am. Ultimately, doubt this is good for us or, as is noted in the article and by some posters above, the game.
  9. This would be a fascinating landing spot for Buck, and as a big fan of the guy (noting his deficiencies), I'd love to see it. From a temperament perspective, as some others have noted, I think he's a great fit as a no-nonsense type, old school guy that can handle the media. He will, in his own way, deflect tough questions about all the scandal around the club and exude an air of competence and professionalism that I think would go pretty well there. It will, of course, be interesting to see how he meshes with the highly analytic culture in Houston, but at least outwardly, I think he's a good fit. Regardless, and partially I don't really care either way about whether the Astros win or lose (I guess only so much as they make life tough for the Yankees and Red Sox), I hope he gets the job because I've got a soft spot for ole Buck.
  10. Thank you for all your contributions, Luke, and best of luck in the new gig. I’m very excited that the Orioles have enlisted your talents to identify and develop talent, though we will all sorely miss your talents here. You and Tony formed a really tremendous team in evaluating and communicating about some of the young players within the system - having two really educated opinions on these players was quite enlightening. Thanks for all the work that you have - and the other folks that own and run this site continue to - put in to make this work; it’s a one of a kind community here. Hope you’ll check in on occasion, just to say hello. Best of luck. We all expect championships. Plural. But no pressure 😉
  11. Merry Christmas and happy holidays to everyone here that’s a part of this fantastic community! May we all share many more together, and maybe even some half decent baseball again at some point 🙂
  12. Could not agree more....just a truly tremendous endeavor, and one of the best features of the site. I also love the “another take” feature, which really adds another layer of depth to the analysis. Thanks for all the work, gents.
  13. To your first point, we would still have a big TV deal, because everyone does now. But sure, because we’re taking a bunch of their money, yea we make more. Still, you’re going with the rising tide raises all ships argument? On attendance, of course it’s a SWAG, but respectfully, don’t be obtuse dude. Let me ask you directly, again: do you not think a team moving 40 miles down the road, to a bigger metropolis from which we have traditionally pulled significant attendance, did not have a substantial impact on O’s attendance? Question is simple. I never, ever, ever said our atrocious W/L record didn’t have a huge role, but please. Use common sense. Finally, on your last point, I do.... 13 times a year, from Shaw in DC.
  14. Most of these are valid points, which I acknowledge in my post - OF COURSE the losing incessantly was a huge factor. And thanks, I obviously looked at attendance numbers, which I referenced at length in my post. However, it’s pretty simple to me: do you dispute that the arrival of the Nationals, 40 miles away and located in the larger of the two metropolises from which the Orioles drew attendance, had a substantial impact on the gate? Not the only impact, but certainly a substantial one? That’s all I’m saying. I thought that was clear, I understand you’re a DC guy, but it’s kind of illogical to argue impact. And on your comment about resenting DC fans....not me, friend. Their money is still green.
  15. I cheer vociferously against the Nationals, and was a bit dismayed to see them win for a simple reason: on the whole, I think it’s bad for the Orioles. Now, part of this also is that I live in DC and am surrounded by Nats fans, which is annoying (though, like others, I’ve got good friends who are real fans for whom I’m individually happy). I also take the point that I believe Drungo made that there is some value in having another club close by succeed because it puts more pressure on the O’s to get their you-know-what together. But, ultimately, I still see the O’s-Nats competition as something of a zero sum rivalry for fans and support, especially in the battleground areas of MD. Certainly those of us on this board and those like us aren’t very likely to switch teams, but for the casual O’s fan that lives in, say, Annapolis or Howard County, it’s a much more real risk. Anecdotally, I can point to 3-4 people at work who have done exactly that while the Orioles were wandering in the desert all those years. The casual fan is much more likely to gravitate to a winner when all else is equal. That’s money that this club needs. I also disagree with the arguments that minimize the resulting impact on attendance, those that point to the fact that in the first year of the Nats, 2005, Orioles attendance stayed relatively high at 32k per game. However, you’ve got to remember that was the first year in a while that we were exciting and actually competitive - remember, we were 49-40 around the break, and I believe in first place, before cratering horribly in the second half (accentuated by all the Palmeiro steroid stuff). I would contend that our early contention probably helped bolster attendance numbers; certainly not by a ton, but at least by a bit. (I recognize that most tickets are sold early.) I remember the palpable excitement around that team. Moreover, I’d argue that it’s reasonable to expect a more gradual drop over time. Look at Orioles attendance the five years before the Nationals move, and the five years after (in thousands, rounded to nearest thousand): 41, 39, 33, 30, 34 before the move, and 32, 27, 27, 25, 24 after. We were lousy all of those years. Of course, the latter years we’d been lousy for longer, so apathy and disinterest has longer to take hold, but I don’t know how anyone can dispute their arrival had a substantial effect. Of course, it wasn’t the ONLY factor, but tough to argue against that trendline. That’s 35.4k average before, 27k average the five years after. Again, I’m NOT arguing that we can’t compete because they are here, nor am I saying that there aren’t other factors (of course) in the decline in support for the team...so you can stow those straw men. I’m just saying that their presence, and even more so their success, on the whole directly negatively impacts, but of course does not eliminate, the Orioles’ chances of winning. It’s less support and less revenue. Thus, despite some of the feel good-ness of the Nats winning (it’s a likable team, and bless you if you’re into the baby shark thing....not for me), it’s ultimately not good for the Orioles, in my view. And frankly, that’s all I really care about.
×
×
  • Create New...