Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

131 High-A

About ThomasTomasz

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 4/11/1988

Recent Profile Visitors

827 profile views
  1. And tanking/not being good got them Harper, Strasburg, Rendon and a host of other talents. Even if they win, it's a legit possibility that Rendon and Strasburg both depart via free agency, and without them, they've got a team that will hang a few games around .500, if they get the bullpen right.
  2. I'd still rather see what guys like Akin and Kremer are going to do, because they are future. Gausman, option year or not, is not in that mix.
  3. Even if we sign him to a one year contract, he will still be a FA at the end of the year as this would be his last arbitration year. I'd rather focus on the pitchers who will be here after 2020, and there are a few who deserve a shot starting next year.
  4. If the trade involved a top player on the roster, the owner has that choice to step in. He vetoed the Britton deal, and I can understand that. Signing free agents on his own is definitely overstepping things, and if they are at that point, a change in the GM probably needed to happen. If I were an owner, I would stay out of just about anything aside from handing out a contract $75 million or over, but Angelos is not me. Like I said in my post before this, it got to the point where it was meddling with everything, and you can't run a team effectively that way. Contracts for utility players and late round draft picks should be left to the professionals. That's why you hire a guy like Elias and let him control just about everything.
  5. He's in the right position on the bus, to put it a way that I relate to my team. He's essentially a consultant on nutrition and strength and conditioning. From what I've heard, they've got him interviewing and making hiring decisions on those S&C people, and I completely trust Anderson to handle those things. He needed to have a drawn out role, and needed to be out of baseball operations, and Elias made that happen. I'm glad he's able to use Anderson for what he does well, and that ownership didn't override the decision and keep him as a top executive.
  6. And they were also rebuilding their minor league system at the time for their next runs as well. Moreso the Red Sox, during that timeframe but they also won the WS in 2013.
  7. To me, both of these things are OK. I run a business as director of operations, and the owner lets me run the business as I see fit. He only wants me to consult him on major people issues (firings) and big money decisions. Otherwise, I am free to operate the business as I see fit. In the Chris Davis example, ownership is still going to be paying $51 million in salary the next three years, plus $42 million in deferred money from 2023-37. I completely understand ownership wanting to be involved and sign off on a decision to release him. Maybe they still see a value in his community work, and also don't see the exact need for a roster spot with most of our prospects still 2-3 years away from making an impact. Maybe they just don't want to release him and not get anything out of it. I don't know, but I do know that just about every owner in professional sports is going to be involved in a decision with this much money at stake.......and it's also without precedence in it's scope. For Trey Mancini, he is one of the most popular players, a potential building block of the future team and just about one of the only players who can be marketed at this point. Ownership should absolutely be consulted on a potential trade, and shoot it down if they have issues with it. However, when we were at the point of a contract sitting on a table for two weeks for a utility player in Ryan Goins, who in no way was guaranteed a roster spot, or getting involved in the medicals for a 4th and 26th round draft choice is more than a bit overkill. Should ownership sign off on a big contract, whether it's cutting Davis or signing another player to a huge deal? Yes, absolutely. If a trade involves one of the top 3-5 players on the roster? I think they should be consulted for sure, but for anything less, the GM needs to have autonomy to do what they need to do to fill the roster out and work the draft and player acquisitions side.
  8. But the thing is, the GMs of years past were brought in with the expectation of managing the franchise with people still in place. Sure, they had the ability to bring in a handful of hires, but to really put their imprint on the organization? That hasn't happened since Peter Angelos bought the club. You don't get the kind of tenure that the Orioles had by not protecting people, from some of the higher end executives like Brian Graham to Scott McGregor, who has served forever and a day in a variety of capacities. I hate to see people lose their job, but at the same time, it almost seems like the Orioles lucked their way into competing from 2012-16. From some successes in the draft, to trades done by the former regime and some very good dumpster diving/low risk FA moves, we were one of the best teams over this time- not to mention great bullpen management. But none of that was indicative of long-term success, and building a talent pipeline that transcends winning periods. That's why I am happy with the moves Elias is making. We can't do it all in one year, and I expected a lot of changes that we are getting now. And guess what? It's making news, and people are talking about the Orioles. Bowden and his partner today on SiriusXM's The Front Office talked about it on their show, and it was brought up a couple times in the past two weeks. Most people are in agreement that it's part of a massive overhaul and needs to happen. There are problems when a team can not develop a top of the rotation starter, which we haven't done for two decades except for Mussina and Bedard. Things had to change from the ground up, and it's slowly happening, and I'm excited. If we can develop even 3/4's of the talent pipeline that the Astros and Dodgers have, combined with payroll resources that we had around $150 million, the Orioles can get back to competing year in and year out and keep it going. Someone made a great comparison that the Redskins have been run in the same way, that's an excellent comparison as I'm also a Redskins fan. Snyder needs to take a cue from the Angelos family, and bring in someone to build from the ground up.
  9. Actually, the opposite has happened with the Athletic. Very well known writers have joined, which means they were tenured and had higher contracts at the newspapers/publications where they were at prior. Newspapers are slowly dying, and to stave that off, they are letting go of the older writers who make more money and bringing in younger writers, who obviously make less. The Athletic started at the right time to capitalize off of those writers being out of jobs, or doing their own thing like Connelly did with the blog. Just off my brief experience as a writer at a newspaper, I know I copy-edited myself in many instances, but there was always someone who did the final tweaks before it went out. I imagine that there is an approval process for them to get something published, and that they have a copy editor or two in each department who does final edits before publishing.
  10. We ran into the hotter team, plain and simple. Not only that, but we had Wieters, Davis and Machado all off the roster.
  11. The only thing I can remotely think of is CC Sabathia losing a lot of weight, pitching poorly that year and putting some of it back on and pitching well. He was in his mid 30s when that happened.
  12. Great post. The long ties to the Orioles of the past needs to end. They're part of the rot in player development thats been there for nearly two decades. Times need to change and I personally thought a full housecleaning- or close to it- was long overdue.
  13. I expect sweeping changes through the minor league system after their seasons wrap up. Elias was hired late and is behind the 8-ball first, and second, you can't get rid of everyone, and they've all had a year to adapt to new bosses and new systems. I'm excited for the changes that lay ahead because, like the scouting department, they are past due. I agree on offering that to Villar, or going for Iglesias.
  14. These guys being 55 or older goes the way of payroll, as well as their own experience. Can they mold traditional scouting with the analytics now at their fingertips? To me, it certainly sounds like they had the year to do their job and adapt, and quite simply, it just didn't happen. And honestly, I hate to see guys lose their jobs, but I've posted this before- there was a rot all through the Orioles organization. If most of the people are purged, yeah I hate to see it, but these people were also all here for terrible drafts, terrible player development and terrible years all around. Change is constant, and it was long overdue in all of the front office departments.
  15. You figure that Richie Martin is spending the year in AAA, and that leaves Villar as the only person with SS experience (not counting Peterson, I think he's out.) Alberto hasn't played SS with us, but I believe I read where he has had innings there with other teams. So he's a potential backup. Villar is making $4.82 million this season, and I've heard potentially $7 million or more for next year. They could sign Jordy Mercer or Freddy Galvas at this year's value slightly over $5 million. Or Jose Iglesias, making $2.5 million this year, or Adeiny Hechavarria making $1 million. All options except Mercer would be an upgrade defensively over Villar at SS. I would say keep Villar as I agree with you. But I'm not the one making the decision, and I could easily see a glove-first option being brought in as a low value FA signing or via trade.
  • Create New...