Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Frobby

Tom Boswell tears down the tear down strategy

Recommended Posts

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/mlb/tanking-by-mlb-teams-isnt-a-strategy-its-fan-abuse/2019/07/25/f29c72ae-ad48-11e9-a0c9-6d2d7818f3da_story.html?utm_term=.17e2699ebea3

I don’t agree with Boswell at all.

In the past 50 years, losing usually leads to more losing. A lot more losing. I’ve watched it up close too often in Baltimore. In 1987-88, the Birds lost 202 games. Full rebuild mode. In the 31 seasons since, the Orioles have won 90 games just three times. At one point, they had 14 straight losing seasons. Why did D.C. get a team? Because the Orioles devalued their brand so much that there was nothing for MLB’s other 29 owners to protect by keeping a team off Baltimore’s doorstep.

The ‘98-‘11 Orioles were never in tear down mode.   They were in try to patch it and pray mode.    And it’s ridiculous to say DC got a team because Baltimore had a bad team.   If anything, the declining fortunes (and attendance) in Baltimore were a reason not to put a competing team in the vicinity.

Where I do agree with him is that not all tear downs are going to work.    But I’d rather try that than relive the ‘98-‘11 patch and pray strategy.    

Going back to ‘87-88, Boswell kind of lumps those seasons together to argue the O’s were in “full rebuild mode.”   I certainly don’t see that with the ‘87 team, which had Murray, Ripken, Lynn and an average age of offense of 30.3.    They tried to patch their team with mediocre veterans like Ray Knight, Rick Burleson and Dave Schmidt.   That team wasn’t tanking, they just sucked.   I really don’t see ‘88 as a tank job, either.   They still had Murray, Ripken and Lynn.    You don’t keep guys like that when your team is in full rebuild mode.    (Lynn had a no-trade clause, which he eventually waived in August ‘88.)

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't read Boswell. I know many think he's a good writer but it seems like this is a really poor article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I don't read Boswell. I know many think he's a good writer but it seems like this is a really poor article.

I usually love his stuff, but I disagree with him here.   One of his points is that the 20 teams that have never lost 200 games over 2 seasons in the last 50 years have won 33 of the last 50 World Series.     Yeah, Tom, DUH.    Teams like the Yankees don’t have to go into full rebuild mode.    Talk about a poor use of statistics.   

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boswell used to be the best in the business 25 years ago.  It is nothing but negative Baltimore stories for most of the past 15 years. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did MLB move a failing Montreal team to DC?  It was a way to induce yet another city to build a new stadium with luxury boxes.   Put simply

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Tom would have us all go back to the marvelous 1950s when the Yankees won 8 pennants, Cleveland won 1 and White Sox won 1.   And every other fan base had basically no prayer, at all, for any reason, for any season including our predecessors, the Browns,  who finally had to move from that great baseball town of St Louis due to their decades of ineptitude only interrupted by the World War era teams. 

Rebuilds are the only reason any fan base except the Yankees and Dodgers ever has a prayer of seeing a World Series.  Yes, GMs can still get it wrong and crapshoots are still a part of winning, but I will take our current system over the “good old days” every time. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before last season, the only thing close to a tear down was 2000.  That wasn't a total rebuild because we hung on to Mussina (for some odd reason considering the final outcome) and Cal and Albert Belle. 

That one could have worked, but you've got to do better than Charles Johnson, B.J. Surhoff, Mike Bordick, Will Clark, Harold Baines, and Mike Timlin for Melvin Mora.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Maybe Tom would have us all go back to the marvelous 1950s when the Yankees won 8 pennants, Cleveland won 1 and White Sox won 1.   And every other fan base had basically no prayer, at all, for any reason, for any season including our predecessors, the Browns,  who finally had to move from that great baseball town of St Louis due to their decades of ineptitude only interrupted by the World War era teams. 

Rebuilds are the only reason any fan base except the Yankees and Dodgers ever has a prayer of seeing a World Series.  Yes, GMs can still get it wrong and crapshoots are still a part of winning, but I will take our current system over the “good old days” every time. 

Washington
First in war
First in peace
Last in the American League

I see no point in comparing the '87-'88 Orioles under a dying EBW to the Peter Angelos '98-'11 teams.  But then again, I'm old enough to remember the Nationals drafting Strasburg and Harper overall #1 by losing 205 games in '08 and '09.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He says “if you’re just in it for the parades you made a bad choice.” 

In the same column he uses World Series winners as a metric to make his point.  

Looks like something written by a 6th grader.  So many foolish parts I don’t know where to start. Apparently if you average 95 losses like the Phillies did from 15-17 that is acceptable?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Frobby said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/mlb/tanking-by-mlb-teams-isnt-a-strategy-its-fan-abuse/2019/07/25/f29c72ae-ad48-11e9-a0c9-6d2d7818f3da_story.html?utm_term=.17e2699ebea3

I don’t agree with Boswell at all.

The ‘98-‘11 Orioles were never in tear down mode.   They were in try to patch it and pray mode.    And it’s ridiculous to say DC got a team because Baltimore had a bad team.   If anything, the declining fortunes (and attendance) in Baltimore were a reason not to put a competing team in the vicinity.

Where I do agree with him is that not all tear downs are going to work.    But I’d rather try that than relive the ‘98-‘11 patch and pray strategy.    

Going back to ‘87-88, Boswell kind of lumps those seasons together to argue the O’s were in “full rebuild mode.”   I certainly don’t see that with the ‘87 team, which had Murray, Ripken, Lynn and an average age of offense of 30.3.    They tried to patch their team with mediocre veterans like Ray Knight, Rick Burleson and Dave Schmidt.   That team wasn’t tanking, they just sucked.   I really don’t see ‘88 as a tank job, either.   They still had Murray, Ripken and Lynn.    You don’t keep guys like that when your team is in full rebuild mode.    (Lynn had a no-trade clause, which he eventually waived in August ‘88.)

The Orioles farm system from the time Cal came up until now has been sporadically productive, at best.  And their infrastructure, scouting, and analytics have often been laughably behind.  The losing from 1998-2011 was because they never tore it down and dedicated themselves to building a self-sustaining, state-of-the-art organization.  Patch and pray is a good way to describe it.  The losing from 1998-2011 was never on purpose - they kept a league-average payroll through much of that, and didn't have or use any surpluses to do anything positive for the future.

I'll read the article when I get a chance, but I'm guessing Boswell doesn't like tanking so he found selective facts to show it doesn't work.  And it's a little funny that his favorite team tanked so they could get Strasburg and Harper, setting them up nicely for a decade of winning records and playoff births.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I usually love his stuff, but I disagree with him here.   One of his points is that the 20 teams that have never lost 200 games over 2 seasons in the last 50 years have won 33 of the last 50 World Series.     Yeah, Tom, DUH.    Teams like the Yankees don’t have to go into full rebuild mode.    Talk about a poor use of statistics.   

It's almost like he's saying that there's a correlation between having overflowing resources that you can dedicate to being consistently really good and winning the World Series.  Someone should study that.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Washington
First in war
First in peace
Last in the American League

I see no point in comparing the '87-'88 Orioles under a dying EBW to the Peter Angelos '98-'11 teams.  But then again, I'm old enough to remember the Nationals drafting Strasburg and Harper by losing.

Do they have an editor? 

If his opinion is this then come up with better reasons/examples not the ones he came up with.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eddie83 said:

Do they have an editor? 

If his opinion is this then come up with better reasons/examples not the ones he came up with.  

Boz is like a college professor with tenure.  No one touches them and they are allowed to retire on their own terms.  He was once one of my favorite writers but I refuse to give his publication any views for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As other have said, the Orioles never truly tore it down until this year.  It's funny that the two main writers who have maligned what the Orioles are doing (Boswell and Rosenthal) are the two writers that are so nakedly bitter towards Baltimore that they can't help themselves. It's especially ironic that someone like Rosenthal rails against the idea of sell offs and tanking but he is practically only relevant until the trade deadline. 

  • Upvote 1

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.

Sign in to follow this  

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







  • Posts

    • Of guys throwing 100+ innings, yes. 
    • You don’t win many games when you shoot 33% from the floor and 25% from 3.  MD was very lucky tonight.  Their defense was great the last 10 minutes of the game and Cowen obviously made a huge shot, but they need to learn from tonight. Good quote from Turgeon after the game: "The basketball gods were obviously on our side," Turgeon said. "It was kind of a miracle win. We weren't very good. I wasn't very good. And we weren't ready to play, and they were."
    • I read that Newsome led all MiLB pitchers in strike throwing percentage at 73% as well as lowest walk percentage at 2.7% in 2019.
    • There's a lot of good stuff in your post. I'll look forward to the rest. Thanks.
    • I'll get to the other questions when I get a chance. I appreciate good questions, I have done so much research that it's good to get some of that info out. 
    • Excellent. Thanks for the detailed response.
    • Good question, the main reason to pick Alemais rather than Hechevarria is you have nothing to lose and Alemais will cost 655K (100K Rule 5 fee + league min) and is controllable for 6 years if he works out while Hechevarria might get similar to the 3M he got last year and if he's good, he's either more expensive or gone. That said Alemais isn't at the top of my list or particularly close, I just think he's worth thinking about and I haven't heard him mentioned anywhere else.  For the Holt question, it could either be guys that fit the same profile that I mentioned earlier. So vertical spin angle, hop on the fastball, high 3/4 arm slot, above average spin. Or it could be guys that have some fixable pitch arsenal things, like a guy whose curveball and slider are too similar, or whose curveball doesn't mirror fastball spin, or who unintentionally cuts his fastball.  Guys that fit the profile include Joe Barlow, Trevor Megill, Brandon Bailey, Hever Bueno, Jordan Sheffield, Bryan Baker, Wladimir Pinto, Scott Engler, Kevin McCanna in a rough order of preference. Some of these guys aren't legit options, I'm just pulling all the guys I have notes on fitting that profile.  Guys that have some correctable flaws include (this is a limited list because I don't have time to extensively study video on every player) in no particular order Luke Bachar (more seperation of breaking balls), Daniel Alvarez (fastball spin angle), Cam Hill (spin efficiency of the fastball), Eric Marinez (release consistency), Andrew Lee (cuts his fastball), Kurt Hoekstra (cuts his fastball). 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...