Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rojo13

If only Elias hadn't traded the 11th best player in baseball (Bundy) for next to nothing

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Money is going to be a primary concern for any owner. Other than holding on to Davis, I don't see any other evidence of ownership not allowing Elias to do what he wants to do. He's pretty much done exactly what he said he was going to do so far.

It's a tear down and re-build. Salary needed to be shed. Yes, the Gausman/O'Day deal was a salary dump... one that I think they did well in considering they received a potential rotation piece/long-man.

IF it's 2022 and they're still not spending on the big-league roster, then you might convince me.

Yes, money is important but the team needed (needs) real talent and not spending money on contracts, valuing money over return, etc..isn’t the market of an owner whose primary focus is winning.

That should be the primary focus of a pro sports owner..winning.  That isn’t the focus of the Angelos family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

And if you look at his top comps on bb-ref from his early 30s they're guys like Henry Rodriguez (last good year at 32), Gus Zernial (34), Kevin Mitchell (played 135 games after the age of 32), Jeromy Burnitz (2 WAR after 32), David Justice (last 2-win season at 34).

Cruz is an outlier among outliers.  If you make a habit of signing players like him to that contract you'll get fired pretty quickly.

Here is the current outlier...Nelson Cruz in 162 games for the Twins 0.318/0.401/0.650 - 191 H, 56 HR, 139 RBI. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes, money is important but the team needed (needs) real talent and not spending money on contracts, valuing money over return, etc..isn’t the market of an owner whose primary focus is winning.

That should be the primary focus of a pro sports owner..winning.  That isn’t the focus of the Angelos family.

Father Angelos wasted decades spending money on "talent" that got us nowhere and neglecting the things that truly makes an organization a sustainable winner. Those things are now being addressed by the current administration and it coincides with Peter handing over the ownership duties to his son. 

What "real talent" was available to them that you'd have them spend on?

Share this post


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

Father Angelos wasted decades spending money on "talent" that got us nowhere and neglecting the things that truly makes an organization a sustainable winner. Those things are now being addressed by the current administration and it coincides with Peter handing over the ownership duties to his son. 

What "real talent" was available to them that you'd have them spend on?

Father Angelos did that?  Wow, that’s news to me.
 

And im not talking about free agents.  I’m talking about maximizing deals by taking on a bad contract, not dumping KG just to get rid of ODay paltry salary and things like that.

Elias was asked about that Cozart deal where the Giants essentially bought a good prospect...he essentially said he isn’t allowed to do that.  He should have the freedom to make trades like that, especially when the payroll is so low.

Get back as much higher end cost controlled talent as you can.

 

Share this post


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

Father Angelos did that?  Wow, that’s news to me.
 

And im not talking about free agents.  I’m talking about maximizing deals by taking on a bad contract, not dumping KG just to get rid of ODay paltry salary and things like that.

Elias was asked about that Cozart deal where the Giants essentially bought a good prospect...he essentially said he isn’t allowed to do that.  He should have the freedom to make trades like that, especially when the payroll is so low.

Get back as much higher end cost controlled talent as you can.

 

Would be nice to be on the other side of a Matusz or Webb deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Father Angelos did that?  Wow, that’s news to me.
 

And im not talking about free agents.  I’m talking about maximizing deals by taking on a bad contract, not dumping KG just to get rid of ODay paltry salary and things like that.

Elias was asked about that Cozart deal where the Giants essentially bought a good prospect...he essentially said he isn’t allowed to do that.  He should have the freedom to make trades like that, especially when the payroll is so low.

Get back as much higher end cost controlled talent as you can.

 

Yes, Angelos wasted many millions on free agency trying to avoid a true rebuild. I've never seen him as cheap, just foolish.

Taking on bad contracts ... That's one way to acquire talent, but there are many other ways to stock the pipeline and the O's are finally participating aggressively in some of those. 

I get that it sucks to trade guys away for mainly salary relief, but let's look at the Gausman trade. They saved close to $10 million by not paying an injured Darren O'Day. They acquired what has turned into one decent prospect. Yes they gave up Gausman in the deal.. but the O's could have had him back for a bag of balls afterwards and turned out to be a really weak return for Atlanta.. that's what Gausman's value was. Not a bad deal if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Yes, Angelos wasted many millions on free agency trying to avoid a true rebuild. I've never seen him as cheap, just foolish.

Taking on bad contracts ... That's one way to acquire talent, but there are many other ways to stock the pipeline and the O's are finally participating aggressively in some of those. 

I get that it sucks to trade guys away for mainly salary relief, but let's look at the Gausman trade. They saved close to $10 million by not paying an injured Darren O'Day. They acquired what has turned into one decent prospect. Yes they gave up Gausman in the deal.. but the O's could have had him back for a bag of balls afterwards and turned out to be a really weak return for Atlanta.. that's what Gausman's value was. Not a bad deal if you ask me.

They should be participating in all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Yes, Angelos wasted many millions on free agency trying to avoid a true rebuild. I've never seen him as cheap, just foolish.

Taking on bad contracts ... That's one way to acquire talent, but there are many other ways to stock the pipeline and the O's are finally participating aggressively in some of those. 

I get that it sucks to trade guys away for mainly salary relief, but let's look at the Gausman trade. They saved close to $10 million by not paying an injured Darren O'Day. They acquired what has turned into one decent prospect. Yes they gave up Gausman in the deal.. but the O's could have had him back for a bag of balls afterwards and turned out to be a really weak return for Atlanta.. that's what Gausman's value was. Not a bad deal if you ask me.

The Orioles unquestionably would have gotten more for KG if ODay wasn’t in the deal. That’s the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The Orioles unquestionably would have gotten more for KG if ODay wasn’t in the deal. That’s the point.

That's true. I understand why that's frustrating. I still think it was a good deal for the O's. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They should be participating in all of them.

Meh.. the point is I'm not ready to call the Angelos Bros an issue just because they haven't employed one niche strategy of taking on bad contracts. I'd be happy to see them do it, but I see much more positive than negative changes since the boys received their early inheritance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

That's true. I understand why that's frustrating. I still think it was a good deal for the O's. 

 

If you call getting less than you should a good deal, I guess.

But KG was a real asset at the time and they pissed that asset away and it was driven by money and the brothers.

So, going back to the point of this, they still aren’t good just because they are better than their dad, who is one of the worst owners in American sports in recent memory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

If you call getting less than you should a good deal, I guess.

But KG was a real asset at the time and they pissed that asset away and it was driven by money and the brothers.

So, going back to the point of this, they still aren’t good just because they are better than their dad, who is one of the worst owners in American sports in recent memory. 

If you're just going to ignore all salary implications of the deal, then we have nothing more to talk about here. We aren't discussing on the same plane of reality. There's value in getting out from under bad contracts.

You also might be overrating what Gausman was at the time. He did not pitch well for us that season prior to the trade, despite his somewhat-lucky 4.43 ERA. He was sporting a career worst FIP and a WHIP trending in the wrong direction. He did pitch better the rest of the season for them I'm about half of the innings, but then proceeded to pitch himself out of a job the following season.

I'm very pleased that they've let Elias do most of what he wants to do without making stupid signings that hinder the rebuild. The organization is in a much better place right now than it was before they took over because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

If you're just going to ignore all salary implications of the deal, then we have nothing more to talk about here. We aren't discussing on the same plane of reality. There's value in getting out from under bad contracts.

You also might be overrating what Gausman was at the time. He did not pitch well for us that season prior to the trade, despite his somewhat-lucky 4.43 ERA. He was sporting a career worst FIP and a WHIP trending in the wrong direction. He did pitch better the rest of the season for them I'm about half of the innings, but then proceeded to pitch himself out of a job the following season.

I'm very pleased that they've let Elias do most of what he wants to do without making stupid signings that hinder the rebuild. The organization is in a much better place right now than it was before they took over because of it.

Im not ignoring it...it just isn’t more important in that situation than acquiring better talent.

That saved money went into the families pocket.  I don’t care about that in the right circumstances...that deal wasn’t one of them.

Share this post


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

Im not ignoring it...it just isn’t more important in that situation than acquiring better talent.

That saved money went into the families pocket.  I don’t care about that in the right circumstances...that deal wasn’t one of them.

I don't think they sock away O'Day's $10 million in a rainy-day fund,  but I also don't believe that they're slashing salary as a nefarious plot to line their own pockets. I have just as much proof as you do to back up my opinion, which is really nothing. It's speculation. I do think it's naive to think that ownership shouldn't value lower salary commitments during a full gut and rebuild. I also don't think Gausman himself was ever going to bring back a top 5 organizational prospect from any team. He wasn't that kind of trade chip.

I think you're frustration is valid, but I just have a different perspective on it. I'm pretty pleased with the ownership hand off.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I don't think they sock away O'Day's $10 million in a rainy-day fund,  but I also don't believe that they're slashing salary as a nefarious plot to line their own pockets. I have just as much proof as you do to back up my opinion, which is really nothing. It's speculation. I do think it's naive to think that ownership shouldn't value lower salary commitments during a full gut and rebuild. I also don't think Gausman himself was ever going to bring back a top 5 organizational prospect from any team. He wasn't that kind of trade chip.

I think you're frustration is valid, but I just have a different perspective on it. I'm pretty pleased with the ownership hand off.

I don't think it's nefarious to expect a solid ROI for an asset such as the Orioles.

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

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...