Jump to content
Sports Guy

Britt joining in on the bash fest

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, eddie83 said:

They offer no solution because there isn’t one. If Elias holds on to the Bundy and Cobb types they are a little more competitive. Ok fine. Still last place team, still not a contender. System not as deep. 

I think That is not being claimed as the solution. You shouldn’t hold onto aging veterans, and you should not sign aging veterans. What is not being done at the moment is improvement. Mike spent a couple years re-organizing the system, and good for him.

What is not doing now is making any incremental improvements. He’s not getting guys who are better than what we have and doing so is his job. I don’t want to sign any aging veterans, but we can find better bad players and he isn’t.

Pick a warm body on the roster and ask yourself”, Can Mike find a ‘readily available’ player who is better than this guy?” For most of the guys the answer is a resounding yes. But he’s doing nothing to make the onfield product less shameful and he could without jeopardizing “the plan.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not as concerned about the immediate losing as the near total failure of the current crop of talent and the chance it continues with the next batch of players like Rutschman, Rodriguez, etc.

I guess I have been seriously following this franchise since 2005 and I've never had a good feeling about the major league transition process.  Lots of hype, and a ton of debris and botched development, and guys going on to success in other organizations.  Arrieta and that stupid cut fastball.  Who's to say this farm system is going to produce anything but more mediocrity?  And then what?  Another 4-5 year cycle of watching retreads play AAAA baseball while we reload again?

Like, why the hell am I even interested in baseball at that point?  This is a miserable slog and I'm tired of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Philip said:
 

I think That is not being claimed as the solution. You shouldn’t hold onto aging veterans, and you should not sign aging veterans. What is not being done at the moment is improvement. Mike spent a couple years re-organizing the system, and good for him.

What is not doing now is making any incremental improvements. He’s not getting guys who are better than what we have and doing so is his job. I don’t want to sign any aging veterans, but we can find better bad players and he isn’t.

Pick a warm body on the roster and ask yourself”, Can Mike find a ‘readily available’ player who is better than this guy?” For most of the guys the answer is a resounding yes. But he’s doing nothing to make the onfield product less shameful and he could without jeopardizing “the plan.”

Philip this is a more than fair criticism. Once again nobody should be against finding value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Agreed. I know it's easy for some to get defensive, but let's face it, no one is lying in these articles. 

The jury is out on Elias and his crew. Are there things that look promising when it comes to using the technologies to help our player develop, sure, but until we see a player make a breakthrough in the minors and then perform well at the major league level, it doesn't mean anything.

We have no idea whether he's able to field a good major league team yet because he hasn't even tried. I don't know what his timeline is, but I can say this, this team is going to need a major, and mean major influx of free agency or trade talent to compete anytime in the next 3-years.

 

I couldn't agree more. Adley and GrayRod look great, but as you mentioned, there are lots of question-marks and there is a serious lack of depth on the pitching side. I don't really see how they compete without adding lots of talent via free agency.

I think this speaks to what the national writers are arguing - are this many 100+ loss seasons really necessary to accomplish the results thus far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, foxfield said:

We interrupt this Sports Guy flame to report some news on the embarrassment that is the Baltimore Oriole rebuild being orchestrated by Mike Elias.

The following are some facts that may be uncomfortable for some.

Mike Elias was hired on November 16, 2018.  He has been GM for 33 months or 1004 days.  The Baltimore Orioles have completed exactly one full season with Mike Elias as GM as of this date and is currently 117-221 (338 games total) for an ugly winning percentage of .346.  During this time Elias has had the helm for three drafts.  

During the 2017-2018 years the Baltimore Orioles kept saying the window was open and they were competing.  During those two full seasons of competing, the Orioles were 122-202 (324 games total) for a winning percentage .376.  

During the 22 months that Elias has had the helm, the Orioles have stated they were focusing on a total rebuild which has included removing scouts, coaches and players tied to the franchise.  It has begun working to sign talent in the rich foreign markets and has completely cleared the Major League roster of contract commitments beyond the current year.  

In 2017-2018 The franchise was ranked universally in the bottom 5 of all Major League teams based on Major League talent and prospect talent.  Today the franchise is ranked in the bottom 5 of all Major League teams and anywhere from 18 to #1 based on prospect talent.

The Orioles salaries in 2017 were $164,326,172 and in 2018 were $148,574,615.  Under Mike Elias the Orioles salaries have been $80,814,882 in 2019 it was $62,285,088 in 2020 and finally this year it has been $53,138,562.  Meaning that Elias has managed about 5 fewer wins over the course of the rebuild than the Orioles managed during the previous two years while trying to keep a window open and win a World Series for Peter Angelos.  (5 fewer wins and 14 more games)

___________

There are no opinions expressed above.  The information and numbers come from Cots, Baseball Reference and Google.  If you are embarrassed by the Orioles today, you don't understand how low they sunk by 2018.  Teams can operate on a low payroll, draft well AND compete at the ML level but it takes years and years to build a well oiled system to do this successfully.  It doesn't happen overnight and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.  

I have tried to not say that Elias is doing well or that he isn't.  I don't know if the Orioles can compete in 2022 or if it will take until 2024 or later.  I personally think even with covid interrupting last year significantly, that next spring will be the first real chance to evaluate Elias.  I don't think the Orioles are going to win the WS in 2022 or the AL East or even a WC.  I think they could win 70-75 games if they make acquisitions and a lot of stuff goes right.  That of course is speculation and requires more than what is currently on the ML roster or showing well in the minors.

I will say this.  An awful lot of people seem embarrassed by the Orioles.  I understand that because the franchise is in fact an embarrassment compared to what it was from say 1966-1983.  But the people who are focused on 2021 standings are either using the O's to further the players union, don't understand what a total rebuild of a disastrous system entails, are simply willfully misrepresenting facts or a combination of the three.  

Nothing you posted means anything in terms of the team failing to develop pitching at this level, Elias failing to add surplus talent to the roster and the team not being remotely competitive right now.

All of what you posted is true yet the team could still be in better shape right now despite those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These national writers need to highlight the disparity in the league between rebuild/competion cycles of large market teams and small market teams.  

Large market teams get to compete almost every season, and when they do have to "readjust" their rosters its for two years at most.  We have seen this with the Yankees in 2016 when their "rebuild" resulted in 85 wins in 2016, Boston in 2014-15 and last year.  They maintain payrolls in the mid $100 millions so even when rebuilding they can afford to buy prospects by taking bad contracts and take chances on short term high AAV contracts.

Meanwhile small market teams by contrast get 2-4 year competition cycles, which typically have to be followed by deep rebuilds.  Small market teams need value out of high draft picks, can't write off bad contracts and so can't take the chances large market teams can, can't afford to buy prospects by taking on bad contracts.

The Royals got to compete from 2013 to 2016 and have had to go through a 5 year rebuild since.

Minnesota had to rebuild for 5 years from 2011 through 2016, losing 99, 96, 96, 92, 79, 103 during those years...they got to compete for four years and are heading back into a rebuild cycle.

National writers shouldn't be saying its terrible teams go into these three 100 loss season rebuilds, they should be saying its terrible MLB is built around a system that requires small market teams to do that.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nothing you posted means anything in terms of the team failing to develop pitching at this level, Elias failing to add surplus talent to the roster and the team not being remotely competitive right now.

All of what you posted is true yet the team could still be in better shape right now despite those things.

If all of what I posted is true...then the following is also true:

The team cannot be failing to develop pitching at this level if it is truly not focusing on this level.  It also cannot be true that the Original Post claiming "some" teams are fine with losing 4-7 years and Elias has not even completed 2 full seasons.  

To say those facts are true but mean nothing is simply trying to pretend a reality exists where it does not.  Could the team be better today, yes.  Do I care that they are terrible, yes.  But this is just my opinion.  Much of what you would have the Orioles do for this year or last year are exactly the type of things they did over the last 25 years to give the appearance of trying to be better and refusing to do the type of work that builds something that can be maintained.  The Rays were unwatchable for 10 years...now they are a model franchise.  

I am not saying the Orioles need to lose for 10 years.  I am saying Elias should get more than 2 full seasons before we are routinely using words like failure.  It should go without saying, that he needs to do more than raise the level of prospects to garner praise.  But anyone touting or complaining about a third 100 loss season fails to comprehend the first one...at 115 losses was from a team proudly claiming they were in it to win it. 

So that's the long version response.  The short version is nothing you posted means anything in terms of what a rebuild is trying to accomplish.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, foxfield said:

If all of what I posted is true...then the following is also true:

The team cannot be failing to develop pitching at this level if it is truly not focusing on this level.  It also cannot be true that the Original Post claiming "some" teams are fine with losing 4-7 years and Elias has not even completed 2 full seasons.  

To say those facts are true but mean nothing is simply trying to pretend a reality exists where it does not.  Could the team be better today, yes.  Do I care that they are terrible, yes.  But this is just my opinion.  Much of what you would have the Orioles do for this year or last year are exactly the type of things they did over the last 25 years to give the appearance of trying to be better and refusing to the type of work that builds something that can be maintained.  The Rays were unwatchable for 10 years...now they are a model franchise.  

I am not saying the Orioles need to lose for 10 years.  I am saying Elias should more than 2 full seasons before we are routinely using words like failure.  It should go without saying, that he needs to do more than raise the level of prospects to garner praise.  But anyone touting or complaining about a third 100 loss season fails to comprehend the first one...at 115 losses was from a team proudly claiming they were in it to win it. 

So that's the long version response.  The short version is nothing you posted means anything in terms of what a rebuild is trying to accomplish.

 

First of all, you have no idea what I would or wouldn’t have done the last year because I have barely (if at all) posted about any individual players or moves I would have liked to have seen.

Secondly, there is a big issue with them not focusing on the ML team.  Just because it’s true they haven’t doesn’t mean they are right for doing it.

The rebuild is over.  They are just stealing at this point.  What a rebuild does, the Os have already accomplished…build up the system, obtain long term roster and payroll flexibility, get younger, etc…oh and btw, you don’t actually need to lose for a lot of years to accomplish these things either.  You can win 100 games a year and still do these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:

These national writers need to highlight the disparity in the league between rebuild/competion cycles of large market teams and small market teams.  

Large market teams get to compete almost every season, and when they do have to "readjust" their rosters its for two years at most.  We have seen this with the Yankees in 2016 when their "rebuild" resulted in 85 wins in 2016, Boston in 2014-15 and last year.  They maintain payrolls in the mid $100 millions so even when rebuilding they can afford to buy prospects by taking bad contracts and take chances on short term high AAV contracts.

Meanwhile small market teams by contrast get 2-4 year competition cycles, which typically have to be followed by deep rebuilds.  Small market teams need value out of high draft picks, can't write off bad contracts and so can't take the chances large market teams can, can't afford to buy prospects by taking on bad contracts.

The Royals got to compete from 2013 to 2016 and have had to go through a 5 year rebuild since.

Minnesota had to rebuild for 5 years from 2011 through 2016, losing 99, 96, 96, 92, 79, 103 during those years...they got to compete for four years and are heading back into a rebuild cycle.

National writers shouldn't be saying its terrible teams go into these three 100 loss season rebuilds, they should be saying its terrible MLB is built around a system that requires small market teams to do that.

 

Except the system doesn’t require that.

Share this post


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

The rebuild is over.  They are just stealing at this point.  What a rebuild does, the Os have already accomplished…build up the system, obtain long term roster and payroll flexibility, get younger, etc…oh and btw, you don’t actually need to lose for a lot of years to accomplish these things either.  You can win 100 games a year and still do these things.

The rebuild is no where close to over.

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.



Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2021 Minor League Depth Chart

2021 Prospect Power Rankings

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...