O's wild card contender in 2011?

[Oriolidae85]

All kinds of great discussion going on here. One thing I think is absolutely essential for the O's if they are going to contend, is for them to compile a winning record in their division.

The O's were 24 games below .500 against AL East teams and 29 games back in the Wild Card chase. They were so bad that all four other teams in the division had winning records against the AL East.

The fact is, the reason the other AL East teams all won at least 85 games is due in significant part to how horrible the O's played last year.

Wins against the East have the dual benefit of bringing the O's closer to the rest of the division AND bringing the division back closer to the O's.

If the O's are able to compile a .500 or better record in the division, that alone might represent an improvement of 15 to 20 games in the standings.

The AL East may be the best division in baseball, but a large part of why the Red Sox and Yankees (and Rays recently) have eclipsed 95+ wins consistently over the past few years had to do with how horrible Baltimore was. If the O's aren't a doormat any more, hitting the 95 win plateau may not be so easy for the #2 team in the East, especially if Boston ends up being a 100+ win team.

Cannot agree with you more, especially with the Rays losing Garza, Soriano, CC, Benoit, etc... That is serious production that will not easily be replaced this season. They are still a good team, but how can they win 90 games without a bullpen? And they are just one season removed from an 84 win season.

It is going to be a one crazy 2011 for the AL East!

[maybenxtyr]

Let me just say that this is a better team than last year. However, on XM today, a question about Baltimore came up. The response was, a team that has lost 90 + games in the previous season stands about a 10-12% chance of getting to .500 the next year.

They are obviously better than last year, but the odds are against them.

[orayole]

Let me just say that this is a better team than last year. However, on XM today, a question about Baltimore came up. The response was, a team that has lost 90 + games in the previous season stands about a 10-12% chance of getting to .500 the next year.

They are obviously better than last year, but the odds are against them.

Last year's team was better than their record.

[DrungoHazewood]

Let me just say that this is a better team than last year. However, on XM today, a question about Baltimore came up. The response was, a team that has lost 90 + games in the previous season stands about a 10-12% chance of getting to .500 the next year.

They are obviously better than last year, but the odds are against them.

What criteria were they using to determine that? All 72 win teams or less? Over what time peroid? Going back to 2005 in the AL, there have been 16 teams that lost 90+ games, and four of them (25%) were over .500 the next year.

But for that to have any applicability to the 2011 Orioles, you'd have to make a case that their recent transactions and roster profile roughly fit that of an average 90+ loss team. I think the O's would have to be in the upper end of that bunch of teams given youth, how they ended 2010 and the transactions they've made since.

[maybenxtyr]

What criteria were they using to determine that? All 72 win teams or less? Over what time peroid? Going back to 2005 in the AL, there have been 16 teams that lost 90+ games, and four of them (25%) were over .500 the next year.

But for that to have any applicability to the 2011 Orioles, you'd have to make a case that their recent transactions and roster profile roughly fit that of an average 90+ loss team. I think the O's would have to be in the upper end of that bunch of teams given youth, how they ended 2010 and the transactions they've made since.

I want too say it was Jim Duquette, so it could be taken with a grain of salt. He really did not elaborate on how the numbers worked.

I do agree with you, and another poster, that this team really should not have been as bad in 2010 as they were. I guess Baltimore should skew the system this year. They appear to be a .500 team on paper.

With the roster changes from last year to this year, I wonder if that gets counted in to the way JD or whomever figures this out. I mean the Yankees could fall apart this year, or any year, and one would imagine they would have a 100 million dollar bench in order to purchase the top free-agents the next offseason. Really I posted the information just as a talking point, but like you I wish he had explained a little further.

[Sports Guy]

What criteria were they using to determine that? All 72 win teams or less? Over what time peroid? Going back to 2005 in the AL, there have been 16 teams that lost 90+ games, and four of them (25%) were over .500 the next year.

But for that to have any applicability to the 2011 Orioles, you'd have to make a case that their recent transactions and roster profile roughly fit that of an average 90+ loss team. I think the O's would have to be in the upper end of that bunch of teams given youth, how they ended 2010 and the transactions they've made since.

Not to mention, they just shouldn't have been as bad a team as they were for the first 3-4 months of the season last year.