Orioles sign Vlad

[Guest rochester]

It would be nice if a provision was put in the contract that Vlad will waive his right to accept arbitration if he is a type A or type B FA.

excellent point! That's where it could turn into a so-so or bad move

[SilentJames]

Incorrect.

We had a viable option for DH (& LF) that is being displaced for one season (or part of a season) to bring Vlad in. We needed Lee, Koji, and to a lesser extent, Gregg.

Plus, if the Vlad money is deferred, it could have ramifications on subsequent payrolls.

Ya know, I love Nolan and Felix too but they did nothing last year to give them a free ride into the lineup.

[Guest rochester]

Um, all I said was that I didn't think it was a good signing and pointed to a Neyer response to this specific signing. Then, I responded to people asking me questions or telling me why I was incorrect. How am I not talking about appropriate things in a "we signed Vlad" thread?

EDIT -- not to mention Lee filled a hole at 1B while Vlad was a superfluous addition at DH and moved Scott into LF. There is an argument for him being an upgrade, but it's not the same thing as filling a hole in the line-up. I agree with you that Greg was superfluous as well, and money that could have been better spent elsewhere.

Stotle: I think what may be happening is that we are all just desperate for a chance of rooting for our team being relevant, whether any individual move does it or not. "Superfluous" is spot on but after spending 4.5 on Atkins last year we feel entitled

[Stotle]

Stotle: I think what may be happening is that we are all just desperate for a chance of rooting for our team being relevant, whether any individual move does it or not. "Superfluous" is spot on but after spending 4.5 on Atkins last year we feel entitled

:thumbsup1:

[steps aside]

Have at it!

[Arthur_Bryant]

I'm sorry - but this has to be the most ignorant response to the Vlad signing I have seen. (Neyer's, I mean, not yours...) Remind me never to let Rob Neyer near my Cheerios, man.

This is so wrong-headed, so just plain insulting to the collective baseball unconscious that I'm glad you pointed it out... just so I can deride it.

The guy is acting like $8 million is a lot to commit to a Major League baseball player. As in: If you're going to spend $8 million on a player, you better plan on going to the World Series, Bub. Attention Space Captain Neyer: We just committed MORE MONEY AND YEARS to a solid middle reliever with a career 4.03 ERA... and nobody batted an eyebrow, really. So where was your outrage then?

How could someone who spent time working for Bill James be so apparently ignorant of Vlad's HOF career... that dropping $8 million strikes him as unthinkable? And how could he be so darn dismissive? Well, as they say, there's no use arguing with crazy people... so I'm going to just shut up.

Except to add that last year we dropped a cool $9 million guaranteed on Kevin Millwood, a notably over-the-hill "innings eater" who anchored the back end of our rotation when he wasn't injured! People at the time questioned whether he could be effective, but very few questioned the financials, as I recall.

Neyer is missing the point here. The single most important factor, to me, is the total amount of the contract, which is less than Gregg's... and the length of the contract... which is the minimum you can sign someone for. It's also important to consider the player's relative importance/value to YOUR team, and not "the market."

How can anyone sanely argue that it's not worth $8 million for one season for the Orioles to have a true cleanup-worthy hitter in their lineup every day?

So your argument is that a history of questionable moves justifies further questionable moves. At least you didn't cite Garrett Atkins, the way others have done, but it's the same principle with Millwood and Gregg: Hey, we've already blown a ton of money of old guys who can't really help us that much--so doing it again must be a great idea!

You realize, I hope, that this creates an unending spiral of questionable moves.

Instead of snarking all over Neyer, maybe you should address his central proposition that a team trying to lift itself out of mediocrity shouldn't throw significant money into short term, incremental upgrades.

In other words: are you ready to argue that throwing big money into short-term incremental upgrades is a smart move for a mediocre team with limited resources?

Personally, I'm somewhat in the middle here. I agree with Neyer that paying $5-8MM for a guy who might be worth two or three extra wins is not a smart way to spend money, unless you have a team that is two or three wins away from contending. I wish the Orioles were that close; my heart says yes but my head says no frickin' way. But Neyer assumes that the money spent on Vlad will prevent the O's from doing things that really should be done, like becoming a big time presence in the Caribbean. I think he's wrong about that, because that wasn't going to happen anyway.

So really all this move confirms is that the Orioles are not being run in an intelligent and far-sighted fashion. But I already knew that.

Look, I really hope that Vlad is as good as many here seem to think he will be. I really, really hope that he's the last piece of a puzzle that has the O's playing big games late into September and bumping up attendance by half a million or more.

But if I have to choose the smart guy between Rob Neyer and somebody who believes that the Gregg and Millwood contracts justify spending $5-8MM on a one-year contract to a 36 YO with bad knees...

...I pick the guy with the blog.

[Sports Guy]

Don't get me wrong, i am excited about this team this year...But I want sustained excitement, not one year.

And Vlad in general, while it will be pretty cool to have him here, doesn't excite me to the level he used to.

I find it funny that many people were bashing Vlad, saying we didn't need him, telling Trea we shouldn't go up, etc...and now many of those same people are just very elated.

Its just not a consistent thought process IMO.

I am still meh about this move and depending on the contract, I may dislike the signing.

While I agree the increased depth is nice, I still am not sure if this is going to make us a better team.

End of the day, for me, this Vlad signing needs to lead to a pick or a trade for me to think it was worth doing.

I also need to see them spending on amateur talent and not hearing that the over budget payroll for the team this year is a reason why the money isn't being spent amateur wise.

So, let's see what happens with that.

Right now, I am excited about the team and the upside but I can't ignore that we still have a lot of long term issues.

[Art Wing]

Right now, I am excited about the team and the upside but I can't ignore that we still have a lot of long term issues.

I said it in another Vlad thread, but I'm less excited about this team without the Reimold/Pie platoon. I think that would have been much more fun to watch and has the higher upside AND could have provided a clearer window into a potential long-term solution.

That being said, I'm rooting full force for Vlad now but I don't like the move.

[Guest rochester]

:thumbsup1:

[steps aside]

Have at it!

We deserve Vlad - we deserved him in his prime darnit.

that's all

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

Just glad this is over. I for one wasn't excited about the move to begin with but can't help be excited to see this team take the field.

One good aspect of this is that we now have one more piece we could trade at the deadline. Depending on how they perform, we could be looking to deal Scott, Lee, Pie, or Vlad and hopefully get a nice prospect or two back in return.

[Sports Guy]

I said it in another Vlad thread, but I'm less excited about this team without the Reimold/Pie platoon. I think that would have been much more fun to watch and has the higher upside AND could have provided a clearer window into a potential long-term solution.

That being said, I'm rooting full force for Vlad now but I don't like the move.

Right.

If there was a good chance Tillman would be in the rotation and Duscherer in the pen and Reimold/Pie in the OF, I would be more excited about the team.

That doesn't mean I don't like Duscherer in the rotation and Vlad at DH, it just means my excitement level is a little lower because of the effects of the team long term by giving the young kids a lot of time.

So, to counteract that, we need this team to win, we need these guys to bring back picks or we need to make some trades. Those things will help the future as well.

Now, of course we will have injuries and those players will get their chance..i am not discounting that likelihood.

[davearm]

My $0.02 as a non-O's fan:

I largely agree with the sentiment expressed by Stotle and Neyer, although I would couch it somewhat differently.

What every fan should demand is that their front office has a clear and focused blueprint for getting the team from where it is, to where it wants to go (or, keeping it there, if it's achieved championship-caliber). The organizational philosophy has to be unambiguous and singularly devoted to winning championships. Naturally the plan needs constant attention and real-time course corrections, but the goal must remain the same, and be the guiding light for all decisions.

So as we sit here in February 2011, what should the O's blueprint for achieving sustained excellence look like?

And specifically, how does a guy like 36-YO Vlad Guerrero fit into that picture?

It's exceedingly easy to argue that he doesn't fit in at all. Vlad on a one-year contract doesn't get the O's any closer to the promised land.

$8M well spent in any number of ways (amateur scouting, international signings, better minor league instruction, bigger and better latin facilities and presences, etc.) surely fits into the plan.

Giving significant opportunity to young guys that have the potential to be significant contributors for another decade surely fits into the plan as well. If they flop, you've lost nothing. It's all upside.

With Vlad, there's no upside. At best, it's treading water.

And the theory that goes something like, "ah what the heck, the O's weren't going to spend that money on development anyway" is a copout, and that tacit acceptance just enables the underperformance the O's have been mired in. If the folks in charge cannot be trusted to spend money and allocate resources most effectively, then you all should be yelling from the rooftops that they be canned and replaced by people that will.

[caljr]

Seems like there has been a lot of talk about trading one of Pie/Reimold, but I really don't think that is the way to go. In my opinion, the best strategy will be to have a competition between the two for the 4th outfield spot and send the other one to the minors. I think then you wait and see who has the best 1st half between Guerrero and Scott and trade whoever has the most value for a young 1st baseman who is being blocked. Then you bring up Pie/Reimold and go from there. I don't think Randy Winn is the answer for 4th outfielder this year. He will be 37 and has had a big downward spiral in offensive production over the last few years.

[Scrat1]

Now, of course we will have injuries and those players will get their chance..i am not discounting that likelihood.

As someone who was opposed to adding Vlad, this is what I keep telling myself. I really do not like the idea of giving up on Pie or Reimold. Acquiring Vlad is a major roadblock for them, but the odds are someone's going to go down for a significant chunk of the season and hopefully Pie or Reimold will show they've got what it takes.

Vlad, especially for 8 million, isn't a move I would have made, but he'll be exciting to watch. Hopefully he's got another big season in him. I think he might, so long as Buck gives him plenty of rest. Perhaps I'm a little jaded from Trembley, but I'm worried that Buck won't be very democratic with playing time. Considering Guerrero's age and health, and that we have Pie/Reimold (though I expect Pie will be on the bench), I hope Buck has plenty of days where Scott DHs, Pie plays the field, and Guerrero rests on the bench. At least once a week, preferably twice. Sort of like Thome's 2010, but not quite that extreme. I think I'm most scared of Drungo's mid case scenario where Vlad produces at about a .750 OPS clip--too high to cut, too low to justify taking playing time from the younger guys.

Can't wait for opening day.

[Sports Guy]

My $0.02 as a non-O's fan:

I largely agree with the sentiment expressed by Stotle and Neyer, although I would couch it somewhat differently.

What every fan should demand is that their front office has a clear and focused blueprint for getting the team from where it is, to where it wants to go (or, keeping it there, if it's achieved championship-caliber). The organizational philosophy has to be unambiguous and singularly devoted to winning championships. Naturally the plan needs constant attention and real-time course corrections, but the goal must remain the same, and be the guiding light for all decisions.

So as we sit here in February 2011, what should the O's blueprint for achieving sustained excellence look like?

And specifically, how does a guy like 36-YO Vlad Guerrero fit into that picture?

It's exceedingly easy to argue that he doesn't fit in at all. Vlad on a one-year contract doesn't get the O's any closer to the promised land.

$8M well spent in any number of ways (amateur scouting, international signings, better minor league instruction, bigger and better latin facilities and presences, etc.) surely fits into the plan.

Giving significant opportunity to young guys that have the potential to be significant contributors for another decade surely fits into the plan as well. If they flop, you've lost nothing. It's all upside.

With Vlad, there's no upside. At best, it's treading water.

And the theory that goes something like, "ah what the heck, the O's weren't going to spend that money on development anyway" is a copout, and that tacit acceptance just enables the underperformance the O's have been mired in. If the folks in charge cannot be trusted to spend money and allocate resources most effectively, then you all should be yelling from the rooftops that they be canned and replaced by people that will.

I don't disagree with you...however, one thing that people like myself and Stotle can realize is that there is value to putting some life into the fan base.

This is one of the best baseball towns in the country and the fans are pretty loyal...but 13 years of being a joke has worn down the fan base.

Injecting some life into the fan base is something that can not be ignored. Stopping the 13 year losing streak is important.

I think we can all agree on the importance of those things.

[Sports Guy]

As someone who was opposed to adding Vlad, this is what I keep telling myself. I really do not like the idea of giving up on Pie or Reimold. Acquiring Vlad is a major roadblock for them, but the odds are someone's going to go down for a significant chunk of the season and hopefully Pie or Reimold will show they've got what it takes.

Vlad, especially for 8 million, isn't a move I would have made, but he'll be exciting to watch. Hopefully he's got another big season in him. I think he might, so long as Buck gives him plenty of rest. Perhaps I'm a little jaded from Trembley, but I'm worried that Buck won't be very democratic with playing time. Considering Guerrero's age and health, and that we have Pie/Reimold (though I expect Pie will be on the bench), I hope Buck has plenty of days where Scott DHs, Pie plays the field, and Guerrero rests on the bench. At least once a week, preferably twice. Sort of like Thome's 2010, but not quite that extreme. I think I'm most scared of Drungo's mid case scenario where Vlad produces at about a .750 OPS clip--too high to cut, too low to justify taking playing time from the younger guys.

Can't wait for opening day.

His H/R splits last year are a little concerning BUT most of his peripheral batting stats are right in line with where they normally are, so the potential of him having a good year is very high IMO. I wouldn't expect an 850-900 OPS over a full season of at bats but he can still be solid.