Anyone have a link to MacPhail's Q&A from today?

[Fan4Life]

So, if you aren't going to pay for FAs and you aren't going to spend enough on amateur talent, exactly how are you planning on acquiring the big time, long term talent needed to compete in this division?

Perhaps his first responsibility is to provide profit to shareholders. Otherwise he is either incompetent or a liar. What else could it be?

[Say O!]

You're definitely right here. The Brewers made a nice deal. But I'm not sure this is applicable for the O's, since part of the reason the Blue Jays were willing to settle for Lawrie was because he was Canadian. And I imagine the price would have gone up if the Orioles were trying to trade for Marcum.

Let's not forget the timing of the Marcum/Lawrie deal. It was before Wells was traded to the LAA, thereby removing huge payroll obligations. Marcum was modestly priced now, but would soon be increasing. With the financial budget constraints from Wells still there, it made sense for AA to deal Marcum (who has exactly 1 season with more than 160 IP) for a top eschelon prospect.

Besides, I'm not sure why Baltimore would deal prospects for marginally above average veteran pitchers. MIL is going all in before Prince sails off.

[hoosiers]

Umm, all you did here was prove to me that they did a poor job putting a team around AROD...Thank you for proving my point.

AM was dead wrong. The Rangers didn't do the proper things to build around AROD.

No, they did not have the minor league resources or the pitching staff when ARod was signed to compete. They finished so far out that the wasted $, even if put to productive use, would not have enabled them to compete.

It is a cop-out to stand behind a ridiculous generality and say - if they had planned better, they would have won. Well, if the division winners of the WL West had planned even better than did, Texas would not have won with better planning.

Texas' plan was DOA from the start.

[Sports Guy]

No, they did not have the minor league resources or the pitching staff when ARod was signed to compete. They finished so far out that the wasted $, even if put to productive use, would not have enabled them to compete.

It is a cop-out to stand behind a ridiculous generality and say - if they had planned better, they would have won. Well, if the division winners of the WL West had planned even better than did, Texas would not have won with better planning.

Texas' plan was DOA from the start.

Your whole argument here is awful.

You are right, the Texas plan was terrible from the start. EXACTLY...That is the FREAKING POINT!

Their plan with AROD was terrible...which is why they didn't compete.

They could have easily contended with AROD had they had a plan in place like the one they have had for the last few years.

[maudibjr]

Umm, all you did here was prove to me that they did a poor job putting a team around AROD...Thank you for proving my point.

AM was dead wrong. The Rangers didn't do the proper things to build around AROD.

I don't think that AM was wrong at all. If fact, I think AM and your point are almost the same. The two are very connected.

Whats the point of signing AROD and his huge contract (besides the fact that the Rangers grossly outbid themselves, which I'm sure AM was also referring to), if you can't figure out the proper team for that bandbox. It makes it a bad fit and bad contract, and if your going to have a bad contract, don't make it the most expensive ever. He performed but the team languished, so on the whole it wasn't working. This was,of course, all the Rangers management fault. And AM is looking at this from that point of view.

As you pointed out, they just won with a $65m team, because they finally figured out the proper team. Now would be the time to add a Arod.

BTW, I don't agree with AM that this was the worst contract ever.

[El Gordo]

I don't think that AM was wrong at all. If fact, I think AM and your point are almost the same. The two are very connected.

Whats the point of signing AROD and his huge contract (besides the fact that the Rangers grossly outbid themselves, which I'm sure AM was also referring to), if you can't figure out the proper team for that bandbox. It makes it a bad fit and bad contract, and if your going to have a bad contract, don't make it the most expensive ever. He performed but the team languished, so on the whole it wasn't working. This was,of course, all the Rangers management fault. And AM is looking at this from that point of view.

As you pointed out, they just won with a $65m team, because they finally figured out the proper team. Now would be the time to add a Arod.

BTW, I don't agree with AM that this was the worst contract ever.

It would be if he could pitch. That's their problem now, and it was then, as well. I think the point is Texas spent their money on something they didn't need. $250MM worth of pitching might have gotten them to the playoffs.

[DrungoHazewood]

You want to deal in reality or hypothetical? You don't think they had a plan when ARod signed? You don't think they were aware what they had in the farm system when he signed?

ARod signed before the 2001 season. Attendance the prior year was 2.6M. It increased to 2.8M in 2001 and declined to 2.4M and 2.1M the next two years.

The team AVERAGED 18 games below .500 and finished fourth all three years ARod was there despite ARod averaging 8 WAR! In some of these years, management wasted huge $ on JuanGone and ChanHo and Carl Everett and Rusty Greer, but in others received tremendous WAR production from IRod, Raffy, Kenny Rogers and even strong contributions from Ismael Valdez and John Thompson, plus positive WAR from Cordero.

At the press conference in the espn article when ARod signed- "We know over the long haul we are going to have to add some quality pitching," Texas general manager Doug Melvin said.

He wasn't kidding. In 2001, only Rogers had an ERA+ over 95 among starters. In 2002, SP had ERA+ over 75.

This is not a team that was going to compete in the short term when ARod signed. It did win 89 games for third in the AL West in 2004 immediately after with Mark Texeira and several others, led by Buck Showalter and a better pitching staff.

18 games below .500 and the conclusion is management should have made better decisions? They were probably two all star players and two other quality contributors from competing. That's a mammoth gap to bridge. They were far from competing. Now, why don't you go back to what AM said and tell us again where he was wrong?

I think it's pretty simple. Take the 2003 Rangers. Their payroll was something like $103M. Without ARod it was $81M.

There were four American League teams that finished with between 83 and 96 wins who had payroll of $55M or less.

You're telling me that ARod caused the Rangers to not be able to compete, when four other AL teams had payrolls at least $26M less than the Rangers without ARod, and still won more than they lost?

The Rangers during ARod's tenure lost because they spent $81M on a 60-win team, when an average team spent $68M on an 81-win team.

[JTrea81]

fixed that for you

I guess the Orange October brand kool-aid wore off quickly because you're back on the same soap box.

Don't get me wrong, I am fully behind the effort this offseason and I expect us to be in the mid 80s in wins for the first time in a long time.

But it's his overall philosophy that I am not behind.

Mid 80s isn't competing in this division. It's being an also-ran. And I don't see that he's willing to either invest in scouting and development nor free agency to get us above that mark.

He's so scared of taking a financial risk, that he's willing to hold the team back from what it could become if he would actually use the resources at his disposal.

[Sports Guy]

Don't get me wrong, I am fully behind the effort this offseason and I expect us to be in the mid 80s in wins for the first time in a long time.

But it's his overall philosophy that I am not behind.

Mid 80s isn't competing in this division. It's being an also-ran. And I don't see that he's willing to either invest in scouting and development nor free agency to get us above that mark.

He's so scared of taking a financial risk, that he's willing to hold the team back from what it could become if he would actually use the resources at his disposal.

Yea, instead of holding the team back, he should be spending huge money on Moyer and Figgins..oh wait.

[Sports Guy]

And he was willing to give 144M to Tex.

What other examples do you have?

We know how he feels about paying pitchers(see Oswalt).

So, what proof do you have that PA is willing to take the payroll to that 100-120 million range?

Hey Trea, are you still digging for these answers?

[JTrea81]

Yea, instead of holding the team back, he should be spending huge money on Moyer and Figgins..oh wait.

Well given the choice, where would you rather see that money go - towards a free agent that could improve the team, or in Peter Angelos' and his ownership group's pockets?

If the choice is either PGA keeps the money, or it is spent to try to improve the team - give me the latter option.

[Sports Guy]

Well given the choice, where would you rather see that money go - towards a free agent that could improve the team, or in Peter Angelos' and his ownership group's pockets?

If the choice is either PGA keeps the money, or it is spent to try to improve the team - give me the latter option.

Depends on who the FA is.

I would rather see PA pocket the money than spend it on most of the players you have advocated over the last few years...because most of the players you advocate really aren't that good and got way too much money..and they got too much money from teams they wanted to go to. Those teams didn't have to pay the Oriole tax. That means those players that you wanted would have cost us a lot more.

[JTrea81]

Hey Trea, are you still digging for these answers?

Aren't we in the $90 million range right now?

I don't have any other proof.

I know you are going by what you saw and heard when you worked for the Orioles, but MacPhail has said countless times that he is more conservative than Angelos, and I know he could just be protecting him.

But seeing how he operated in Chicago, and seeing how he's operating now with the Orioles, I truly believe it's MacPhail that is holding this team back as he's doing all the same things that led to failure with the Cubs.

The Cubs could never sustain a playoff run because MacPhail never made the proper investment in the team to sustain competitiveness.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well given the choice, where would you rather see that money go - towards a free agent that could improve the team, or in Peter Angelos' and his ownership group's pockets?

If the choice is either PGA keeps the money, or it is spent to try to improve the team - give me the latter option.

It always comes back to the same thing - you think the Orioles have a lot more money than everyone else does.

[Sports Guy]

Aren't we in the $90 million range right now?

Our payroll is 85 million. Incentives could make the payroll higher. You have said we should have a payroll of 100-120 million. You are saying that PA will spend money on FAs and that it is AM who holds that back. So, I am asking you for proof that PA is willing to spend what you feel the team should be spending. If you have none, then your blanket statements are nothing more than biased driven lies. So, which is it...Do you have proof or are you a liar?

I know you are going by what you saw and heard when you worked for the Orioles, but MacPhail has said countless times that he is more conservative than Angelos, and I know he could just be protecting him.

Look, I am in total agreement with you that AM is too conservative. You are never going to hear me argue different. But where you are clueless is how much of an effect PA has on everything...He is the main problem. Now, maybe he was behind the extra money given to Vlad..that wouldn't surprise me. But that isn't a good thing either.