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

[Stotle]

I would never have expected you to. Basically you think Vlad is a bad signing because he is not a player we need, and the money is better spent elswhere right? Do you believe that Texas could have found better ways to spend the $250 MM in 2001? Perhaps going with a younger cheaper SS, as we would have with Reimold/Pie and DH? Or was ARoid the best way for Texas to spend that money at that time?

No. I think the $250 million on ARod was a great way to spend on payroll. They gave themselves the best player in the game at a good price for the production they would have gotten over that time. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't take five years to build a good team (especially in the AL West) if you go about it the right way. If TEX had a better front office, they would have been well set-up.

They had it easier than many in that they had a huge chunk of offensive output signed-up for good cost. The Giants won the world series last year with two of the worst contracts in baseball on the books (Rowand/Zito). The ARod contract didn't prevent TEX from doing anything, and it allowed them more wiggle room in where they found the remaining production they needed. They just blew it.

[carolinaoriole]

No. I think the $250 million on ARod was a great way to spend on payroll. They gave themselves the best player in the game at a good price for the production they would have gotten over that time. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't take five years to build a good team (especially in the AL West) if you go about it the right way. If TEX had a better front office, they would have been well set-up.

They had it easier than many in that they had a huge chunk of offensive output signed-up for good cost. The Giants won the world series last year with two of the worst contracts in baseball on the books (Rowand/Zito). The ARod contract didn't prevent TEX from doing anything, and it allowed them more wiggle room in where they found the remaining production they needed. They just blew it.

I think that Macphail's comment on the Arod contract was from a baseball management perspective. As being bad for the game of baseball , and not from the perspective of if it was bad or good for the Rangers (even though I think that it was bad for the Rangers). It would be interesting to see a poll of baseball owners and gm's to see what they think of that contract. As a fan I thought it was a bad contract because I knew it would have a impact on what the salaries were going to do moving forward and make it tougher for teams not named New York and Boston to attract top players.

[Stotle]

I think that Macphail's comment on the Arod contract was from a baseball management perspective. As being bad for the game of baseball and not from the perspective of if it was bad or good for the Rangers(even though I think that it was bad for the Rangers). It would be interesting to see a poll of baseball owners and gm's to see what they think of that contract. As a fan I thought it was a bad contract because I knew it would have a impact on what the salaries were going to do moving forward and make it tougher for teams not named New York and Boston to attract top players.

I think that having BOS/NYA in the same division makes it tough on the AL East. In every other division, teams have more than enough resources to be reasonably competitive if reasonably well run. The owners have the money to spend, based on the amount of money coming in. I would rather the players get it than the owners sit on it.

[carolinaoriole]

I think that having BOS/NYA in the same division makes it tough on the AL East. In every other division, teams have more than enough resources to be reasonably competitive if reasonably well run. The owners have the money to spend, based on the amount of money coming in. I would rather the players get it than the owners sit on it.

I would rather the players get it who earn it.

And I know that rising salaries will not be good for the Orioles chances to win.

I believe that the owners of things put out an investment to be the owner of things and I admire that. I am not a big fan of the MLBPA. I love the salary cap in the NFL because I believe it gives every team an equal chance to win.

[SrMeowMeow]

I mean, I think MacPhail was being hyperbolic. His point is just that investing A-Rod money in A-Rod is a complete waste unless you have a foundation to build on. Or, in other words, "the Orioles stand as a reminder of why the worst mistake in baseball is to spend when you are not ready to win".

[mweb]

So I guess MacPhail's point was that you don't take a bad, inefficient, expensive team, and add ARod and expect to win? Ok, I agree with that. I don't know of anyone who wouldn't. It's basically what we've been saying here for years - you don't take a crappy Oriole team, add Prince Fielder or Mark Teixeira, and expect to win.

But MacPhail said "Alex Rodriguez to Texas was the worst signing in the history of baseball in my view." I think that's hyperbolic, and it obscures the real reasons for the Rangers' failings, which were all the other things besides the ARod signing.

I think that was pretty clearly his point and a good one as you say.

As far as the last sentence goes, I don't see how you are reaching that conclusion when he pointed out what you are saying he was obscuring.

It may not be the worst contract in history, but it was a bad one given the team's situation.

[mweb]

Dave Cameron weighs in on ARod's first big contract: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/a-rods-first-contract-was-a-good-move/

I think he's misinterpreting what AM said somewhat when he says Arod "was a bust because the team he was on flopped." AM is saying he the contract was bad because the team was setup to be bad when they gave out that huge contract, so the deal didn't make sense. Important distinction imo.

I also find it interesting that writers on FG consistently bring up team's situations when evaluating teams moves, including some O's moves this off-season which they've knocked, but here Cameron seems to ignore that concept.

[mweb]

In general I agree with him, although I question how some of the moves made this offseason fit into that ideology.

I get the impression from those comments that BAL will not make a huge push for Prince Fielder next season. I don't see how the "perfect storm" that he felt during the Tex saga could present itself for Fielder, and we didn't even land Tex.

So, I've got to wonder if his plan is to let the young pitchers grow and continue to sign Vlads and Lees year after year.

If FA is definitively out of the question as an avenue to acquire long-term, elite pitchers and bats, I think AM needs to show more creativity on the trade market.

He rarely loses trades, but I think he needs to show that he can acquire good, young targets on the market. Reynolds and Pie were good examples, but both were buy-low bargains.

It would be nice to see AM pursue young, established, 2-3 starting pitchers like Floyd, Marcum, Garza or Liriano. I'd also like to see him pursue young, blocked bats like Alonso, Kila or Banks.

Obviously, you don't want to get beat on the deal, and you don't want to dip too far into your young core to acquire these guys, but I think AM is fooling himself if he thinks he can assemble a contending rotation solely from internal options, particularly when Jordan's draft record has been spotty and we are not investing much into international talent.He's right that the FA market is inefficient and potentially damaging to the long-term plans of mid-market teams. But when you cut off an entire avenue for acquiring top talent, you need to work the other avenues overtime to compensate.

I agree with much of what you are saying, but I question what I put in bold. You really think Matusz, Tillman, Britton, Arrieta, BB, Guthrie (or a free agent like him since he didn't rule out signing a pitcher like that), and anyone else down in the farm and drafted over the next couple years or so can't form a contending rotation?