At what point was it clear to you MacPhail was not "the guy?"

[Tony-OH]

Nice to see you continue to skirt your own forum rules.

Umm, you want to show me where calling people part of the lollipop Brigade is against the rules? I mean seriously, embraced your positiveness. It's ok, some people just see things differently. And at the very least, stop being so sensitive. Sheesh...

[Tony-OH]

Tony, I am not saying that all is well. I think you know that. However, we have to identify that right problem if it is to be fixed.

I hear you, but we can't fix the Angelos problem so the highest we can "fix" is MacPhail. At the end of day, someone needs to be held responsible and I'm all out of patience. 14 years is apparently my limit. Who knew?

[clapdiddy]

Ahh, as my aunt used to tell me... "Cruisin for a bruisin."

For me, it was Atkins. Laugh all you want, but it was pretty inexcusable to think that that guy was going to be a good ballplayer for us. It was a dumbass move.

MacPhail does have a lot of blame to take but I still believe the majority of this mess is because of Angelos.

Does anyone remember what GM candidates were being considered by the Orioles at the time? I'd like to know if in hindsight there was anyone who we'd rather have now.

Agree about the Atkins signing. As a matter of fact, I don't think it was the fact that we signed Atkins...I think it was the fact that we guaranteed him 4.5M. I think you (and most posters here) would have had no problem with a 500K, incentive-loaded type deal. It's the fact that he committed so much money to a guy in obvious decline.

[Moose Milligan]

I hear you, but we can't fix the Angelos problem so the highest we can "fix" is MacPhail. At the end of day, someone needs to be held responsible and I'm all out of patience. 14 years is apparently my limit. Who knew?

Yeah, but I don't think "we" can fix MacPhail.

I wouldn't trust Angelos with about anything. I don't trust him to make the right hire if MacPhail leaves. I mean, Angelos has done precisely squat to give any reason why I should have an iota of faith.

[mweb]

For anyone saying the Atkins signing, I guess it's more of a matter of questioining the reasoning there? Because it terms of magnitute of the mistake, it was relatively minor. If that's the worst mistake a GM makes over a 4 year period, I would encourage people to check out other GM's mistakes and compare. Now that may be part of the problem since his risk aversion not only only prevents big mistakes, but limits the team in making potentially high-reward moves.

[SrMeowMeow]

I agree that the Atkins signing was bad, although not very costly in the big picture, and giving up the pick for Gonzo was bad. I think if we really analyzed other teams the way we do the O's, we would find examples that are roughly as bad with a lot of teams.

I think the spending on the draft has been decent and as stated I would guess that PA has a lot to do with limiting the spending on that and the international market.

I'm not looking at it in terms of what hurt the future of the franchise the most, but rather what information I can learn about MacPhail's decision-making. Atkins was an obvious bad decision from the start. I (and many other posters) posted research saying that he was a poor bet, no real bounceback potential, etc. This was not the case with guys like Vlad and Lee, signings I liked. It was just a flat-out poor decision to add to the "con" side of the MacPhail chart.

[mweb]

I'm not looking at it in terms of what hurt the future of the franchise the most, but rather what information I can learn about MacPhail's decision-making. Atkins was an obvious bad decision from the start. I (and many other posters) posted research saying that he was a poor bet, no real bounceback potential, etc. This was not the case with guys like Vlad and Lee, signings I liked. It was just a flat-out poor decision to add to the "con" side of the MacPhail chart.

I get that, but I still think it's one or two bad signings if you include Gonzo over 4 years. That's not that bad. Look at other clubs moves over the past 4 years. We as a board are consistently saying so and so team just made a dumb move, but of course we don't harp on it like we do with the O's and then bring it up years later.

[Phil Beckett]

The Adkins signing, to me, just defined the orioles bad moves over the years. Going the cheap route, and hoping for a lucky fix. Neither the yanks or red sox work that way! Even we "hate" them as rivals, I do respect that usually get the job done. One thing the O's do is complain about their situation. I don't see the rays or jays doing the same, and they are competitive!

[wildcard]

I hear you, but we can't fix the Angelos problem so the highest we can "fix" is MacPhail. At the end of day, someone needs to be held responsible and I'm all out of patience. 14 years is apparently my limit. Who knew?

Well, my plan starts with promoting Mike Griffin to pitching coach. Everything revolves around pitching. Griffin knows the guys on the staff and they seem to respect him. Griffin is the one they go to when they need to be fixed. Get him up to the majors.

Secondly, don't trade away your future. The young talented guys need to stay.

Third, I like the way MacPhail traded AAAA players and relievers for salary dump position players Hardy and Reynolds. I want to see more of that.

Sounds like the O's want more pitching for Guthrie and Koji. Sounds right to me.

Don't think that everyone has to be young. A mix of players is a good thing not a bad thing.

[LookitsPuck]

The Adkins signing, to me, just defined the orioles bad moves over the years. Going the cheap route, and hoping for a lucky fix. Neither the yanks or red sox work that way! Even we "hate" them as rivals, I do respect that usually get the job done. One thing the O's do is complain about their situation. I don't see the rays or jays doing the same, and they are competitive!

Andruw Jones says hi from the Yankees.

[Phil Beckett]

Andruw Jones says hi from the Yankees.

How nice! Tell him I said howdy!

[JTrea81]

Andruw Jones says hi from the Yankees.

Jones was always meant to be a bench player. Atkins was picked up to be a regular.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I supported AM up until this season. But this season has really made me sour on him. I dunno, I just can't believe how bad we are. I'm ready for a change.

[SrMeowMeow]

I get that, but I still think it's one or two bad signings if you include Gonzo over 4 years. That's not that bad. Look at other clubs moves over the past 4 years. We as a board are consistently saying so and so team just made a dumb move, but of course we don't harp on it like we do with the O's and then bring it up years later.

But bad decisions are way worse than bad results. I cannot imagine a really good GM who would make the Gonzo or Atkins moves. Thus, I don't consider MacPhail a really good GM.

Atkins was more of slightly but unambiguously negative insight into the decision-making process. I remember thinking that there were no signs of a bounce-back in Atkins' stats, and the only justification I could imagine was that there was a mechanical tweak they had in mind that would take Atkins back to the hitter he once was. And then I read a quote on here that the hitting coach (Crowley?) didn't even look at video until after the signing, killing that last option.

Gonzalez was a haymaker to the chin of my hopes for MacPhail. Giving up a pick for a reliever is like the number one warning sign that a GM doesn't understand the relative value of prospects and veterans. Note that I don't feel this way at all about Gregg. We paid acceptable money for a mediocre reliever. That's not how I'd allocate my resources, but it's defensible. Atkins and Gonzalez were not.

[Satyr3206]

I hear you, but we can't fix the Angelos problem so the highest we can "fix" is MacPhail. At the end of day, someone needs to be held responsible and I'm all out of patience. 14 years is apparently my limit. Who knew?

Unfortunately it's the Angelos problem that will have to be addressed at some point. I've had issues with most of the GM's during the Angelos years about one thing or another but he is the constant. The FO has been changed time and time again so what does that tell us? The Owner is the problem. I have no way of knowing but I'd bet he has put restraints and roadblocks in front of every GM or decision maker. And that's the core problem. Until he sells or understands it's in his best interest to let Baseball people run the Franchise, the Orioles will be an afterthought that he profits from.

At this point, as an O's fan, I almost have to hope that he will be gone at some point before I die so I'll have a sliver of hope for the Franchise. Sounds dramatic but it's close to the truth.