Epstein's presser...how it relates to the Orioles

[Frobby]

Take the $61MM off the $143,026,214 Boston had in payroll that year and around 13.5 wins from their 96 total and you have an $82MM team winning around 82 games. The wild card could have been won for 89 games, so Boston would have needed to find around seven WAR out of whatever players they used to fill those five vacated spots by removing Ramirez/Matsuzaka/Drew/Veritek/Schilling.

Call me crazy, but I think that World Series was won by low-end to mid-level extensions/FA and completely homegrown talent, not the handful of "big ticket items" on the roster.

OK, I'll call you crazy. There is no way the Red Sox are winning the World Series without ManRam, Schilling, Dice-K et al. Mind you, I'm not downplaying the primary importance of a team developing its own talent, which is well demonstrated by the research reflected in your post. But without these guys the Sox would have been lucky to make the playoffs, and certainly wouldn't have gotten past the Yankees.

[Stotle]

OK, I'll call you crazy. There is no way the Red Sox are winning the World Series without ManRam, Schilling, Dice-K et al. Mind you, I'm not downplaying the primary importance of a team developing its own talent, which is well demonstrated by the research reflected in your post. But without these guys the Sox would have been lucky to make the playoffs, and certainly wouldn't have gotten past the Yankees.

The Yankees won 94 games. the next best team in the AL won 88. Would Boston be a lock for the playoffs without those arms? No. Did they need big money to make the playoffs that year? No.

I understand the example was a bit extreme. But it underscores the fact that Boston's success is not simply a product of big spending. By the way, I'm not convinced they wouldn't have been better off with Ellsbury for a full year in place of Manny. Buchholz received a late call-up and was nails, as well, over 22IP and three starts (including a no hitter).

[VeveJones007]

Of course it is not impossible, but in every case I can remember the actual return on investment is much lower then projections.

Lets look at Illinois's credit rating for a second. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b6f27f66-75ab-11df-86c4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1bwJ8ns3C

Does that sound like a State that should be issuing bonds for a private industry?

No. I lived there my entire life until this August. That state is in shambles economically.

This whole thing derived from Drungo's statement that he would completely ban these types of bonds. I was simply trying to state that they aren't always a bad option.

[Can_of_corn]

No. I lived there my entire life until this August. That state is in shambles economically.

This whole thing derived from Drungo's statement that he would completely ban these types of bonds. I was simply trying to state that they aren't always a bad option.

From what I have seen they pretty much are a bad option, for the municipality and the taxpayers. Can you make a case that it was worth the cost to taxpayers to get OPACY built? I suppose you can but the ownership group made far more money off the deal then the State and city did, if they turned a profit at all at the end of the day.

The issues with the current model are worsened by the economic climate. States and cities just don't have the cash, or the credit, to give teams huge sums of money to help the team make huge sums of money.

[LookinUp]

The Yankees won 94 games. the next best team in the AL won 88. Would Boston be a lock for the playoffs without those arms? No. Did they need big money to make the playoffs that year? No.

I understand the example was a bit extreme. But it underscores the fact that Boston's success is not simply a product of big spending. By the way, I'm not convinced they wouldn't have been better off with Ellsbury for a full year in place of Manny. Buchholz received a late call-up and was nails, as well, over 22IP and three starts (including a no hitter).

My take away from this discussion is it will be very very hard for the Rays to win a WS with their model. Consistently competitive, yes, but WS winners...tough.

[DrungoHazewood]

My take away from this discussion is it will be very very hard for the Rays to win a WS with their model. Consistently competitive, yes, but WS winners...tough.

The difference between a consistent contender and a World Series winner is who happened to be peaking in October. There is scarcely any difference between building a team for 90 wins and building a team to win the Series.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The difference between a consistent contender and a World Series winner is who happened to be peaking in October. There is scarcely any difference between building a team for 90 wins and building a team to win the Series.

Yeah, I agree with that. It's not like the NBA.

[LookinUp]

The difference between a consistent contender and a World Series winner is who happened to be peaking in October. There is scarcely any difference between building a team for 90 wins and building a team to win the Series.

Consistently competitive puts you in the 85+ win range. World Series contenders from the AL East need to be in the 90+ win range to consistently have a shot at making the playoffs, then they need to get hot at the right time. The former is much easier with an infusion of $$$.

[Frobby]

My take away from this discussion is it will be very very hard for the Rays to win a WS with their model. Consistently competitive, yes, but WS winners...tough.

I don't see it that way. Once the playoffs start, anything can happen. The Rays have been to the playoffs 3 times in 4 years following their model. In two of those years, they were division champs. They went to the World Series once with a 97-win team and had the best record in the AL last year with a 96-win team. I'd say their model is working just fine.

[Frobby]

I saw Epstein on PTI today and what he said on there was apparently what he said in his presser today.

He talked about how it will take some time but that he wants to build an organization in Chicago. He wants to build a team that can sustain winning and make the playoffs for several years, not some one and done type thing.

On PTI, they asked him about the differences between Boston and Chicago..He said when he got to Boston, there was already an excellent core of players.

He said that is lacking in Chicago and that they needed to build that.He also talked about how they need to improve the defense, be more patient and have better at bats.

I couldn't help but listen to him and think, damn he gets it...He knows what needs to happen.

So, obviously the easy segway here is that this is exactly what the Orioles need to do.

He didn't talk about adding premium FAs, spending big dollars or anything like that...He talked about building an organization, having good scouting, player development, etc...

Its almost as if he was looking at the camera and talking directly to the Orioles and telling them what they need to do as well.

It is interesting to re-read this with Duquette's presser coming tomorrow. Of course, Duquette largely assembled the "excellent core of players" that Theo inherited in Boston. But like Theo with the Cubs, Duq really doesn't have an "excellent core" he is inheriting here. Oh, he has a few nuggets, but there is a lot missing. It will be very interesting to see what Duq has to say about the task in front of him.