Jump to content

Geoff Baker echos my thoughts on FA and the standard cliches (excuses) for a non-contending team


JTrea81

Recommended Posts

Tex was still a 4.0+ fWAR player last year, and he's only been worth a few million less than his contract thus far.

And look at all the money that was wasted to sign sub replacement players. It pretty much equals Tex's salary, so don't tell me his contract would have hamstrung the club in anyway.

Resource allocation has been a big problem for this club. I think Duquette will fix that.

As long as you don't waste money on positions that provide the least value, you can afford a couple of premium contracts.

Actually, on this I agree with you. I would rather go with a Fielder than a bunch of stopgap FA's. Your issue/problem is that you only foresee a roster of 120+ million dollars (even your latest effort) with a bunch of acquisitions and can't be realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply
By the way, please change your avatar. Your posts are ruining a classic comic strip character for me. Can't you be the kid from Family Circus or something instead?

Sorry, I've had this avatar since I joined this board. If you don't like the posts, put me on ignore and you don't have to see your character "tarnished" by my very existence...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, on this I agree with you. I would rather go with a Fielder than a bunch of stopgap FA's. Your issue/problem is that you only foresee a roster of 120+ million dollars (even your latest effort) with a bunch of acquisitions and can't be realistic.

We don't have to have Wilson per say (and probably won't). There's a way to get that payroll down, but still get a player like Fielder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I've had this avatar since I joined this board. If you don't like the posts, put me on ignore and you don't have to see your character "tarnished" by my very existence...

He's right. That way, you also protect the forum from being tarnished by him as well. Not being sarcastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smoak isn't the chip he once was. He's rapidly approaching Chris Davis territory...

Really? Because you were ready to trade the whole farm for him a year or two ago. Maybe you should brush up on your pro scouting skills before you go deciding who to spend $100m on, or who to trade every prospect you have for.

Just saying, you've clamored for many more busts than you have breakout stars. If you want to help, maybe you should focus on targeting guys that are still fairly cheap and controllable that will get better instead of guys that are at their peak performance and will not earn the latter half of their contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Because you were ready to trade the whole farm for him a year or two ago. Maybe you should brush up on your pro scouting skills before you go deciding who to spend $100m on, or who to trade every prospect you have for.

Just saying, you've clamored for many more busts than you have breakout stars. If you want to help, maybe you should focus on targeting guys that are still fairly cheap and controllable that will get better instead of guys that are at their peak performance and will not earn the latter half of their contract.

We need established talent to move this team forward, not a bunch of question marks IMO.

I'll admit I was high on Smoak, and the career parallels that Matusz and Smoak have had are quite interesting.

And with Posey being hurt and then having to move to 1B, out of all those guys Alonso might actually be the best of the bunch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't have to have Wilson per say (and probably won't). There's a way to get that payroll down, but still get a player like Fielder.

I agree with you, but even in your latest and greatest good faith effort you were still around 120-130 million in payroll? You don't seem to have much patience with guys like Reimold/Andino/Davis/Adams etc. as potential complements ..... and if we get a Fielder, that's what we're going to have to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a stupid argument.

He doesn't think the M's can contend for another 3 years, yet he wants to give Fielder a contract anyway, knowing full well that the last few years aren't likely to be his better years?

I actually think he is wrong though...I think the M's are in position to make a big push for Fielder. They make way more sense than the Orioles.

And saying Smoak is entering Davis territory is one of the dumbest things ever said on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you, but even in your latest and greatest good faith effort you were still around 120-130 million in payroll? You don't seem to have much patience with guys like Reimold/Andino/Davis/Adams etc. as potential complements ..... and if we get a Fielder, that's what we're going to have to do.

Not neccesarily. We can move some underperformers like Markakis even eating some salary and still get some more breathing room.

1 year deals will also help make some payroll room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need established talent to move this team forward, not a bunch of question marks IMO.

I'm with you on guys when they make sense. I was with you on Tex. To a lesser degree I'm with you on Fielder. But you want to go sign EVERY top FA every offseason. If we had signed Burnett a couple years ago, we'd be hamstrung by that contract and getting Tillman-like production. I do agree with you to a point, but you have to find that break even point of spending for the sake of spending and making a really smart signing that is going to help you in 4-5 years.

The GMs that do the best are the ones that make a move like getting Granderson when he was coming off a so-so year, or getting Carpenter when he looked like he was a bust. Any idiot can go out there and throw a truck load of money at Pujols, but in 4 years when he's putting up Smoak-like numbers, and KILLING your payroll you are really going to regret it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And saying Smoak is entering Davis territory is one of the dumbest things ever said on this board.

Have you not seen his stats? His away stats last year were worse than his home stats.

He'll be 25 next season and Adam Jones has been more productive and more valuable than him at that age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of my friends think the Orioles should sign Fielder and Darvish, some Reyes too. I should get them to write a blog so I can post it here and talk about it like it is A. a good idea and B. something that is realistic and will put us over the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with you on guys when they make sense. I was with you on Tex. To a lesser degree I'm with you on Fielder. But you want to go sign EVERY top FA every offseason. If we had signed Burnett a couple years ago, we'd be hamstrung by that contract and getting Tillman-like production. I do agree with you to a point, but you have to find that break even point of spending for the sake of spending and making a really smart signing that is going to help you in 4-5 years.

The GMs that do the best are the ones that make a move like getting Granderson when he was coming off a so-so year, or getting Carpenter when he looked like he was a bust. Any idiot can go out there and throw a truck load of money at Pujols, but in 4 years when he's putting up Smoak-like numbers, and KILLING your payroll you are really going to regret it.

Depends on what happens in years 1-4...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not neccesarily. We can move some underperformers like Markakis even eating some salary and still get some more breathing room.

1 year deals will also help make some payroll room.

That's fine. Moving Nick is a good idea to reduce some salary. That said, he's still a decent player and we'd have to replace his production somewhere. One year FA deals (for anybody worthwhile) isn't going to create payroll room and are likely to give you subpar production. Thats the essence of your point. You can't have it both ways. I think you've got the right idea that lesser high quality FA's are better than numerous stop-gap ones. You should probably stick with that instead of wandering off.

I agree with you about Fielder but you need to be around 100 mil in payroll (and that's a stretch) for anyone to take you serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...