Jump to content

Dave Cameron: Big Ticket Signings Don't Drive Attendance

SrMeowMeow

By SrMeowMeow
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply
RavNMadMan Veteran All-Star

RavNMadMan

Posted
Posted
That's true. But trying to spend your way out of the problem and likely failing doesn't help.

Yeah I agree but taking responsible actions to improve the ML roster is what is needed here. Not the big ticket guys but guys we need to improve like some decent, proven pitching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SrMeowMeow Hangout Grand Counsel

SrMeowMeow

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I agree that good players mean more wins. But that's not the argument being nuked from orbit here (for the 100 millionth time, BTW).

You say Fielder, I say "only if the contract is acceptable" - i.e. if the money justifies the wins he'll bring to the team.

You say that a premium player will help pay for himself in attendance. I say that's false. Everyone says it's false. Dave Cameron says it's false. Statistics and history and anecdotal evidence say it's false.

Time passes (one day? two, tops?).

You say that a premium player will help pay for himself in attendance. The world facepalms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BaltimoreTerp Hangout Grand Counsel

BaltimoreTerp

Posted
Posted
Yeah I agree but taking responsible actions to improve the ML roster is what is needed here. Not the big ticket guys but guys we need to improve like some decent, proven pitching.

Again, though, like who? What price? What players in trade?

Nobody is opposed to improving the team, but there are risks associated with every deal. You don't want to avoid risk altogether, because that is itself an admission of failure, but you want to take the "right" risks at the right times.

Overpaying for "decent" pitching, cash or commodity-wise, is a good risk at some times, and a poor risk at others. Same for acquiring a powerful bat. Same for trading your best players for prospects, to go the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SrMeowMeow Hangout Grand Counsel

SrMeowMeow

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How many teams have added a premium FA or two and have gone backwards in the standings?

Nobody is arguing with your strawman arguments! Everyone knows that the O's would win more games with Prince Fielder than without him. Is that the sum of your argument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RavNMadMan Veteran All-Star

RavNMadMan

Posted
Posted
Again, though, like who? What price? What players in trade?

Nobody is opposed to improving the team, but there are risks associated with every deal. You don't want to avoid risk altogether, because that is itself an admission of failure, but you want to take the "right" risks at the right times.

Overpaying for "decent" pitching, cash or commodity-wise, is a good risk at some times, and a poor risk at others. Same for acquiring a powerful bat. Same for trading your best players for prospects, to go the other way.

I'm not sure who or what price. That's the GMs job and thankfully someone more knowledgable than I has it. I would rather go FA for a middling guy or two (pitchers) whom has impressed someone in the organization. I completely agree that we don't have many trade pieces in the system unless we go full "fire sale, rebuild from the ground up" mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
The Mets say hello.

Throughout O's history, save for 1992-2000, the organization has had one of the lowest star/fan ratios in baseball. The 1982 Orioles won 94 games, had four Hall of Famers, and finished 8th in the AL in attendance. The '71 Orioles, a dynastic team full of Hall of Famers, on the heels of two straight World Series, got all the way up to third in the league, then promptly fell back to 6th the next year, and 9th the year after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...