Orioles had over a full WAR more than the Reds..

[mikegallo]

Of course it matters. How can you you think stating 17 wins as fact (when it's more likely 6-8 imo) and providing factually incorrect data and false assumptions not matter? Who is going to take you serious when you do that? You're STILL not getting WAR is not the way to approach this and you're STILL making incorrect and misleading assumptions here.

They beat us by 6% in WRC+. Fangraphs does not publish park adjusted woba. WRC+ converted to Park adjusted woba is about 5 wins difference on offense. That would go into the WAR differential you're talking about. Add at least another win for baserunning and you probably have a least 6wins there. Maybe you get 6-8 wins on defense. I don't buy 10 wins on UZR and DER clearly is more like about 8 wins on defense. There are other factors in play like park/DIPS flaws/pitching characteristics in play here.

It's just HYPERBOLE to prove a point our D sucks and greatly impacts our pitching and our over all badness....As for the 2010 Mariners no one is saying to put a historically bad Offense on the field to have a good D on the field.....Value is value whether it is offense or defense doesn't matter.....

But I would argue I would rather have the same amount of value through D then O because of Ds impact on pitchinng their cofidence etc...

This game is about having more RS than RA our problem right now on this team is much more RA oriented....so the question is why and how do we get better at it...

Now while it is clear our pitching is bad I would argue our D is much much worse.....Look at Tommy Hunter and the sucesss he had in texas versus what he did hear...

Now did he just become that much worse a pitcher because he was wearing black and orange...NO he was on a team with very good D that helped prop a pitcher like him who pitched to contact up while our bad D made him a bad pitcher....We need to upgrade our D if we don't there is no way we can ever compete ever ever ever ever...

[CA-ORIOLE]

It's just HYPERBOLE to prove a point ...

That's close enough to a troll imo. Good luck to you.

[Can_of_corn]

Hunter was dealing with injury issues last season. His 15 IP with Texas were out of the pen. You can not put a lot of statistical weight on less then 70 IP.

Also the 2010 Mariners were built around the idea of run prevention which makes them the perfect example of what you evidently want to do. I am sure they expected the offense to be better then it turned out.

[mikegallo]

That's close enough to a troll imo. Good luck to you.

What does troll mean?

[Frobby]

The orioles have the highest Babip in the league at .302 yet we have an below average Ld% and our Fb% is above average which tells us our D sucks....Flyballs tend to be converted into outs easier than groundballs...

So in conclusion we have below average GBs and LD above average FB and yet our ball put in play is the highest in the league, which means our team sucks at converting balls in play into outs even tho we had a much easier batted balls to deal with than most teams(more fly balls less GB and LD).....Our D is historically bad and effects our pitching more than any other team in the league...

If I am our GM the best way for us to catch up to the rest of the league is improve our D....Pitching is of course also a big problem but it is not as bad as it first appears.

So Mike, exactly who do you want to trade, and who do you want to acquire, to remedy the problem you believe you have identified? I don't believe that Longoria and Zobrist are available.

I think you should cool it with the "historically bad" rhetoric.

2007 - Mariners were -54.9. O's were 2.4.

2008 - Rockies and Tigers were -60 UZR. O's were +12.6.

2009 - Royals were -48.6. O's were -22.2.

2010 - Pirates were -63.6. O's were -21.4

2011 - Mets were -59.6. O's were -53.6

There have been plenty of teams worse than the 2011 Orioles, and the 2011 Orioles were outliers for the Orioles. Over the last 5 years, the O's are 24th in UZR, and deal last in ERA, FIP and xFIP

Again, I am not denying that the Orioles would be helped if they had a better defense. But if you think it is a bigger problem than the pitching, then I just wholeheartedly disagree.

[mikegallo]

So Mike, exactly who do you want to trade, and who do you want to acquire, to remedy the problem you believe you have identified? I don't believe that Longoria and Zobrist are available.

I think you should cool it with the "historically bad" rhetoric.

2007 - Mariners were -54.9. O's were 2.4.

2008 - Rockies and Tigers were -60 UZR. O's were +12.6.

2009 - Royals were -48.6. O's were -22.2.

2010 - Pirates were -63.6. O's were -21.4

2011 - Mets were -59.6. O's were -53.6

There have been plenty of teams worse than the 2011 Orioles, and the 2011 Orioles were outliers for the Orioles. Over the last 5 years, the O's are 24th in UZR, and deal last in ERA, FIP and xFIP

Again, I am not denying that the Orioles would be helped if they had a better defense. But if you think it is a bigger problem than the pitching, then I just wholeheartedly disagree.

What to do about it is another discussion that I think we should have, saying that there is only so much you can do in the real world which DD is apart of....The first thing I would do is make MArk R my DH and tell him he's not allowed to bring a glove to OPACY while hes on this team....

I agree pitching is also a huge problem but my question to you is Is our current pitching staff really as bad as it seems or is it possible the reason why our pitching is so bad is our D was so bad this year?

I believe if we had a top flight D our pitching results would have been much closer to 20th in the league instead of last...Now without better starting pitching we will not contend but look at the White Sox they had one of the best rotations in the game but there Bad D made there actual results much worse than there prephs would indacate..

I just can't see anyway our pitching can get signifantly better without a much better D behind them even if we get a guy like E Jack we need a better D for our young guys to take that next step.

[Frobby]

What to do about it is another discussion that I think we should have, saying that there is only so much you can do in the real world which DD is apart of....The first thing I would do is make MArk R my DH and tell him he's not allowed to bring a glove to OPACY while hes on this team....

I agree pitching is also a huge problem but my question to you is Is our current pitching staff really as bad as it seems or is it possible the reason why our pitching is so bad is our D was so bad this year?

I believe if we had a top flight D our pitching results would have been much closer to 20th in the league instead of last...Now without better starting pitching we will not contend but look at the White Sox they had one of the best rotations in the game but there Bad D made there actual results much worse than there prephs would indacate..

I just can't see anyway our pitching can get signifantly better without a much better D behind them even if we get a guy like E Jack we need a better D for our young guys to take that next step.

I don't see how we acquire a "top flight D," unless we sacrifice something else. Would we be better off if we had a "top flight D" but our offense was the worst in the league? Last year, the defense was about 32 runs worse than the year before (going by UZR), but the offense was 95 runs better. Don't you have to make that tradeoff?

I need to see who we have to play 3B who is significantly better than Reynolds, before ruling him out at 3B. Davis in his career has a -28.8 UZR/150 at 3B, while Reynolds is at -10.5. I don't see a prima facie reason to think Davis is better at 3B than Reynolds. I haven't seen Antonelli, so who knows what his defense at 3B (or 2B for that matter) would be like?

Overall, it is a complicated equation, where offense and defense both have to be considered. I certainly am not going to just assume that what we saw from Reynolds in 2011 is what we will see next year. He can go out and compete for 3B and try to show that his defense will be more in line with his career numbers in 2012. Depending on how he looks, and how the other candidates look, the team will make a decision. I see no reason to pre-judge it.

[Lucky Jim]

The way I have worded my threads was meant to be assumptions about how our team is built....I purposefully do not do the "heavy lifting" because that is kind of the point of the rest of the thread and I have been leaving it open for the purpose for discussion...

For instances if I were to make a point (our D sucks) then back it up with heavy statistical anaylsis, what is there left to say in the thread other than yea man I agree or yupp thats it good point....

But if I make assumption based points and use examples such as our WAR being over a win better than the Reds in spite of the actual results it leaves room for the actual discussion of the problem with our team....

Then I go on to ask the questions of why they got so much more out of there pitchers, or why ours was so bad....I mean yeah I could ask the ? then answer them myself in the OP but there isn't much room so discussion at all....

And instead of the discussion that I am sheding light on and trying to engage in taking place it is dismissed because I didn't answer my own ? or is avoided with posts of my worship of great front office guys...

I would rather let the thread develop then add in stats anyalzes as to why the opening points make sense.....

I mean if you want me to neatly ask the question then answer it all in the same op and you guys then pat me on the back for it great but that is kind of boring...

And I am sure Lucky Jim and others have thought of the things I am saying but anyone who follows this board knows Defense is one of the least talked about problems and rarley is blamed for our bad record...I mean isn't the point of a message board to throw around idea's and have thoses discussions...

In my threads I make and example and then ask questions, having others try to answer those question is what will spark thoses great discussions where people do the heavy lifting and we actually get to answers as to why we suck and what other teams our doing to kick our butt....And D is one of thoses things that other good teams have used to win yet our team just does not seem to get it.

Go look at the Jeremy versus Zach thread if that thread does not show you that our D being horrible is not supported with the development of our young pitchers then Idk what else can be said....There seasons our a clear example of how our D has hindered our young pitching versus the Rays who make it almost impossible for there young pitching not to develop.

This is the only real takeaway from that thread:

I think Britton is a more volatile talent with a higher ceiling if everything clicks. Hellickson is much more refined but is still adjusting to ML ball and wasn't sequencing and executing as well as he needs to if he wants to reach his #2 ceiling.

Britton was unlucky, but he also created a lot of that poor luck by living too much in the middle of the plate and allowing hard contact. Hellickson was flat out lucky and benefited from a good defense.

To be honest, I think the debate about "who was better in 2011" is largely uninteresting. The question is who will be better moving forward. Will Britton make the adjustments he needs to cut down on walks and improve his command? Will Hellickson improve his approach and learn to make more effective use of his above-average secondaries?

The safe pick is Hellickson; the upside pick is Britton. Should be fun to watch both of them in 2012.

You haven't even made the leap connecting "ERA from last year" to "development". That's the problem. You've never defined development, you just move it around to mean whatever you want it to mean. If Britton is "better" than Hellickson, and only non-predictive stats support another conclusion, then the Orioles have "developed" Britton. They just need to improve the run-context around him (i.e., score the same or more, give up fewer). This isn't news.

What makes you think this board needs a provocateur who can't do the heavy-lifting - and then doubles back to hammer people with his own half-formed opinion? If you think you serve some didactic purpose - and between the gaping logical flaws, the over-reliance on hyperbole and the poor wording that seems doubtful - then do it subtly, the way others have historically done it around here. Look to the example set by the posters you cite - Frobby, Drungo, Stotle - rather than the self-aggrandizing nature of what you're doing in these threads. We all have our flaws as posters (even the three above), but these threads haven't provided anything new - save for a source of aggravation.

[Lucky Jim]

None of this is to say that our pitchers wouldn't be better off w/ a better defense - obviously, it would allow them to pitch more fearlessly. Frankly, however, I haven't seen anything among our young pitchers that allows me to think their issues w/ walks and home runs is because they register some tangible difference in defense. Again, no one thinks our defense is where it needs to be - even those who think the available metrics are somewhat flawed.

[El Gordo]

I don't see how we acquire a "top flight D," unless we sacrifice something else. Would we be better off if we had a "top flight D" but our offense was the worst in the league? Last year, the defense was about 32 runs worse than the year before (going by UZR), but the offense was 95 runs better. Don't you have to make that tradeoff?

I need to see who we have to play 3B who is significantly better than Reynolds, before ruling him out at 3B. Davis in his career has a -28.8 UZR/150 at 3B, while Reynolds is at -10.5. I don't see a prima facie reason to think Davis is better at 3B than Reynolds. I haven't seen Antonelli, so who knows what his defense at 3B (or 2B for that matter) would be like?

Overall, it is a complicated equation, where offense and defense both have to be considered. I certainly am not going to just assume that what we saw from Reynolds in 2011 is what we will see next year. He can go out and compete for 3B and try to show that his defense will be more in line with his career numbers in 2012. Depending on how he looks, and how the other candidates look, the team will make a decision. I see no reason to pre-judge it.

You can't draw any conclusions about Davis at 3B or Reynolds at 1B from the numbers. Neither has played more than 1/2 a season's worth of IN at those respective positions in over 4 full seasons of play. We don't know how they might adapt with a fullseason at one position. As to our defense as a whole, alot depends on how well those 2 can play. 1B and 3B are the biggest defensive negatives, if you take Markakis and Jones away stats to be the true measure of their defensive value. If Davis/Antonelli can give us league average play at 3B and Reynolds can give us a -5 to -0 at 1B then with Reimold at a +2 in LF, Andino +2 or better at 2B, and Wieters and Hardy at GG caliber at C and SS we might not not be too bad.

[mikegallo]

This is the only real takeaway from that thread:

You haven't even made the leap connecting "ERA from last year" to "development". That's the problem. You've never defined development, you just move it around to mean whatever you want it to mean. If Britton is "better" than Hellickson, and only non-predictive stats support another conclusion, then the Orioles have "developed" Britton. They just need to improve the run-context around him (i.e., score the same or more, give up fewer). This isn't news.

What makes you think this board needs a provocateur who can't do the heavy-lifting - and then doubles back to hammer people with his own half-formed opinion? If you think you serve some didactic purpose - and between the gaping logical flaws, the over-reliance on hyperbole and the poor wording that seems doubtful - then do it subtly, the way others have historically done it around here. Look to the example set by the posters you cite - Frobby, Drungo, Stotle - rather than the self-aggrandizing nature of what you're doing in these threads. We all have our flaws as posters (even the three above), but these threads haven't provided anything new - save for a source of aggravation.

This is a message board dude...its purpose is to talk about baseball and thats what I am trying to do while looking at the Os a little diffrently then I have seen in the past on here.

I didn't know that each thread had to be "news" as you call it....If the way I try to start discussion is such a source of aggravation for you then don't particapte in the thread...

And for you to try to marginalize my thread on Jeremy vs Zach by saying the only real takeaway from the hole thing is a comment by stotle is kind of uncalled for and not fair to me or aneone else who took part in it.

And just because I am a new poster and your not does not put you in the postion to say that I think this board needs a provocateur who can't do the heavy lifting...You know nothing about me and to say that I am uncapable of doing this heavy lifting is just not good form on your part...

Besides why do you care so much how I lay out my threads and how I am choosing to start the discussion....I have seen alot of posters new ones espically been run of by guys like you who think its there right to tell them how to word there posts and blast them for the way they choose to talk about the game...

I want to continue to post on this board and think that how I make my points should not upset others like it has, thats not my intent, it is my intent to continue to enjoy the board and engage others in discussion of our team and how to improve it.

If you don't like my methods then just don't comment I mean really just do that instead of slamming them and derailing the whole thread into a dispute on how you don't approve of my points...

Thats it and if you want to actually talk about baseball I am all for it, if you wan to talk about why my posts rub you the wrong way and how you percieve me to be unable to critically think and unable to make my very logical points or "heavy lifting" as you call it then please go somewhere else with that.

[mikegallo]

I don't see how we acquire a "top flight D," unless we sacrifice something else. Would we be better off if we had a "top flight D" but our offense was the worst in the league? Last year, the defense was about 32 runs worse than the year before (going by UZR), but the offense was 95 runs better. Don't you have to make that tradeoff?

I need to see who we have to play 3B who is significantly better than Reynolds, before ruling him out at 3B. Davis in his career has a -28.8 UZR/150 at 3B, while Reynolds is at -10.5. I don't see a prima facie reason to think Davis is better at 3B than Reynolds. I haven't seen Antonelli, so who knows what his defense at 3B (or 2B for that matter) would be like?

Overall, it is a complicated equation, where offense and defense both have to be considered. I certainly am not going to just assume that what we saw from Reynolds in 2011 is what we will see next year. He can go out and compete for 3B and try to show that his defense will be more in line with his career numbers in 2012. Depending on how he looks, and how the other candidates look, the team will make a decision. I see no reason to pre-judge it.

Yea it is a tough trade off on O vs D and each situation should be based on its own merit, but it's clear to me last years pitching staff was greatly hindered by our sub-par D and Mark Reynolds was a big part of that....

For starters I would prolly trade AJ because if his D is actually what his UZR indicates then I think is tarde value is much higher than his actual value to our team..and plus as your AJ cieling thread stated he has pretty much reached his offensive potential...

I think that based on Mark Reynolds career we can pre-judge that at best he is below average at third and at worst he is all time bad there and who else on our team is better suited to DH then him..A guy who has value in his bat but negative value in his glove.

Andino would provide us with a much better glove at third and depending who starts in other places might have enough of a bat to not kill our offense....Idk

All I do know is if our D doesn't improve in a major way you can kiss the 2012 season goodbye (we are most likely doing that anyway but Id like to hope not)

[Can_of_corn]

And yet the 2005 Yankees made the playoffs...

In 2005, however, their defense plummeted ten miles south of abysmal towards incalculable, unfathomable depths.

That season, the aggregate UZR in the Bronx was -130 runs. -130!

Not only is it the worst team defense of playoff teams, it is the worst team defense of anybody since at least 2002. The next worse mark belongs to the 2003 Brewers at -75 runs. Essentially, the Yankees defense in 2005 fell 5.5 wins below the next worse defense in the same seven year span.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/worst-defense-ever/

[mikegallo]

If only we had HOF on offense at almost every spot I am sure we could to but I just don't think that is possible given our budget...

If we could construct a lineup that scored almost 1000 runs we could prolly only play with three infielders and one outfielder but again don't think that is really gonna happen but what do I know maybe we get Prince and trade for Ryan Bruan and Jeter and all those other all bat no glove guys.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/worst-defense-ever/

[Can_of_corn]

I was just making the point that an above average defense is not a prerequisite to winning baseball.