According to Jones...

[BrunoCherrytown]

It's a more grounded, well-supported opinion than your trumped up version of "if the O's raid Toys'R'Us and re-paint the Monopoly money they can buy eeeeveryoneeee.

Have we tried this yet? Because this is just the kind of outside the box thinking that could turn us into contenders. We could also paint some American presidents on Zimbabwe currency and we could've bought Pujols, Wilson, Fielder, Darvish, Cespedes, Soler, Jackson, and the Royals for a Trillion Dollar Bill!

[Putz47]

i can tell you all that the message i got from my contact that the Nats and O' are fielders choices right now so unless someone else comes forward one of those two teams he's going to go to.. other than that i don't have anymore info.. being that is the case i would guess that Prince Fielder has already visited Baltimore! my guess as of right now he's going to the Nats! but if Petey wants him bad enough you never know!

[El Gordo]

i can tell you all that the message i got from my contact that the Nats and O' are fielders choices right now so unless someone else comes forward one of those two teams he's going to go to.. other than that i don't have anymore info.. being that is the case i would guess that Prince Fielder has already visited Baltimore! my guess as of right now he's going to the Nats! but if Petey wants him bad enough you never know!

Fielder is irrelevant. If Matusz, Arrieta and Britton step up, we can win without him, If they don't we can't win with him.

[OsLuvrInKy]

I guess I'll leave it at two things.

1. No fans should expect an owner to personally fund a team -- the organization needs to be self-sustaining.

2. Time will tell how much scouting/development change/improve for the Baltimore Orioles.

I agree with the importance of both of these. However from what I have read over the years it is my opinion that the ownership group has used the O's/MASN as a cash cow. So I do feel the money is there.

I do like the direction that DD seems to be taking the FO. That to me is more encouraging than anything I have seen from this team in years. Here's hoping it continues.

However if I was given a choice of Fielder or continued MiL/Scouting/acquisition/Development/FO improvements. Well I'll take the improvements please.

[MrOrange82]

Have we tried this yet? Because this is just the kind of outside the box thinking that could turn us into contenders. We could also paint some American presidents on Zimbabwe currency and we could've bought Pujols, Wilson, Fielder, Darvish, Cespedes, Soler, Jackson, and the Royals for a Trillion Dollar Bill!

I think I know how that might turn out.

Sometimes I miss living in NC.

[nate22]

I think I know how that might turn out.

Sometimes I miss living in NC.

I think Frank McCourt used those same bills when he bought the Dodgers.

[El Gordo]

He's not irrelevant. He simply makes us better in either case. I'm not advocating signing Fielder and I certainly don't agree with JTrea's logic but if Matusz, Britton, and Arrieta step up, Fielder could be very relevant.

Not at his price. We could upgrade the offense more using his 25 M per on two or three other players instead.

[JTrea81]

Not at his price. We could upgrade the offense more using his 25 M per on two or three other players instead.

And how has that worked for us in the past?

[Darren33]

I agree with the importance of both of these. However from what I have read over the years it is my opinion that the ownership group has used the O's/MASN as a cash cow. So I do feel the money is there.

I do like the direction that DD seems to be taking the FO. That to me is more encouraging than anything I have seen from this team in years. Here's hoping it continues.

However if I was given a choice of Fielder or continued MiL/Scouting/acquisition/Development/FO improvements. Well I'll take the improvements please.

Does anyone have definitive proof that MASN is even making money? Typical start-ups don't start making money right away, and as a rule of thumb, it takes on average about 3 - 5 years for most small companies to become profitable. And MASN is a lot more complex than a small company. I don't know much about media companies and the costs involved to run them but everyone seems to assume money is flowing in but can anyone actually prove that its resulting in profits? From what I've read there is a war going on between content providers and the Media/Telecom conglomerates over the pricing of content which can't be helping margins. For all we know, MASN could be bleeding money, especially with the costs of converting to HD over the past few years and trying to expand its lineup to include better content. Just playing devil's advocate here but seriously, does anyone know if MASN is actually profitable? I'm not asking for opinions, just actual facts.

[srobby08]

Here is the plan for 5 games over 500 this year the playoffs next.

1)Sign Prince Fielder for 8 yrs 200 mil

2)Sign Madson for 3 yrs 30 mil

3) Sign Cespedes for 5 yrs $30 mil

4) Trade Jones to Atlanta for Jurjens, Prada, and another of their young starters

:2yay-thumb:Playoffs here we come.

[Can_of_corn]

Does anyone have definitive proof that MASN is even making money? Typical start-ups don't start making money right away, and as a rule of thumb, it takes on average about 3 - 5 years for most small companies to become profitable. And MASN is a lot more complex than a small company. I don't know much about media companies and the costs involved to run them but everyone seems to assume money is flowing in but can anyone actually prove that its resulting in profits? From what I've read there is a war going on between content providers and the Media/Telecom conglomerates over the pricing of content which can't be helping margins. For all we know, MASN could be bleeding money, especially with the costs of converting to HD over the past few years and trying to expand its lineup to include better content. Just playing devil's advocate here but seriously, does anyone know if MASN is actually profitable? I'm not asking for opinions, just actual facts.

Forced subscription rates.

Also, I find it hard to believe that the Nats, who are privy to the actual numbers, would be seeking an increase in compensation if MASN was loosing money.

Remember Mr Angelos received a substantial cash infusion to help get MASN off the ground.

[El Gordo]

And how has that worked for us in the past?

Depends on the players you spend it on. Suppose it were Matt Cain and Cespedes, plus?

[Darren33]

Forced subscription rates.

Also, I find it hard to believe that the Nats, who are privy to the actual numbers, would be seeking an increase in compensation if MASN was loosing money.

Remember Mr Angelos received a substantial cash infusion to help get MASN off the ground.

But none of that necessarily means they are making a profit. And just because the Nats are asking for more money doesn't mean MASN is profitable. MASN may be cashflow positive, which would allow them to pay the Nats more, but that's a big difference from being profitable.

[El Gordo]

Last I heard, Mat Cain is not a free agent. And NO ONE knows what Cespedes will do at the ML level. Sure, those two players could equal or better Fielder. Fielder is a known factor. You have to give up something valuable to get Cain, and Cespedes is an unknown. Besides you didn't argue the fact that Fielder would be relevant, which he would if the pitching stepped up.

He will be next season as will a number of other potential TOR's. Suppose Britton, Matusz, and Arrieta, combine to for 40 W's this season. Wouldn't you rather spend 15 M on him and have spent 8 M on Cespedes. Fielder is 25 M that may or may not be of any value to us. If Britton, Matusz, and Arrieta continue to disappoint, you will see a sale at the trade deadline and next fall, that would make a 25 M investment in him now, absurd.

[AZOriole]

The bottom line is that with or without Fielder, success still depends on pitching. Of course Fielder makes the Orioles better. But without improved pitching, he alone doesn't put the Orioles in the playoffs.