What if Duquette's plan for 2012....works?

[Sports Guy]

Who hijacked Sports Guy's keyboard?

The Sports Guy I know has, for years, said if you can't contend in year X then the players you put on the field in Year X don't matter at all. You don't wast a single penny on a multi-year contract for a 30+ year old player because that player won't be there on that day, which is always several years in the future and always receding, when we actually can contend. Who you put on the field this year doesn't matter if you aren't going to win it. And that taking steps towards winning are useless, don't spend a single penny on a guy who will get you from 65 to 75 wins if that guy won't be around to help you contend.

Now suddenly you are worried about the team he is putting on the field this year?

You have said you like the organizational structural things he has done, as do I.

He has brought in a lot of marginal talent, much of which will be forgotten in a year or two -- but unlike previous regimes he hasn't spent lots of money on these guys (DLee, Gregg, Gonzalez, Vlad, etc). Yeah, the 2nd year for Betemit is a waste. And maybe he could have gotten younger players for Guthrie (note the maybe) -- now you have been demanding that Guthrie be traded for a longt ime, and now that he finally is, you don't like the take. Hey, I'm not crazy about the take either, but we have absolutely no way of knowing if he could have gotten better. We just fired a GM whose best skill was getting maximum value back in trades, just about any other GM is going to suffer in comparison in that one respect.

As for "blocking" guys in our farm system -- we don't have a lot in the way of ML ready talent. If Nick Johnson can hit, he'll "block" Mahoney? Are Avery and Hoes "blocked"? They have never played AAA ball yet. DD apparently is someone who believes in not rushing minor league talent. We have rushed prized prospects (Cabrera, Matusz) and have had some catastrophic results, so I'm willing to try it his way. If an Antonelli or Johnson or Eveland DOES turn out to be a quality major leaguer and winds up "blocking" someone else, well, that's a good proble to have considering we are reputed to be about the 17th best farm system with the bulk of our talent in the low minors a few years away.

No, I'm not crazy about every move he has made. But he hasn't made the type of commitments (big money for relief pitchers who are likely to fluctuate in performance, guaranteeing a cleanup spot to Vlad, etc) that our previous GMs have made. He has made moves which APPEAR to improve our infrastructure (scouting, player development, conditioning, consistent coaching through all levels of the system). Those moves should result in getting more out of the guys in the system now, and better players coming into the system in the future. He is giving the cavalry the year they deserve to sink or swim once and for all, rather than tossing them away and saying there's no way we can be any good until we have Bundy and Machado at OPACY. But he has brought in competition and depth so that if those guys do falter again, or can't show they are making strides, we will not be starting Mitch Atkins or Chris Waters or Victor Zambrano or Dennis Sarfate.

So that seems like a "plan" to me:

1 -- make infrastructure improvements which should help down the line

2 -- give the present core one last chance to succeed before giving up on being competitive until #1 reaps benefits down the road

3 -- augment the present core with depth to provide competition for guys that are here without spending millions on guys and guaranteeing

them spots in the lineup or bullpen. Yes some of that depth will wind up at AAA but because the true talent in our farm system is bottom heavy,

I don't see this depth "blocking" anyone

4 -- begin taking steps in the international market

5 -- he appears to be emphasizing onbase percentage, something that has been lacking in our offense for a long time

That appears to be the plan, insofar as it affects down the line a few years, and 2012. It's not so clear what the "plan" is for 2013 and 2014,

as no decision ahs been made on Jones yet. It could be that he wants to see what happens this year before the short term direction for 2013/14 is determined.

Not going to address each point here...Just going to say that your interpretation of what I am saying is way off.

[wildcard]

I don't think either is very likely. But, I am curious why you say this. Davis has had a season where he had an .800+ OPS in the majors. He has a career OPS of .749 in the majors. His career OPS in the minors is .971. Why are the odds that Davis will come within 171 points of his MiL OPS worse than the odds that Antonelli will come within 23 points of his MiL OBP? Because you've never seen him play before?

Reason one:

In order to have 800 OPS Davis has to improve his OBP and slug pct. That is two forms of discipline. And that is what is expected of a power position player. Antonelli only has to get on base.

Reason Two: Health. Antonelli comes into this season healthy (as far as I know). Davis had problems healthwise and didn't have surgery to fix them. He just rested which works sometimes and sometimes it doesn't. Buck has so much faith in Davis' health that he is going to keep him away from third base because he doesn't believe his shoulder will holdup.

[wildcard]

Let's say it goes something like this:

Antonelli proves capable defensively and puts up a .720 OPS that includes a .340 OBP.

Teagarden proves an upgrade defensively to Tatum and puts up a .700ish OPS.

Betemit hits around .750 OPS and a .345 OBP.

Chavez has a .700ish OPS and plays good outfield defense when he's out there.

Let's say all that happens and the offense improves by 50-75 runs.

On the pitching side:

Chen posts a 4.00ish ERA in 180 IP.

Hammel posts a 4.60ish ERA in 170 IP

Lindstrom gives us 55 IP at a 4.00ish ERA

Wada gives us 65 IP at a 4.00ish ERA

O'Day gives us 50 IP at a 4.00ish ERA

Eveland gives us 75 IP as a long reliever/spot starter at a 5.00ish ERA

Let's say all that happens and the Orioles allow 75-100 runs less than last year.

That's the new components to your .500 team. The stats I gave for those 10 players probably don't result in all of the team runs scored/runs allowed improvement I hypothesized. The rest has to come from internal improvement.

If it played out like that, I'd say Duquette's plan worked out pretty well.

Of course, it won't work out exactly this way. Maybe 1 or 2 guys do a lot better than I suggested here; maybe 1 or 2 do nothing positive at all. But if the overall contribution of these 10 looks like this, and the team gets to .500 as a result, I say kudos go to Duquette.

Just so it's clear, I'm not predicting it comes out this way. But it's not that implausible, either.

So it comes down to the players that were already here. Especially the pitching, pitching, pitching. And of course the terrible defense at 3B. Which has to be changed one way or another.

There is no way any starter should get to pitch 170 inning with a ERA of 4.60. That time should be past. Last year the AL average team ERA is 4.08. The average team starter ERA is 4.23. The O's may not have a starter the put up a 3.00 ERA but they should have 5 guys the can be at least average.

[Going Underground]

Most GM's make changes when they take over a team. DiPoto and Epstein have made four or five major changes since they have taken over with new hires and scouting changes. Changes always happen when a new person takes over in a business or in baseball. Time will tell whether the changes make the team better.

[Fan4Life]

There is no way any starter should get to pitch 170 inning with a ERA of 4.60. That time should be past. Last year the AL average team ERA is 4.08. The average team starter ERA is 4.23. The O's may not have a starter the put up a 3.00 ERA but they should have 5 guys the can be at least average.

The problem with quoting averages when using stats to make a point is that they usually aren't revealing enough. So the AL Average starter has an ERA of 4.23, show me what the average innings and ERA were for the #4 and #5 starter in the AL.

Just spit balling it I see the following pitchers near or over 4.60 ERA with near or more than 170 IP.

Brandon Marrow

Rick Porcello

Jeff Francis

Ubaldo Jiminez

Brian Duensing

[DrungoHazewood]

There is no way any starter should get to pitch 170 inning with a ERA of 4.60. That time should be past. Last year the AL average team ERA is 4.08. The average team starter ERA is 4.23. The O's may not have a starter the put up a 3.00 ERA but they should have 5 guys the can be at least average.

I think it's very likely the O's have several starters who throw around 170 innings with an ERA well above league average. Last year the likely guys in the rotation had the following MLB performances (ERA+) :

Hammel: 94

Arrieta: 82

Matusz: 39

Britton: 90

Tillman: 75

Hunter: 90

Eveland: 124 (but in 30 innings, career 77)

Wada: N/A

Chen: N/A

It would be rather astounding if they set and kept a goal of not letting anyone get significant innings if their ERA+ was around 90. Every significant candidate would be cast aside if they didn't significantly improve.

[Frobby]

There is no way any starter should get to pitch 170 inning with a ERA of 4.60. That time should be past. Last year the AL average team ERA is 4.08. The average team starter ERA is 4.23. The O's may not have a starter the put up a 3.00 ERA but they should have 5 guys the can be at least average.

There were 9 pitchers in the AL last year who threw at least 160 IP and had an ERA over 4.60. Five of them pitched on playoff teams. The only Oriole starter who had an ERA under 4.60 last year was Jeremy Guthrie, and he's gone. The odds that we are going to have five pitchers who are "at least average" is like 1,000 to 1. If we start booting out pitchers who have a 4.60 ERA, all that's going to do is create a revolving door of guys worse than 4.60 at the back of the rotation.

[wildcard]

The problem with quoting averages when using stats to make a point is that they usually aren't revealing enough. So the AL Average starter has an ERA of 4.23, show me what the average innings and ERA were for the #4 and #5 starter in the AL.

Just spit balling it I see the following pitchers near or over 4.60 ERA with near or more than 170 IP.

Brandon Marrow

Rick Porcello

Jeff Francis

Ubaldo Jiminez

Brian Duensing

If the O's have 10 starters. They pick 5 to begin the season and the other 5 are in the pen or at AAA. If anyone of the starters has a 4.60 ERA after say... 5 starts I would be looking at the other 5 starters to see if they can do better and that guy can be moved out of the rotation. That should be the advantage of having starter depth. So I don't see a starter that is putting up a 4.60 ERA for 170 innings.

If I understand your point, there are other reasons then ERA that could move a starter out of the rotation. I agree with that.

[Sports Guy]

If the O's have 10 starters. They pick 5 to begin the season and the other 5 are in the pen or at AAA. If anyone of the starters has a 4.60 ERA after say... 5 starts I would be looking at the other 5 starters to see if they can do better and that guy can be moved out of the rotation. That should be the advantage of having starter depth. So I don't see a starter that is putting up a 4.60 ERA for 170 innings.

If I understand your point, there are other reasons then ERA that could move a starter out of the rotation. I agree with that.

When the orioles get starters depth, let us know.

And they need to give the young starters a whole lot more than 5 starts...that's a really awful plan.

[wildcard]

There were 9 pitchers in the AL last year who threw at least 160 IP and had an ERA over 4.60. Five of them pitched on playoff teams. The only Oriole starter who had an ERA under 4.60 last year was Jeremy Guthrie, and he's gone. The odds that we are going to have five pitchers who are "at least average" is like 1,000 to 1. If we start booting out pitchers who have a 4.60 ERA, all that's going to do is create a revolving door of guys worse than 4.60 at the back of the rotation.

1,000 to one??? So you say there is a chance!!!!

I am sorry but the guys that do well stay in the rotation IMO. The guy that don't should be moved to give the other starters on the roster a chance. If that means two slots see several starters before someone steps up and claims the slot then so be it.

[Fan4Life]

If the O's have 10 starters. They pick 5 to begin the season and the other 5 are in the pen or at AAA. If anyone of the starters has a 4.60 ERA after say... 5 starts I would be looking at the other 5 starters to see if they can do better and that guy can be moved out of the rotation. That should be the advantage of having starter depth. So I don't see a starter that is putting up a 4.60 ERA for 170 innings.

If I understand your point, there are other reasons then ERA that could move a starter out of the rotation. I agree with that.

Help me out then... if we start with 5 guys that were the best of the 10 guys we looked at, and 2 (or more) have an ERA north of 4.60 after 5-8 starts, who exactly are you going to replace them with?

[wildcard]

When the orioles get starters depth, let us know.

And they need to give the young starters a whole lot more than 5 starts...that's a really awful plan.

Don't think so. If Britton, Matusz, Hunter, Chen, and Arrieta are in the rotation and one of them is putting up a 4.60 ERA after 5 starts. If at that point Wada is lights out at AAA or Hammel is lights out in relief, I would not hesitate to move someone out of the rotation. Now there are circumstance that should not be done. Like if a pitcher got nailed in one start but pitched well in the other 4 starts. But the idea that just because a pitcher has potential but is not doing well in the rotation that he should stay in the rotation doesn't fly IMO. You have starter depth, you use it. Later if the pitcher redeems himself in the pen or at AAA he becomes a candidate to rejoin the rotation IMO.

[Sports Guy]

Don't think so. If Britton, Matusz, Hunter, Chen, and Arrieta are in the rotation and one of them is putting up a 4.60 ERA after 5 starts. If at that point Wada is lights out at AAA or Hammel is lights out in relief, I would not hesitate to move someone out of the rotation. Now there are circumstance that should not be done. Like if a pitcher got nailed in one start but pitched well in the other 4 starts. But the idea that just because a pitcher has potential but is not doing well in the rotation that he should stay in the rotation doesn't fly IMO. You have starter depth, you use it. Later if the pitcher redeems himself in the pen or at AAA he becomes a candidate to rejoin the rotation IMO.

This post(and plan) is so wrong on so many levels...i just can't believe I am actually reading it on a site like this one.

[wildcard]

This post(and plan) is so wrong on so many levels...i just can't believe I am actually reading it on a site like this one.

Very insightful response. I tells everyone nothing except you disagree.

[Sports Guy]

Very insightful response. I tells everyone nothing except you disagree.

I think anyone who is reading your idea here will disagree...not much more needs to be said than what I said.