Jump to content

Dave Cameron: O's rank as worst organization in baseball


Frobby

Recommended Posts

There is no reason to put a may be in a ranking like this.

He is ranking exactly what has happened and what he sees.

He put the O's at 16 last year. It's just really hard to make an assessment on if what he sees is actually just conjecture or if there is some real analysis behind it.

I just think for a system that is supposed to look at MLB, MiLB, Front Office, Financials, there shouldn't be this kind of variation year to year. It seems like his analysis is kind of surface in general, and not worth putting too much time or stock thinking about to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I think you need to be honest about the stability/certainty of your inputs. There's nothing in these analyses that functions like a "confidence interval," and I think it needs it.

I think this idea would actually be quite helpful in understanding the prior analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I can't argue much w/ the factual statements (though the drop-off is after Schoop, not Machado). It's a pretty narrow analysis full of supposition masking as certainty, but at the same time, the organization has done little to promote confidence.

That said, Cameron's a joke. If, in the process of winning, we get to make him look silly, all the better.

Like him or not, Cameron's not a joke. He's definitely one of maybe three Fangraphs writers capable of an original thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He put the O's at 16 last year. It's just really hard to make an assessment on if what he sees is actually just conjecture or if there is some real analysis behind it.

I just think for a system that is supposed to look at MLB, MiLB, Front Office, Financials, there shouldn't be this kind of variation year to year. It seems like his analysis is kind of surface in general, and not worth putting too much time or stock thinking about to me.

And going into last year, the young pitching looked very promising.

We also didn't have a new FO that is an unknown.

We have also seen the organizations in our division get better.

Whatever he said last year is absolutely irrelevant to this year.

The Orioles are clearly either 29th or 30th..with only Houston competing...but I give Houston the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And going into last year, the young pitching looked very promising.

We also didn't have a new FO that is an unknown.

We have also seen the organizations in our division get better.

Whatever he said last year is absolutely irrelevant to this year.

The Orioles are clearly either 29th or 30th..with only Houston competing...but I give Houston the edge.

I think the White Sox are in the conversation as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the White Sox are in the conversation as well.

I could see that but I think their ML talent is better and they are in an easier division.

They also have a better front office and owner.

Their farm system is horrible and that could hurt them but the rest of their profile is better than ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like him or not, Cameron's not a joke. He's definitely one of maybe three Fangraphs writers capable of an original thought.

Plenty of folks who are capable of "original thought" are jokes. Often, precisely because they are capable of an original thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you need to be honest about the stability/certainty of your inputs. There's nothing in these analyses that functions like a "confidence interval," and I think it needs it.

Eh. I guess it would be more accurate if he said the Orioles were in the bottom 20% of the organizations but I don't think he's trying "publish" research here. It's just a quick piece to stimulate discussion and comment. As noted elsewhere, it's hard to argue that we're bad and I don't think it lends much to see a range in this kind of article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no reason to put a may be in a ranking like this.

He is ranking exactly what has happened and what he sees.

yes exactly, I understand that. I was just commenting how the reality of 2012 might be vastly different than 2011. The 2011 season earns the Orioles this ranking, there is no doubt about that. But outside the bubble of 2011 there are some very real what ifs that, if things go well, could mean the outlook for this team drastically changes.

If Matusz' revival is real, if Arrieta pitches to expectations, if Chen is as solid as we hope then the Orioles pitching staff is a lot better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes exactly, I understand that. I was just commenting how the reality of 2012 might be vastly different than 2011. The 2011 season earns the Orioles this ranking, there is no doubt about that. But outside the bubble of 2011 there are some very real what ifs that, if things go well, could mean the outlook for this team drastically changes.

If Matusz' revival is real, if Arrieta pitches to expectations, if Chen is as solid as we hope then the Orioles pitching staff is a lot better.

When you have a terrible season like the O's pitchers had last year, it goes against laws of probability to think that they will bounce back the following year, if ever. So why would someone go against that to make a prediction like Cameron's? And even if they did bounce back, and we win 80 games instead of 68 or 70, what does that mean? That we're 20th instead of worst? Did the MiL all the sudden become the Expos of the 90's?

I don't blame Cameron for basing his prediction off of past results. Now if you want to dive into his ranking of Seattle as the 6th best organization, then I will be right there with you.

But it seems like you always have to cushion the blow when someone comes out with a prediction or a statement saying the O's are the worst at doing something. I know it pains you to accept it, not to even mention, believe it or agree with it.

But lollipops and rainbows aren't going to change a thing. This organization still has a lot of work to do...even if the planets align this year and we somehow, win 81+ games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And going into last year, the young pitching looked very promising.

We also didn't have a new FO that is an unknown.

We have also seen the organizations in our division get better.

Whatever he said last year is absolutely irrelevant to this year.

The Orioles are clearly either 29th or 30th..with only Houston competing...but I give Houston the edge.

My point about last year was more like this: How sure was Cameron that those guys were going to work out last year, I guess pretty optimistic. I'm willing to say his inability on getting it right last year, makes him just as unlikely to predict how they rebound this year. Whatever he says from year to year, is our only insight into telling whether or not he uses strong analysis to make his predictions.

As for your assessment of where the O's landed on his rankings, I frankly agree with you, they are probably somewhere between 28-30, and it's semantics to argue the number. I'm more saying, I have zero idea of how/what Cameron uses to make these assessments, and am generally untrustworthy of all of them, not just the Orioles ranking, which appears to be close to being correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point about last year was more like this: How sure was Cameron that those guys were going to work out last year, I guess pretty optimistic. I'm willing to say his inability on getting it right last year, makes him just as unlikely to predict how they rebound this year. Whatever he says from year to year, is our only insight into telling whether or not he uses strong analysis to make his predictions.

As for your assessment of where the O's landed on his rankings, I frankly agree with you, they are probably somewhere between 28-30, and it's semantics to argue the number. I'm more saying, I have zero idea of how/what Cameron uses to make these assessments, and am generally untrustworthy of all of them, not just the Orioles ranking, which appears to be close to being correct.

Headed into 2011 there were some legitimate signs for optimism, though. Now, there are hardly any.

Not to mention we're hoping for a rotation that is spitballed together to succeed, and that a GM who has been out of baseball for 10 years to right the ship. If those aren't longshots, they need to come up with a better expression.

I know the season will be here in 10 days and we're all giddy with excitement but let's not forget a little thing called reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Headed into 2011 there were some legitimate signs for optimism, though. Now, there are hardly any.

Not to mention we're hoping for a rotation that is spitballed together to succeed, and that a GM who has been out of baseball for 10 years to right the ship. If those aren't longshots, they need to come up with a better expression.

I know the season will be here in 10 days and we're all giddy with excitement but let's not forget a little thing called reality.

This is the point. Why were they "legitimate"? And why did they fail? Where does "legitimacy" fall along a continuum of probabilities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And going into last year, the young pitching looked very promising.

We also didn't have a new FO that is an unknown.

We have also seen the organizations in our division get better.

Whatever he said last year is absolutely irrelevant to this year.

The Orioles are clearly either 29th or 30th..with only Houston competing...but I give Houston the edge.

I would agree that because our FO is an unknown that the ranking needs to be near the bottom, until that FO produces. BUT you also need to admit that if the Orioles had landed Dipoto or some young guy that they would earn the same rank for the same un-proven reasons. If they would be ranked any higher then it proves the bias in the thesis. Dipoto et al would still be just as unproven as DD's regime is right now.

Again I have no problem with the ranking, it is pretty spot on. I was just commenting that it is a snapshot at a bad time before any plan or move has a chance to be proven/dis-proven on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the point. Why were they "legitimate"? And why did they fail? Where does "legitimacy" fall along a continuum of probabilities?

You don't think it was legit to be excited about guys like Britton and BMat heading into last year and now, the excitement level is lower?

Pretty obvious that it was legit.

Add Arrieta's injury and Guthrie being dealt for a mediocre package and its not really all that hard to figure out the differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • The problem with a Cowser/Kjerstad/Stowers/Bradfield outfield roster is there are no right handers to handle LHP. I don't think and completely left handed outfield is the destination for an organization the values versatility.
    • Looks maybe concussion related. 
    • How can you not be romantic about baseball? This seems slightly poetic. I enjoyed reading, and correlated your experience in the stands back to what I watch in Game 1 on MASN.  It was also pretty cool to hear Jim Palmer give you a shout out in Game 2 of the series on Live TV.
    • I am not worried.  It just doesn’t remotely meet the eye test.  He has been great in the field . I can think of at least 3 outstanding plays he has made and not any that I thought he should have gotten but didn’t. Meanwhile Holliday is 3 OAA and I can’t think of an outstanding play and can think of a number I thought he should have made. 
    • Nicely stated Roy. Every since I was 9 years old and saw the O's vs. the Tokyo Giants in Tokyo in 1971, I've been infected with the Orange/Black virus. There is no cure and I don't want one. You and I sat at the lunch table with Jim Palmer at the 1970 World Series Champs reunion, and its still one of my enduring baseball memories. You said I looked like Carlton Fisk! I was at all 3 games in this Angels series, right behind the O's dugout. I got to see all our boys, and just simply love to watch this team play. And in true baseball fashion, the one game on paper we should have dominated (GRod vs. 8+ ERA Channing), we end up down 7-0 and lose. But watching Gunnar's homers, his electric triple, and he made a fantastic play today on a ball that went under Westburg's glove, Adley do Adley things, Cowser, holy crap. Kimbrel v. Trout with bases loaded, bottom of 9th, 2 outs, down by 2? That was fun. Next game Trout bats leadoff and torches a GRod fastball for a homer to the opposite field.  An observation.... If you didn't know anything about the team, and you only watched game 1 batting practice, you'd think Cowser and O'Hearn were the studs of the team. Mountcastle was taking BP with the reserves and he put on a show as well.  Home after 3 straight days watching this O's team, so jealous of the Balt fans in Balt that get to see the team with regularity. It's a special bunch.
    • emmett16 is right. Uppercut swings produce a lot of groundouts because the bat is not on the same plane as the ball for very long. The best swing stays on the same plane as the ball for a longer time. This will produce contact that creates backspin on the ball which makes it carry. That Ted Williams book is one of the best hitting books ever written.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...