So Buster Olney says the Orioles are looking to re-sign Saunders

[jjnono]

When the ownership is only willing to spend a limited amount then you have limited resources. How much PA could spend isn't the issue, it is how much he is willing to spend.

Actually, it IS partially the issue. I mean you're essentially right that what he will spend is the LIMITING issue. But what he COULD spend is still PART of the issue. And Until I see otherwise, Angelos spends less than he could and therefore hurts our team's chances. But this is nothing new. Carry on...

[weams]

Actually, it IS partially the issue. I mean you're essentially right that what he will spend is the LIMITING issue. But what he COULD spend is still PART of the issue. And Until I see otherwise, Angelos spends less than he could and therefore hurts our team's chances. But this is nothing new. Carry on...

No owner is required to spend more than his business model brings in. Evidently, the Orioles business model has been poorly operated, because until last year, the expenditures have not produced a winning team, or (according to Forbes) increase the wealth of Peter Angelos. Maybe the new plan will produce a cash flow that allows for more spending. Very few owners spend any of their personal funds on a team. Indeed, most of them use their teams as cash registers.

[El Gordo]

No owner is required to spend more than his business model brings in. Evidently, the Orioles business model has been poorly operated, because until last year, the expenditures have not produced a winning team, or (according to Forbes) increase the wealth of Peter Angelos. Maybe the new plan will produce a cash flow that allows for more spending. Very few owners spend any of their personal funds on a team. Indeed, most of them use their teams as cash registers.

It's a gamble. If we spent 45M per for the next 6 years on Greinke and Hamilton, we would have a good shot at the WS at least two of those years. How much would that increase our revenues? Enough to warrant the extra spending?

[CA-ORIOLE]

It's a gamble. If we spent 45M per for the next 6 years on Greinke and Hamilton, we would have a good shot at the WS at least two of those years. How much would that increase our revenues? Enough to warrant the extra spending?

Most rich people don't gamble.

[Barnaby Graves]

Most rich people don't gamble.

With their own money, anyway :laughlol:

[section18]

I think DD will sign Saunders and won't forget the effort he gave us in Texas to make it to the playoffs against the Yankees. Most were questioning Buck's decision and he didn't disappoint. I've always liked him and think he will come back for less money than he would get elsewhere because of his wanting to be here and being from Virginia. One year with an option would be ideal but 2 years for 13M or 14M is okay. Guthries deal was CRAZY as was Gomes deal with Boston. Add R.A. Dickey ( trade) and Saunders and the rotation will be set. Hamilton is perfect for OP and Buck is the perfect low key Manager he needs. 5 years for $110 M. Re-sign McLouth and we will be in the series next year. I'd still like to see us make a deal for Ian Kinsler and Texas is thinking about moving him because of a top prospect they may bring up to replace him. BROB is probably not tradeable but maybe the Marlins would have an interest in him during Spring Training if we eat half of his contract and he performs well enough. They have plenty of money now to spend and may want to add a name player reasonably priced.

[El Gordo]

With their own money, anyway :laughlol:

It's not PA's money, it's a short term deficit for a long term gain with the O's money. Businesses often go into the red short term, if the long term gains will be worth it. The question is how much would a couple of shots at the WS be worth.

[CA-ORIOLE]

It's not PA's money, it's a short term deficit for a long term gain with the O's money. Businesses often go into the red short term, if the long term gains will be worth it. The question is how much would a couple of shots at the WS be worth.

Rich people generally take calculated risks with their money, not gambles. Also, baseball just isn't a very good business model in most respects, though theoretically aspects can and should be applied. PA will be in business and doing quite well with his cash cow whether he takes unecessary risks or not. Most businesses don't have that luxury.

Unless PA decides to become a late stage Andrew Carnegie to the Baltimore Orioles, I doubt you'll see spending/risk on the scale you're taking about (2 premium FA's on the order of 45 mil/yr) anytime soon. Certainly not at this stage, considering the attendance/revenue profile. I'm perfectly happy with a payroll around 100 million and him keeping his hands out of DD's business in developing the organization.

[El Gordo]

Rich people generally take calculated risks with their money, not gambles. Also, baseball just isn't a very good business model in most respects, though theoretically aspects can and should be applied. PA will be in business and doing quite well with his cash cow whether he takes unecessary risks or not. Most businesses don't have that luxury.

Unless PA decides to become Andrew Carnegie to the Baltimore Orioles, I doubt you'll see spending/risk on the scale you're taking about (2 premium FA's on the order of 45 mil/yr) anytime soon. Certainly not at this stage, considering the attendance/revenue profile. I'm perfectly happy with a payroll around 100 million and him keeping his hands out of DD's business in developing the organization.

To begin with it's not PA's money, it's the team's assets being invested for a long term gain. Angelos isn't spending any of his money on the O's. It's the stock holders profits of which he is a principle share holder. Also aren't the owners of LAD, DET, MFY, MIA,TOR, etc. rich people? They make these kinds of spending/risks often.

[CA-ORIOLE]

To begin with it's not PA's money, it's the team's assets being invested for a long term gain. Angelos isn't spending any of his money on the O's. It's the stock holders profits of which he is a principle share holder..

I'm sorry, I forgot the majority owner of the team has no interest in how the teams money is spent.

Also aren't the owners of LAD, DET, MFY, MIA,TOR, etc. rich people? They make these kinds of spending/risks often

Lets see, do any of those teams have the same financial considerations, individual interests, and market considerations that Baltimore has? I actually can't believe you used MIA here.

[wildcard]

If Hammel (already under contract for next year) has a good season next year, it's too late to extend him to anything reasonable after the fact. that's part of the risk vs reward balance.

Hammel is not currently under contract with the O's for next year. He can not be a FA until after next season so he is under the O's control until after the 2013 season. So if Hammel is to pitch for the O's next year he will have to sign a contract and I am suggesting that they offer him a one year contract with a club option.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Hammel is not currently under contract with the O's for next year. He can not be a FA until after next season so he is under the O's control until after the 2013 season. So if Hammel is to pitch for the O's next year he will have to sign a contract and I am suggesting that they offer him a one year contract with a club option.

I'm not sure of your point from the original post. Next year is 2013. The only player among those you initially listed that will be under contract for 2013 is Hammel. That is a different situation from Reynolds/Saunders/Mclouth who are (or on the verge) of becoming FA's. My point is, it might be smarter to try and extend Hammel now rather wait until he becomes a FA.

[wildcard]

I'm not sure of your point from the original post. Next year is 2013. The only player among those you initially listed that will be under contract for 2013 is Hammel. That is a different situation from Reynolds/Saunders/Mclouth who are (or on the verge) of becoming FA's. My point is, it might be smarter to try and extend Hammel now rather wait until he becomes a FA.

Reynolds and Hammel are in the same situation. Both have to be tendered contracts by Nov 30 to be with the O's next. Both will have 6 years of service time after the 2013 season and therefore eligible to become FAs. If either or both are not tendered contracts this year they become free agents. Most of us probably believe that Hammel will be tendered and that it is still an outstanding question as to whether Reynolds will be tendered.

To your point about signing Hammel long term, I agree the O's probably do not want him to go FA so trying to negotiate something more than a year this off season is preferable. However Hammel has never had a really good season until 2012 and even then he was injured for a good part of the season. He has a history of pitching well in the first half and poorly in the second half. So to give him several years on a multi year contract could be a big mistake. That is why I suggest that the O's sign him for a year with a club option for 2014. That way he is not a FA after 2013 and the O's can re-negotiate a longer contract with him if he pitches better next year.

[El Gordo]

I'm sorry, I forgot the majority owner of the team has no interest in how the teams money is spent.

Lets see, do any of those teams have the same financial considerations, individual interests, and market considerations that Baltimore has? I actually can't believe you used MIA here.

Of course he has an interest in how the team is managed, but he isn't investing his own money, which is what you implied. The owners of these teams are rich people who spent money on players that put their team in the red, in order to achieve some percieved gain. You say that rich people don't do these kinds of things. Where do you get your info as to what most rich people do? The O's have a core that could be a perennial contender over the next 3-5 years with the addition of a TOR SP and a MOO bat. The question is how much revenue would that kind of contention bring in? Enough to offset the initiall expense?

[scOtt]

Of course he has an interest in how the team is managed, but he isn't investing his own money, which is what you implied. The owners of these teams are rich people who spent money on players that put their team in the red, in order to achieve some percieved gain. You say that rich people don't do these kinds of things. Where do you get your info as to what most rich people do? The O's have a core that could be a perennial contender over the next 3-5 years with the addition of a TOR SP and a MOO bat. The question is how much revenue would that kind of contention bring in? Enough to offset the initiall expense?

Second time you've asked, I'll chime in. We made the first round and made $7.1 mill. Straight up that's 3 times as much to make the WS. 21.3 mill. But the second two rounds, ALCS and WS are 7 games instead of 5, so 3 games instead of 2. X 1.5 . 7.1 + 10.65 + 10.65 = 28.4 mill. If we win it all even more. And the ALCS and WS rate higher and higher so even more than that. This might be completely bogus but it might be something...