Jump to content

Revisiting Duquettes' second half moves


Frobby

Recommended Posts

Lots to reply in this thread and I will get to some of it, but Tony posts pretty much the core issue to me here - why does it matter whether we finished under .500 versus where we did (six games and four or so teams out of a playoff spot)? It doesn't to me - at any cost, let alone a top 40 pick, international draft slots and Hader/Delmonico.

It did seem very unlikely that Strop and Arrieta would turn their seasons around, but that happens all the time. Guys go to the minors, work on things and come back better. Why is it so difficult to believe these guys performed so well for the Cubs after the trade, but could not have done the same for the Os?

What would have been so horrible about committing to Arrieta, Britton, Wada and Gausman in the rotation? And if it had turned out horrible, it would not have been much worse than what happened - falling out of the race and being passes by multiple other teams.

The Rangers/Os were somewhat similar regarding the WC, but within the divisions, the Rangers had no other competition besides the As, while the Os did have Tampa ahead of them in late July and the NYY right behind. So somewhat similar, but not exactly the same competitive positioning - at least in my opinion.

I am very familiar with Mike Olt - a BA Top 50 at the beginning of the past two seasons. The Mike Olt of 2013 is summed up nicely by a Baseball America writer in the recent PCL Top 20 chat -

Frank (Chicago, IL): Will the trade to the Cubs give Mike Olt a better shot at playing everyday? Was he considered for this list?

Matt Eddy: Cubs 3B Mike Olt hit .197/.302/.368 in 104 games at Triple-A this season, giving him the lowest AVG among qualified PCL batters. He did manage 14 home runs, and he probably will once again approach 30 at Triple-A once his vision problems are cleared up, but his feel to hit is in serious question after a troubling season. He may too closely resemble early-Rockies-career Ian Stewart to be a reassuring presence for Cubs fans.

Mike Olt is a prospect who has lost an enormous amount of luster. The Cubs took a flier on a former highly regarded prospect, but his inclusion in a trade in late 2013 means little to me.

Other trade examples included some before the season - which I really don't believe is an apt comparison for sake of reviewing deadline deals and a GM's mid-season assessment of our competitive positioning.

Regarding the Os being near a second wild card in the last two weeks of the season, I say that our September schedule should have been a surprise to no one. Those late September series were with very competitive teams (BoSox, Tampa, NYY) and it was not a surprise to me that we fell further behind in the WC race. Further, winning the second WC while finishing 10+ games behind the BoSox would not have justified the deadline deals IMO. I would prefer an organization so far behind other teams in its division be an accumulator of prospects at the trade deadline and not a buyer.

That's about it. I enjoyed most of the responses above. I would just like to re-iterate one more time that our September schedule should have been a shock to no one. It's is not practical to look at our position in the standings without taking into account the remaining schedule. There were threads devoted to complaints about our September schedule acknowledging its difficulty and the likelihood of our fading as we did. This should have been taken into account at the time we made the deals.

Hindsight. As I read your response it is apparent that you have the benefit of hindsight. You think that the strength of the schedule should not have been a surprise and it wasn't. What was a surprise was that the O's didn't do as well as they did in 2011 and 2012 down the stretch. The schedule was as tough those two years. But they finished strong both years. So the strength of the schedule was not the deciding factor on whether to add. Boston had faltered in other years. They didn't this year. Tampa and the O's battled to the end last year with the O's coming out on top. This year the O's fell back at the end.

The O's where in the thick of the pennant race, a least for the wild card. They didn't have the benefit of knowing what you know now. The offense had been strong the first half. It was a good bet to continue to be good but it turned out it wasn't. We only know that through hindsight.

Small point - Strop was out of options and could not be sent down as you suggest.

You say Mike Olt stock had fallen and that is true, but he still has the highest profile player traded between the two teams which was the point you brought up. And you ignored the 17M that the Rangers spend on Rios which is huge commitment compared to what DD did.

Your major point that the O's should not have traded minor league talent in the 2nd half has the huge benefit of hindsight. No one could know that the O's offense would fail that bad. It was near the top of the league after the first half. The O's needed starting pitching to get to its goal. DD added that pitching and the starters finished strong.

Maybe your crystal ball is better than everyone elses including DD. But most of us didn't know that the offense would fall and had seen the O's under Buck rally late in the second half even with a hard schedule. Hindsight is a big benefit. You seem to be using it a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Hindsight. As I read your response it is apparent that you have the benefit of hindsight. You think that the strength of the schedule should not have been a surprise and it wasn't. What was a surprise was that the O's didn't do as well as they did in 2011 and 2012 down the stretch. The schedule was as tough those two years. But they finished strong both years. So the strength of the schedule was not the deciding factor on whether to add. Boston had faltered in other years. They didn't this year. Tampa and the O's battled to the end last year with the O's coming out on top. This year the O's fell back at the end.

The O's where in the thick of the pennant race, a least for the wild card. They didn't have the benefit of knowing what you know now. The offense had been strong the first half. It was a good bet to continue to be good but it turned out it wasn't. We only know that through hindsight.

Small point - Strop was out of options and could not be sent down as you suggest.

You say Mike Olt stock had fallen and that is true, but he still has the highest profile player traded between the two teams which was the point you brought up. And you ignored the 17M that the Rangers spend on Rios which is huge commitment compared to what DD did.

Your major point that the O's should not have traded minor league talent in the 2nd half has the huge benefit of hindsight. No one could know that the O's offense would fail that bad. It was near the top of the league after the first half. The O's needed starting pitching to get to its goal. DD added that pitching and the starters finished strong.

Maybe your crystal ball is better than everyone elses including DD. But most of us didn't know that the offense would fall and had seen the O's under Buck rally late in the second half even with a hard schedule. Hindsight is a big benefit. You seem to be using it a lot.

I'll just comment on a few things and that might wrap it up on this thread.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/135289-I-may-be-wrong-and-I-hope-I-am-but-I-dont-see-us-making-the-playoffs?highlight=september+schedule

I did not participate in the thread attached, but my position is not one of hindsight. It is one recognized by lot of posters. That the Os won some games to get closer in the standings and lost some games to fall back is all part of a season. That thread is less than one week after the trade deadline. Notice post 88 which comments on the Os schedule having more games (32) remaining among teams with a greater than .500 winning % by 6 than any other contender including twice as many as Texas and 10 more than Cleveland.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/136214-Grantland-Article-on-Balanced-Schedule?highlight=september+schedule

Thread based on Grantland article on difficulty of Sept schedule.

Someone will have to find articles about last year's schedule in September being difficult, because all I remember is playing against heavily injured, cupcake lineups from Boston, Toronto and NYY. Boston's lineups last September were absolute jokes and I know I posted as much then and last offseason. We may have finished strong under Buck in prior years, but anyone counting on that this year was showing a clear lack of judgment.

Not sure what Alex Rios made after his trade on an annual salary near $12.5M with the ChiSox chipping in $1M, but I am pretty sure his .9 WAR with the Rangers easily justified that compensation. Going forward, Alex Rios is due $13M in 2014 plus a $2M buyout. I am not one to like investing in aging ballplayers generally, but Alex Rios has put up WAR of 3.2, -1.7, 4.6 and 2. I have been told above I am ignoring Rio's comp in 2014, but frankly I never saw it as a concern as opposed to someone suggesting the Rangers are holding an albatross contract on their hands. Rios may be injured or struggle in 2014, but IMO the odds are that Rios come close enough to justifying the salary. Note that Rios is probably ahead of schedule with the .9 WAR for Texas at a cost under $3.5M or so since Texas acquired him. Not really eager to see this thread get sidetracked on nuances over Alex Rios, but I guess no one wants to discuss what the other GMs did.

As one can see from threads above, despite being ridiculed above as to using a crystal ball, our playoff odds were never that great to begin with and it was noticed by quite a few participants in the above threads. No crystal ball necessary to see that the Os were fighting an uphill battle relative to the schedule and standings, that our GM dealt away quality assets against those long odds and that we would fall short. We fell way short. We should not have dealt those assets. The trades reflected extremely poor judgment by our front office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just comment on a few things and that might wrap it up on this thread.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/135289-I-may-be-wrong-and-I-hope-I-am-but-I-dont-see-us-making-the-playoffs?highlight=september+schedule

I did not participate in the thread attached, but my position is not one of hindsight. It is one recognized by lot of posters. That the Os won some games to get closer in the standings and lost some games to fall back is all part of a season. That thread is less than one week after the trade deadline. Notice post 88 which comments on the Os schedule having more games (32) remaining among teams with a greater than .500 winning % by 6 than any other contender including twice as many as Texas and 10 more than Cleveland.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/136214-Grantland-Article-on-Balanced-Schedule?highlight=september+schedule

Thread based on Grantland article on difficulty of Sept schedule.

Someone will have to find articles about last year's schedule in September being difficult, because all I remember is playing against heavily injured, cupcake lineups from Boston, Toronto and NYY. Boston's lineups last September were absolute jokes and I know I posted as much then and last offseason. We may have finished strong under Buck in prior years, but anyone counting on that this year was showing a clear lack of judgment.

Not sure what Alex Rios made after his trade on an annual salary near $12.5M with the ChiSox chipping in $1M, but I am pretty sure his .9 WAR with the Rangers easily justified that compensation. Going forward, Alex Rios is due $13M in 2014 plus a $2M buyout. I am not one to like investing in aging ballplayers generally, but Alex Rios has put up WAR of 3.2, -1.7, 4.6 and 2. I have been told above I am ignoring Rio's comp in 2014, but frankly I never saw it as a concern as opposed to someone suggesting the Rangers are holding an albatross contract on their hands. Rios may be injured or struggle in 2014, but IMO the odds are that Rios come close enough to justifying the salary. Note that Rios is probably ahead of schedule with the .9 WAR for Texas at a cost under $3.5M or so since Texas acquired him. Not really eager to see this thread get sidetracked on nuances over Alex Rios, but I guess no one wants to discuss what the other GMs did.

As one can see from threads above, despite being ridiculed above as to using a crystal ball, our playoff odds were never that great to begin with and it was noticed by quite a few participants in the above threads. No crystal ball necessary to see that the Os were fighting an uphill battle relative to the schedule and standings, that our GM dealt away quality assets against those long odds and that we would fall short. We fell way short. We should not have dealt those assets. The trades reflected extremely poor judgment by our front office.[/QUOTE]

Agree!!!

Worse than trading the assets was trading them for players not likely to make a difference, which they didn't. DD was fleeced on every trade and since we didn't make the playoffs the fleecing is all the more painful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just comment on a few things and that might wrap it up on this thread.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/135289-I-may-be-wrong-and-I-hope-I-am-but-I-dont-see-us-making-the-playoffs?highlight=september+schedule

I did not participate in the thread attached, but my position is not one of hindsight. It is one recognized by lot of posters. That the Os won some games to get closer in the standings and lost some games to fall back is all part of a season. That thread is less than one week after the trade deadline. Notice post 88 which comments on the Os schedule having more games (32) remaining among teams with a greater than .500 winning % by 6 than any other contender including twice as many as Texas and 10 more than Cleveland.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/136214-Grantland-Article-on-Balanced-Schedule?highlight=september+schedule

Thread based on Grantland article on difficulty of Sept schedule.

Someone will have to find articles about last year's schedule in September being difficult, because all I remember is playing against heavily injured, cupcake lineups from Boston, Toronto and NYY. Boston's lineups last September were absolute jokes and I know I posted as much then and last offseason. We may have finished strong under Buck in prior years, but anyone counting on that this year was showing a clear lack of judgment.

Not sure what Alex Rios made after his trade on an annual salary near $12.5M with the ChiSox chipping in $1M, but I am pretty sure his .9 WAR with the Rangers easily justified that compensation. Going forward, Alex Rios is due $13M in 2014 plus a $2M buyout. I am not one to like investing in aging ballplayers generally, but Alex Rios has put up WAR of 3.2, -1.7, 4.6 and 2. I have been told above I am ignoring Rio's comp in 2014, but frankly I never saw it as a concern as opposed to someone suggesting the Rangers are holding an albatross contract on their hands. Rios may be injured or struggle in 2014, but IMO the odds are that Rios come close enough to justifying the salary. Note that Rios is probably ahead of schedule with the .9 WAR for Texas at a cost under $3.5M or so since Texas acquired him. Not really eager to see this thread get sidetracked on nuances over Alex Rios, but I guess no one wants to discuss what the other GMs did.

As one can see from threads above, despite being ridiculed above as to using a crystal ball, our playoff odds were never that great to begin with and it was noticed by quite a few participants in the above threads. No crystal ball necessary to see that the Os were fighting an uphill battle relative to the schedule and standings, that our GM dealt away quality assets against those long odds and that we would fall short. We fell way short. We should not have dealt those assets. The trades reflected extremely poor judgment by our front office.

Very weak response. Using a reactionary thread from Roy Firestone after a lose is no proof at all. Even FRobby admits in the thread that his post is reactionary.

Here is Tony's post after the Norris trade on July 31st.

TT: Norris trade shows the Orioles are acting like contenders

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/135144-TT-Norris-trade-shows-the-Orioles-are-acting-like-contenders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hindsight. As I read your response it is apparent that you have the benefit of hindsight. You think that the strength of the schedule should not have been a surprise and it wasn't. What was a surprise was that the O's didn't do as well as they did in 2011 and 2012 down the stretch. The schedule was as tough those two years. But they finished strong both years. So the strength of the schedule was not the deciding factor on whether to add. Boston had faltered in other years. They didn't this year. Tampa and the O's battled to the end last year with the O's coming out on top. This year the O's fell back at the end.

The O's where in the thick of the pennant race, a least for the wild card. They didn't have the benefit of knowing what you know now. The offense had been strong the first half. It was a good bet to continue to be good but it turned out it wasn't. We only know that through hindsight.

Small point - Strop was out of options and could not be sent down as you suggest.

You say Mike Olt stock had fallen and that is true, but he still has the highest profile player traded between the two teams which was the point you brought up. And you ignored the 17M that the Rangers spend on Rios which is huge commitment compared to what DD did.

Your major point that the O's should not have traded minor league talent in the 2nd half has the huge benefit of hindsight. No one could know that the O's offense would fail that bad. It was near the top of the league after the first half. The O's needed starting pitching to get to its goal. DD added that pitching and the starters finished strong.

Maybe your crystal ball is better than everyone elses including DD. But most of us didn't know that the offense would fall and had seen the O's under Buck rally late in the second half even with a hard schedule. Hindsight is a big benefit. You seem to be using it a lot.

Mike Olt wasn't the headliner of the Garza trade. He was a flier who they hoped would regain his form. The prize of the Garza trade was CJ Edwards who is a top 50-70 prospect and coming off a season where he posted a 1.86 ERA and an 11.99 K/9 over 116 1/3 IP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very weak response. Using a reactionary thread from Roy Firestone after a lose is no proof at all. Even FRobby admits in the thread that his post is reactionary.

Here is Tony's post after the Norris trade on July 31st.

TT: Norris trade shows the Orioles are acting like contenders

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/135144-TT-Norris-trade-shows-the-Orioles-are-acting-like-contenders

I did a search on "September schedule" and that thread was among those popping up. I thought there were a lot of good posts in the thread and a lot of people with a good understanding of how difficult it would be for the Os to make the playoffs. I could have picked other threads, but thought that was the most credible based on the time I was going to put into the reply. (Noting of course the "weak" criticism is from the guy jumping up and down silly about the value of Mike Olt and the cost of Alex Rios).

WE WERE NEVER GOING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS FOLKS. More than half our games were against teams above .500 - it was simply too difficult to make up ground in that environment on other teams and get to or above 90 wins. We were always going to be passed by at least Cleveland and were highly unlikely to pass both Texas and Tampa. It reflected a profound lack of judgment by our GM to part with the assets we did for a 15%-20% play at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a search on "September schedule" and that thread was among those popping up. I thought there were a lot of good posts in the thread and a lot of people with a good understanding of how difficult it would be for the Os to make the playoffs. I could have picked other threads, but thought that was the most credible based on the time I was going to put into the reply. (Noting of course the "weak" criticism is from the guy jumping up and down silly about the value of Mike Olt and the cost of Alex Rios).

WE WERE NEVER GOING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS FOLKS. More than half our games were against teams above .500 - it was simply too difficult to make up ground in that environment on other teams and get to or above 90 wins. We were always going to be passed by at least Cleveland and were highly unlikely to pass both Texas and Tampa. It reflected a profound lack of judgment by our GM to part with the assets we did for a 15%-20% play at best.

How can you type those two things in such proximity to each other and keep a straight face?

Seriously.

You seem deeply, deeply confused by probability if that's the case.

But I mean, honestly, to say "we were never going to make the playoffs" and then a few sentences later say we had a "15-20% chance of making the playoffs, is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Olt wasn't the headliner of the Garza trade. He was a flier who they hoped would regain his form. The prize of the Garza trade was CJ Edwards who is a top 50-70 prospect and coming off a season where he posted a 1.86 ERA and an 11.99 K/9 over 116 1/3 IP.

On the Cubs website, Olt is listed as the Cubs 6th prospect. CJ Edwards is listed as #11, So it seems that Mike Olt was the headliner. Good point that Edwards was another highly rated prospect traded at the deadline though. Thanks.

http://cubs.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2013/index.jsp?c_id=chc#list=chc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I mean, honestly, to say "we were never going to make the playoffs" and then a few sentences later say we had a "15-20% chance of making the playoffs, is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

You must have missed the comment about Duquette trading away our assets like a "Drunken Sailor".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One game out with 11 to play. I mean that should end all this nonsense of WE WERE NEVER GOING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. We crapped the bed after that, but that is just a stupid comment. You can hate the moves, which is fine, but don't make things up that don't have any basis in probability. I don't care who you are or who you're playing, anybody can make up 1 game in 11 just by getting on a lucky hot streak. The Astros were one of the worst teams of my lifetime and were always playing teams far better than themselves and even they had a 7-3 stretch this year.

Yeah, all the contenders got hot. Texas and TB went 9-3 after that day, Cleveland 10-0. In hindsight it wasn't too likely, but all that happening isn't that likely either.

And I don't like the "division win is all that matters, wild card stinks" argument. Plenty of world series have been won by wild cards. You get in, you have a chance. We beat Bos, Tex, Oak, and Det head to head this year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One game out with 11 to play. I mean that should end all this nonsense of WE WERE NEVER GOING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. We crapped the bed after that, but that is just a stupid comment. You can hate the moves, which is fine, but don't make things up that don't have any basis in probability. I don't care who you are or who you're playing, anybody can make up 1 game in 11 just by getting on a lucky hot streak. The Astros were one of the worst teams of my lifetime and were always playing teams far better than themselves and even they had a 7-3 stretch this year.

Yeah, all the contenders got hot. Texas and TB went 9-3 after that day, Cleveland 10-0. In hindsight it wasn't too likely, but all that happening isn't that likely either.

And I don't like the "division win is all that matters, wild card stinks" argument. Plenty of world series have been won by wild cards. You get in, you have a chance. We beat Bos, Tex, Oak, and Det head to head this year...

Great post. Rep coming your way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Hammel doesn't get hurt if we pull the trigger on the Norris deal. That deal not only kept up in the WC race but probably assured us of a 2nd straight winning season. But man was it at a steep price. Hoes would be a perfect platoon partner for Mcclouth next year. Hader would be in our top 7 prospects. And that 1st rd pick, well it's a 1 rd pick. But finishing below .500 would have really soured the fan base. Bad to Mediocre teams always make moves to just remain in the hunt. It takes a GM with job security to tank. The result of lets say winning 74 games instead of 85 would be having a protected 1st rd pick for signing FA's with qualifying offers. Picking 7 spots before we are currently scheduled to pick. Still having Hader and our other 1st rd pick. We all endured the 14 straight losing seasons. But wouldn't be equally as heartbreaking to make it in one of the wild card spots then lose? I want a division title and a shot at the ship or bust. We've had our two mediocre seasons now. And yes losing in the division series isn't winning a darn thing. I think this team may have topped out it's potential unless Bundy and Gausman turn into Wacha and Matt Harvey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Hammel doesn't get hurt if we pull the trigger on the Norris deal. That deal not only kept up in the WC race but probably assured us of a 2nd straight winning season. But man was it at a steep price. Hoes would be a perfect platoon partner for Mcclouth next year. Hader would be in our top 7 prospects. And that 1st rd pick, well it's a 1 rd pick. But finishing below .500 would have really soured the fan base. Bad to Mediocre teams always make moves to just remain in the hunt. It takes a GM with job security to tank. The result of lets say winning 74 games instead of 85 would be having a protected 1st rd pick for signing FA's with qualifying offers. Picking 7 spots before we are currently scheduled to pick. Still having Hader and our other 1st rd pick. We all endured the 14 straight losing seasons. But wouldn't be equally as heartbreaking to make it in one of the wild card spots then lose? I want a division title and a shot at the ship or bust. We've had our two mediocre seasons now. And yes losing in the division series isn't winning a darn thing. I think this team may have topped out it's potential unless Bundy and Gausman turn into Wacha and Matt Harvey.

The competitive balance pick would be the equivalent of Josh Hart. Not Hunter Harvey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As one can see from threads above, despite being ridiculed above as to using a crystal ball, our playoff odds were never that great to begin with and it was noticed by quite a few participants in the above threads. No crystal ball necessary to see that the Os were fighting an uphill battle relative to the schedule and standings, that our GM dealt away quality assets against those long odds and that we would fall short. We fell way short. We should not have dealt those assets. The trades reflected extremely poor judgment by our front office.

I think you have to go back to the OP. You mentioned several times here that the O's had a tough September schedule, but it's not like the Feldman, KRod and Norris trades were made on August 31. We were not in a bad position at all when those trade were made. I wish it was possible to go back and look at the BP playoff odds on those days (which take remaining strength of schedule into account), but I'd be the Orioles' odds were much higher than you seem to think. I certainly wouldn't want to have a GM who would have just given up in those circumstances.

I think the Norris trade, which was a longer-term play, is the one I have some reservations about in hindsight. The price paid was fine for a no. 3-4 starter for 2.3 seasons, which is what Norris was touted as being. But I haven't been impressed with him so far. I wasn't really against the deal at the time but I don't like what I saw from Norris. Hopefully, he was just suffering from a tired arm and will be more impressive next year. If not, that trade could turn out very poorly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Thanks for the detailed explanation of all of the issues.  Sounds like a mess.
    • Yeah the amenities are pretty outdated at the yard and they seem to do nothing year over year to improve them. The touchscreens have been banged on to death to the point they barely function, so you can't accurately fill out your order at the kiosks, and they don't have a way for the people behind the counter to ring you up at many of the food places. The sound is low to non-existent in certain sections of the club level, like around 218. Seems like there should be speakers that reach there but they might have been damaged by rain, etc. and they are too lazy to fix them. If you go to a game that's even slightly busy, you will wait forever to get into the bathroom, and the sink will be an absolute mess with no soap or paper towels. It's even worse on the club level where they have one sink that's right by the door. Nearby businesses don't care, either. The Hilton parking garage reeks of decay, pot and human waste. They don't turn on the air circulation fans, even if cars are waiting for an hour and a half to exit from P3, filling up the air with carbon monoxide. They only let you enter the stadium with one 20 oz bottle of water. It's so expensive to buy a drink or water in the stadium, but with all the salty food, 20 oz of water isn't enough, especially on a hot day. Vegetarian food options are poor to none, other than things like chips, fries, hot pretzels and the occasional pizza. Vida Taco is better, but at an inconvenient location for many seats. The doors on the club level are not accessible. They're anti-accessible. Big, heavy doors you have to go through to get to/from the escalators, and big, heavy doors to get to your seats, none of them automatic (or even with the option to be automatic with a button press). Makes it hard to carry food out to your seats even if not handicapped. The furniture in the lounges on the club level seem designed to allow as few people as possible to sit down. Not great when we have so many rain delays during the season. Should put more, smaller chairs in and allow more of the club level ticket holders to have a seat while waiting for thunderstorms to pass. They keep a lot of the entrance/exit gates closed except for playoff/sellout games, which means people have to slowly "mooooo" all the way down Eutaw St to get to parking. They are too cheap to staff all the gates, so they make people exit by the warehouse, even though it would be a lot more convenient for many fans to open all the gates. Taking Light Rail would be super convenient, except that if there's at least 20k fans in attendance, it's common to have to wait 90-120 minutes to be able to board a non-full train heading toward Glen Burnie. A few trains might come by, but they are already full, or fill up fast when folks walk up to the Convention Center stop to pre-empt the folks trying to board at Camden Station. None of the garages in the area are set up to require pre-payment on entry (reservation, or give them your card / digital payment at the entrance till). If they were, emptying out the garage would be very quick, as they wouldn't need to ticket anyone on the way out: if you can't get in without paying, you can always just leave without having to stop and scan your phone or put a ticket in the machine. They shut down the Sports Legends Museum at Camden Station in 2015 because the Maryland Stadium Authority was too greedy. That place was a fun distraction if you were in the area when a game wasn't about to start, like if you show up super early on Opening Day or a playoff day. Superbook's restaurant on Eutaw is a huge downgrade from Dempsey's in terms of menu and service quality. Dempsey's used to be well-staffed, you could reserve a table online, and they had all kinds of great selection for every diet. Superbook seems like just another bar serving the same swill that the rest of the park serves, with extremely minimal and low-quality food. For that matter, most of the food at the stadium is very low quality these days. A lot of things we used to love are made to a lower standard now if they are served at all. These are gripes about the stadium and the area that haven't changed my entire adult life. Going to an O's game requires one to tolerate many small inconveniences and several major inconveniences, any number of which could easily be fixed by the relevant authorities if they gave a damn about the people who pay to come see the team play. You would think a mid-market team would be able to afford to invest in the fan experience. You would think the city and partnering organizations like garages, the Stadium Authority and MTA would at least try to do their part to make the experience enjoyable and free of kinks. You would think they would put some thought into handling the "growing pains" of the fanbase due to recent renewed interest after the dark years. Instead, all we get is the same indifference and the same annoyances year in and year out. The whole area is overdue for a revamp. Not sure if $600 mil will get it done, but at least it's a start. Hopefully they can start to patch up some of the many holes in the fan experience. If you're not going to invest in Burnes, at least make it so paying customers have an easier, more enjoyable time getting to/from the stadium and having some food while we're there.
    • Elias has only been in rebuild mode with the O's so there's not much to speculate on there.  Houston, where he spent his formative years, doesn't seem to like to be on the hook for more than a couple of big long-term contracts at any given time.  I can see that as being Elias' choice as well, albeit with a lower overall cost - Houston runs a big payroll.  But it's all guesswork.  I really don't know. If Elias takes the 2025 payroll to $150 million it will creep up to $200 million or so by 2028 just from keeping the core together.  That's where I start to wonder about sustainability due to market size, economic forces, etc., etc., etc... If it were up to me, I would add a couple of free agents this offseason even if the contracts were longer than ideal and be conservative about extensions elsewhere until the prospects establish themselves a little better.  I think there's a competitive opportunity that the team is already into that's worth exploiting. I think ownership is very happy to have Elias on board and they're not inclined to force him to do anything.  I also think Rubenstein's demonstrated business prowess is great enough to assume that he has had plenty enough time to come to a mutual understanding with Elias as to goals.
    • We need a RH O’hearn…in addition to Westburg. At least 3 batters that will push up the pitch count and cause damage in the top 5 of the lineup.
    • Boy,  that Jackson Merrill is a good young player that is playing his best ball down the season stretch and in the playoffs.   He's only 21.  I guess some young guys are able to play up to the pressure.   Who could have guessed that?
    • I’m aware.   You are arguing something im Not.
    • What agreement? The agreement you are talking about happened as a result of the move.  The MASN agreement would not have existed if Angelos had gone to court to block the move.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...