Duquette: "I like our starting rotation."

[CA-ORIOLE]

I could pick a few points to disagree with here, but I think you mean "splitter" here. His out pitch is the Koji pitch, essentially - a diving pitch that acts kind of like a slider. So I wouldn't say he's in danger of losing velocity because of his splitter, but he does depend on it. When it's not working for him, he can get roughed up a bit.

Yeah, it's splitter not a cutter.

[Guest]

"Particularly with the emergence of (Chris) Tillman. Miguel Gonzalez has been good, (Wei-Yin) Chen has been good and we added (Bud) Norris. We have some dependable innings in that group"

[Guest]

"Particularly with the emergence of (Chris) Tillman. Miguel Gonzalez has been good, (Wei-Yin) Chen has been good and we added (Bud) Norris. We have some dependable innings in that group"

[weams]

Now that, I like.

[DaveV]

I think DD said last year that he liked our lineup. I sure did not. As the season progressed and our offense and defense looked pretty darn good, I had to finally agree with him. Maybe this year he is right about the pitching. I guy can dream can't he?

[CA-ORIOLE]

Man you're on a roll with the gifs today.

[Il BuonO]

Maybe someone should shown him Norris' splits against left handed batters. 811 OPS and a 1.77 K/BB ratio ain't so hot.

Wallace is gonna work up a splitter for him.

[weams]

"We're not reducing our payroll. The payroll was $82 million at the end of 2012 season, and last year it was over $95 million, so our payroll will be upwards of that this year. If somebody believes that the team is reducing the payroll, the team isn't reducing the payroll. The team is reallocating resources. In regard to closers that make over $10 million, so far there's been two. One of them you know very well. He enjoyed a lot of success and he's en route to the Hall of Fame. That's Mariano Rivera. And the other reliever is Papelbon. So, it's not something that clubs commonly do. Clubs don't ordinarily pay their closer 10 percent of their salary budget. It's generally not done in the industry. It wasn't done in New York and it wasn't done in Philadelphia. The Orioles made the same determination that the rest of the industry made. If you have 100 marbles and you have to give 10 to your closer, then you have 90 for the rest of your team, right? If you were to allocate five or six marbles to that position and you give 10, then you have to find four other marbles somewhere else that you will be taking away from one of your other players. So, we just felt, given that Jimmy Johnson was going to be a free agent at the end of the year and there are quite a few experienced closers available on the board, that we would trade the player's contract and restaff our team. The other issue is that the players who had good years who are core players on the team, they're due an increase based on the current system. So, players like Chris Davis and Matt Wieters, they're due raises based upon how they performed within the system. The club has to fund those. A year ago, we funded over $22 million in raises for players who were in the arbitration system. And then this year, we have nine players in the system and a number of them will be receiving raises. That perception that the team is lowering payroll, that's not accurate. That's not the case. The team has increased payroll in past years and is prepared to do that again this year."

Duquette

[bobmc]

"We're not reducing our payroll. The payroll was $82 million at the end of 2012 season, and last year it was over $95 million, so our payroll will be upwards of that this year. If somebody believes that the team is reducing the payroll, the team isn't reducing the payroll. The team is reallocating resources. In regard to closers that make over $10 million, so far there's been two. One of them you know very well. He enjoyed a lot of success and he's en route to the Hall of Fame. That's Mariano Rivera. And the other reliever is Papelbon. So, it's not something that clubs commonly do. Clubs don't ordinarily pay their closer 10 percent of their salary budget. It's generally not done in the industry. It wasn't done in New York and it wasn't done in Philadelphia. The Orioles made the same determination that the rest of the industry made. If you have 100 marbles and you have to give 10 to your closer, then you have 90 for the rest of your team, right? If you were to allocate five or six marbles to that position and you give 10, then you have to find four other marbles somewhere else that you will be taking away from one of your other players. So, we just felt, given that Jimmy Johnson was going to be a free agent at the end of the year and there are quite a few experienced closers available on the board, that we would trade the player's contract and restaff our team. The other issue is that the players who had good years who are core players on the team, they're due an increase based on the current system. So, players like Chris Davis and Matt Wieters, they're due raises based upon how they performed within the system. The club has to fund those. A year ago, we funded over $22 million in raises for players who were in the arbitration system. And then this year, we have nine players in the system and a number of them will be receiving raises. That perception that the team is lowering payroll, that's not accurate. That's not the case. The team has increased payroll in past years and is prepared to do that again this year."

Duquette

It's obvious that Double D has been reading the Hangout (AKA the pulse of Oriole Nation)! :clap3::laughlol:

[Rene88]

Increasing payroll = more beer vendors?

[TonySoprano]

Dear Dan,

I already ran the numbers. We had this same conversation last year. I'll believe the numbers will go up when I see it and not before. The numbers need to go up a lot, not no nickel and dime business either. Don't go hiding the extra money from Selig in Angelos' mattress. That's the first place we'll look. Capisce?

Merry Christmas from my famiglia to yours.

Your pal,

T. Soprano

[srock]

"We're not reducing our payroll. The payroll was $82 million at the end of 2012 season, and last year it was over $95 million, so our payroll will be upwards of that this year. If somebody believes that the team is reducing the payroll, the team isn't reducing the payroll. The team is reallocating resources. In regard to closers that make over $10 million, so far there's been two. One of them you know very well. He enjoyed a lot of success and he's en route to the Hall of Fame. That's Mariano Rivera. And the other reliever is Papelbon. So, it's not something that clubs commonly do. Clubs don't ordinarily pay their closer 10 percent of their salary budget. It's generally not done in the industry. It wasn't done in New York and it wasn't done in Philadelphia. The Orioles made the same determination that the rest of the industry made. If you have 100 marbles and you have to give 10 to your closer, then you have 90 for the rest of your team, right? If you were to allocate five or six marbles to that position and you give 10, then you have to find four other marbles somewhere else that you will be taking away from one of your other players. So, we just felt, given that Jimmy Johnson was going to be a free agent at the end of the year and there are quite a few experienced closers available on the board, that we would trade the player's contract and restaff our team. The other issue is that the players who had good years who are core players on the team, they're due an increase based on the current system. So, players like Chris Davis and Matt Wieters, they're due raises based upon how they performed within the system. The club has to fund those. A year ago, we funded over $22 million in raises for players who were in the arbitration system. And then this year, we have nine players in the system and a number of them will be receiving raises. That perception that the team is lowering payroll, that's not accurate. That's not the case. The team has increased payroll in past years and is prepared to do that again this year."

Duquette

My biggest issue is the implication the teams budget is $100 million. I hope he is just basing that on the $95 million from last year and is actually not indicative of the 2014 budget.

$100 million payroll ain't what it used to be. In fact, its below average. Not the budget cap a winning mid market team with a billionare owner and a sweet RSN deal should have.

[Yardball85]

My biggest issue is the implication the teams budget is $100 million. I hope he is just basing that on the $95 million from last year and is actually not indicative of the 2014 budget.

$100 million payroll ain't what it used to be. In fact, its below average. Not the budget cap a winning mid market team with a billionare owner and a sweet RSN deal should have.

I know a few other posters also thought the 100 marbles analogy seemed to indicate a $100M payroll. I don't see it that way. I think DD just chose 100 as a round number that makes it easy to see what giving 10% of your payroll to a closer does. It could be 110 or 115, but giving a bunch of marbles to a closer doesn't make sense.

[Can_of_corn]

It's the quote about not paying your closer "10% of your salary budget" (10M is 10% of 100M) that is more telling.

Dan was rounding down.

[srock]

I know a few other posters also thought the 100 marbles analogy seemed to indicate a $100M payroll. I don't see it that way. I think DD just chose 100 as a round number that makes it easy to see what giving 10% of your payroll to a closer does. It could be 110 or 115, but giving a bunch of marbles to a closer doesn't make sense.

It's the quote about not paying your closer "10% of your salary budget" (10M is 10% of 100M) that is more telling.

Yup, this is what is troubling. He pretty clearly put the payroll budget at $100 million. I hope what he said is not what he meant.

$100 million max payroll for the Orioles at this time in this situation is utterly embarrassing.