If the payroll is $100M max, the Orioles are a small-market team.

[Going Underground]

Not trying to provide excuses here, but I mean, the Astros have no money tied up in position players whatsoever. We have Jones, Hardy, Davis, Wieters, so our money is there rather than the pitching staff.

You forgot Markakis ,who makes the most of all I think, I understand your point but it was kind of funny that Feldman makes more then the entire Orioles pitching staff.

[TradeAngelos]

You forgot Markakis ,who makes the most of all I think, I understand your point but it was kind of funny that Feldman makes more then the entire Orioles pitching staff.

Spending money on good pitching isn't very good "resource allocation". Fool's gold.

Just wasting money.

[El Gordo]

You forgot Markakis ,who makes the most of all I think, I understand your point but it was kind of funny that Feldman makes more then the entire Orioles pitching staff.

In the abstract that should be a good thing. In context with the Grinch it's not.

[backwardsk]

Is this sad or funny? The Rays pitching staff also has a higher payroll then the O's'

By comparison, the Orioles' entire projected starting rotation ? Chris Tillman, Wei-Yin Chen, Miguel Gonzalez, Bud Norris and any combination of a fifth starter from Kevin Gausman, Zach Britton or Steve Johnson ? is set to make less money than former Orioles starter Scott Feldman, who will earn $12 million this year in the first year of a three-year, $30 million deal with the Houston Astros.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-02-07/sports/bal-bronson-arroyo-signs-twoyear-deal-with-arizona-diamondbacks-20140207_1_zach-britton-kevin-gausman-wei-yin-chen

I did an exercise the other day when Arroyo signed. It was either 24-25 teams that spent more on two rotation spots than the Orioles do on their entire rotation. I plugged in Matusz as the fifth.

[TradeAngelos]

I did an exercise the other day when Arroyo signed. It was either 24-25 teams that spent more on two rotation spots than the Orioles do on their entire rotation. I plugged in Matusz as the fifth.

Not too hard to trump an 11m total for 5 guys. I bet that most have ONE guy who makes that.

[backwardsk]

Not too hard to trump an 11m total for 5 guys. I bet that most have ONE guy who makes that.

It was a decent amount, but it wasn't most. I can't recall the breakdown offhand. And the figure was closer to 13mm, whatever COTs had--not that it's a big difference.

[Number5]

Not too hard to trump an 11m total for 5 guys. I bet that most have ONE guy who makes that.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that it is better to pay more? Just for the sake of paying more? IMO, the goal is to pay less for better results. The important thing is the results. The smaller amount that you have to pay for the desired results, the better. Sorry, but saying that paying more for one guy "trumps" paying less for all 5 without any reference whatsoever to the baseball results makes less than zero sense to me.

[Frobby]

Is this sad or funny? The Rays pitching staff also has a higher payroll then the O's'

By comparison, the Orioles' entire projected starting rotation ? Chris Tillman, Wei-Yin Chen, Miguel Gonzalez, Bud Norris and any combination of a fifth starter from Kevin Gausman, Zach Britton or Steve Johnson ? is set to make less money than former Orioles starter Scott Feldman, who will earn $12 million this year in the first year of a three-year, $30 million deal with the Houston Astros.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-02-07/sports/bal-bronson-arroyo-signs-twoyear-deal-with-arizona-diamondbacks-20140207_1_zach-britton-kevin-gausman-wei-yin-chen

The Rays have David Price, so I am not at all surprised their payroll for pitchers is higher than ours. We are fortunate that of our three best starters, two are not yet eligible for arbitration and the other signed a very cheap contract coming from Japan. Those three will be plenty more expensive as time goes by. I'd rather have any of the three than Scott Feldman.

[El Gordo]

Our rotation including Gausman/Britton would cost 11.5M.

[weams]

It is funny that those are the two teams you chose to pick out. Funny indeed, but not surprising in the least.

Spin, spin, spin away.

Frobby had a well thought out post. You simply mocked and made fun of fellow posters. I know you are upset and I know you can make good posts. I look forward to them.

[TradeAngelos]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that it is better to pay more? Just for the sake of paying more? IMO, the goal is to pay less for better results. The important thing is the results. The smaller amount that you have to pay for the desired results, the better. Sorry, but saying that paying more for one guy "trumps" paying less for all 5 without any reference whatsoever to the baseball results makes less than zero sense to me.

The goal is to "pay less for better results"?? Really? is that what the goal is going into every season, pay the least amount of money for the best results? UNREAL!! Do you realize what you just said?

Are we here to win baseball games or win the "who gets the most out of the least money" game? Do they give out a trophy for that at the end of the year? Do they raise flags with "value champions of 2013!!" at the stadiums these days?

And BTW, I never said anything you claim after "are you saying...." No I quite clearly didn't say any of that in my 1 line response. But you chose to put a paragraph of words in my mouth as if I did.

Nothing makes my jaw drop like this place does with this type of thoughts. That is isn't about winning, it is about saving money.

Do you work in the warehouse with BradyBurns? Because they are the only ones who seem to think saving money is the main goal over winning games.

[weams]

Spending money on good pitching isn't very good "resource allocation". Fool's gold.

Just wasting money.

I think spending money on pitching is one of the better ways for us to spend it.

[Number5]

The goal is to "pay less for better results"?? Really? is that what the goal is going into every season, pay the least amount of money for the best results? UNREAL!! Do you realize what you just said?

Are we here to win baseball games or win the "who gets the most out of the least money" game? Do they give out a trophy for that at the end of the year? Do they raise flags with "value champions of 2013!!" at the stadiums these days?

And BTW, I never said anything you claim after "are you saying...." No I quite clearly didn't say any of that in my 1 line response. But you chose to put a paragraph of words in my mouth as if I did.

Nothing makes my jaw drop like this place does with this type of thoughts. That is isn't about winning, it is about saving money.

Do you work in the warehouse with BradyBurns? Because they are the only ones who seem to think saving money is the main goal over winning games.

Exactly what part of "the important thing is the results" did you find the most difficult to understand?

[Frobby]

The goal is to "pay less for better results"?? Really? is that what the goal is going into every season, pay the least amount of money for the best results? UNREAL!! Do you realize what you just said?

Are we here to win baseball games or win the "who gets the most out of the least money" game? Do they give out a trophy for that at the end of the year? Do they raise flags with "value champions of 2013!!" at the stadiums these days?

And BTW, I never said anything you claim after "are you saying...." No I quite clearly didn't say any of that in my 1 line response. But you chose to put a paragraph of words in my mouth as if I did.

Nothing makes my jaw drop like this place does with this type of thoughts. That is isn't about winning, it is about saving money.

Do you work in the warehouse with BradyBurns? Because they are the only ones who seem to think saving money is the main goal over winning games.

Let's be very clear -- it's about winning. But if you have a budget that is finite, you obviously want to get the most for your money that you can. Is that even debatable?

[TradeAngelos]

Frobby had a well thought out post. You simply mocked and made fun of fellow posters. I know you are upset and I know you can make good posts. I look forward to them.

I made a perfectly reasonable response pointing out how he chose to select two teams that have lower than normal payrolls due to their semi rebuilding, and leaving out the 10 other better examples of teams who are spending more without near the resources we have.

I don't "mock" anyone, I point out the clearly flawed arguments trying to defend this team at every turn. Many people agree with me, you obviously don't. That is fine.