Camden Depot's Shepherd: Failed Physicals and Testing the Orioles' Success

[Number5]

As Jon Sheperd points out? People here have been pointing out precisely the same thing for quite some time. Of course, the problem is that everyone keeps pointing out the same three names: Hernandez, Sele, and Burnitz. As I've pointed out elsewhere, Hernandez had a torn rotator cuff. Missing that would've been the medical equivalent of falling asleep at the wheel. It was not an illustration of the powers of prognostication of the O's medical team. Burnitz? He was never even examined. Why are the Orioles getting credit for their care/scrutiny concerning Burnitz, when Burnitz never even saw the Orioles' doctors? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (let alone a person with a medical degree) to predict that Burnitz was nearing the end of his career at that point. And the funny thing is...we can't even say with any degree of certainty that he would not have passed the O's exam.

Oh, but Aaron Sele. Despite the fact that his arm problems didn't manifest for a couple of years after meeting with the Orioles, the wizards in the warehouse (or at JHU) were able to predict that Sele's health was going to take a dive. Good on them. Where were they when Wada signed? How about Albert Belle? And how about Dylan Bundy as a recent example? He was barely in the organization for a year before coming down with an injury that required Tommy John. A five year ML contract and a $4 million signing bonus? Why didn't they see that coming?

Point being, I'm pretty sick of hearing about the Orioles' "track record" when it comes to this type of thing. There's only one half-decent example on the list that keeps getting trumpeted (Sele), and there's no way to know with any certainty whether even that proves that the O's doctors were "right" or "just plain lucky" on one occasion.

Moreover, the above notwithstanding, the real problem with the Balfour situation is that it's just one more knock against an organization that's given the rest of baseball plenty of reasons to view it with skepticism and/or derision. We're talking about a franchise that, over the last 15 years or so, has employed a possibly senile GM, and, later on, two GMs at the same time. For a while, they couldn't even find someone to take the bloody job. We're talking about a franchise that allowed its manager-of-the-year manager resign on the day he won the award because the owner wouldn't extend his contract. We're talking about a team that got itself banned from an entire country (S. Korea), and made "international headlines" by signing a softball-playing New Zealander. There are PLENTY of reasons the Orioles are, and should be, drawing fire for the Balfour situation, and I'm not even covering all of them.

Granted, it took me a minute to figure out why things like this put the O's in the cross-hairs, while the Red Sox escape criticism for the Napoli signing, but then it became rather obvious: the Red Sox have shown themselves time and again to be committed to winning, and the Red Sox have been frequent participants in the FA market. In short, they have familiarity and volume on their side. The Orioles barely dabble in free agency, and, when they do, it seems like they either make poor choices or few choices...or both. Anyway, this has gone on long enough...I'm just sick to death of hearing about the O's solid "track record." They don't have a solid track record. They barely have a record at all.

Burnitz's agent refused the physical examination. That tells me that making the signing subject to a physical examination was a pretty good move. How you can try to say that is, in any way, a bad reflection on the Orioles us beyond me.

[NJ BIRD FAN]

As Jon Sheperd points out? People here have been pointing out precisely the same thing for quite some time. Of course, the problem is that everyone keeps pointing out the same three names: Hernandez, Sele, and Burnitz. As I've pointed out elsewhere, Hernandez had a torn rotator cuff. Missing that would've been the medical equivalent of falling asleep at the wheel. It was not an illustration of the powers of prognostication of the O's medical team. Burnitz? He was never even examined. Why are the Orioles getting credit for their care/scrutiny concerning Burnitz, when Burnitz never even saw the Orioles' doctors? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (let alone a person with a medical degree) to predict that Burnitz was nearing the end of his career at that point. And the funny thing is...we can't even say with any degree of certainty that he would not have passed the O's exam.

Oh, but Aaron Sele. Despite the fact that his arm problems didn't manifest for a couple of years after meeting with the Orioles, the wizards in the warehouse (or at JHU) were able to predict that Sele's health was going to take a dive. Good on them. Where were they when Wada signed? How about Albert Belle? And how about Dylan Bundy as a recent example? He was barely in the organization for a year before coming down with an injury that required Tommy John. A five year ML contract and a $4 million signing bonus? Why didn't they see that coming?

Point being, I'm pretty sick of hearing about the Orioles' "track record" when it comes to this type of thing. There's only one half-decent example on the list that keeps getting trumpeted (Sele), and there's no way to know with any certainty whether even that proves that the O's doctors were "right" or "just plain lucky" on one occasion.

Moreover, the above notwithstanding, the real problem with the Balfour situation is that it's just one more knock against an organization that's given the rest of baseball plenty of reasons to view it with skepticism and/or derision. We're talking about a franchise that, over the last 15 years or so, has employed a possibly senile GM, and, later on, two GMs at the same time. For a while, they couldn't even find someone to take the bloody job. We're talking about a franchise that allowed its manager-of-the-year manager resign on the day he won the award because the owner wouldn't extend his contract. We're talking about a team that got itself banned from an entire country (S. Korea), and made "international headlines" by signing a softball-playing New Zealander. There are PLENTY of reasons the Orioles are, and should be, drawing fire for the Balfour situation, and I'm not even covering all of them.

Granted, it took me a minute to figure out why things like this put the O's in the cross-hairs, while the Red Sox escape criticism for the Napoli signing, but then it became rather obvious: the Red Sox have shown themselves time and again to be committed to winning, and the Red Sox have been frequent participants in the FA market. In short, they have familiarity and volume on their side. The Orioles barely dabble in free agency, and, when they do, it seems like they either make poor choices or few choices...or both. Anyway, this has gone on long enough...I'm just sick to death of hearing about the O's solid "track record." They don't have a solid track record. They barely have a record at all.

I hear there are a bunch of other teams looking for fans.

[Stotle]

Not really.

The Napoli signing was announced prior to the physical, as well. I certainly knew they had signed him, didn't you? You are, for some reason, trying to say that the Orioles handled this more publicly than Boston did. They haven't. They simply haven't. The publicity, from the very beginning, has emanated from the Balfour side. I don't understand why you are saying otherwise.

I've addressed all of this multiple times, I think. The lynchpin issue is the reason used for retracting the offer. If it was deemed reasonable by both sides (as was the case with Napoli) Balfour would almost certainly sign a short term deal with Baltimore (as did Napoli). The problem arises when a player feels like a team has unfairly crushed his value on the open market.

Baltimore is justified in using whatever standards it likes in determining risk of signing players. However, if that standard is higher than generally accepted practices, there is some responsibility that goes along with that. It's pretty much that simple.

There is obviously a chance that Balfour is being wholly unreasonable. But that seems unlikely given the comments we've seen from various parties.

[MrOrange82]

Burnitz's agent refused the physical examination. That tells me that making the signing subject to a physical examination was a pretty good move. How you can try to say that is, in any way, a bad reflection on the Orioles us beyond me.

It's kind of strange to me that the above is the one thing you took away from my post, but regardless...there are two sides to every story. Just seems like few people bother to find both sides:

Burnitz, who will turn 37 two weeks into next season, is healthy - he played 160 games for the Chicago Cubs last season - but his agent said he was uncomfortable with the Orioles' position in the letter of agreement.

The letter, Simon said, talked of a full review of Burnitz's health record, a physical for the Orioles and a physical for the insurance policy the Orioles would take out on him.

When all of those steps had been taken, the letter went on, and the Orioles received all of the data they needed, they would decide if Burnitz's physical condition was acceptable to them.

"Who knows how many weeks or months it could take?" Simon said.

Simon said he was concerned that the Orioles could change their mind on Burnitz, and by that time, the other teams most interested in him - the Pirates and the Houston Astros - could have signed other players.

The letter of the agreement with the Pirates, Simon added, stated simply that the contract was contingent on Burnitz's passing a physical examination that he would take no later than Jan. 6.

"That's more typical of what teams do," Simon said.

Jim Duquette, the Orioles executive who negotiated the Burnitz deal, did not return a telephone call seeking comment.

[russ snyder]

Loudly deny they had any deal in place with Balfour, but that they were in discussions. Make clear to Balfour that the medicals were HUGE for Baltimore, and they didn't want to put the cart before the horse in announcing a deal (and encouraging Balfour's side to do the same).

You're saying that they should have lied about having a deal in place with Balfour? Remember, they were negotiating with him for several weeks, and there were several other teams that were trying to sign him as well.

Shame on Balfour and his camp for not knowing that medicals were huge for Baltimore. If it was not spelled out during the negotiations, his agents should have been aware of the Orioles past history with Sele, Hernadez, et al. If they had done this, perhaps Balfour would not have felt blindsided. Also, good luck in keeping things quiet in this age of twitter.

In retrospect, the Orioles should not have scheduled the press conference to announce the signing. It turned out to be the start of the PR nightmare for the Orioles.

In the future, I would suggest the team to wait until the plyer has pssed the physical to announce the signing. They may have to cave in for some a hotel room or two for a couple of days, but it might better than scheduling an qnnouncement that turns out to be less than good news.

[SteveO]

I don't know why the Red Sox get lauded for being smart because they knocked Napoli's deal from a 3 year deal to a 1 year deal, but the O's do the same thing (or try to) with Balfour and they get kicked to the ground for it. No one ever mentions that Sele broke down 2 years into a 4 year deal, or the Burnitz was terrible and injured the year after he failed our physical. They just lambast the fact that the O's like to be thorough when throwing around 8-figure cash. Which is understandable. If I signed a contract for 15 million dollars the company would probably take every legal precaution necessary.

Balfour has a history of shoulder issues. If your gonna have more stringent physical standards thats fine but then you might want to pursue guys who are likely to meet their standards.

The 35 plus year old reliever with a history of shoulder issues really does not fit that bill do ya think?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4

[NJ BIRD FAN]

This is patently incorrect. There's no way this doesn't impact every FA signing in some small way for years to come. There is now risk associated with negotiating with the Orioles, and that risk is re-entering the market with less value after a failed physical that is more stringent than any other team's.

It's a damn nightmare. End of story.

You are assuming that the Orioles Physical's are more stringent then others. You are talking about something as fact, that you know nothing about. Everything you have heard has come from Balfour's camp.

[Ruzious]

I've addressed all of this multiple times, I think. The lynchpin issue is the reason used for retracting the offer. If it was deemed reasonable by both sides (as was the case with Napoli) Balfour would almost certainly sign a short term deal with Baltimore (as did Napoli). The problem arises when a player feels like a team has unfairly crushed his value on the open market.

Baltimore is justified in using whatever standards it likes in determining risk of signing players. However, if that standard is higher than generally accepted practices, there is some responsibility that goes along with that. It's pretty much that simple.

There is obviously a chance that Balfour is being wholly unreasonable. But that seems unlikely given the comments we've seen from various parties.

I concur with your reasoning. And I think it likely damages the O's credibility in future negotiations with free agents.

And my guess is - the tactics used by the O's were the idea of the Angelos family.

[NJ BIRD FAN]

We all know the O's physicals are more strict because it has to go through Peter Angelos. That's been reported time and again. There are quotes from players about the O's physicals being harder than any other physical. It is a fact! That's why I'm talking about it as fact!

Wake up!

We've heard from ex-O's GM's, reporters, players... not just Balfour's people. This is a well-documented, Orioles-specific PROBLEM.

So if this is a fact and has been going on for some time as you claim, then why would this Balfour deal some how change anything?

[Stotle]

You're saying that they should have lied about having a deal in place with Balfour? Remember, they were negotiating with him for several weeks, and there were several other teams that were trying to sign him as well.

Shame on Balfour and his camp for not knowing that medicals were huge for Baltimore. If it was not spelled out during the negotiations, his agents should have been aware of the Orioles past history with Sele, Hernadez, et al. If they had done this, perhaps Balfour would not have felt blindsided. Also, good luck in keeping things quiet in this age of twitter.

In retrospect, the Orioles should not have scheduled the press conference to announce the signing. It turned out to be the start of the PR nightmare for the Orioles.

In the future, I would suggest the team to wait until the plyer has pssed the physical to announce the signing. They may have to cave in for some a hotel room or two for a couple of days, but it might better than scheduling an qnnouncement that turns out to be less than good news.

You can feel that way. The vast majority of players and agents don't, though. Bottom line is, rightly or wrongly, Balfour apparently feels Baltimore took millions of dollars and multi-year security out of his hands for unconvincing reasons.

I mean, don't we see most players acknowledge when medicals reveal something that is likely to bring down their value across the board? The problem comes when the player doesn't think his value should be knocked down.

In other words, if Balfour feels like he could have had 2/14 with the Yankees or whomever else, there's regret he ever spoke with Baltimore. The Napoli case is different in that Napoli clearly conceded the medical issues reduced his long term value, and he proceeded under that understanding.

If you are a pitcher in his thirties, you don't shut out Baltimore but you certainly think long and hard about giving them the first bite of the apple. How could you not?

[Number5]

I've addressed all of this multiple times, I think. The lynchpin issue is the reason used for retracting the offer. If it was deemed reasonable by both sides (as was the case with Napoli) Balfour would almost certainly sign a short term deal with Baltimore (as did Napoli). The problem arises when a player feels like a team has unfairly crushed his value on the open market.

Baltimore is justified in using whatever standards it likes in determining risk of signing players. However, if that standard is higher than generally accepted practices, there is some responsibility that goes along with that. It's pretty much that simple.

There is obviously a chance that Balfour is being wholly unreasonable. But that seems unlikely given the comments we've seen from various parties.

Well, I have to disagree with you. I know of no team that will fail a player on a physical only if the player agrees to it. I have to say that I don't even understand that point of view at all. Frankly, I feel pretty safe in assuming that all teams heed the advise of the doctors that they are paying to give them that advice. I seriously doubt that any teams will take a player's opinion, or even a player's doctor's opinion over that of their own team of medical professionals.

I'm also a little hazy on what various parties you are talking about that are making comments. Balfour and his agent? Rosenthal? Who are we talking about, and what comments?

[MrOrange82]

So if this is a fact and has been going on for some time as you claim, then why would this Balfour deal some how change anything?

(1) It's a reminder that the more things change, the more they stay the same. (2) Related to the preceding, it's history repeating itself after the purported transformation of the O's into a winning/contending team.

If you can't see why that might be significant moving forward, then I don't know what to tell you. And I'll say it again for posterity: I didn't even want them to sign Balfour, but spending that much energy on a relief pitcher only to have it wind down like this is ridiculous.

[NJ BIRD FAN]

You can feel that way. The vast majority of players and agents don't, though. Bottom line is, rightly or wrongly, Balfour apparently feels Baltimore took millions of dollars and multi-year security out of his hands for unconvincing reasons.

I mean, don't we see most players acknowledge when medicals reveal something that is likely to bring down their value across the board? The problem comes when the player doesn't think his value should be knocked down.

In other words, if Balfour feels like he could have had 2/14 with the Yankees or whomever else, there's regret he ever spoke with Baltimore. The Napoli case is different in that Napoli clearly conceded the medical issues reduced his long term value, and he proceeded under that understanding.

If you are a pitcher in his thirties, you don't shut out Baltimore but you certainly think long and hard about giving them the first bite of the apple. How could you not?

Do you have some kind of data on this bold statement?

[Stotle]

Well, I have to disagree with you. I know of no team that will fail a player on a physical only if the player agrees to it. I have to say that I don't even understand that point of view at all. Frankly, I feel pretty safe in assuming that all teams heed the advise of the doctors that they are paying to give them that advice. I seriously doubt that any teams will take a player's opinion, or even a player's doctor's opinion over that of their own team of medical professionals.

I'm also a little hazy on what various parties you are talking about that are making comments. Balfour and his agent? Rosenthal? Who are we talking about, and what comments?

You're missing the point. The fact we don't generally see situations like this isn't evidence teams only retract offers if players agree they failed a physical. It's evidence that when something comes up on a physical that leads to retraction of an offer, it's generally something significant enough that the player and team are on the same page as to the import of the findings.

[Stotle]

Do you have some kind of data on this bold statement?

1. Enough industry exposure to understand some of these dynamics.

2. Historical data that tells us players don't generally make a giant fuss over failed medicals.