Its now 2014 and we haven't made any notable moves

[CA-ORIOLE]

Bottom line, I'm more frustrated this offseason that I have been in years. Much of it stems from the Balfour thing coupled with a clear idea of what the plan is. We have 2 years of Davis and Wieters. It seems to be near impossible to sign a FA. There is 0% chance we post for any international players.

It's just frustrating. I believe in DD, I just need to see him make a follow up move to regain my confidence.

I think he's set enough money aside to make an impact signing. I'll be upset myself if we end up spending the bulk of it on a "closer".

[weams]

"Lateral moves" that save 20+ million dollars aren't really lateral imo. I'm guessing we have another 10-12 mil or so to spend that we wouldn't have had without those moves. We'll see where it goes.

Well concidering that we are paying 20 million more for the arbitration eligible players that we had last year causes me to caution too much optimism. We got very fortunate on Davis. The more I think about things, I am very happy we offloaded Jim Johnson. We may still trade Wieters.

[Redskins Rick]

I think he's set enough money aside to make an impact signing. I'll be upset myself if we end up spending the bulk of it on a "closer".

You dont say words like resource allocation, if you plan on making an impact signing.

[weams]

This team in theory could have a 125-140 million dollar payroll and hang with the best of them.

According to who? I'd like it, but I don't see that as sustainable. I'd just as soon do the Tampa thing as overspend on poor players.

[Redskins Rick]

According to who? I'd like it, but I don't see that as sustainable. I'd just as soon do the Tampa thing as overspend on poor players.

The Nationals have a 140 million dollar payroll.

[Redskins Rick]

Hit post too quickly.

Spending wisely, doesn't mean foolishly, either.

You can sign mid-market FAs and improve this team and not troll for outcasts.

[CA-ORIOLE]

You don't say words like resource allocation, if you plan on making an impact signing.

Yeah that's not necessarily true. The context here is that we've made "lateral" moves and cleared a lot of payroll. We "should" have another 10-12 mil (my guess) to make an "impact" signing. If your definition of an impact signing is a Choo/Elsbury type player/contract then yeah, that's not going to happen.

[weams]

The Nationals have a 140 million dollar payroll.

The Lerners have lots of money. And we are just as good as them without the payroll. You don't want to get me started on Nationals and Red Skins

[Redskins Rick]

Yeah that's not necessarily true. The context here is that we've made "lateral" moves and cleared a lot of payroll. We "should" have another 10-12 mil (my guess) to make an "impact" signing. If your definition of an impact signing is a Choo/Elsbury type player/contract then yeah, that's not going to happen.

Those are high end, and not realistically in the budget, and neither made fiscal sense.

[UMDTerrapins]

The "Oriole Way" over the tenure of a number of GMs now is waiting for the free agent pool to thin, and then start making value offers on the remnants. I'm quite confident that's a product of each GM receiving a budget ceiling that doesn't leave room for the pursuit of in-demand free agents. I don't think it's fair to judge DD on his offseason because given the way we work through Angelos, his offseason has barely begun. And once the offseason is complete, I think it's only fair to look at the payroll at that point (don't assume it's $100M) and then judge how he could have stretched his budget to make a better roster.

All that aside, what I can't get away from is larger reality check that if Angelos will not add to payroll this offseason (which is borderline criminal given what the fan base has endured), then we will not be good enough to compete for the playoffs. And given that, Davis and Wieters should be traded this offseason while their returns will be significant. DD, like most every GM under Angelos is in a terrible spot. His reputation is tied to an owner who cares more about the appearance of putting a ML team on the field than spending to go after a championship. So not only does he not have the means to add to a pretty good team to give them a shot to compete, but I seriously doubt Angelos would allow him to trade Davis and/or Wieters....knowing that if we're not building for 2014/15, we need to start building for 2016/17.

It also doesn't matter what the calendar says, we're not a team that makes many notable moves.

[Redskins Rick]

The Lerners have lots of money. And we are just as good as them without the payroll.

Are we really?

I guess we can revisit this discussion in August.

[scOtt]

The Nationals have a 140 million dollar payroll.

They're free spenders (and richer I think...) We're tight.

[Ommaculate]

Harper has done nothing overly great yet. We'll see if he lives up to the hype this season.

[Redskins Rick]

They're free spenders (and richer I think...) We're tight.

Free spenders are teams over and above the Luxury cap.

I think they are spending their profits back into the team, and not trying to make a profit from the team for their own bank accounts.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Well concidering that we are paying 20 million more for the arbitration eligible players that we had last year causes me to caution too much optimism. We got very fortunate on Davis. The more I think about things, I am very happy we offloaded Jim Johnson. We may still trade Wieters.

The net impact is (even with arbitration) we will have a payroll structure of around 82 million with the current players on hand (post arbitration) and we "arguably" have something close to the same level of talent that we had last year (overall) at a higher payroll structure.