CSN: The five worst contracts in Orioles history

[OFFNY]

I believe he set the all-time single season record for doubles in a season by a switch hitter. Sisler still holds the record, and nobody has gotten as close to it in modern times as Todd Helton in 2000.

Thanks Shane, that what I meant to say. He broke Lance Berkman's record of 55, when he (Berkman) was playing for the Astros.

I'll fix it. And thanks, again. I'll give you a greenie, but I have to spread it around first.

[Plutarch]

Maybe not one of the worst, but Jay Gibbons should not go unmentioned

[24fps]

.

Almost immediately after the contract extension took effect, Roberts began suffering from a bizarre series of injuries.

This is not correct.

Roberts signed the extension in February of 2009. 2009 was one of Roberts' best (if not best) seasons ever, as he set the all-time major league record for doubles by a switch-hitter in a season (56), stole 30 bases, hit 16 HR's, and scored 110 runs.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3921371

The 4 years that he was extended for covered his injury-riddled seasons (2010-2103), but the extension was not signed just previous to those seasons.

It still turned out to be an awful contract in terms of production (or lack thereof) in those 4 years, but I believe that it is important to remember it how it happened, and not through myth/misconception. To this day, there are people that still believe that if Bill Buckner had caught Mookie Wilson's dribbler up the first baseline (and beaten Wilson to the bag to record the out) that the Red Sox would have won the World Series. In fact, the Mets had already tied the game, so even if Buckner had caught the ball (AND beaten Wilson to the bag), the game would have continued into the 11th inning ...... and at that point, the Mets were much more likely to win the game, since they had just ripped the heart out of the Red Sox, who had just blown a 2-run lead with 2 outs and nobody on base.

I know that it sounds a little sexier to say, "Right after Roberts signed that contract, he started getting hurt," but that is not the way that it happened.

EPILOGUE: That same off-season (between 2008 and 2009), Nick Markakis also signed a long-term extension, and at that time, it (the long-term extensions of two of the team's core, star players) was being lauded as a commitment to the future of a perennially losing franchise to try to turn things around, and spend money ($66 Million on Markakis, $40 Million on Roberts.)

So, while the Roberts contract turned out to be an awful one because of his previously-mentioned numerous injuries from 2010 through 2013, it should also be noted that when he actually signed the extension (February of 2009), not many Oriole fans were up in arms about it ....... and more significantly, 7 months later in October of 2009 when Roberts had just completed his season with 56 doubles, 30 stolen bases, 110 runs scored, 16 HR's, 79 RBI's, a .283 batting average, a .356 OBP, and an .807 OPS, NOBODY was complaining about it.

There were many posters here (myself included) who felt that Roberts' best value prior to the extension was as the centerpiece of a trade for prospects. The primary partner being discussed at the time was the Cubs, and if any of the deals being kicked around had actually happened, the Orioles would have ended up very much the losers. There was a great deal of argument on here over the extension as well. Many felt that 3/30 should have been the very upper limit. The commitment was lauded by some, but not all.

[OFFNY]

Almost immediately after the contract extension took effect, Roberts began suffering from a bizarre series of injuries.

This is not correct.

Roberts signed the extension in February of 2009. 2009 was one of Roberts' best (if not best) seasons ever, as he set the all-time major league record for doubles by a switch-hitter in a season (56), stole 30 bases, hit 16 HR's, and scored 110 runs.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3921371

The 4 years that he was extended for covered his injury-riddled seasons (2010-2103), but the extension was not signed just previous to those seasons.

It still turned out to be an awful contract in terms of production (or lack thereof) in those 4 years, but I believe that it is important to remember it how it happened, and not through myth/misconception. To this day, there are people that still believe that if Bill Buckner had caught Mookie Wilson's dribbler up the first baseline (and beaten Wilson to the bag to record the out) that the Red Sox would have won the World Series. In fact, the Mets had already tied the game, so even if Buckner had caught the ball (AND beaten Wilson to the bag), the game would have continued into the 11th inning ...... and at that point, the Mets were much more likely to win the game, since they had just ripped the heart out of the Red Sox, who had just blown a 2-run lead with 2 outs and nobody on base.

I know that it sounds a little sexier to say, "Right after Roberts signed that contract, he started getting hurt," but that is not the way that it happened.

EPILOGUE: That same off-season (between 2008 and 2009), Nick Markakis also signed a long-term extension, and at that time, it (the long-term extensions of two of the team's core, star players) was being lauded as a commitment to the future of a perennially losing franchise to try to turn things around, and spend money ($66 Million on Markakis, $40 Million on Roberts.)

So, while the Roberts contract turned out to be an awful one because of his previously-mentioned numerous injuries from 2010 through 2013, it should also be noted that when he actually signed the extension (February of 2009), not many Oriole fans were up in arms about it ....... and more significantly, 7 months later in October of 2009 when Roberts had just completed his season with 56 doubles, 30 stolen bases, 110 runs scored, 16 HR's, 79 RBI's, a .283 batting average, a .356 OBP, and an .807 OPS, NOBODY was complaining about it.

There were many posters here (myself included) who felt that Roberts' best value prior to the extension was as the centerpiece of a trade for prospects. The primary partner being discussed at the time was the Cubs, and if any of the deals being kicked around had actually happened, the Orioles would have ended up very much the losers. There was a great deal of argument on here over the extension as well. Many felt that 3/30 should have been the very upper limit. The commitment was lauded by some, but not all.

OK, point taken.

But whether he should have gotten 3 for 30, 4 for 40, or if he should have been traded for prospects, my overall point remains. Roberts had an outstanding season following the signing of the extension, and nobody could have foreseen what happened with him from 2010-2013 ...... and the 159 games that he played that season (2009) certainly did not give anybody any signs or any clue whatsoever of what was to happen over the ensuing 4 seasons.

Also, I'm curious ...... were the debates that were occurring here before the 2009 season (when Roberts signed the extension that February) still just as vigorous after Roberts had completed that 2009 season 8 months later in October?

[24fps]

OK. But whether he should have gotten 3 for 30, 4 for 40, or if he should have been traded for prospects, my overall point remains. Roberts had an outstanding season following the signing of the extension, and nobody could have foreseen what happened with him from 2010-2013 ...... and the 159 games that he played that season (2009) certainly did not give anybody any signs or any clue whatsoever of what was to happen over the ensuing 4 seasons.

Also, I'm curious ...... were the debates that were occurring here before the 2009 season (when Roberts signed the contract) still just as vigorous after Roberts had completed that 2009 season 8 months later in October?

My recollection is less vigorous for many, but not all. There remained the contingent that continued to advocate a "blow it up" approach at every opportunity and BRob was the poster boy for missed opportunity for that faction. 2009 was a frustrating year on the field even though it was the year that AM's turnaround was supposed to first start bearing fruit. BRob caught a lot of the flak.

[OFFNY]

There were many posters here (myself included) who felt that Roberts' best value prior to the extension was as the centerpiece of a trade for prospects. The primary partner being discussed at the time was the Cubs, and if any of the deals being kicked around had actually happened, the Orioles would have ended up very much the losers. There was a great deal of argument on here over the extension as well. Many felt that 3/30 should have been the very upper limit. The commitment was lauded by some, but not all.

OK, point taken.

But whether he should have gotten 3 for 30, 4 for 40, or if he should have been traded for prospects, my overall point remains. Roberts had an outstanding season following the signing of the extension, and nobody could have foreseen what happened with him from 2010-2013 ...... and the 159 games that he played that season (2009) certainly did not give anybody any signs or any clue whatsoever of what was to happen over the ensuing 4 seasons.

Also, I'm curious ...... were the debates that were occurring here before the 2009 season (when Roberts signed the extension that February) still just as vigorous after Roberts had completed that 2009 season 8 months later in October?

My recollection is less vigorous for many, but not all. There remained the contingent that continued to advocate a "blow it up" approach at every opportunity and BRob was the poster boy for missed opportunity for that faction. 2009 was a frustrating year on the field even though it was the year that AM's turnaround was supposed to first start bearing fruit. BRob caught a lot of the flak.

OK, thanks for the info.

[Jagwar]

How about Marty Cordova, 3 years $9.1 million? (Just used Baseball Reference sums). Resulted in 140 games played for the O's. Good times.

[24fps]

How about Marty Cordova, 3 years $9.1 million? (Just used Baseball Reference sums). Resulted in 140 games played for the O's. Good times.

Wow, forgot about Marty. Mr. Suntan.

[epic]

This thing is so poorly edited/written. Which is because editors don't exist anymore, so I don't necessarily put all the blame Dubroff. But seriously, look at this:

I don't know what this sentence means.

About more than a million?

Uses a hyphen in the first sentence, but not the second.

I was thinking the exact same thing while I was reading it. That first quote you posted is just brutal. I guess there aren't editors online but shouldn't you make up for that by proof reading your articles/posts? Those errors stick out like a sore thumb and only make the writer look lazy. Hell, I usually proof read my posts here.

This article is also from 2012, not that it makes any difference.

[FlipTheBird]

Remember when 5/65 for a primetime slugger was a big contract?

[DrungoHazewood]

I don't think the Orioles really have had any bad contracts. I mean, sure there have been guys who didn't perform up to the level that was expected. Roberts' deal was obviously a very poor return on investment. But when you don't ever sign any top free agents it's hard to have a truly crippling contract. The Oriole simply have never had anything like the worst MLB contracts of all time. Roberts was bad, but not even remotely in the same universe of, say Mike Hampton and his 5.75 ERA for $121M. Or Barry Zito and $125M for being a #5 starter they could have signed for 1/25th of that. Or Jason Schmidt and what ended up as a zero-WAR, $60k per pitch contract with the Dodgers. The O's can't have a Ryan Howard debacle, because they never sign anyone to a $125M contract.

[McNulty]

Giving Jay Payton anything.

[Flash- bd]

Giving Jay Payton anything.

lol. Agreed. Replace "Jay Payton" with "Marty Cordova" and you also have a pretty true sentence here. Alternatively, the words "Garret Atkins" would fit nicely in the blank, as well.

[Can_of_corn]

I like what olehippi said earlier:

That would apply to Wada to.

Would it? Then why didn't he get called up when rosters expanded?

I think Wada was a combination of injured and couldn't get it done.

Let's see how he does if he gets to the majors this season.

[gpolee]

Bringing in Belle at all may have been a bad decision, given his surly personality. However, his contract was a reasonable one and, since it was insured, not really that costly to the Orioles. I think they recovered 2/3 or 3/4 of the salary for those 3 years from insurance?

Overall, the O's must rank near the bottom in terms of bad contracts, not that they've risked that much.

Who gives a EFF about 'surly' (Besides megalomaniacal sportswriters). Belle hit Ruthian-ly prior to his injury. Bad break for the Orioles.