Have we sacrificed too much the last 2 seasons trying to be in "win now" mode?

[Ohfan67]

Some of the ideas like trading Davis last offseason are ridiculous. Not because they are dumb from a strict strategy point of view and I don't mean to insult Stotle or others, but ridiculous because it was clear the O's thought they had control of a significant slugger for several more years. That was not a bad assumption on their part. Just projecting Davis' career average over the next several years would likely generate more wins than any players that his trade would have netted. I don't think Billy Beane or any other manager would have traded Davis for what other teams were likely to offer.

I also think always comparing the O's to organizations like the Athletics or Rays leaves out a very important variable (or two). First, Billy Beane is obviously the best in the business. What Oakland has done with their budget is incredible. Second, the O's are not the Athletics or the Rays because they can spend 40-60 million more per year. They can absorb more risk than the Rays to win. The Rays won because they had an amazing core of home grown players including some of the best pitching in baseball. It will be interesting if they can win on a consistent basis like Oakland now that they are losing that core group. The Twins and Rays may be sliding back into a ten year oblivion after a four or five year peak. Many of these teams have great minor league players and always seem a year or two or three away from being competitive, but then a couple of players don't pan out and the teams never really break through to the winning side. This happens all the time in both leagues.

I think the Cardinals and Braves are better examples for the O's. They produce incredibly competitive clubs while maintaining fantastic player development. If I were GM, then I would be constantly trying to steal player development personnel from these two clubs.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I hesitate to call anything a "mistake" since I don't have access to all of the variables at play, but if I were to say Baltimore made a mistake it would be not expanding payroll in the short term to help bridge the gap and facilitate the transition from up-and-comer to contender. I think signing a guy like Ellsbury and trading Davis for a couple of cost controlled pieces would have gone a long way to giving this year's team (and the team in the shot term) a more stable foundation. Going to $115 MM or $120 MM this year and then slowly ramping down as some of the contracts come off the books this year.

It also makes it less likely you will have to go back into your farm system or comp picks to try and plug holes, which is potentially creating a larger long term problem as far as org talent available to supplement the 25 man from 2016 and on.

Ellsbury? i recall you stating we should get McCann in the trade Dais scenario.

[bpilktree]

I posted this in the Bundy thread before I saw this was moved here.

Listen, I don't think the O's are perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Nor do I think the moves that the team makes shouldn't be examined or analyzed by the fanbase. I am of the opinion though, that we should afford the Front office a little leeway given the overall results of the past few years. In the end we may have "Lost" the Norris trade or it may turn out we "Won" the trade - only time will tell. What we do know is that from a 'projection' standpoint and a 'current value' standpoint we gave up more than we received. Sometimes you have to gamble a little to get a needed or targeted player. Ultimately, the question is: Do you trust this Front office to gamble wisely when the odds (or projections) are not in our favor. Personally, I do trust them. IIRC one of Duquette's stated goals was to make sure that we knew our own players better than other teams did - he shuffled the scouting department and increased the emphasis on scouting our own MiL players. Yes, we are going to take a hit not having any early picks this year and we're still not heavily invested in the international market, but we are on pace to win 90+ game, AND our Farm system was ranked in top 10 in baseball coming in to the year (KLaw #10). That earns you some flexibility in my book.

I still see the Norris trade as a win. We gave up Hoes who was not going to help much. Hader was a big loss and then the pick however with Norris under are belt for two and a half years it helps the team now and this offseason allows us to trade one of the starters like Norris to get a prospect or young player at a position of need whether that be the outfield or SS.

[Guest rochester]

I hesitate to call anything a "mistake" since I don't have access to all of the variables at play, but if I were to say Baltimore made a mistake it would be not expanding payroll in the short term to help bridge the gap and facilitate the transition from up-and-comer to contender. I think signing a guy like Ellsbury and trading Davis for a couple of cost controlled pieces would have gone a long way to giving this year's team (and the team in the shot term) a more stable foundation. Going to $115 MM or $120 MM this year and then slowly ramping down as some of the contracts come off the books this year.

It also makes it less likely you will have to go back into your farm system or comp picks to try and plug holes, which is potentially creating a larger long term problem as far as org talent available to supplement the 25 man from 2016 and on.

I am in agreement with this except for signing a guy like Ellsbury. $21-22M each for 7 years would have been a huge albatross sooner rather than later and would have handcuffed us in the future, even with a CD or MW off the books. Determining what they could get for a CD or MW would have been interesting, and is where I believe they can get the best return for current needs and maintain a decent flow of prospects. I know the Bedard trade is still held up as a great one (rightfully so), but even if it did not work out (AJ and Tillman bombed out) it is that philosophy that should be considered.

I am not necessarily in the camp that subscribes to the theory that we should keep cycling through "prospects" through the draft. But that is most likely due to the "Cavalry". I do believe that the development is better in the organization but still find too many holes in the risk assessment of the draft in the ML. Not to say the draft shouldn't be used, but is should be a part of an overall plan. Like I said, though, "The Cavalry", not to mention your Rowell's, etc. may have ruined all excitement for me.

[LookitsPuck]

Outside of Hader, I don't think the O's have traded much (if any) meaningful minor league talent. Guys like Strop were not performing and out of options. Arrieta was given years to perform. A lot of people projected LJ Hoes as a 4th outfielder. Same w/ Xavier Avery. Nick Delmonico was a flawed prospect defensively as well as from a health standpoint. Really, if you want to stab the O's, stab them for trading/giving up their 1st pick, compensation pick, and 2nd pick for Norris, Cruz, and Ubaldo. That said, I think Cruz was a no brainer for a 2nd rounder because you could easily turn that into a compensation pick. Norris is on the club (at the time) from 2013-2015 (FA in 2016). Ubaldo could still perform depending on how he performs in the second half and the remainder of his contract.

Other than that? There is still a lot of talent in the minors. And I think the O's can certainly make a case to trade a Chris Davis type if/when he rebounds in the second half this year to help bridge the gap further.

I think it's coming down to Dan Duquette valuing his blue chip prospects (ERod, Bundy, Gausman, Harvey, Schoop, et. al.) and willing to give up fringey prospects. Not a bad plan to have. They just need to invest more internationally.

[webbrick2010]

To answer the original question, Yes the O's gave up to much last year to be in win mode.

My problem was that I felt last year that the trades we made were not going to get us into the playoffs and we gave up al ot of talent to get Norris and Feldman.

This year is different we have a 4 game lead, not a 4 game deficit (and behind 3 teams in our divsion), and we have slightly better pitching.

I don't know what DD will do but at least this year I do believe we are a playoff contender.

I don't believe however that we would win a series against Detroit, LAA or Oakland, so the question is how much of the future do you sacrifice to say you won the AL East and got to play a 5 game division series?

[bpilktree]

The Red Sox did a great job of manipulating the comp pick with taking on bigger contracts in the last year or at the deadline to get get the pick. They were able to do that by trading for some guys to help fill the holes they had and competing for a playoff spot. That was not a position the Orioles were in because what would trading for a guy in August done to help us when we were already out 20 plus games. MLB has since adjusted that rule to keep that from happning it could basically be called the Red Sox rule as they used being competitive and have extra money to spend on these guys then letting them walk and doing the same thing next season. The Red Sox did give up prospects to get these guys many times but eating the contracts helped them at times to give up lesser prospects.

[Aristotelian]

To answer the original question, Yes the O's gave up to much last year to be in win mode.

My problem was that I felt last year that the trades we made were not going to get us into the playoffs and we gave up al ot of talent to get Norris and Feldman.

Don't forget, Norris is still helping us. In fact, it would be hard to imagine us being where we are without his contributions. In hindsight, we gave up a borderline MLB player to get him (easily replaced by David Lough). That was a great deal for us and was not just for the purpose of winning last year.

Who knew that Arrieta would pitch like Koufax in the NL Central? He was given multiple opportunities to succeed in the AL East and failed spectacularly. We got decent value for him, it just wasn't enough.

[Frobby]

To answer the original question, Yes the O's gave up to much last year to be in win mode.

My problem was that I felt last year that the trades we made were not going to get us into the playoffs and we gave up al ot of talent to get Norris and Feldman.

This year is different we have a 4 game lead, not a 4 game deficit (and behind 3 teams in our divsion), and we have slightly better pitching.

I don't know what DD will do but at least this year I do believe we are a playoff contender.

I don't believe however that we would win a series against Detroit, LAA or Oakland, so the question is how much of the future do you sacrifice to say you won the AL East and got to play a 5 game division series?

These are tough calls. You turned out to be right that we didn't make the playoffs last year, but we were in a tight race when we made those trades and they could have made the difference. For this year, I agree that we are not as good as Detroit, LAA and Oakland, but that doesn't mean you can't beat them in a short series. Everything has its risk and its rewards. One thing is sure, Dan is not gun-shy.

[Stotle]

Ellsbury? i recall you stating we should get McCann in the trade Dais scenario.

McCann tied to trading Wieters. I think both were included in an off-the-cuff reshaping of the roster/payroll (which also included moving Hardy if I recall).

[Stotle]

I am in agreement with this except for signing a guy like Ellsbury. $21-22M each for 7 years would have been a huge albatross sooner rather than later and would have handcuffed us in the future, even with a CD or MW off the books. Determining what they could get for a CD or MW would have been interesting, and is where I believe they can get the best return for current needs and maintain a decent flow of prospects. I know the Bedard trade is still held up as a great one (rightfully so), but even if it did not work out (AJ and Tillman bombed out) it is that philosophy that should be considered.

I am not necessarily in the camp that subscribes to the theory that we should keep cycling through "prospects" through the draft. But that is most likely due to the "Cavalry". I do believe that the development is better in the organization but still find too many holes in the risk assessment of the draft in the ML. Not to say the draft shouldn't be used, but is should be a part of an overall plan. Like I said, though, "The Cavalry", not to mention your Rowell's, etc. may have ruined all excitement for me.

I think you expect solid performance through four years or so and you make up the difference later on. It wouldn't be an albatross, in any event. Simply removing Markakis's and Davis's contracts would cover that amount, and you are assumed to be getting back so cost control replacements for those guys in your Davis/Wieters/Hardy deals.

[Mayor McCheese]

Depending on what happens this year and how the Orioles handle the offseason....

[Guest rochester]

I think you expect solid performance through four years or so and you make up the difference later on. It wouldn't be an albatross, in any event. Simply removing Markakis's and Davis's contracts would cover that amount, and you are assumed to be getting back so cost control replacements for those guys in your Davis/Wieters/Hardy deals.

I think I have to get over thinking of Ellsbury as the guy, which you named as "someone like." I like JE but his injury HX is a concern for that amount of $$

[EagleOriole]

Personally I think it is a little ridiculous to criticize the Orioles for some of their "non-moves." The farm system is average - but I wonder how many of the better teams in baseball are younger than us:

Cruz 34

Pearce, Hardy 31

Gonzalez, Markakis, Jimenez 30

Norris 29

Chen, Wieters, Davis, Jones, Hunter 28

Britton, Tillman 26

McFarland 25

Gausman 23

Machado, Schoop 22

There is a ton of young talent still improving on the ML club. No one is trading Chris Davis off a 53 homer season - no one. Why would you trade Wieters when you had no idea he was going to need TJ surgery.

Look at where this franchise was 5 years ago and look today - no question that the talent pool is getting deeper, give DD more time and it will only get better.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Personally I think it is a little ridiculous to criticize the Orioles for some of their "non-moves." The farm system is average - but I wonder how many of the better teams in baseball are younger than us:

Cruz 34

Pearce, Hardy 31

Gonzalez, Markakis, Jimenez 30

Norris 29

Chen, Wieters, Davis, Jones, Hunter 28

Britton, Tillman 26

McFarland 25

Gausman 23

Machado, Schoop 22

There is a ton of young talent still improving on the ML club. No one is trading Chris Davis off a 53 homer season - no one. Why would you trade Wieters when you had no idea he was going to need TJ surgery.

Look at where this franchise was 5 years ago and look today - no question that the talent pool is getting deeper, give DD more time and it will only get better.

How the team was supposed to know they would lose Wiet to TJ surgery is beyond me. Further, if he continued playing even close to what he was playing like before he went down, the idea that he should have been sold in the offseason would be laughable.