Regretting Not Signing Andrew Miller?

[Crazysilver03]

At the end of the season, those 2 wins can make a big difference if we don't get a leg up over the rest of the AL East.

Who knows how many games Hunter alone will cost us?

MSK

But there is no guarantee that we win those two games even if Miller is in the game.

[MemorialStadKid]

But there is no guarantee that we win those two games even if Miller is in the game.

In theory, you're correct.

I can only go by my past observation of Miller's performances on the mound. Using only that as my evidence, I tend to believe he would have pulled out those wins for us.

It's all idle speculation after the fact, but as I said earlier in this post, I do believe that we made a mistake not going with a known value.

MSK

[Crazysilver03]

In theory, you're correct.

I can only go by my past observation of Miller's performances on the mound. Using only that as my evidence, I tend to believe he would have pulled out those wins for us.

It's all idle speculation after the fact, but as I said earlier in this post, I do believe that we made a mistake not going with a known value.

MSK

Hey, I liked Miller. I would have loved to keep him.

But there were some serious red flags for giving a deal like that To him. Career year. Spent time on the DL almost every year.

And I don't doubt that he would have pitched well in his games for the Is, but You still have 8 other innings to deal with. Plus Buck wouldn't use him the way Girardi is/will. I think the Yankees will burn him out by over relying on him.

[Crazysilver03]

I also buy into the theory that the Orioles need to save money in the bullpen since they have plenty of pitching prospects that profile nicely as bullpen arms. And using the Rule 5 to snag TJM and Garcia. Especially since the team is weak on the position player side and will likely need to rely on a few free agent additions there.

[Russsnyder]

You realize it doesn't work like that. To afford Miller, half the bullpen is different most likely. You can't assume the same personnel would perform the exact same way that the game played out.[/quote

Peter Angelos said when he created Masn he now had the financial means to compete wth the Yankees and Red Sox. How much money is he losing at Masn with his lack of original programming? professor Marty Conway says they are losing substantial money with their programming. Angeles blew it with the Ravens. CSN now covers the Ravens. The Yankees and Red Sox blew us away with international signings. I still contend we had/have a small window to win a championship. That means a World Series championship.

[Crazysilver03]

You realize it doesn't work like that. To afford Miller, half the bullpen is different most likely. You can't assume the same personnel would perform the exact same way that the game played out.[/quote

Peter Angelos said when he created Masn he now had the financial means to compete wth the Yankees and Red Sox. How much money is he losing at Masn with his lack of original programming? professor Marty Conway says they are losing substantial money with their programming. Angeles blew it with the Ravens. CSN now covers the Ravens. The Yankees and Red Sox blew us away with international signings. I still contend we had/have a small window to win a championship. That means a World Series championship.

That doesn't really challenge anything I said in the post you quoted.

I agree that they have completely bungled MASN and the original programming is terrible compared to YES or NESN. But I don't know enough about the MASN dispute to challenge whether the Os are losing more money than they thought they would.

[PaulFolk]

Vintage Weams (aka John Angelos) post. He takes only a portion of my post to make his argument. I have complete confidence if Miller pitches instead of Matusz in Tampa we win. I have complete confidence that Miller would maintained a two run lead last night. That is two wins in 7 games. 5-2 vs 3-4.

Wait, are you suggesting that if the O's had Miller, they would've won a game in which they scored zero runs? Neat trick. Are you saying that Miller also would've DH'ed and hit a home run?

Also, Matusz's implosion came in the 6th inning. Miller would not have been pitching that early in the game. With the O's last year, he never once pitched earlier than the 7th inning except in the playoffs.

It's not as easy as just picking out a random bad relief appearance and saying, "Well, that should've been Miller instead!" You have to think about the context of the game.

[brianod]

I have heard ad nauseam that we have the highest Orioles budget of all time. You guys are bright people and I know you understand the concept of current value of money. 2015 dollars are worth much less than 2010 dollars, much much less than 2005 dollars and much, much, much less than 2000 dollars. A budget of 80 million in 2000 could be much more valuable than a budget of 120 today. So, this is a red hearing and I'm sure most of you saying this already know it.

The Orioles made 37 million of profit last year according to Forbes. Would it really hurt ownership to only make 27 or 25? So, yes, I maintain that we can increase budget without hurting the long term viability of the franchise.

The majority state that relievers are notoriously fickle. That is a good point. But, that point is mitigated by the age of our free agents last year. Both Cruz and Nick will soon be entering a downward slide due to age. Miller is entering his prime. I would argue that his age mitigates that argument.

There are those that state we need to save money and list the players that are free agents next year. But, do we really expect to sign any of them? I keep hearing we need to save money to resign players but here is my take on a few:

Weiters: offensive disappointment throughout his career that will command too much money on the open market and has an agent that will demand top dollar. Oh, and he's been hurt the last two years. His best asset has always been his arm and his ability to throw is very much in question.

Davis: Not consistent enough for us to risk big money to. Some team that can afford the risk will probably give it to him.

Chen: Nice pitcher that will command more than he is worth. Take the O's offense and defense away and he becomes a highly expensive number three starter with and agent that will demand top dollar.

Norris: A nice number 3 or 4, some other team will give him more than he's worth to the O's

So, the bottom line as I see it, is that we have nobody major to resign next year. The only possible argument for saving money is to sign Tilman and Manny to Adam Jone's type contracts. Can we do that with a lame duck gm? Debatable.

The final argument against signing Miller that I would like to dispute is the fact the mid market teams can't overspend on free agents and that if the Yankees want that guy, we simply have to let him go. If we follow that model, we will never compete long term. Yes, I completely agree with not signing Pujols, Hamilton, etc. But, we are talking 40 million for a player that dramatically effects the team. Not 200 million. Many of the guys on this board who advocate against the importance of closers say that setup men can be more valuable. Seems to me their arguments adjust to fit their needs. In today's baseball, the dynamics have changed. An unhittable reliever is very valuable, especially to a team full of starters that routinely go 6 innings.

I believe, sometimes, a mid market team has to outbid a big market team when that player fits a major need for the team. You have to use free agency judiciously but can't simply ignore it and roll over for the big market team.

[Crazysilver03]

I have heard ad nauseam that we have the highest Orioles budget of all time. You guys are bright people and I know you understand the concept of current value of money. 2015 dollars are worth much less than 2010 dollars, much much less than 2005 dollars and much, much, much less than 2000 dollars. A budget of 80 million in 2000 could be much more valuable than a budget of 120 today. So, this is a red hearing and I'm sure most of you saying this already know it.

The Orioles made 37 million of profit last year according to Forbes. Would it really hurt ownership to only make 27 or 25? So, yes, I maintain that we can increase budget without hurting the long term viability of the franchise.

The majority state that relievers are notoriously fickle. That is a good point. But, that point is mitigated by the age of our free agents last year. Both Cruz and Nick will soon be entering a downward slide due to age. Miller is entering his prime. I would argue that his age mitigates that argument.

There are those that state we need to save money and list the players that are free agents next year. But, do we really expect to sign any of them? I keep hearing we need to save money to resign players but here is my take on a few:

Weiters: offensive disappointment throughout his career that will command too much money on the open market and has an agent that will demand top dollar. Oh, and he's been hurt the last two years. His best asset has always been his arm and his ability to throw is very much in question.

Davis: Not consistent enough for us to risk big money to. Some team that can afford the risk will probably give it to him.

Chen: Nice pitcher that will command more than he is worth. Take the O's offense and defense away and he becomes a highly expensive number three starter with and agent that will demand top dollar.

Norris: A nice number 3 or 4, some other team will give him more than he's worth to the O's

So, the bottom line as I see it, is that we have nobody major to resign next year. The only possible argument for saving money is to sign Tilman and Manny to Adam Jone's type contracts. Can we do that with a lame duck gm? Debatable.

The final argument against signing Miller that I would like to dispute is the fact the mid market teams can't overspend on free agents and that if the Yankees want that guy, we simply have to let him go. If we follow that model, we will never compete long term. Yes, I completely agree with not signing Pujols, Hamilton, etc. But, we are talking 40 million for a player that dramatically effects the team. Not 200 million. Many of the guys on this board who advocate against the importance of closers say that setup men can be more valuable. Seems to me their arguments adjust to fit their needs. In today's baseball, the dynamics have changed. An unhittable reliever is very valuable, especially to a team full of starters that routinely go 6 innings.

I believe, sometimes, a mid market team has to outbid a big market team when that player fits a major need for the team. You have to use free agency judiciously but can't simply ignore it and roll over for the big market team.

The dollar is devaluing but there is no way 80M in 2000 is more valuable than 120M in 2015.

[atomic]

The dollar is devaluing but there is no way 80M in 2000 is more valuable than 120M in 2015.

80 million in 2000 is worth 111 million in 2015:

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2000-dollars-in-2015?amount=80

[brianod]

The dollar is devaluing but there is no way 80M in 2000 is more valuable than 120M in 2015.

According to this easily accessible inflation calculator (google), 100 2000 dollars is worth 140 today. So, you are wrong.

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2000-dollars-in-2015?amount=100

[brianod]

According to this easily accessible inflation calculator (google), 100 2000 dollars is worth 140 today. So, you are wrong.

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2000-dollars-in-2015?amount=100

In any event, let's not nit pick on specifics, the concept is sound and it refutes the argument of highest payroll of all time...

[Crazysilver03]

According to this easily accessible inflation calculator (google), 100 2000 dollars is worth 140 today. So, you are wrong.

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2000-dollars-in-2015?amount=100

How am I wrong? You are citing different numbers now than you did before.

Just Because the difference between 100 and 140 is 40 doesn't mean all differences are 40. It is a percentage. Not a strict value.

[Crazysilver03]

In any event, let's not nit pick on specifics, the concept is sound and it refutes the argument of highest payroll of all time...

Let's not nitpick because you are wrong? Atomic just proved your values wrong.

[Bmorefan24]

Not reading this entire thread, just answering the question....YES!!!! After seeing the bullpen so far this year, YES!!!