Jump to content

Regretting Not Signing Andrew Miller?


Rene88

Recommended Posts

I know Miller got a big payday. I get it. I also know he went to the dreaded Yankees. That hurts a little more (I am sure the Red Sox feel the same way too).

All a matter of opinion I guess. I think we all know Peter Angelos has the ability to increase payroll substantially at any point. So we aren't the typical middle-market team. This will likely change when he passes and we will be hating life if his son's choose not to sell the team to a home-town group.

Regardless-everyone is entitled to their opinion. I welcome posters like MSK because there are few like him left that still posts here. Many have given up posting contrary views. It is good to read if you agree or not. Just my two cents.

Spending money doesn't always guarantee you anything?

This isn't a large market by any stretch of the imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 688
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Dont blame the ownership, we yelled and begged for the Ownership to not meddle and pretend to know baseball. Hire baseball people and get out of their way and let them do their job.

Now that we have that, we can't stand here and yell at them to do something.

Miller was not the best reliever in 50 years of baseball, it would be foolish to spend the piggy bank on one reliever.

I said he has the best stuff of any reliever the O?s have had in my 50 years following the team. I have spent 31 years coaching baseball at the collegiate and high school levels. Not to sound arrogant but I have seen a lot of baseball. Greg Olsen is the only one close to Miller. I heard all the names this summer Benitez had better stuff etc. Miller is a Randy Johnson in relief. Look at his stats last year in the playoffs. He is lights out. We are likely 5-2 this year if we still have him.

I don?t want ownership meddling either. What I said was we had a GM that didn?t want to be here this winter. We spent months with a GM trying to leave town. We lose the AL home run champ. and a great reliever to whom we gave up a top prospect to obtain . I don?t see where either one of those moves made us a better team. We should be aiming to raise the bar, and get better each year. Angelos was the one that said MASN would give us the financial means to compete with the Red Sox and Yankees. Our window is closing. We had two players in our grasp that would have given us a great chance of having an outstanding team on the field this year. The season is still early. We have time to turn it around. But is ownership using all their financial resources (international spending) to put the best product on the field?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All a matter of opinion I guess. I think we all know Peter Angelos has the ability to increase payroll substantially at any point. So we aren't the typical middle-market team. This will likely change when he passes and we will be hating life if his son's choose not to sell the team to a home-town group.

I don't feel that I know whether Angelos can increase payroll at any point. What I do know is that we have the 11th - 13th highest payroll now (depending on which source you believe), and that the payroll has increased pretty significantly for three years in a row ($78 mm/$101 mm/$109 mm/$114 mm). If you think we could spend more, you can certainly make that case. My view is that our spending is pretty well in line with similarly situated teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we have Miller we are probably 5-2 right now.

Not sure I understand this one. You're saying Miller would account for two extra wins if he were with the Orioles? You could count last night as one, but what's the other game that would've turned from a loss to a win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, they knew there was a chance Miller would go to an AL East team. And I'm sorry to sound so harsh but while I wish we had kept him, I really hate seeing this the second week of the season. If Miller ends up performing the expectations of his entire contract and more (since we would have surely gotten into a bidding war with the Yanks if we had tried to retained him) then I'll eat my shorts but until then, I can't get wound up about a guy who FWIW plays the most volatile position in sports and one furthermore we saw our own two consecutive seasons of 50 saves guy from that to a minor league free agent within a few years. I'll be more upset if Mlller is shutting us down while the Yanks get near a division title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that time when RShack referred to you as Section 8, because you were being crazy, and you got all mad because you thought he was calling you poor? Wish I could find that thread...

Isn't it nice that we don't do that now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all know Peter Angelos has the ability to increase payroll substantially at any point. So we aren't the typical middle-market team. This will likely change when he passes and we will be hating life if his son's choose not to sell the team to a home-town group.

I don't think we know anything. Maybe we have some suspicions. The Orioles have a payroll of, what, $120M or so? I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that the only thing standing between the Orioles and a $150M+ payroll is that Angelos wants to die on a mattress stuffed full of $1000 bills. A new ownership group might spend more, or maybe the cable bubble pops and revenues crash and almost nobody can sustain payrolls at today's levels. And if Baltimore had to stand on its own without redirecting the Nats' media rights into their pockets I don't think anyone could argue that the payroll was way too low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel that I know whether Angelos can increase payroll at any point. What I do know is that we have the 11th - 13th highest payroll now (depending on which source you believe), and that the payroll has increased pretty significantly for three years in a row ($78 mm/$101 mm/$109 mm/$114 mm). If you think we could spend more, you can certainly make that case. My view is that our spending is pretty well in line with similarly situated teams.

Especially when you define "similarly situated" as teams in media markets of similar size and wealth without the cushion of Nats dollars being funneled through MASN. It would not at all surprise me if Duquette was operating under the assumption that they won't have the full stream of Nats dollars forever. In which case Baltimore is a Nielsen media market on par with Raleigh-Durham, Sacramento, San Diego, and Pittsburgh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller was a keeper. There's always some foolishness abound when it comes to improving the team.

It was a VERY bad idea to let Miller walk. It's always easier to see it when it comes back to haunt us than back in the offseason when suggesting we spend money to improve the team is considered verboten. :angryfire:

THIS IS WHY you keep Miller. I hope the math dudes get it now.

Oh well, here's hoping we get the Skanks tomorrow. :cool:

MSK

Why? Because he saved a game against us on April 13? That's why you give him over $9 million per year on a 4+ year contract? Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I understand this one. You're saying Miller would account for two extra wins if he were with the Orioles? You could count last night as one, but what's the other game that would've turned from a loss to a win?

How do we count last night if Hunter gives up the bomb as he did? :scratchchinhmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...