Not signing Miler and Cruz is going to haunt this team and it's fans for years to come......

[Russsnyder]

[Olney Historical ?Part of my job as the writer assigned to cover the Baltimore Orioles for the Baltimore Sun was to call owner Peter Angelos daily, and because he didn't particularly enjoy a lot of what was written about him in our paper, he would often open our conversation with profanity that might make even Reds manger Price blush.?

I would have put my resources into signing Miller. I would have gotten rid of Hunter and Matusz and kept Miller. You are talking virtually the same cost. Again I repeat in for the duration of Miller?s contract how much is it going to cost to fill his role and more importantly his productivity. Although I would have liked to sign Cruz I was skeptical based on his second half of the season. I understood not signing him. So far he is proving me wrong. To say signing not signing either player has not had an affect on our poor start is simply absurd. Their production states otherwise.

[weams]

[Olney Historical ?Part of my job as the writer assigned to cover the Baltimore Orioles for the Baltimore Sun was to call owner Peter Angelos daily, and because he didn't particularly enjoy a lot of what was written about him in our paper, he would often open our conversation with profanity that might make even Reds manger Price blush.?

I would have put my resources into signing Miller. I would have gotten rid of Hunter and Matusz and kept Miller. You are talking virtually the same cost. Again I repeat in for the duration of Miller?s contract how much is it going to cost to fill his role and more importantly his productivity. Although I would have liked to sign Cruz I was skeptical based on his second half of the season. I understood not signing him. So far he is proving me wrong. To say signing not signing either player has not had an affect on our poor start is simply absurd. Their production states otherwise.

No one doubts that Peter Angelos was like that many years ago. I thought you had new news. This is not relevant any longer.

[weams]

[Olney Historical ?Part of my job as the writer assigned to cover the Baltimore Orioles for the Baltimore Sun was to call owner Peter Angelos daily, and because he didn't particularly enjoy a lot of what was written about him in our paper, he would often open our conversation with profanity that might make even Reds manger Price blush.?

I would have put my resources into signing Miller. I would have gotten rid of Hunter and Matusz and kept Miller. You are talking virtually the same cost. Again I repeat in for the duration of Miller?s contract how much is it going to cost to fill his role and more importantly his productivity. Although I would have liked to sign Cruz I was skeptical based on his second half of the season. I understood not signing him. So far he is proving me wrong. To say signing not signing either player has not had an affect on our poor start is simply absurd. Their production states otherwise.

Would Miller have asked what his role was going to be for three of the four years in Baltimore?

[CA-ORIOLE]

[Olney Historical ?Part of my job as the writer assigned to cover the Baltimore Orioles for the Baltimore Sun was to call owner Peter Angelos daily, and because he didn't particularly enjoy a lot of what was written about him in our paper, he would often open our conversation with profanity that might make even Reds manger Price blush.?

I would have put my resources into signing Miller. I would have gotten rid of Hunter and Matusz and kept Miller. You are talking virtually the same cost. Again I repeat in for the duration of Miller?s contract how much is it going to cost to fill his role and more importantly his productivity. Although I would have liked to sign Cruz I was skeptical based on his second half of the season. I understood not signing him. So far he is proving me wrong. To say signing not signing either player has not had an affect on our poor start is simply absurd. Their production states otherwise.

That's fine. Quite a few people had issues with Matusz and Hunter Being arbed. Myself included, espexially Matusz. That said they are not the same cost. To get Miller we'd have had to gone 4/40. Matusz/Hunter have outlays less than 9 mil for 1 year. Thats significantly more long term risk and cost. To get Cruz we'd have had to go 4/60. You don't really commit on that. No one doubts we'd be a better team THIS year if we had a signed Miller and Cruz and kept everything else the same.

[brianod]

The disastrous 2015 off-season from our front office is over and we can?t change it. We had a general manager that wanted out. The owner refused to let him go. We lose arguably the top reliever in baseball. I acknowledge starting pitching is our main issue. But to say Cruz and Miller would not have helped our cause is absurd. 7.11 innings of middle relief with 15 strikeouts and no runs would not have led us to of a couple of victories? Cruz?s nine homeruns in 64 at bats wouldn?t have helped win a couple of games?

There are many lifelong fans of the franchise that want to see the front office put the best product on the field. This is our avenue to vent when we feel that ownership has failed to do so. Buster Olney said this week that conversations with Angelos usually start with profanity with what is written about the franchise. Angelos controls the local media. The only media entity that challenges him has no credibility. The purpose of a forum is to allow differences of opinion. Those that disagree with the posters regarding the off-season should continue to offer their opinions. But when you launch continued personal attacks or retort with sarcasm you offer nothing to the debate other than appearing that your argument has no merit.

Good post. I agree. This board is split into two camps. One camp thinks we are money wise and have no problem with the off season. The other thinks that we are cheap and have squandered a great opportunity to be great. It's a very valid debate with good points on both sides. I have seen a lot of sarcasm and superiority from those who defend the Orioles actions this off season and I've seen a lot of offense taken just because someone has a different opinion. The bottom line is that this organization squandered a good opportunity, took no risks and lost three good players and replaced them with minor league players and journeymen. I keep reminding those defending the offseason that we made 37 million in profit last year. We could have increased the payroll and still made a profit. We stood pat. I don't pretend to know how this year will pan out. But I do resent the fact that the Angelos family continues to make large profits while not improving the club.

[weams]

Good post. I agree. This board is split into two camps. One camp thinks we are money wise and have no problem with the off season. The other thinks that we are cheap and have squandered a great opportunity to be great. It's a very valid debate with good points on both sides. I have seen a lot of sarcasm and superiority from those who defend the Orioles actions this off season and I've seen a lot of offense taken just because someone has a different opinion. The bottom line is that this organization squandered a good opportunity, took no risks and lost three good players and replaced them with minor league players and journeymen. I keep reminding those defending the offseason that we made 37 million in profit last year. We could have increased the payroll and still made a profit. We stood pat. I don't pretend to know how this year will pan out. But I do resent the fact that the Angelos family continues to make large profits while not improving the club.

Lost two good players. The Orioles did not even have Qualifying Offer rights to Miller. And the Orioles already had a closer. Even though he blew a save tonight. If you think I feel superior to anyone here you don't know me. I do think that the Orioles had a budget and to ignore that is to lose the argument before it starts. Whether the Angelos family are raking in the bucks or not.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Good post. I agree. This board is split into two camps. One camp thinks we are money wise and have no problem with the off season. The other thinks that we are cheap and have squandered a great opportunity to be great. It's a very valid debate with good points on both sides. I have seen a lot of sarcasm and superiority from those who defend the Orioles actions this off season and I've seen a lot of offense taken just because someone has a different opinion. The bottom line is that this organization squandered a good opportunity, took no risks and lost three good players and replaced them with minor league players and journeymen. I keep reminding those defending the offseason that we made 37 million in profit last year. We could have increased the payroll and still made a profit. We stood pat. I don't pretend to know how this year will pan out. But I do resent the fact that the Angelos family continues to make large profits while not improving the club.

The "we can spend more money" is a relavant point. Some of us choose to focus on variables contollable by the GM rather than dragging him into being a distracted idiot because he didn't spend money that was likely not available to him.. I don't see where the "Angelos can spend more money"point provides any meaningful baseball discussion. When baseball points are made, they are answered. Sorry, I just don't see the point as that meaningful.

[weams]

The "we can spend more money" is a relavant point. Some of us choose to focus on variables contollable by the GM rather than dragging him into being a distracted idiot because he didn't spend money that was likely not available to him.. I don't see where the "Angelos can spend more money"point provides any meaningful baseball discussion. When baseball points are made, they are answered. Sorry, I just don't see the point as that meaningful.

It's not. And the reason that the club did not increase it's payroll had nothing to do with Toronto. But some people like to stir that.

[weams]

The "we can spend more money" is a relevant point.

It may well be. While the RSN is in litigation, I suspect that not only will the payroll not increase, we are likely to see a decrease next season. And no All Star game for a while.

[Can_of_corn]

Good post. I agree. This board is split into two camps. One camp thinks we are money wise and have no problem with the off season. The other thinks that we are cheap and have squandered a great opportunity to be great. It's a very valid debate with good points on both sides. I have seen a lot of sarcasm and superiority from those who defend the Orioles actions this off season and I've seen a lot of offense taken just because someone has a different opinion. The bottom line is that this organization squandered a good opportunity, took no risks and lost three good players and replaced them with minor league players and journeymen. I keep reminding those defending the offseason that we made 37 million in profit last year. We could have increased the payroll and still made a profit. We stood pat. I don't pretend to know how this year will pan out. But I do resent the fact that the Angelos family continues to make large profits while not improving the club.

And I have seen a lot of personal attacks and unsupported arguments from the other camp.

[Can_of_corn]

It may well be. While the RSN is in litigation, I suspect that not only will the payroll not increase, we are likely to see a decrease next season. And no All Star game for a while.

They would be hard pressed to increase payroll next season given the likely departures.

[brianod]

Lost two good players. The Orioles did not even have Qualifying Offer rights to Miller. And the Orioles already had a closer. Even though he blew a save tonight. If you think I feel superior to anyone here you don't know me. I do think that the Orioles had a budget and to ignore that is to lose the argument before it starts. Whether the Angelos family are raking in the bucks or not.

The debate boils down to this. Is the Angelos family doing everything they can do to make this franchise competitive or not? Are they raking in profits or spending as much as they can? It seems obvious to me that they are raking in profits, short changing the team. If you look at the posts of those that agree with me and look at the responses of those that disagree with me, you will see lots of sarcasm and superiority from those defending ownership. There are strong opinions each way, those on the side of cheap shouldn't be marginalized and vilified.

[weams]

And I have seen a lot of personal attacks and unsupported arguments from the other camp.

This is not an us against them thing. And the camps are not evenly divided. And most of the "yeah, that's right"...comes from folks that are just visiting. I respect all of our longtime posters, and many newer ones. Whether I always agree with them or not. I am not always right myself. I will not allow this place to be divided into groups.

[weams]

The debate boils down to this. Is the Angelos family doing everything they can do to make this franchise competitive or not? Are they raking in profits or spending as much as they can? It seems obvious to me that they are raking in profits, short changing the team. If you look at the posts of those that agree with me and look at the responses of those that disagree with me, you will see lots of sarcasm and superiority from those defending ownership. There are strong opinions each way, those on the side of cheap shouldn't be marginalized and vilified.

I suspect that more money is available to the family than they are willing to invest in the Orioles. I think you are right on that. I swear, if you say superiority and sarcasm one more time, I will stop liking you as I do.

[MemorialStadKid]

Good post. I agree. This board is split into two camps. One camp thinks we are money wise and have no problem with the off season. The other thinks that we are cheap and have squandered a great opportunity to be great. It's a very valid debate with good points on both sides. I have seen a lot of sarcasm and superiority from those who defend the Orioles actions this off season and I've seen a lot of offense taken just because someone has a different opinion. The bottom line is that this organization squandered a good opportunity, took no risks and lost three good players and replaced them with minor league players and journeymen. I keep reminding those defending the offseason that we made 37 million in profit last year. We could have increased the payroll and still made a profit. We stood pat. I don't pretend to know how this year will pan out. But I do resent the fact that the Angelos family continues to make large profits while not improving the club.

The bolded part is where I get confused.

It's not a complicated thing - the Orioles did nothing to improve when we had a chance. Player after player kept getting signed while DD was caught up with dreams of Lake Ontario.

Several of us kept saying "What happens with injuries?" "What if our guys regress?" and we got hit with nothing (and I mean nothing) but nasty memes, snark, sarcasm, virtual high-fiving with their buddies and general unsavory attitudes.

Now all of our weaknesses are laid bare and the lack of acquiring better players is clear and STILL there's folks acting as if everything is going to be okay.

It's scary.

MSK