The This Team IS Done, We are Dumb and Nothing can Fix it MEGA THREAD

[MemorialStadKid]

I think pretty much everyone would admit that Cruz and Miller, if somehow the O's budget were increased to include them, would make the team better this year.

Okay, so with THIS YEAR being the issue - what's the worst that can happen? The Orioles win the WS THIS YEAR and then be really good next year, and the year after that, with the 4th year being like the 2014 squad.

Is that a horrible fate? Any worse than what's waiting for us in the next couple of seasons? Barely scraping .500 again?

MSK

[DrungoHazewood]

Russ, when some folks are hardwired to defend the FO under any circumstance, they will find justifications for any horrible moves they make (or horrible non-moves). The stats are all some folks have to add to the discussion.

Is it even physically possible for you to type out a post that doesn't include a condescending generalization about statheads and front office apologists who just don't get it? Every single one of your posts is of the form "if you're not mad at the Orioles you're not paying attention or you're stupid."

[DrungoHazewood]

Okay, so with THIS YEAR being the issue - what's the worst that can happen? The Orioles win the WS THIS YEAR and then be really good next year, and the year after that, with the 4th year being like the 2014 squad.

Is that a horrible fate? Any worse than what's waiting for us in the next couple of seasons? Barely scraping .500 again?

MSK

No, actually it could be like the Mariners who went all in for Cruz and are 8.0 games out of first and sporting a worse record than the O's. And this idea that Cruz means the O's win the Series this year is laughable. The idea that he guarantees them to be really good for the next two years is delusional. It's some kind of bizzaro alternate universe where paying $60M for a mid-30s DH is the key to success and happiness and solves the unsolvable riddle of how to win a short series in October.

[24fps]

Russ, when some folks are hardwired to defend the FO under any circumstance, they will find justifications for any horrible moves they make (or horrible non-moves). The stats are all some folks have to add to the discussion. Even though it's clear that Cruz and Miller will make us a better overall team, they'll tell you via a calculus formula that we're somehow "better" despite being in or near last place.

That is how screwed up the thought process can be so that the FO can be hailed as perfect.

I used to believe that FO members posted on here because I couldn't understand the slavish devotion to their poor management and offseason tactics, but now I realize it's deeper than that. Much deeper, and frankly more terrifying.

MSK

Over the 12 years I've been following the OH, I can't remember a single instance of a poster who could fairly be categorized as "hardwired to defend the FO under any circumstances." Nor have I ever seen a suggestion that "the FO can be hailed as perfect."

Sadly I can't say the same in regard to posters who happily make stuff up to support an agenda.

[MurphDogg]

Okay, so with THIS YEAR being the issue - what's the worst that can happen? The Orioles win the WS THIS YEAR and then be really good next year, and the year after that, with the 4th year being like the 2014 squad.

Is that a horrible fate? Any worse than what's waiting for us in the next couple of seasons? Barely scraping .500 again?

MSK

You think the worst thing that could happen if the Orioles had signed Cruz would be that they would win the World Series this year?

Yikes.

[MemorialStadKid]

Is it even physically possible for you to type out a post that doesn't include a condescending generalization about statheads and front office apologists who just don't get it? Every single one of your posts is of the form "if you're not mad at the Orioles you're not paying attention or you're stupid."

That's not what I said at all man.

I don't have a problem with sabermetrics or fans of statistical tracking of baseball performance. What I have a problem with are folks that use sabermetric thinking to argue against improving the team with proven talent.

There's ALWAYS this bizarre fascination with what the team will be like in 4-5 years rather than what we could do to win in the next 2-3 seasons. This line of thinking hasn't helped to sign international talent or significantly improved our farm system, yet, with the right set of VORPs, UZRs, WARs and OPS analyses, folks keep making the claims that the FO is working magic by not doing anything of significance during the offseason.

We should have traded Matusz when his value was high. We didn't.

Same with Davis.

At the right moment, those guys could have netted us some value. We waited and got nothing except reclamation projects.

Now, the numbers will somehow prove that Snider, De Aza and Lough are improvements, but I just don't see it on the field.

MSK

[MemorialStadKid]

Over the 12 years I've been following the OH, I can't remember a single instance of a poster who could fairly be categorized as "hardwired to defend the FO under any circumstances." Nor have I ever seen a suggestion that "the FO can be hailed as perfect."

Sadly I can't say the same in regard to posters who happily make stuff up to support an agenda.

Apparently you don't remember all the arguments against signing Mark Tex, or Josh Hamilton, or J. Werth, or M. Scherzer, or A. LaRouche or any proven talent who could improve the team.

I guess I made all that up.

MSK

[Crazysilver03]

Over the 12 years I've been following the OH, I can't remember a single instance of a poster who could fairly be categorized as "hardwired to defend the FO under any circumstances." Nor have I ever seen a suggestion that "the FO can be hailed as perfect."

Sadly I can't say the same in regard to posters who happily make stuff up to support an agenda.

Some people just like to look stupid. The Matusz threads alone blow this idea to pieces.

[DrungoHazewood]

What I have a problem with are folks that use sabermetric thinking to argue against improving the team with proven talent.

I think you have a problem when evidence says that what you think will guarantee improvement is really just a risk. You see Cruz as guaranteed to be a giant improvement and a no-brainer to sign to an expensive long-term deal. But you don't even need advanced analysis to see that Cruz wasn't even very good three of the last four years and he's much older now.

There's ALWAYS this bizarre fascination with what the team will be like in 4-5 years rather than what we could do to win in the next 2-3 seasons. This line of thinking hasn't helped to sign international talent or significantly improved our farm system, yet, with the right set of VORPs, UZRs, WARs and OPS analyses, folks keep making the claims that the FO is working magic by not doing anything of significance during the offseason.

We should have traded Matusz when his value was high. We didn't.

Same with Davis.

At the right moment, those guys could have netted us some value. We waited and got nothing except reclamation projects.

Now, the numbers will somehow prove that Snider, De Aza and Lough are improvements, but I just don't see it on the field.

MSK

Again, making up strawmen and mischaracterizing your opponent's positions because it's too hard or too inconvenient to use the facts. I'm not sure anyone ever argued that it was likely that Snider and De Aza and Lough would be more productive than Cruz and Markakis, only that they'd be reasonable replacements at a tiny, tiny fraction of the cost and a far lower long-term risk. You already admit that you simply don't care about a few years down the road. The real life front office has to care about fielding a viable franchise several years down the road. They can't present Angelos with a plan that says "we'll figure out how to get $50M of dead weight off the payroll in 2017 when we get there."

[Crazysilver03]

That's not what I said at all man.

I don't have a problem with sabermetrics or fans of statistical tracking of baseball performance. What I have a problem with are folks that use sabermetric thinking to argue against improving the team with proven talent.

There's ALWAYS this bizarre fascination with what the team will be like in 4-5 years rather than what we could do to win in the next 2-3 seasons. This line of thinking hasn't helped to sign international talent or significantly improved our farm system, yet, with the right set of VORPs, UZRs, WARs and OPS analyses, folks keep making the claims that the FO is working magic by not doing anything of significance during the offseason.

We should have traded Matusz when his value was high. We didn't.

Same with Davis.

At the right moment, those guys could have netted us some value. We waited and got nothing except reclamation projects.

Now, the numbers will somehow prove that Snider, De Aza and Lough are improvements, but I just don't see it on the field.

MSK

For the 173rd time, how are Miller and Cruz "proven" talent? That is one of the biggest issues people had bringing them back. Because they had career years in 2014. That's not proven. And that's not elite.

[Dipper9]

That's not what I said at all man.

I don't have a problem with sabermetrics or fans of statistical tracking of baseball performance. What I have a problem with are folks that use sabermetric thinking to argue against improving the team with proven talent.

There's ALWAYS this bizarre fascination with what the team will be like in 4-5 years rather than what we could do to win in the next 2-3 seasons. This line of thinking hasn't helped to sign international talent or significantly improved our farm system, yet, with the right set of VORPs, UZRs, WARs and OPS analyses, folks keep making the claims that the FO is working magic by not doing anything of significance during the offseason.

We should have traded Matusz when his value was high. We didn't.

Same with Davis.

At the right moment, those guys could have netted us some value. We waited and got nothing except reclamation projects.

Now, the numbers will somehow prove that Snider, De Aza and Lough are improvements, but I just don't see it on the field.

MSK

I'm gonna call on this. Had the Orioles traded Davis you would be beating your broken demolished drum about how the Orioles let another All Star walk because we are cheap and the FO has their head up their rear. The fact that you cannot see this, quite honestly scares me.

[Crazysilver03]

Apparently you don't remember all the arguments against signing Mark Tex, or Josh Hamilton, or J. Werth, or M. Scherzer, or A. LaRouche or any proven talent who could improve the team.

I guess I made all that up.

MSK

Hahaha.

Hahahahaha.

Hahahahaa.

So you are citing names that have more or less been disasters. Or citing contracts that only 4 teams in baseball would hand out.

[Dipper9]

Apparently you don't remember all the arguments against signing Mark Tex, or Josh Hamilton, or J. Werth, or M. Scherzer, or A. LaRouche or any proven talent who could improve the team.

I guess I made all that up.

MSK

OMG you just proved our point for us. Not a single guy on that list is worth their contract, and most have been complete flops for their team!

[DrungoHazewood]

Apparently you don't remember all the arguments against signing Mark Tex, or Josh Hamilton, or J. Werth, or M. Scherzer, or A. LaRouche or any proven talent who could improve the team.

I guess I made all that up.

You're really going to use those examples?!? I'd bet the O's have gotten similar production at first to Teixeira since he signed with the Yanks at probably 10% of the cost. Hamilton's contract and performance have been laughably terrible, mediocre performances at ultra-premium rates. Adam LaRoche has been an above-average MLB regular once in his entire career, yet has been paid $60-some million since 2011. You'd be better served by saying something like "despite the dismal contracts for Tex, Hamilton, etc I still advocate large free agent deals."

[Babypowder]

I think you have a problem when evidence says that what you think will guarantee improvement is really just a risk. You see Cruz as guaranteed to be a giant improvement and a no-brainer to sign to an expensive long-term deal. But you don't even need advanced analysis to see that Cruz wasn't even very good three of the last four years and he's much older now.

Again, making up strawmen and mischaracterizing your opponent's positions because it's too hard or too inconvenient to use the facts. I'm not sure anyone ever argued that it was likely that Snider and De Aza and Lough would be more productive than Cruz and Markakis, only that they'd be reasonable replacements at a tiny, tiny fraction of the cost and a far lower long-term risk. You already admit that you simply don't care about a few years down the road. The real life front office has to care about fielding a viable franchise several years down the road. They can't present Angelos with a plan that says "we'll figure out how to get $50M of dead weight off the payroll in 2017 when we get there."

There also isn't some magic potion or spell they can put over him to make him spend 30+ million dollars over budget. It doesn't matter if it can be afforded or not, it wasn't going to happen. Some of us "FO apologists" simply like to live in reality. Everyone knew the O's were not going to re-sign Cruz and/or Miller except apparently a handful of posters here. The decisions still being lamented is insane to me.