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

[TiredofLosing20]

The naysayers are not going to want to hear this, but I'd argue that DD wasn't wrong, even with the extremely early returns on Cruz' and Millers' performances and the O's current record. You still have to make rational projections for the rest of those contracts, and those have only very slightly changed from two months ago. Cruz is still a 35-year-old DH who was a below-average performer from 2011-13. Miller's career high in innings as a reliever is still 62. An awful lot of free agent deals look awesome two months in, and by year 2 or 3 their teams are desperately trying to cobble together a 25-cents-on-the-dollar salary dump.

You are right, it is too early to determine if not signing Cruz/Miller was wrong long term. I actually said that myself several weeks ago. So maybe I should have said in the short term he has been wrong. I believe context is important and given where they finished last year, I think the team was in the extremely rare situation where the short term should have taken precedence over the long term. The team was in a position to take some risks to win a WS, which is why I feel that in the overall decision making process on these two players, the bolded part of your text should have been devalued, and given the contracts and players coming off the books in 2016 maybe significantly devalued. I think in virtually every other situation not signing those two guys given all the information is absolutely a no brainer. So at that level, it is difficult to be too critical of DD. But again context is important, if these two players would have helped the O's win a World Series (or even get there) I think I could live with the 2 or 3 bad years of their contracts or the 25 cents on the dollar salary dump. As it stands now, the team appears to be worse and those two players look like they may have significantly helped the team.

Of course there are a lot of ifs and buts here but isn't that really what risk is. I know that this board spent a decade discussing how it wasn't the right time to take significant risks given their position in the standings, (an opinion I shared) I just wish (and believed) that when they finally did get in the situation where taking a risk was warranted, they would have done so. That is really my only beef.

I fully understand your point and it is completely valid and 99% of the time I would agree with you but IMO, for the 2015 Orioles, DD got this one wrong. I worry that we may not be in a position to take short term risk again for awhile.

For the record, I wouldn't have brought Markakis back for his contract. I don't think that was a good move in the short or long term.

[TiredofLosing20]

I thought and still do, that you'll get 2 productive years out of Cruz and the final two will be a bust.

I think there is generally consensus on that here. Though I think an argument could be made that all four years would have been a bust. It is not looking now like that is the case but I think that it was a fair assumption when the contract was signed given age and history. The point of contention I believe is whether the O's should have taken that risk and whether they had the money to do it.

[Going Underground]

I thought and still do, that you'll get 2 productive years out of Cruz and the final two will be a bust.

Is two good years from Cruz and perhaps a trip to the World Series worth it? We went all in by getting Miller for a prospect when we knew we probably had no chance of signing him. We wanted to win the World Series. Cruz might have three good years. The Hardy contract might turn out to be worse then the Cruz deal. We shall see. Every contract has risks and rewards.

[DrungoHazewood]

The risk was probably worth it, until year #4 and then you have dead money in 2018

Can someone talk to me about this seeming consensus that Cruz was going to perform at a fairly high level for three years then tank in year four? My back-of-the-napkin rule of thumb is that you weight the last 3-4 years performance then assume about half a win decline per year, but probably bump up that half a win decline the older the guy is. Coming off 2014 Cruz had an established level of something like 2.5 wins, three on the outside. So over four years I have/had him somewhere between 2.5, 2, 1.5, and 1 wins and 2, 1, 0, 0. That's all just back-of-the-napkin, and often a player disappears all of a sudden in his mid-to-late 30s. To me Cruz is always a risk of disappearing, and isn't likely to be an above-average player for most of his contract. I don't see any magic dividing lines at year 3 or 4. It's all probabilities and risk.

[Redskins Rick]

Is two good years from Cruz and perhaps a trip to the World Series worth it? We went all in by getting Miller for a prospect when we knew we probably had no chance of signing him. We wanted to win the World Series. Cruz might have three good years. The Hardy contract might turn out to be worse then the Cruz deal. We shall see. Every contract has risks and rewards.

Sorry trading E-Rod, was not going all in for Miller.

[DrungoHazewood]

Is two good years from Cruz and perhaps a trip to the World Series worth it? We went all in by getting Miller for a prospect when we knew we probably had no chance of signing him. We wanted to win the World Series. Cruz might have three good years. The Hardy contract might turn out to be worse then the Cruz deal. We shall see. Every contract has risks and rewards.

No deal should include the assumption of playoff success as a result. Ever.

[mdbdotcom]

Can someone talk to me about this seeming consensus that Cruz was going to perform at a fairly high level for three years then tank in year four? My back-of-the-napkin rule of thumb is that you weight the last 3-4 years performance then assume about half a win decline per year, but probably bump up that half a win decline the older the guy is. Coming off 2014 Cruz had an established level of something like 2.5 wins, three on the outside. So over four years I have/had him somewhere between 2.5, 2, 1.5, and 1 wins and 2, 1, 0, 0. That's all just back-of-the-napkin, and often a player disappears all of a sudden in his mid-to-late 30s. To me Cruz is always a risk of disappearing, and isn't likely to be an above-average player for most of his contract. I don't see any magic dividing lines at year 3 or 4. It's all probabilities and risk.

Perhaps mitigated by chemistry.

[Crazysilver03]

Is two good years from Cruz and perhaps a trip to the World Series worth it? We went all in by getting Miller for a prospect when we knew we probably had no chance of signing him. We wanted to win the World Series. Cruz might have three good years. The Hardy contract might turn out to be worse then the Cruz deal. We shall see. Every contract has risks and rewards.

We didn't get to the WS with them in 2014. Why do people assume that We will get their with the same crew.

[eddie83]

I think this is a good post and reasonable approach. I agree that power hitting OF/DH would seem to be a place to take more risk based on our near term MiL depth. That was mainly why I wanted Cruz and thought the risk was worth it.

I know Davis has his warts but who replaces him if he leaves? I am really concerned about this issue.

[Going Underground]

Sorry trading E-Rod, was not going all in for Miller.

I did not mean the trade. But Miller ,some people thought would shore up the bullpen in the later innings and help us in the run for the playoffs. O'Day was not pitchiong well in the later half of the year.

[Redskins Rick]

I did not mean the trade. But Miller ,some people thought would shore up the bullpen in the later innings and help us in the run for the playoffs. O'Day was not pitchiong well in the later half of the year.

I think he did, he was an upgrade over Webb. They made a good run at it and fell short.

[TonySoprano]

The last time the Orioles were 5 games under .500 was in 2011. In 2004, the worst was 3 games under (2-5), in 2013 it was 1 game under (3-4), and in 2002, the Orioles were never below .500. In Buck's first full season, the Orioles finished 24 games under, with a season high 30 games below (58-88)

[eddie83]

The risk was probably worth it, until year #4 and then you have dead money in 2018

This division right now stinks. I don't care if we win 85 games and get the division title. Nobody scares me in the playoffs, nobody. I just think if we are going to take some risks now is the time. Our minor league system is not producing enough talent to keep replenishing the big league roster.

[Going Underground]

I know the Orioles are playing poor baseball but they are only three back in the loss column for first place in the AL East and for the final wildcard spot. Jones gets healthy and Wieters gives a spark perhaps they make a run. Tillman gets better and Pearce hits to the opposite field. Still time left to fix a sinking ship. One trade also might be what this team needs.They play the Yankees next week and if they sweep them everyone would feel better.

[Redskins Rick]

This division right now stinks. I don't care if we win 85 games and get the division title. Nobody scares me in the playoffs, nobody. I just think if we are going to take some risks now is the time. Our minor league system is not producing enough talent to keep replenishing the big league roster.

I think the system is loaded with pitching, but there are some quality prospects in the system that we might be seeing at the end of this season and in ST for next year.