This is A Mess (Mega RANT Thread)

[MDtransplant757]

We're having a less meh and more bleh version of 2013

[sportsfan8703]

You can't win a playoff spot in the offseason but you sure can lose won. And we did just that. Angelos won his "case" with mlb and letting DD go to Toronto. But that's all we will win. I'm starting to hate Angelos so much that I'm rooting for the Nats to win the MASN case. It's not like that 85% slice of the pie went anywhere near the Orioles payroll.

[MemorialStadKid]

I know some folks view any defense of the FO a sign of blind allegiance.

I know some folks that take any criticism of Buck as a personal attack.

Both groups bore me.

People were defending the FO during the darkest of times. Now a few of them behave like they have always been fair-minded. It's hilarious and insane really.

I remember every single silly argument made against signing good players when they were FAs. You still have those that argue against re-signing Cruz or making any big move.

But somehow it's annoying to suggest we improve somehow.

Oh well.

MSK

[MdSooner]

People were defending the FO during the darkest of times. Now a few of them behave like they have always been fair-minded. It's hilarious and insane really.

I remember every single silly argument made against signing good players when they were FAs. You still have those that argue against re-signing Cruz or making any big move.

But somehow it's annoying to suggest we improve somehow.

Oh well.

MSK

I am not exactly sure what this means? We haven't signed any big free agents (or kept the ones we had) . We have Manny, Adam, and Davis but no one else.

We could have JJ but he is obviously hurt. Other than that we have AAAA players.

Edit: Schoop could be added to the list of players we have. Everyone else? Not so much.

Edit 2:

And this doesn't even include our suspect SP or bullpen.

We are not a very good team right now.

[Crazysilver03]

People were defending the FO during the darkest of times. Now a few of them behave like they have always been fair-minded. It's hilarious and insane really.

I remember every single silly argument made against signing good players when they were FAs. You still have those that argue against re-signing Cruz or making any big move.

But somehow it's annoying to suggest we improve somehow.

Oh well.

MSK

These are the type of posts that should get you banned for trolling. It is a blatant misrepresentation of what has been written. You know it is. You write it anyway. I don't know why you insist on doing this type of stuff.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Agreed. These are the types of posts that show he isnt trip here to discuss.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[theobird]

I was wrong about the option year so that part of it overrides the driver I thought existed. I distinctly remember that Roch and a couple others reporters wrote about how Arrieta would have been out of options as a driver of the trade, but I shouldn't rely on that. My mistake.

I do want to make sure we all understand how different Rule V players are from 40 man players without options. A Rule V player has to stay on the 25 man for a full season and be active for 90 days to be retained, but once retained they now have the normal 3 option years that any player just added to the 40 man gets. In other words, if you hold your nose and stash the player for a season, you get 3 seasons of MiL/ML flexibility with that player.

A 40 man player without options is in a completely different situation. There is no such window for them at a later date. They are either on the 25 in perpetuity or exposed to all the other teams.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I fully understand the difference between rule 5 guys and not. The point being that we have demonstrated that we can indeed "hide" a player that we value, whether rule 5 or not. We will likely do just this with Bundy next year.

This does not have any bearing on the Jake situation. That still comes down to trading two very high end young arms for a journeyman rental pitcher, which in my book is just poor management.

[turtlebowl]

I personally don't understand the obsession with Dan and the Rule 5 anyways. You are creating a lot of roster stress for what, someone with potential. Is there one player that we have brought in as a rule 5 guy that has brought more to the table than what you could have gotten from 1 of the hundred 4A guys floating around every year. In fact we have had more luck with those types (Steve Pierce) and should look to stock the minors hoping to occasionally catch lightning in the bottle. At worst case they may help the minor league affiliate and at best they are called up when needed to help fill a roll.

I would love to see the number of rule 5 guys that have gone on to have successful major league careers compared to some minor league free agents. The rule 5 may pay off occasionally but should only be used if you are rebuilding team.

[Stotle]

I personally don't understand the obsession with Dan and the Rule 5 anyways. You are creating a lot of roster stress for what, someone with potential. Is there one player that we have brought in as a rule 5 guy that has brought more to the table than what you could have gotten from 1 of the hundred 4A guys floating around every year. In fact we have had more luck with those types (Steve Pierce) and should look to stock the minors hoping to occasionally catch lightning in the bottle. At worst case they may help the minor league affiliate and at best they are called up when needed to help fill a roll.

I would love to see the number of rule 5 guys that have gone on to have successful major league careers compared to some minor league free agents. The rule 5 may pay off occasionally but should only be used if you are rebuilding team.

When you aren't otherwise able to bring in young, cost-controlled talent it sort of forces your hand. Baltimore needs cheap fixes from somewhere.

[turtlebowl]

When you aren't otherwise able to bring in young, cost-controlled talent it sort of forces your hand. Baltimore needs cheap fixes from somewhere.

Which gets us back to the main problem, drafting and development of players. We can go round and round with all of the moves that should or shouldn't be made but it really comes down to this. It's amazing how we constantly get back to this.

[Crazysilver03]

I personally don't understand the obsession with Dan and the Rule 5 anyways. You are creating a lot of roster stress for what, someone with potential. Is there one player that we have brought in as a rule 5 guy that has brought more to the table than what you could have gotten from 1 of the hundred 4A guys floating around every year. In fact we have had more luck with those types (Steve Pierce) and should look to stock the minors hoping to occasionally catch lightning in the bottle. At worst case they may help the minor league affiliate and at best they are called up when needed to help fill a roll.

I would love to see the number of rule 5 guys that have gone on to have successful major league careers compared to some minor league free agents. The rule 5 may pay off occasionally but should only be used if you are rebuilding team.

There have been several contending teams in the past few years that have taken a rule 5 guy and kept them all year.

It is also a way to add talent to the organization. And it is ironic because most of the people complaining about the Os taking Rule 5 guys while competing also complain about the Os not having enough talent.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[Can_of_corn]

There have been several contending teams in the past few years that have taken a rule 5 guy and kept them all year.

It is also a way to add talent to the organization. And it is ironic because most of the people complaining about the Os taking Rule 5 guys while competing also complain about the Os not having enough talent.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

But the talent you get is generally the same level of talent you can pick up for a 1/1 contract in March. There isn't exactly a shortage of utility infielders and relief pitchers.

[Crazysilver03]

But the talent you get is generally the same level of talent you can pick up for a 1/1 contract in March. There isn't exactly a shortage of utility infielders and relief pitchers.

True. Unless you sign them to a minor league deal in November and they get taken in the Rule 5 draft. Oi Vey.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

[turtlebowl]

There have been several contending teams in the past few years that have taken a rule 5 guy and kept them all year.

It is also a way to add talent to the organization. And it is ironic because most of the people complaining about the Os taking Rule 5 guys while competing also complain about the Os not having enough talent.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I know it is done but the reward at the end of the day doesn't seem to compare to the risk/complications of having to keep a player on the 25 man roster.

As for talent all I am saying is minor league free agents is an easier way to fill voids in an organization. Even Joey Bats who was a rule 5 didn't make it in the organization that drafted him. If others have a list of rule 5 guys that have performed with that team for multiple years my opinion could be persuaded. Just can't recall too many examples of what I would consider an impact type player.

[MemorialStadKid]

These are the type of posts that should get you banned for trolling. It is a blatant misrepresentation of what has been written. You know it is. You write it anyway. I don't know why you insist on doing this type of stuff.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I will tell you why. When I see respected posters (like you for example) using terms like "boring" or "annoyed" whenever someone has something negative to say about the Orioles FO, it just takes me back to the darkest of times - going way back to Flanny (RIP) and JIM Duquette and how the overall status quo on the OH was strangely pro-FO and anti-signing free agents.

Then MacPhail came with his snail-like crawl toward offseason moves and the player marketplace and we missed signing after signing after signing while our record crept lower and lower and still there was an overwhelming contingent who argued against making the moves necessary to win. Using fangraphs and Pecota to justify why Player A (who was a proven commodity) wouldn't be a great signing.

Then we moved on to an era where a growing chunk of the OH were tired of MacPhail not doing anything for a good stretch. Once, I remember someone getting admonished because he said "Andy MacFart." He actually got in trouble and was lambasted for saying Andy MacFart (I know you must remember that).

Turns out, MacPhail's approach wasn't so bad in retrospect, BUT the Orioles ownership rested on the laurels of 2012 to the point where they made middling moves to supplement the core and got EXTREMELY lucky that no one wanted Nelson Cruz after his PED issues.

Cruz comes here and kills it. Carrying us for much of the beginning of 2014 and then just when we had enough talent to make a serious run, THEY LET THOSE GUYS GO! THEY LET THEM GO!

DD replaces the known talent with AAAA and then expected the return of Davis, Wieters and Machado to be a deciding factor without grabbing at least ONE decent SP.

This is a travesty. I don't want to hear we can't afford it. I don't want to hear about markets.

Suddenly, a lot of other folks are waking up to this nonsense and while some still are homers (which is fine) it doesn't make sense to pretend that a lot of the pro-FO folks have always been fair-minded when it comes to critiquing this team and its ownership.

MSK

[DrungoHazewood]

But the talent you get is generally the same level of talent you can pick up for a 1/1 contract in March. There isn't exactly a shortage of utility infielders and relief pitchers.

You may have more choice in who you get in the Rule 5. It's harder to plan on grabbing a guy off waivers in late March who fits your roster.