Jump to content

This is A Mess (Mega RANT Thread)


eddie83

Recommended Posts

I think you are creating that paradigm yourself. My being critical of aspects of how a team is run doesn't come close to "demanding unconditional success." I have no issue with winning at the expense of a sustainable process, but I'm not sure why winning means I'm no longer permitted to point out why I believe a particular process is unsustainable.

You can point out anything you want to, and your observations are far less vicious than others here. But you're the one who said that 2012 was going to be damaging in the long run. To me, 2012 was the reward. What happens in 2016... well, you're not going to build a farm system in six months. Fix what you can going forward. Sure, Duquette could have done better building the organization. But they won ballgames, and they played meaningful baseball. For the better part of four years. That's what matters more than anything else, and it seems like you and others sometimes lose that in the quest for building for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
You can point out anything you want to, and your observations are far less vicious than others here. But you're the one who said that 2012 was going to be damaging in the long run. To me, 2012 was the reward. What happens in 2016... well, you're not going to build a farm system in six months. Fix what you can going forward. Sure, Duquette could have done better building the organization. But they won ballgames, and they played meaningful baseball. For the better part of four years. That's what matters more than anything else, and it seems like you and others sometimes lose that in the quest for building for the future.

And I do not see a substantive difference between:

1. buying four high-priced FA with bad contracts that clog up the 25-man for four years to "win now", and

2. trading off your farm, ignoring impactful J2 acquisitions, and trading draft picks/losing draft picks all in the name of riding a "winning wave" that you essentially lucked into in 2012.

Both options make your life much more difficult three or four years out, but only one results in folks turning up their nose. I get that 2012-2014 was fun. It would be fun to sign four big time FA and enjoy a talent bump and improved odds at winning in the short term, but I'd be expressing concerns about payroll flexibility and the like if that's the route the FO opted for.

My stance isn't that building up an organization is more important than winning. My stance is that building up an organization is the best way to put a club in a position to be fun, interesting, and competitive for a long long time.

That stance was acceptable before 2012. Then folks got a taste of winning for the first time in a long while and a position previously viewed as reasonable became a position to be met with "Why don't you stop obsessing over minor leaguers!!" Shrug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can point out anything you want to, and your observations are far less vicious than others here. But you're the one who said that 2012 was going to be damaging in the long run. To me, 2012 was the reward. What happens in 2016... well, you're not going to build a farm system in six months. Fix what you can going forward. Sure, Duquette could have done better building the organization. But they won ballgames, and they played meaningful baseball. For the better part of four years. That's what matters more than anything else, and it seems like you and others sometimes lose that in the quest for building for the future.

I just don't understand if your interested in "building for the future" how it makes sense to not address needs in a meaningful way during the offseason? Your putting yourself in a position to do just what we did which is give up one of the few real prospects we have for a rental property. That's not how you build a system, especially when that system has limited talent anyway.

I think we both agree that building a team should come from within as much as possible, free agency is the least economical way to build a team. I just think we disagree if the way the Orioles go about business reflects that. I think that should be obvious when you compare our farm system and its relative lack of talent comparative to almost the rest of baseball. When your farm system is consistently ranked 27-30 post trade deadline, that is not building for the future and something is being done wrong. I just hope we get that figured out. If DD can do that then I will be a happy guy, if he continues to not be able to do that then eventually he will have to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My stance isn't that building up an organization is more important than winning. My stance is that building up an organization is the best way to put a club in a position to be fun, interesting, and competitive for a long long time.

That stance was acceptable before 2012. Then folks got a taste of winning for the first time in a long while and a position previously viewed as reasonable became a position to be met with "Why don't you stop obsessing over minor leaguers!!" Shrug.

I would prefer a sustainable organization to one that produces little talent. No question. That was my position in 2011, and it still is. But winning changes a lot. At least in theory, winning should increase revenues which go back into the organization and help fix the holes. In practice, maybe not so much. I think the Orioles and their fans should certainly be obsessing over minor leaguers, but not at the expense of enjoying baseball. There is an undercurrent of "who cares if we're winning now, we might not be winning next year." Don't forget the future, definitely worry about the future to some degree, but at some point you have to drink a beer and enjoy a pretty good season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When your farm system is consistently ranked 27-30 post trade deadline, that is not building for the future and something is being done wrong. I just hope we get that figured out. If DD can do that then I will be a happy guy, if he continues to not be able to do that then eventually he will have to go.

No one is happy with a 27th (or whatever) ranked farm system. So let's hope they go fix it. But it's not like this was a rock-bottom system for all of Duquette's tenure. They've graduated a bunch of players, Schoop and Manny and Tillman and Gausman and Britton. They had two of the top 25(?) pitching prospects a year ago, both unfortunately got hurt. They're not 27th because they traded some decent prospects for Norris and Parra and a few other rentals. Those guys would help, but none of them are likely impact talent, there's no stars there. Hopefully they can get back to having a good system after a few drafts and maybe, finally, some more international investments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think this is brilliantly said and very true.

Am I upset the O's let an opportunity slip through their fingers to take that next step and build on next year? Yea a little, but what concerns me far more is the fact that our farm system is just not good. You cannot be a cost conscious organization and win if you cannot develop talent. What allows the TB Rays to not have to spend and be competitive is that they have a as you put it "talent factory" down there. Right now the Yankees and Boston comparative to us are also talent factories. Both are now ranked top ten farm systems. Even the Jays are ranked ahead of us after they supposedly gave up the farm. We would be lucky to see maybe 3 or 4 of our top ten prospects even register in their top 10.

I guess what I am concerned about is this. If we are going to be cost conscious in our approach to landing talent, that is fine but you better be churning out the talent in the minors. If your not willing to buy that talent and your not developing it, I don't care how much we trust DD to find diamonds in the rough, its not gonna work. Its worked till now because there has been enough solid core players. It also worked cause we traded prospects to supplement that core when what we threw against the wall did not stick. If Davis, Chen and O'Day walk and we do little to replace them in the FA market this team is in real trouble. We do not have the answers in the minors.

I am ok with taking a hit for few years if means we can build that talent factory. I just wonder why it is that here we are again looking at a farm system that comparative to most other MLB teams is pretty poor again. Till we fix that, we are going to struggle in this division.

This is perfectly stated. Well done! Well done! I couldn't agree more and love every point you made here.

IMO, our talent evaluation is subpar as well as our player development. Like you stated above that if we aren't going to be buyers in the FA market and we can't afford to do so build in the farm is the most important thing.

I think at seasons end this team needs to look in the mirror and start making changes in a few areas to build for success in the future.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would prefer a sustainable organization to one that produces little talent. No question. That was my position in 2011, and it still is. But winning changes a lot. At least in theory, winning should increase revenues which go back into the organization and help fix the holes. In practice, maybe not so much. I think the Orioles and their fans should certainly be obsessing over minor leaguers, but not at the expense of enjoying baseball. There is an undercurrent of "who cares if we're winning now, we might not be winning next year." Don't forget the future, definitely worry about the future to some degree, but at some point you have to drink a beer and enjoy a pretty good season.

I'm not sure why you assume I am not enjoying the season. Because there is a particular cross-section of baseball topics I enjoy discussing online? I don't upload 100% of my baseball experiences to this message board, and my posts online don't reflect the full spectrum of my experiences.

I was a season ticket holder for six straight years while living in Illinois and then New York. I purchased XM Radio and then MLB.tv specifically to be able to watch/listen to Orioles baseball while out of market. Despite all of that there are still morons on this message board that insist I am an Orioles hater.

I'm all for debating/discussing virtually anything. With one exception I've never "blocked" anyone and with a handful of exceptions over seven or so years I've never really gotten heated with anyone. I honestly couldn't care less what *type* of fan someone is or whether they check in to give equal positive and negative posts on this message board. I assume if people are spending time here they follow the Orioles, and outside of that I don't really think anyone needs any further credentials in order to state opinions without having their intentions questioned.

I honestly have no clue how much or how little enjoyment anyone on this board gets out of the Orioles. For all I know the constant "naysayer" venting about a player/coach/front office member is exercising 30 minutes of *internet therapy* after watching nine innings without so much as an elevated heart rate, while a constant *super fan* spent the same game yelling and throwing things around the room before logging on to tell the naysayer that he should relax and stop flipping out over ever little thing.

I get that the topics I like to discuss aren't interesting or worthwhile to many baseball fans. I don't expect to get responses or discussion-mates all the time. It would all be a little more enjoyable if there were fewer folks, on both sides, telling everyone else what is and is not acceptable to discuss, or worry about, or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is happy with a 27th (or whatever) ranked farm system. So let's hope they go fix it. But it's not like this was a rock-bottom system for all of Duquette's tenure. They've graduated a bunch of players, Schoop and Manny and Tillman and Gausman and Britton. They had two of the top 25(?) pitching prospects a year ago, both unfortunately got hurt. They're not 27th because they traded some decent prospects for Norris and Parra and a few other rentals. Those guys would help, but none of them are likely impact talent, there's no stars there. Hopefully they can get back to having a good system after a few drafts and maybe, finally, some more international investments.

I agree. Even the best systems have ebbs and flows as they graduate guys or move them to supplement a team that is competitive. When your trading competitive balance picks just to save a few bucks though and your farm system is ranked as poorly as ours, that seems like a thing that makes it reasonable to wonder just how much they really value improving that system. I just can't understand those types of moves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you assume I am not enjoying the season. Because there is a particular cross-section of baseball topics I enjoy discussing online? I don't upload 100% of my baseball experiences to this message board, and my posts online don't reflect the full spectrum of my experiences.

I was a season ticket holder for six straight years while living in Illinois and then New York. I purchased XM Radio and then MLB.tv specifically to be able to watch/listen to Orioles baseball while out of market. Despite all of that there are still morons on this message board that insist I am an Orioles hater.

I'm all for debating/discussing virtually anything. With one exception I've never "blocked" anyone and with a handful of exceptions over seven or so years I've never really gotten heated with anyone. I honestly couldn't care less what *type* of fan someone is or whether they check in to give equal positive and negative posts on this message board. I assume if people are spending time here they follow the Orioles, and outside of that I don't really think anyone needs any further credentials in order to state opinions without having their intentions questioned.

I honestly have no clue how much or how little enjoyment anyone on this board gets out of the Orioles. For all I know the constant "naysayer" venting about a player/coach/front office member is exercising 30 minutes of *internet therapy* after watching nine innings without so much as an elevated heart rate, while a constant *super fan* spent the same game yelling and throwing things around the room before logging on to tell the naysayer that he should relax and stop flipping out over ever little thing.

I get that the topics I like to discuss aren't interesting or worthwhile to many baseball fans. I don't expect to get responses or discussion-mates all the time. It would all be a little more enjoyable if there were fewer folks, on both sides, telling everyone else what is and is not acceptable to discuss, or worry about, or whatever.

I have no idea if anyone is truly enjoying baseball, but for a lot of folks the only clue I have is what they post here. And there are an awful lot of people (not you) who do little but vent, so my only insight into them is an almost constant tirade against the Orioles. To tell the truth, when I finally put 3-4 folks on ignore my time here got much more enjoyable. I probably shouldn't care, and I probably should just have the willpower to ignore the folks I find objectionable without putting them on ignore. But I find that difficult. It's hard to see the joy in baseball when someone (again, not you) does almost nothing but criticize. I find it difficult to have a meaningful conversation with people who seem to be angry all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Even the best systems have ebbs and flows as they graduate guys or move them to supplement a team that is competitive. When your trading competitive balance picks just to save a few bucks though and your farm system is ranked as poorly as ours, that seems like a thing that makes it reasonable to wonder just how much they really value improving that system. I just can't understand those types of moves.

I think it comes down to Angelos setting a fixed budget, and allowing little leeway in exceeding that. It certainly seems that way. I can't understand why else they'd trade small assets in what looks like an attempt to recoup a few $million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea if anyone is truly enjoying baseball, but for a lot of folks the only clue I have is what they post here. And there are an awful lot of people (not you) who do little but vent, so my only insight into them is an almost constant tirade against the Orioles. To tell the truth, when I finally put 3-4 folks on ignore my time here got much more enjoyable. I probably shouldn't care, and I probably should just have the willpower to ignore the folks I find objectionable without putting them on ignore. But I find that difficult. It's hard to see the joy in baseball when someone (again, not you) does almost nothing but criticize. I find it difficult to have a meaningful conversation with people who seem to be angry all the time.

It's a choice to enter that conversation and, admittedly, I'm less emotionally charged either way when it comes to the Orioles so it's easy for me not to see the needle swing much regardless of what others are screaming about.

Hey, I get it when it comes to blocking. I grew a *troll* that insisted on regular personal insults, and while the insults alone never really riled me up it's a more enjoyable experience now that the person does not exist for me in the universe of this message board.

I guess I feel like I never know where an interesting thought might come from so whenever possible I like seeing everything. I can shrug off the uninteresting/silly stuff pretty easily, but (again) I'm not hugely invested from an emotional standpoint. I could see it all getting tiring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At some point the rankings which discuss future potential have to take a backseat to the actual players that graduate and contribute to the ML. The rankings don't win games. The players do.

I'd like to know if anyone thinks our contributions from players that came from MiL promotion to the majors ranks in the 25th - 30th range over the last 4 years? I certainly don't. I'd put us easily in the top 10 for contributions from MiL (rather than tradeor FA).

Now, if the concern is that this contribution is about to stop or significantly slow, I can see why and I share the concern although not as fervently as some. However, once you start winning, you stop getting picks in top 8 of the draft. Once that stops, most of the Machado-type players aren't going to be there. We will get a LOT of draft picks early next year and I expect the system to make a major step forward in the rankings because of it. I won't get happy about the step forward any more than I got upset about the "step back". I get happy when guys get to the ML level and contribute and unhappy when they fail. I think the rankings only do an OK job at predicting that result.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Respectfully, I disagree. Maybe the numbers attached to the rankings aren't great, but the narrative that accompanies the rankings is usually highly instructive. Baltimore in the top 10 in baseball for homegrown contributions over the past few years? Maybe, I guess. Machado has been special enough to carry the team to that type of ranking, potentially. But it would surprise me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At some point the rankings which discuss future potential have to take a backseat to the actual players that graduate and contribute to the ML. The rankings don't win games. The players do.

I'd like to know if anyone thinks our contributions from players that came from MiL promotion to the majors ranks in the 25th - 30th range over the last 4 years? I certainly don't. I'd put us easily in the top 10 for contributions from MiL (rather than tradeor FA).

Now, if the concern is that this contribution is about to stop or significantly slow, I can see why and I share the concern although not as fervently as some. However, once you start winning, you stop getting picks in top 8 of the draft. Once that stops, most of the Machado-type players aren't going to be there. We will get a LOT of draft picks early next year and I expect the system to make a major step forward in the rankings because of it. I won't get happy about the step forward any more than I got upset about the "step back". I get happy when guys get to the ML level and contribute and unhappy when they fail. I think the rankings only do an OK job at predicting that result.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

At some point the rankings which discuss future potential have to take a backseat to the actual players that graduate and contribute to the ML. The rankings don't win games. The players do.

I'd like to know if anyone thinks our contributions from players that came from MiL promotion to the majors ranks in the 25th - 30th range over the last 4 years? I certainly don't. I'd put us easily in the top 10 for contributions from MiL (rather than tradeor FA).

Now, if the concern is that this contribution is about to stop or significantly slow, I can see why and I share the concern although not as fervently as some. However, once you start winning, you stop getting picks in top 8 of the draft. Once that stops, most of the Machado-type players aren't going to be there. We will get a LOT of draft picks early next year and I expect the system to make a major step forward in the rankings because of it. I won't get happy about the step forward any more than I got upset about the "step back". I get happy when guys get to the ML level and contribute and unhappy when they fail. I think the rankings only do an OK job at predicting that result.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rankings are not the end all be all, on that I agree. I also think though you are being far to quick to dismiss them and their value. For 14 years we were ranked pretty low in prospect rankings, it was reflected in our record on the field. When we buckled down and started to work on the system that changed and shortly after it so did our fortunes. Yes a lot of guys did not exactly hit or did not hit as we would have wanted but the fact is that the talent level was raised and it was reflected by product on the field. For several years we have heard about the talent in systems like Houston, KC, Minnesota, and the Cubs. Now you are starting to see the effect of that on the field. While scouts may miss on individual players, when judging a group collectively, you may hit on a guy and miss on another but usually those things come pretty close to canceling each other out and provide a pretty decent picture of what a team really has. These people do not hate the Orioles lol....when we had good prospects, they said so and guess what, good teams followed. Dismissing them now simply cause we don't like the message we are getting is a good way to find ourselves repeating this cycle over and over. What we need to do is look at ourselves and then look at a few organizations like the Cardinals and a few others that find a way to manage those ebbs and flows much much much better than we have and learn from them. I gotta feeling that trading competitive balance picks is not a strategy that those teams employ. When we do stuff like that, I question if we are learning or if we are just falling back into old behaviors.

I love this team and want to see them succeed without having to constantly have top 8 picks. It can be done. We need to stop having the mentality that we should be the Rays and only do it their way and start having the mentality that we wanna be the Cardinals, Rangers or a few other select teams that do a good job of getting young talent even when they do not have top 10 picks.

When I read an Orioles write up in 10 years I want to hear something like this with the name Orioles instead of Cardinals. "The Cardinals have graduated a team?s worth of impact talent to St. Louis in recent years, from Matt Carpenter and Carlos Martinez to Matt Adams and Michael Wacha. Despite often selecting in the second half of the draft?s first round, St. Louis has chosen prudently and well. A renewed focus in recent years in Latin America, highlighted by Martinez and the late Oscar Tavares, is producing another wave led by Alex Reyes and Magneuris Sierra." That is from BA write up of the Cardinals going into this season. What I have seen over the past couple years makes me wonder if DD or anyone is gonna get us there so long as we refuse to be players in the Latin markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The eligibility revisions went into effect almost a decade ago, which is why your examples are dated. I don't think you are anti-Stotle at all, or devious.

I'll preface this by noting that I'm not defending the concept of the using the Rule V the way the Orioles have (under current management, it's seemed like a crutch - a way to get a league minimum player on the cheap and ride them come Hell or high water, ala Flaherty and McFardland)... but it still HAS occasionally churned out very useful players, even after the 2006 eligibility change. Josh Hamilton (drafted under the new rules, I do believe) is obviously the big fish, but there have been some other intriguing names since then. Including guys that are/have been on our active roster this season, like Darren O'Day, Miguel Gonzalez and Everth Cabrera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...