Dan's Offseason Moves Part One: Cruz

[Stotle]

I'm not sure, with a $120M payroll and without a lot of young talent constantly knocking on the door, if you'll ever really be an AL East favorite. It's almost impossible, again without a top-notch farm system, to be in the 50th percentile in payroll but a projected 95+ win team. Not when the Yanks will always have a $200M+ payroll and the Sox not that far behind. When I say competitive I mean shoot for 85 wins, maybe 90 in a good year. Sometimes 85 win teams actually win 96.

Yeah, I'd say building up a minor league system is pretty important. You might say the most important thing an Orioles front office can do if it wants to build a consistent winner...

[bobmc]

Yeah, I'd say building up a minor league system is pretty important. You might say the most important thing an Orioles front office can do if it wants to build a consistent winner...

They have one but it just isn't cooking with the right kind of "gas"....

[Stotle]

They have one but it just isn't cooking with the right kind of "gas"....

I just continue to be amazed that the "I am enjoying having a winner" crowd doesn't get that they are cut from the same cloth as the "go spend a bunch on free agents, I just want to win" crowd. Both courses of action are clearly sacrificing future flexibility in exchange for instant gratification. I can argue just as easily that building up your farm by not trading away draft picks and not trading away prospects and spending international money available gives you the flexibility you need to maneuver around the final meh years in a Cruz or Ubaldo or Heyward or Upton deal as I can that avoiding long term commitments allows the team the payroll flexibility it needs in the future to try and plug holes.

It's literally the same issue. I know, Stotle -->

[Il BuonO]

I just continue to be amazed that the "I am enjoying having a winner" crowd doesn't get that they are cut from the same cloth as the "go spend a bunch on free agents, I just want to win" crowd. Both courses of action are clearly sacrificing future flexibility in exchange for instant gratification. I can argue just as easily that building up your farm by not trading away draft picks and not trading away prospects and spending international money available gives you the flexibility you need to maneuver around the final meh years in a Cruz or Ubaldo or Heyward or Upton deal as I can that avoiding long term commitments allows the team the payroll flexibility it needs in the future to try and plug holes.

It's literally the same issue.

I'm glad you said this. I've said it in smaller sound bites and different ways, but the idea that we should be happy watching competitive baseball is foreign to me. I guarantee you that's not how Buck or the players look at it.

Why would the organization set them up for failure by not building for the future through the minor leagues? Very puzzling considering their market and the way they're almost forced to operate.

[abbott]

I just continue to be amazed that the "I am enjoying having a winner" crowd doesn't get that they are cut from the same cloth as the "go spend a bunch on free agents, I just want to win" crowd. Both courses of action are clearly sacrificing future flexibility in exchange for instant gratification. I can argue just as easily that building up your farm by not trading away draft picks and not trading away prospects and spending international money available gives you the flexibility you need to maneuver around the final meh years in a Cruz or Ubaldo or Heyward or Upton deal as I can that avoiding long term commitments allows the team the payroll flexibility it needs in the future to try and plug holes.

It's literally the same issue. I know, Stotle -->

Since 1983, the Orioles have tried every approach, often many times. The result is failure. Which philosophy have they not tried?

[Can_of_corn]

Since 1983, the Orioles have tried every approach, often many times. The result is failure. Which philosophy have they not tried?

They have never tried the tank on purpose for multiple years.

It's the new moneyball.

[Stotle]

Since 1983, the Orioles have tried every approach, often many times. The result is failure. Which philosophy have they not tried?

They've had plenty of "non-failure" results. I think they were on the right track under MacPhail (though sputtering by the time he left and still remaining lifeless on the international front). They won unexpectedly and thanks in large part to one-run success rate. From that point on they have been trying to spin plates and keep the ML team good enough to be competitive while giving up picks and prospects in the process.

This off-season they need to fix a lot; we'll see what Duquette has in store. Should be interesting.

As far as what they haven't tried, I'd say fully leveraging J2 acquisitions, added resources into PD, acquiring draft picks/international money, and making moves like trading Britton this year or Wieters and/or Davis previously in order to help restock the top of the system while plugging short term holes in FA.

[Stotle]

They have never tried the tank on purpose for multiple years.

It's the new moneyball.

[Can_of_corn]

You do know I wasn't being entirely serious right?

[Stotle]

You do know I wasn't being entirely serious right?

I do -- I just wanted to use the picture.

[weams]

Since 1983, the Orioles have tried every approach, often many times. The result is failure. Which philosophy have they not tried?

They have never tried the tank on purpose for multiple years.

It's the new moneyball.

It is the only method I have seen that built a team from the grass roots.

[Stotle]

It is the only method I have seen that built a team from the grass roots.

Cardinals, Mets, Rangers, Giants, Royals, Pirates, Cubs, etc.

Can we please, not, with the clearly disproved narratives? If you are going to claim this, you should just leave it at "The Astros did something sort of like that, and the Nationals were fortunate enough to get Harper and Strasburg 1-1 in back-to-back year. Yeah, I know they built-up a large part of their team in other ways, too, but it was also losing that helped them."

That would be more accurate, no?

[Can_of_corn]

Cardinals, Mets, Rangers, Giants, Royals, Pirates, Cubs, etc.

I think the Cubs at least partially purposefully tanked. At the very least they went a few years not being concerned about the their MLB record

[Stotle]

I think the Cubs at least partially purposefully tanked. At the very least they went a few years not being concerned about the their MLB record.

That's not close to the same thing, though. They weren't shooting to draft as high as they could. They were acquiring minor league and major league assets, aggressively. Weams is setting up a false dichotomy -- either Baltimore shrugs and wallows in several years of last place finishes or they do what Duquette is doing and try to win with stop-gap bargain acquisitions. Do you believe those are the only two options available to a team like Baltimore?

[weams]

That's not close to the same thing, though. They weren't shooting to draft as high as they could. They were acquiring minor league and major league assets, aggressively. Weams is setting up a false dichotomy -- either Baltimore shrugs and wallows in several years of last place finishes or they do what Duquette is doing and try to win with stop-gap bargain acquisitions. Do you believe those are the only two options available to a team like Baltimore?

I never said that. I said all the teams with good young talent that have been successful over multiple seasons have been very bad for extended periods of time, or leveraged the old rules of trading for players that were type a or b free agents at the end of the year to alleviate a losing team's financial distress to accumulate additional draft slots.

I am certain that their are other methods. That do not require replacing Chris Davis with LaRoche. After winning the division by twelve and being four games from the World Series. I am just not smart enough to know what they are.