O's start the off-season with a last place team?

[25 Nuggets]

I think the Red Sox are in a pretty good position for next year despite the three horrible contracts they gave out last winter (Sandoval, Ramirez and Porcello). They have a really talented young core that is only going to get better, and they still have some money available to spend. They're done with Victorino and Napoli, who cost $26 mm last year. I think they'll be over .500 in 2016 if they have any kind of decent offseason, and they could contend if things go right.

That's what having a good farm does for you. The Red Sox could very well phantom-DL all three of those guys and still finish above .500

I agree. I think Dombroski will make some trades with his young players to re-establish with major league talent immediately.

That would be a horrible mistake, depending on who.

[mdbdotcom]

Hey, they have 38m to spend after spending 2m on Worley.

They will have 50 after trading Britton and Gonzalez.

[wildcard]

41 after they non tender Matusz.

I had already counted Matusz as non tendered.

[DrungoHazewood]

I look at the O's roster without the free agents and it seems like the worst team in the AL East to start the off-season. Is that your take?

http://m.orioles.mlb.com/roster

Maybe, or right there with Tampa. But I imagine the division is pretty well clustered and Baltimore has an opportunity to make impactful additions if they so choose.

The term "last place" has lost most of its meaning. Last place used to mean 8th place, worst record in the league. At other points it's meant things like 12th or 10th place, and about 60 wins. As recently as the mid-90s it meant 7th place and almost certainly no more than about 70 wins. In other sports it can mean 20th place and being sent to a lower league. In today's MLB it can mean "on the fringes of contention, or better if the offseason goes well."

[Slappy]

I think the Red Sox are in a pretty good position for next year despite the three horrible contracts they gave out last winter (Sandoval, Ramirez and Porcello). They have a really talented young core that is only going to get better, and they still have some money available to spend. They're done with Victorino and Napoli, who cost $26 mm last year. I think they'll be over .500 in 2016 if they have any kind of decent offseason, and they could contend if things go right.

The Red Sox and Orioles are extremely similar right now. Both have starting pitching issues to address. The Sox have a better offense, the O's a better bullpen. The Sox have a few more young impact players but also more albatross contracts and the threat of Ortiz finally declining and taking a big chunk of their offense with him. Which team finishes higher in 2016 is going to be a function of who can more effectively fix their starting pitching this offseason.

[Redskins Rick]

I had already counted Matusz as non tendered.

True, and if you were GM, you wouldn't have brought Matusz back, and they did.

So it's not that simple that he is already non tendered.

[Tryptamine]

Maybe, or right there with Tampa. But I imagine the division is pretty well clustered and Baltimore has an opportunity to make impactful additions if they so choose.

It obviously means very little as an offseason can completely change everything, but ESPN has you guys as 22nd for 2016.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/65936/the-way-too-early-2016-power-rankings

[wildcard]

True, and if you were GM, you wouldn't have brought Matusz back, and they did.

So it's not that simple that he is already non tendered.

You know, you are right. Non tenders probably do not happen until late November,early December. Matusz is still on the roster and is projected to get a 3.4m salary. That would drop the available funds to sign players down to 34.6m. That is probably a good reason to non tender him.

[weams]

You know, you are right. Non tenders probably do not happen until late November,early December. Matusz is still on the roster and is projected to get a 3.4m salary. That would drop the available funds to sign players down to 34.6m. That is probably a good reason to non tender him.

What if it is only 15 million that is allocated to 2016 payroll? I keep hearing speculation bases on those higher numbers. But true is, we have no idea. It is just as likely that there is 60 million available. And I don't think that is likely.

[wildcard]

What if it is only 15 million that is allocated to 2016 payroll? I keep hearing speculation bases on those higher numbers. But true is, we have no idea. It is just as likely that there is 60 million available. And I don't think that is likely.

Yes, we don't know, but what seems likely is the O's cut payroll slightly because of the off year in attendance and revenue. But only slightly because they want to have a competitive team in 2016. I am sticking with my 115m projection until I see some reason to change it.