MW QO Acceptance: For or Against the QO?

[mdbdotcom]

Sounds like there may be a group of minds involved in these franchise impacting decisions. A brain trust as it were. Not necessarily just ownership.

The fact that Buck very much wanted Wieters to return might have been a factor. It's not like there was a clear consensus within the organization.

[weams]

The fact that Buck very much wanted Wieters to return might have been a factor. It's not like there was a clear consensus within the organization.

Buck is a very powerful and influential man in our organization.

[Larry18]

Agreed. I was fairly vocal as to the fact that MW shouldn't be considered a lock to turn down the QO, and I still said it made since to extend it.

I think it's hard to imagine a player with Matt's bona fides accepting the QO. Three All Stars, two gold gloves premier player available heading into his age thirty season. And oh yeah he's a Boras client.

[weams]

I think it's hard to imagine a player with Matt's bona fides accepting the QO. Three All Stars, two gold gloves premier player available heading into his age thirty season. And oh yeah he's a Boras client.

I was startled.

[24fps]

Disagree. In every single piece that I read on the subject at the time, the only question being floated was "Why are the Orioles even considering not offering the QO to MW?" It was universally being called a no-brainer decision. That's the way it was. There were a few -- a very few -- posters on this board that called for not making the QO, and that's it. To pretend that there was an outcry in the media and the public for DD to not make the QO is just plain malarkey.

I don't think you understood my post because I don't know what to make of your response. No one, certainly not me, was suggesting that there was any outcry from the media or elsewhere. I have never made any point where the media has any relevance on how decisions should be made in this case.

When you are putting $15.8 million at risk of being misapplied, I would argue that right there is a clear example of a situation where a brain should definitely be involved, and a fairly well-functioning one at that.

[sportsfan8703]

There's been stories before of Boras trying to get package deals for his guys. Why not just try and work out a 4 year deal with MW and a 6 year deal for Davis? I know it's not ideal but maybe that's away we solve the 15.8 salary number and get to keep Davis. Just an idea.

[DrungoHazewood]

Rather than make a new thread, this has relevance here: On Bill James' site there's an article (I would link but I'm having strange browser issues) about teams that have have had great/awful records of having sustained excellence at specific positions. I'm sure most of this is just random, but it's fun. The first bit was on catchers, and the Yankees have had five HOF or near HOF catchers in Berra, Dickey, Posada, Munson, Howard, and they didn't even bring up Wally Schang or Butch Wynegar or Mike Stanley.

On the other hand, the Orioles/Browns (I hate including the Browns but it's kind of interesting here) have never had a catcher on the level of Elston Howard, much less Berra or Dickey. Matt Wieters is arguably the 4th-best catcher in O's/Browns history and is IMO a better catcher than anyone the Browns had in their 52-year history. Hank Severid is probably the Browns' best catcher and he was in no way as good as Rick Dempsey or Chris Hoiles. If Wieters had a strong comeback year worth 4-5 wins he would be in the conversation for best catcher in franchise history despite less than 900 games played.

[24fps]

There's been stories before of Boras trying to get package deals for his guys. Why not just try and work out a 4 year deal with MW and a 6 year deal for Davis? I know it's not ideal but maybe that's away we solve the 15.8 salary number and get to keep Davis. Just an idea.

Would you like to be the player who was discounted in a package deal? Me? I would be on the phone to my lawyer in about 3 seconds if I thought that was how my career was being handled by the guy I was paying good money to to look after my best interests. I believe that any story about any agent packaging players together to get a deal done should be greeted with a great deal of skepticism.

[Aristotelian]

Disagree. In every single piece that I read on the subject at the time, the only question being floated was "Why are the Orioles even considering not offering the QO to MW?" It was universally being called a no-brainer decision. That's the way it was. There were a few -- a very few -- posters on this board that called for not making the QO, and that's it. To pretend that there was an outcry in the media and the public for DD to not make the QO is just plain malarkey.

I remember a few media pieces toward the end of the season that did raise the question whether Wieters might reject the QO. The conventional wisdom was that he was a potential borderline case but the Orioles were "leaning" toward extending the QO. I think almost everyone expected the O's to make the QO and Wieters to accept it, but it was not a slam-dunk-no-brainer.

[Larry18]

I remember a few media pieces toward the end of the season that did raise the question whether Wieters might reject the QO. The conventional wisdom was that he was a potential borderline case but the Orioles were "leaning" toward extending the QO. I think almost everyone expected the O's to make the QO and Wieters to accept it, but it was not a slam-dunk-no-brainer.

Could you link some of these pieces? Or at least cite which media members thought Wieters would accept, because that isn't my memory at all.

[Aristotelian]

Could you link some of these pieces? Or at least cite which media members thought Wieters would accept, because that isn't my memory at all.

I don't think anyone went on record predicting he "would" accept but there were plenty who acknowledged the risk. Not a slam dunk.

Encina:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bal-qualifying-offer-pricetag-is-set-will-orioles-make-offers-to-davis-chen-and-wieters-20151009-story.html

That’s not so certain anymore. Wieters’ return from Tommy John elbow reconstruction was slowed. He didn’t return to the Orioles lineup until June and he rarely played behind the plate on back-to-back days.

Wieters could still get a multiyear deal this offseason, but also could benefit from playing an entire season healthy and then testing the free-agent market again this time next year.

Roch:

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2015/11/orioles-make-qualifying-offers-to-davis-wieters-and-chen.html

Wieters' case has been the most intriguing. Not everyone in the warehouse was in agreement on making the qualifying offer due to the risk of committing nearly $16 million to one player. However, as I've written, the Orioles also don't want to risk losing him and getting nothing in return, which happened last winter when Nick Markakis signed a four-year deal with the Braves. The vote eventually shifted in favor of making the offer to Wieters as a win-win proposition. Keep him for one more season or receive the draft pick.

[Larry18]

I know I didn't think it was a slam dunk but I thought the chance was remote. The Sun article is incorrect in stating that this is the 4th year of the QO system. In 2012 they used the old A/B/C system with some modifications.

[Larry18]

Thanks for looking those up.

[TonySoprano]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Scott Boras: "There’s no question the qualifying offer system impaired Matt Wieters." <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Orioles?src=hash">#Orioles</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/OriolesTalk?src=hash">#OriolesTalk</a></p>— Rich Dubroff (@RichDubroffCSN) <a href="

">December 9, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Frobby]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Scott Boras: "There’s no question the qualifying offer system impaired Matt Wieters." <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Orioles?src=hash">#Orioles</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/OriolesTalk?src=hash">#OriolesTalk</a></p>— Rich Dubroff (@RichDubroffCSN) <a href="

">December 9, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Poor guy. He'll have to get by on that $15.8 mm this year.