We get no respect from the National Media.

[crowmst3k!]

Our rotation looks to be mediocre to terrible. Hard to predict a lot of success with that.

And our offense built to be very power-heavy, but likely very streaky.

[Can_of_corn]

It's hard to imagine how the Orioles can go from 82 wins down to 64. The difference between Chen and Gallado is not 18 games. If anything the offense is better with Alvarez and Trumbo. I don't think the rotation could be any wors than last season. I actually think Tillman and Jiminez will be better. As long as Gallardo is at his career average he will not be much of a drop off.

I do agree with many of the writers other points.

I'm pretty sure it will be.

[24fps]

Fan bias. If Moose thinks they are a .500 team, and he is a fan, than the actual talent level of the team is under .500.

What fan wants to admit that their favorite team spent a bunch of money in the offseason and is still going to finish under .500?

Roughly half of us who post here?

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the team made this offseason, but 69-93 is silly. I can see 81-81 though and I wish I had a better feeling going into this season.

[DrungoHazewood]

It's hard to imagine how the Orioles can go from 82 wins down to 64.

Machado and Jones collide chasing a popup during a shift in a mid-April game, both miss 75-100 games. Pitching staff puts up a 4.75. That's probably 80% of the way there. There have to be almost infinite numbers of more complex ways to envision a collapse. Remember the 2013-14 Red Sox? The 1997-98 Orioles? The 1983-85 Orioles? Who remembers the 1967 Orioles? They finished 76-85 on the heels of their first World Championship.

64 wins is on the very low end of reasonable, in my opinion. But let's not pretend it couldn't happen to almost anyone.

[Can_of_corn]

Roughly half of us who post here?

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the team made this offseason, but 69-93 is silly. I can see 81-81 though and I wish I had a better feeling going into this season.

No way do half the posters think the team is going to finish under .500.

Wasn't there a poll before spring training started?

[DrungoHazewood]

Roughly half of us who post here?

I don't agree with a lot of the decisions the team made this offseason, but 69-93 is silly. I can see 81-81 though and I wish I had a better feeling going into this season.

I think many here fall into the "I'll root for them no matter what, but have my 'I told you so' card ready to throw out at the first sign of trouble" category.

69 wins does seem silly if that's your median projection with reasonable health.

[DrungoHazewood]

No way do half the posters think the team is going to finish under .500.

Wasn't there a poll before spring training started?

But the average record for the board, cumulatively, might be under .500 since webbrick and Herman have the team at 20-142.

[Frobby]

I don't think the rotation could be any worse than last season.

I'm pretty sure it will be.

I think how you see this question determines how you see this season. There's no reason to think the offense will be worse than last year -- it should be either slightly better or significantly better. The bullpen should be about the same, though I could imagine the situational results being a touch worse. But it really comes down to whether the rotation improves, stays the same or gets worse.

Personally, I think the rotation could go either direction, but the spring has not been particularly encouraging. I won't blame the pessimists for feeling pessimistic. I'm still not really worried that the rotation will be so bad that we win under 75 games as some of the pundits have predicted -- that would really require an epically bad rotation. But I could see a 75-80 win team if the rotation is worse than last year's. Or an 85-90 win team if it's better.

[Larry18]

But the average record for the board, cumulatively, might be under .500 since webbrick and Herman have the team at 20-142.

Winning 20 by forfeit seems rather high.

[Tony-OH]

I think the record is off base - 69-93 (.426), 5th place -, but most of what they wrote is pretty accurate from what I can tell. This rotation has the potential to be disaster and although the offense is going to hit a lot of homers, it has a lot of streak hitters so if there may be stretches of cold hitting. Combine that with a rotation that's probably going to struggle and that could means long stretches of struggles. I was saying this team is a 85 win team, but if I had to bet the house, I'd put the over under at 78 wins now. Now the orioles could be much better if guys like Wright and/or Wilson step up this year, Tillman and Gonzo rebounds, Gausman's elbow is just a spring thing and he takes a step forward, and Gallardo and Jimenez find a way to at least be average. But that's a lot of IFs.

[Roll Tide]

I think the record is off base - 69-93 (.426), 5th place -, but most of what they wrote is pretty accurate from what I can tell. This rotation has the potential to be disaster and although the offense is going to hit a lot of homers, it has a lot of streak hitters so if there may be stretches of cold hitting. Combine that with a rotation that's probably going to struggle and that could means long stretches of struggles. I was saying this team is a 85 win team, but if I had to bet the house, I'd put the over under at 78 wins now. Now the orioles could be much better if guys like Wright and/or Wilson step up this year, Tillman and Gonzo rebounds, Gausman's elbow is just a spring thing and he takes a step forward, and Gallardo and Jimenez find a way to at least be average. But that's a lot of IFs.

I agree Tony and think the Vegas line is 74

[byrdz]

Our rotation is shaping up to be historically bad. So I'm starting to believe the national media.

[OFFNY]

Machado and Jones collide chasing a popup during a shift in a mid-April game, both miss 75-100 games. Pitching staff puts up a 4.75. That's probably 80% of the way there. There have to be almost infinite numbers of more complex ways to envision a collapse. Remember the 2013-14 Red Sox? The 1997-98 Orioles? The 1983-85 Orioles? Who remembers the 1967 Orioles? They finished 76-85 on the heels of their first World Championship.

64 wins is on the very low end of reasonable, in my opinion. But let's not pretend it couldn't happen to almost anyone.

Good point overall, but the Orioles didn't collapse until 1986.

It was more of a gradual decline over the course of those 3 seasons between 1983 and 1985. Then the 1986 team wound up being a bonafide bad team, and then they continued to decline through the disastrous 1988 season.

1983: 98-64

1984: 85-77

1985: 83-78 (one rain-out)

1986: 73-89

1987: 67-95

1988: 54-107 (one rain-out)

[FlipTheBird]

I listen to XM LB every day and it does seem that most of their "pundits" go out of their way to mock the O's. I think it's a combination of industry wide dislike for PA and resentment and envy for DD success.

The O's have consistently defied advanced statistics in the DD era. This upsets those that swear by those very same statistics.

[21xxxv]

What have we done to garner respect? We have the same holes from last year, No OBP hitters, No Corner proven OF's, no leadoff hitters. Our most consistent pitcher is starting for the Marlins. Our most promising young arm is hurt. And our overpaid underperforming Catcher is hurt. When he's healthy he's a .258 hitter that may hit 20 bombs. When healthy.