The Orioles would build a better team if they sold

[osfan83]

It still isn't a fair play field and here's why. They can still sign 2-3 of the best players in the game during any given offseason. If three of their top 10 prospects become anything that resembles Schoop, Machado and Gausman we will likely be in trouble. But New York is not the team that I am worried about long term. Boston is the team for me.

Sure, it's not completely "fair" but better than it was in the 90's and 2000's.

[SteveA]

I am as big a fan as any and my argument is simple.

1.) Win now for one, maybe two seasons and then struggle to compete as Davis and Jones continue to age and we face losing guys like Wieters and Trumbo.

OR

2.) We sell off some parts for some serious prospects. Maybe we rebuild heavily or maybe we deal those prospects for a stud starting pitcher. I did not say trade Manny or Schoop even though it might eventually come to that as these guys are going to be highly expensive.

If someone would tell me that you will win a World Series, but you will be terrible for a decade I would take it. But if you change the if to a might, then what I am willing to give up decreases. You can easily make an argument that the Orioles trading for players to get better over the last few years has cost them a better run at a championship now. When the Orioles are ready to deal away guys because they need to, other teams may be ready to do the same and the Orioles could get pennies on the dollar.

You never HAVE to be terrible for a decade. Teams that do that (like the Orioles did) do it due to incompetence.

Even if you sign a 16 year old in the Dominican, he has pretty much graduated from your farm system in 8 or 9 years. So you COMPLETELY turn over your farm system in under 10 years, and you turn over 90% of it in 6 or 7 years.

So done correctly, no matter how much you "play for today" at the expense of the future, even if you trade every minor league asset to win this year, should have any effect more than 6 or 7 years down the road. Only your competence in drafting and development will affect more than 6 or 7 years down the road.

In other words, if there is a Dark Ages at the end of this stretch of winning, it doesn't have to be 10 years. If it's 10 years, or 14 again, that will be due to incompetence, not to some sort of inevitability derived from not punting away the season today.

[SteveA]

The Yankees have 27 of them so I disagree, but I think your overall mindset of once you make the playoffs anything can happen is something I agree with. This team hasn't pitched well as a rotation, they can't score when they are not hitting homeruns and they have a crap record on the road. I think we are one and done in the playoffs. I am a huge Orioles fan, but I am not blind and I have seen a lot of baseball.

I disagree.

I think some things help us in the playoffs:

-- our bullpen... playoff system, with off days for travel, means that the top 3 or 4 arms in your pen can pitch nearly every game, and our top 3 or 4 is as good as any in the game

-- not having to pitch #5 starters at all and less use of your #4 -- especially if Bundy is still able to start then. Losing our #5 is a plus for us. A team like Cleveland, with 5 very good starters (but no incredibly dominant ones) doesn't have as big an advantage over us as they do in the regular season

Some things hurt us:

-- our dependence on the home run will hurt vs good pitching

Then there'x the X-factor, our huge home/road split. If we can somehow get the best record in the AL and have home field in every playoff series, throughout the World Series, that would be a HUGE benefit to us, moreso than other teams. If we don't get home field advantage, yes it would hurt us.

Right now we are 1 game off having the best record in the AL. So that could wind up being a huge determinant in how far we can go in the playoffs.

The Yankees got over 20 of their 27 titles in an era where all they had to do was win one postseason series, not an 8 or 10 team tournament, so those are totally irrelevant to this discussion. Yes, they do have multiple titles since the tournament went to 8 teams in the early 90s. Mostly because they had the most dominating closer in the game. Right now, you can make a case that we have the most dominating closer in the AL and the Cubs have the most dominating closer in the NL.

If we make the post season, I like our chances as much as anyone's. Of coruse that still might mean we only have a 15% chance to win or something like that. But I don't think we would enter the playoffs (if we win the division) with any significantly smaller chance to win than anyone else in the tournament.

[SteveA]

I believe, on this date, that there is not much of a difference between the O's and Cubs odds of winning the WS. Maybe the Cubs have 10% chance and the O's have a 6% chance or in that neighborhood. But not enough of a difference to react any differently at the trade deadline. Both should have been looking for reasonable ways to improve this years team. (And reasonable does not mean giving up all our top prospects for a very marginal gain in talent)

Actually the Cubs' is higher because they have a much higher chance of winning their division. But once the playoffs start, if we win the division, I will agree with you 100%. There won't be more than a 3 or 4 % difference in their chance to win it all and ours.

[SteveA]

Right, so this year and next. That is the run and after that we are in trouble again IMO. I LOVE Orioles baseball, but I could see this scenario coming years ago and the trades we have made for half year rentals or to sign mediocre free agents hasn't helped.

So, let's assume we have a winning record and contend again next year, whether or not we miss the playoffs.

So what you are saying is that after 6 [hypothetical] consecutive years of .500+ baseball, we are likely to hit a dry spell? And this is such a concern to you that it matters more to you than actually trying to win this year?

Do you know how few teams actually have that many straight years where they are in contention? If the Yankees don't finish .500 this year, we will be the ONLY team in the AL that has done it 5 straight years, let alone 6. And the only teams in the NL are SL & Washington.

[Moondoggie]

Actually the Cubs' is higher because they have a much higher chance of winning their division. But once the playoffs start, if we win the division, I will agree with you 100%. There won't be more than a 3 or 4 % difference in their chance to win it all and ours.

Not only a much higher chance of winning the division, but a much higher chance of making the playoffs -- period. The Cubs would have to suffer a collapse of historic proportions to miss the playoffs. The Orioles are far from a lock. They're only 2 1/2 games ahead of Detroit and 4 1/2 ahead of Houston, so if the Orioles finish third in the division there's a good chance one of those clubs will pass them. Right now the Fangraphs/Baseball Prospectus playoff probability graph has the Cubs with a 99.9 percent chance of making the playoffs. The Orioles are at 63 percent. And if you don't make the playoffs, you ain't winning the World Series.

[backwardsk]

It's not that far-fetched to believe we could have the MVP and Cy Young winner in 2018.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dark Helmet]

So the 1st place Orioles should have just thrown away 2016 because of what the Yankees "Might" become 3 years down the road?

[OFFNY]

So the 1st-place Orioles should have just thrown away 2016 because of what the Yankees "Might" become 3 years down the road?

Correct.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the fans started booing the team for staying in the 2016 playoff hunt, which could potentially minimize their chances of holding off the Yankees in 2018 and beyond.

Franchises that don't plan ahead pay the price.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Duquette, Showalter and Angelos are going all in for one reason. They have no other opportunity. Duquette and Showalter are not sticking around for a rebuild. Angelos isn't getting any younger either. The Orioles should have been buyers years ago so they could make an earlier and longer deep run. We are at the end of the run and everyone knows that.

Everyone knew the run was over last season, I thought.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DrungoHazewood]

Some things hurt us:

-- our dependence on the home run will hurt vs good pitching

What's more likely:

1) Hitting a homer off a very good pitcher or

2) Stringing together multiple single-base events against a very good pitcher?

I don't think being a power-hitting team is a negative against good pitching.

[Bahama O's Fan]

I disagree.

I think some things help us in the playoffs:

-- our bullpen... playoff system, with off days for travel, means that the top 3 or 4 arms in your pen can pitch nearly every game, and our top 3 or 4 is as good as any in the game

-- not having to pitch #5 starters at all and less use of your #4 -- especially if Bundy is still able to start then. Losing our #5 is a plus for us. A team like Cleveland, with 5 very good starters (but no incredibly dominant ones) doesn't have as big an advantage over us as they do in the regular season

Some things hurt us:

-- our dependence on the home run will hurt vs good pitching

Then there'x the X-factor, our huge home/road split. If we can somehow get the best record in the AL and have home field in every playoff series, throughout the World Series, that would be a HUGE benefit to us, moreso than other teams. If we don't get home field advantage, yes it would hurt us.

Right now we are 1 game off having the best record in the AL. So that could wind up being a huge determinant in how far we can go in the playoffs.

The Yankees got over 20 of their 27 titles in an era where all they had to do was win one postseason series, not an 8 or 10 team tournament, so those are totally irrelevant to this discussion. Yes, they do have multiple titles since the tournament went to 8 teams in the early 90s. Mostly because they had the most dominating closer in the game. Right now, you can make a case that we have the most dominating closer in the AL and the Cubs have the most dominating closer in the NL.

If we make the post season, I like our chances as much as anyone's. Of coruse that still might mean we only have a 15% chance to win or something like that. But I don't think we would enter the playoffs (if we win the division) with any significantly smaller chance to win than anyone else in the tournament.

I agree with all of this. I also think we have many good bats, that if even a few are on a dry spell, the others will produce. I think July is an anomaly; I hope not. If Gausman can get his act together, we can start Tillman, Bundy, Gausman, Gallardo, Tillman, Bunday, Gausman in a seven game series. Maybe even get Tillman in three times, games 1, 4, 7.

[weams]

What's more likely:

1) Hitting a homer off a very good pitcher or

2) Stringing together multiple single-base events against a very good pitcher?

I don't think being a power-hitting team is a negative against good pitching.

The fact is hitting a home run is very hard for those slap hitters that can't really hit one. So for them, stringing a bunch together is all they can do. The home run hitter obviously can cut down his swing should he chose.

[Stotle]

All of this is obviously true and you clearly know it so I guess I don't understand your opening post. If you were Buck or DD or PGA and knew you were on borrowed time, you'd just say the heck with a first place team and trade for the minors and maybe the future? Come on, this isn't even a rational discussion if that is your premise. If you're saying you wish they would do that, but you completely understand why they didn't and won't, sure, whatever...

I still don't agree with even the last premise because of the Yankee factor (you have to take advantage of their few down years due to their resources and the fact that they seem to have finally gotten smarter about selling for prospects in down cycles) and the fact that the play-offs are a complete crapshoot. I don't think we are likely to be a WS team, but I'm certain we could get hot and win it all. I've seen it happen too many times recently.

Regarding your premise that the Sox and Jays are better than us, I could easily make a convincing argument that the Red Sox are more likely to regress than the Orioles. They are getting monster years out several players that weren't exactly supposed to be monsters and they have almost no under performers. The Jays scare me though. I admit that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Would trading Zach Britton have had any meaningful impact on Baltimore's playoff chances? And I'll bite on Boston -- who are the several players having surprising monster years?

[weams]

Would trading Zach Britton have had any meaningful impact on Baltimore's playoff chances? And I'll bite on Boston -- who are the several players having surprising monster years?

Obviously Ortiz and Hanley, with a bit of JBJ throwing in for good measure.