An inconvenient truth

[wildcard]

2 hours ago, hoosiers said:

This isn't going to work.  You will probably have spend $75M just on Manny, Davis, Tillman and Trumbo. 

Your 7 guys for $4M are mostly bottom of the roster guys - utility, fifth OF, bullpen. 

With our payroll, you likely need 7-9 of your top 17 players (rotation, every day starters, dh and top 3 bp arms) to be pre-arb - that's a number I have been saying for years.  Otherwise, the payroll just gets too high.  Our run the past five years has been fueled by cheap salaries and big production from Tillman, Britton, Machado, Schoop, Gausman, Davis, Wieters and others with cheap contract to Hardy.

The O's are deferring about 14m per year in 2017.  That number may go up if/when the Tillman extention is signed this off season.

Manny and Britton are also likely to be traded next off season according to what Dan has said.  With other contracts that could end for Gallardo, Miley, Jimenez, and Hardy there could be up to 60m per year that is coming off the book.  That doesn't count Jones contract that I think gets extended.   Dan is going to have to use that 60m to keep the O's in contention next off season.  It  will be interesting to see how it unfolds.   But I look for Dan, Buck and O's ownership to stay in win now mode until they fall in the standings.  The other teams will tell them when they can no longer compete.  I don't think they stop trying until that happens.

This assumes that Dan and Buck are re-signed next off season.  I am hoping that happens.

[Dark Helmet]

10 hours ago, weams said:

That's just a thing you wish to say. Make the playoffs and you are a WS contender. Nothing else improves those odds. Ask Boston or Washington.

Or ask the Cubs. I'm sorry, but adding a guy like Sale improves your odds. That's not just something I wish to say.

[Redskins Rick]

17 hours ago, SilentJames said:

Holy crap dude. If you are still bent over Mussina - then you need to get a hobby. Markakis' desired contract would have been a bad move. Crap sake didn't they give Jones a long term contract once already? I think they have invested in him already. The only question is will he be a lifelong Oriole, and how often does that happen in today's game? 

And maybe I am optimistic - BECAUSE IT IS BASEBALL. IT IS A FLIPPING GAME. I have plenty enough to be cynical about in my life, baseball doesn't need to be one of them. 

Get over yourself. 

Nice post.

I think the Mussina belongs in the HOF thread has rekindled raw emotions for some posters.

Thankfully, that was a long time ago, and a different front office organization, and clearly, this is a better run team,

You are right, its a flipping game, and a matter of inches sometimes, and thats why they still play the game on the field, and not in the boardroom.

 

[hoosiers]

8 hours ago, wildcard said:

I accept everything you have said here.   The value today of the young players traded by DD is high.  No question.  But that has to be balanced by 5 years of winning more games than any other team.  That also does not happen without DD.   

I think at the time of the trades Dan was willing to give up long term gains for short term gains to achieve winning then.  He did re-strain himself to not trading his top pitchers in Bundy, Gausman, Tillman, Harvey and Wright.  To date three of those look like the right moves.  Wright is still developing, even if that is at an advanced prospect age.   Harvey may yet develop as Bundy is now.

He seems to be good at holding on to top relievers in Britton, O'Day. Brach, Givens and Hart.   Brach may be on the block now but until we see if he is traded and for whom, it hard to evaluate.

We don't know what is going to happen in the future.  One other things that Dan has achieved is to raise the payroll from 90m to 150m that looks now that it might go to 170m.  He is doing that while attendance is not keeping pace.  He apparent has convinced management that the MASN gains in revenue are worth the increased spending.  This is a major accomplishment and could help the team greatly going forward.

So if you want to focus on what DD has traded away, go ahead.  But also focus on who he has kept and what the team has been able to achieve under his guidance.   Then compare that to what other GMs have done trying to work with the Angelos.   I think those inside baseball recognize his achieve.  That is why he was Executive of the Year in 2014.  Now if only O's fans would wake up and understand what they have now under his leadership rather than waiting until he is gone and saying 'Oh, wow, look what we are missing.' 

I really am not one for the "DD has won, his methods are justified" point.  DD did win and another GM may have come in here and thrown the whole thing down the toilet, but if one believes in any player productivity metrics like WAR it seems highly likely we would have won a lot, maybe less but maybe more, and we would be a lot better, younger and cheaper entering 2017 under a large majority of potential GMs IMO.  If one wants to isolate these last five years, that is their prerogative, but that winning has come at the expense of the next five years and more. 

DD did sign Grant Balfour and he tried to trade Britton, but you can give him reliever kudos if that works for you.

The payroll is high thanks to the owner who some here posted was banking profits  approaching $75M-$80M just a few years ago (besides what Forbes was saying).  DD has had to ask for this payroll because his farm system cannot replace what he must buy on the free agent market.  If only our owner had increased our amateur talent budget in the three to five years leading up to this.  Or if our owner had put up $5M, we could have just cut Webb and Matusz and kept our high draft picks.  If one had posted in 2012 that we would need a $170M in 2017, folks here would have thought we were a shoe-in for the WS. 

[weams]

9 hours ago, wildcard said:

The O's are deferring about 14m per year in 2017.  That number may go up if/when the Tillman extention is signed this off season.

Manny and Britton are also likely to be traded next off season according to what Dan has said.  With other contracts that could end for Gallardo, Miley, Jimenez, and Hardy there could be up to 60m per year that is coming off the book.  That doesn't count Jones contract that I think gets extended.   Dan is going to have to use that 60m to keep the O's in contention next off season.  It  will be interesting to see how it unfolds.   But I look for Dan, Buck and O's ownership to stay in win now mode until they fall in the standings.  The other teams will tell them when they can no longer compete.  I don't think they stop trying until that happens.

This assumes that Dan and Buck are re-signed next off season.  I am hoping that happens.

No, I don't think so. No.

[weams]

12 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

I really am not one for the "DD has won, his methods are justified" point.  DD did win and another GM may have come in here and thrown the whole thing down the toilet, but if one believes in any player productivity metrics like WAR it seems highly likely we would have won a lot, maybe less but maybe more, and we would be a lot better, younger and cheaper entering 2017 under a large majority of potential GMs IMO.  If one wants to isolate these last five years, that is their prerogative, but that winning has come at the expense of the next five years and more. 

DD did sign Grant Balfour and he tried to trade Britton, but you can give him reliever kudos if that works for you.

The payroll is high thanks to the owner who some here posted was banking profits  approaching $75M-$80M just a few years ago (besides what Forbes was saying).  DD has had to ask for this payroll because his farm system cannot replace what he must buy on the free agent market.  If only our owner had increased our amateur talent budget in the three to five years leading up to this.  Or if our owner had put up $5M, we could have just cut Webb and Matusz and kept our high draft picks.  If one had posted in 2012 that we would need a $170M in 2017, folks here would have thought we were a shoe-in for the WS. 

I don't really care about the methodology. It's not like you are building a perpetual process. The goal has and will be to win more games than lost and to have to opportunity to participate in the postseason roulette.  Dan has traded off guys that would have been helpful to retain and allowed FA to leave that have continued to be good. He has. No one can dispute that. I think the moral of the story is not to trade off failed starters with good "stuff." And not to worry about starters that don't have the stuff. The league will catch up with them. 

[backwardsk]

12 hours ago, hoosiers said:

This isn't going to work.  You will probably have spend $75M just on Manny, Davis, Tillman and Trumbo. 

Your 7 guys for $4M are mostly bottom of the roster guys - utility, fifth OF, bullpen. 

With our payroll, you likely need 7-9 of your top 17 players (rotation, every day starters, dh and top 3 bp arms) to be pre-arb - that's a number I have been saying for years.  Otherwise, the payroll just gets too high.  Our run the past five years has been fueled by cheap salaries and big production from Tillman, Britton, Machado, Schoop, Gausman, Davis, Wieters and others with cheap contract to Hardy.

Why do we have to spend on Trumbo?

We won 89 games last year.  Were 7 to 9 of our best 17 players pre-arb?  

Manny, Hardy, Davis, Trumbo, Jones, Wieters, Kim, Tillman, Britton, Kim, O'Day, Alvarez were not.

[weams]

Just now, backwardsk said:

Why do we have to spend on Trumbo?

He believes that Trumbo will accept the Orioles offer and that the ongoing Tillman extension will be fruitful. 

[wildcard]

1 hour ago, hoosiers said:

 

The payroll is high thanks to the owner who some here posted was banking profits  approaching $75M-$80M just a few years ago (besides what Forbes was saying).  DD has had to ask for this payroll because his farm system cannot replace what he must buy on the free agent market.  If only our owner had increased our amateur talent budget in the three to five years leading up to this.  Or if our owner had put up $5M, we could have just cut Webb and Matusz and kept our high draft picks.  If one had posted in 2012 that we would need a $170M in 2017, folks here would have thought we were a shoe-in for the WS. 

So are you blaming Duquette for the owner not spending?

 

[Dark Helmet]

3 hours ago, weams said:

He believes that Trumbo will accept the Orioles offer and that the ongoing Tillman extension will be fruitful. 

Atleast bringing back Trumbo allows us to keep our 1st Rd pick. Unless the real objective is to just be a farm system for teams committed to winning and to collect draft picks.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Dark Helmet said:

Atleast bringing back Trumbo allows us to keep our 1st Rd pick. Unless the real objective is to just be a farm system for teams committed to winning and to collect draft picks.

But if you let Trumbo walk you get an additional first round pick.

[Dark Helmet]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But if you let Trumbo walk you get an additional first round pick.

I understand that. But we'll still have a 1st Rd pick, and I'd like to stay competitive. Signing Davis was probably a mistake, but it makes even less sense of they believe he can be a cornerstone player.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Dark Helmet said:

I understand that. But we'll still have a 1st Rd pick, and I'd like to stay competitive. Signing Davis was probably a mistake, but it makes even less sense of they believe he can be a cornerstone player.

I don't think Trumbo is the difference between being competitive or non-competitive.

[Dark Helmet]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think Trumbo is the difference between being competitive or non-competitive.

I respectfully disagree. 

[ArtVanDelay]

BTW, anyone see Miguel Gonzalez's final stat line for the season?

3.71 FIP, 2.7 fWAR (career high by far), 1.23 WHIP in 135 innings for the White Sox.  But we gave up our first round pick for the privelage to pay Gallardo for 2 years.

Could DD have possibly butchered that any more?