The Reality about the Showalter-Duquette Era

[HillbillyBird]

I didn't start that early...around '69 for me. :-). Agreed.

[Uli2001]

18 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

I'd say we have been "good-not-great". That is a step above mediocre. 2015 was a mediocre year but we have been mostly better than that.

I can live with that. But I would like to see them win another title in my lifetime...

[Uli2001]

1 hour ago, ChuckWilliams said:

In using those words, you would have described the "Why Yes?" era of 2012-2016 very well.

I see what you did there. 

[MDtransplant757]

4 minutes ago, Uli2001 said:

I can live with that. But I would like to see them win another title in my lifetime...

I want to see them win A title in my lifetime

[Uli2001]

19 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

18 hours ago, Frobby said:

Yeah, he's using a pretty liberal definition of that term.     But whatever.    Most teams wish they'd been as mediocre as the Orioles the last five years.   

I see I may have started a new internet meme. "Are the Orioles Mediocre?" Move over, "Is Joe Flacco Elite?"

Look, it is how I see it. I would go for "good-but-not-great" that another poster proposed, if that suits you better.

What is really the difference between "mediocre" and "good-but-not-great" anyway? Neither is what you want your team to be, which is great.

 

 

[Frobby]

47 minutes ago, Uli2001 said:

I see I may have started a new internet meme. "Are the Orioles Mediocre?" Move over, "Is Joe Flacco Elite?"

Look, it is how I see it. I would go for "good-but-not-great" that another poster proposed, if that suits you better.

What is really the difference between "mediocre" and "good-but-not-great" anyway? Neither is what you want your team to be, which is great.

 

 

I'm fine with calling this era good not great.    That's better than mediocre, and I don't consider them equivalent just because in either case we didn't reach the ultimate goal.  I guess I'm at the point in life where I don't see the world in black and white, but as a spectrum running through all the greys.    An 85-win season where you miss the playoffs is better than a 77-win season where you miss the playoffs.    An 89-win season where you make the 2nd wildcard is better than an 85-win season where you don't.     A 93-win season where you win the wild card game is better than an 89-win season where you lose the wild card game.    A 96-win season where you win a division title and an ALDS series is better than a 93-win season where you are a wild card and lose the ALDS.     I've found the last five seasons relatively enjoyable.    As enjoyable as 1966-71 or 1979-83?     No.     But in my opinion, the "enjoyment gap" between those eras and this one is smaller than the gap between this era and the 14-year era that preceded it.

 

[Uli2001]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I'm fine with calling this era good not great.    That's better than mediocre, and I don't consider them equivalent just because in either case we didn't reach the ultimate goal.  I guess I'm at the point in life where I don't see the world in black and white, but as a spectrum running through all the greys.    An 85-win season where you miss the playoffs is better than a 77-win season where you miss the playoffs.    An 89-win season where you make the 2nd wildcard is better than an 85-win season where you don't.     A 93-win season where you win the wild card game is better than an 89-win season where you lose the wild card game.    A 96-win season where you win a division title and an ALDS series is better than a 93-win season where you are a wild card and lose the ALDS.     I've found the last five seasons relatively enjoyable.    As enjoyable as 1966-71 or 1979-83?     No.     But in my opinion, the "enjoyment gap" between those eras and this one is smaller than the gap between this era and the 14-year era that preceded it.

 

Fair enough.

[bobmc]

3 hours ago, MDtransplant757 said:

I want to see them win A title in my lifetime

It's not on my bucket list of ten or so years but "good not great" works for me since I did see those "66 - 71" teams perform and set standards of excellence.  I also had the '54 Giants in my youth so all in all I am good but I see where y'all are coming from!  Those long-suffering Cubbie fans got theirs and those poor, poor downtrodden woebegone Sawx fans got theirs over and over so (to coin a phrase) , "Why not?" ;-)

 

Well said Frobby!

[25 Nuggets]

On 6/17/2017 at 1:13 PM, allquixotic said:

I think if they continue to lose 80-90% of their games played over the next two to three weeks, fans would be 100% justified in angrily demanding the termination of Buck and/or DD. I'm not saying I personally would want that -- I don't, really, because I know it wouldn't make things any better, especially this season.

But if anyone claimed they wanted that, I wouldn't shout them down or anything -- it would be completely understandable. And if the O's actually did fire one or both of them as a result, so be it. Somebody has to take the blame for these bums, and if it's going to be the leadership, that's unfortunate -- especially if it's Buck. But you know the old saying, "the Buck stops here"? Ultimately the leaders are responsible for their team members' success. And at some point you have to recognize that and go, "OK, it's time to get a new leader in here". You can't just tear up the contracts of every player on the team. And the vast majority of them are such poor baseball players that nobody would take them off our hands if we gave them away for free.

I heard someone on the radio want Joe Maddon fired after a 33-34 start by the Cubs.

I think this line of thinking is irrational.

[25 Nuggets]

On 6/17/2017 at 2:29 PM, Frobby said:

 

 

 

Believe it or not, the no. 1 team is....the Oakland A's, with 434 Pythagorean wins.    Here's a full list: 

OAK 434

TOR 429

BAL 428

BOS 425

DET 424

LAA 424

TBR 419

NYY 418

TEX 415

KCR 412

CLE 412

SEA 401

CWS 371

HOU 363

MIN 353

I'd also point out that the Orioles accomplished their third-best Pythagorean record while playing in the toughest division in baseball -- every AL East team had a Pythagorean record of .516 or better.     

 

Good stuff.

Look, right now there is one distinct, glaring problem and that is how the team is playing on the road.  I said they needed some home games, they got a home series and guess what they took 2 of 3.  But they still need to figure out their road woes.

[esmd]

This thread is just revisionist b****ing and moaning.

2012, they were damned good.  2013 they were good, just not good enough.  2014 they were outstanding and came 8 wins short of winning it all.  2015, yes, mediocre.  2016, damned good team.  Maybe not quite as good as 2012, but close.  2017, mediocre.

To discount 2012 and 2016 because you're disappointed about the current state of the team just isn't fair, IMO.

[glenn__davis]

In 2012 they were pretty lucky for most of the year, BUT, by the end of the year they were very good.

To me, what 2012 really drove home was the unpredictability of baseball.  I remember posters on this board saying prior to that season the Orioles were a minimum of 5 years away from competing.  Instead, they spent each of those 5 years (with the possible exception of 2015) contending deep into the season.  Prior to 2012 Buster Olney said that the BEST CASE scenario was for the Orioles to win 69 games.

In baseball, youneverknow.  The O's look bad now.  But Gausman and Tillman could turn it around, Manny could start hitting, and the Orioles could win 10 of their next 12.  Do I think that will happen, or that any decisions should be made based on that possibility?  Not really.  But I'll just never get why so many fans are in a rush to throw in the towel in this sport especially.

[FlipTheBird]

18 hours ago, MDtransplant757 said:

I want to see them win A title in my lifetime

You're what, 20? Not even? Be patient.

[FlipTheBird]

On 6/17/2017 at 2:40 PM, Uli2001 said:

I was fully aware of that when I wrote the OP. I did say they were consistent, consistently mediocre (plus one really good season). That will give you the best record over 5 years. But do you get a trophy for that? Meanwhile, low-budget KC made the WS twice over that span, and won it once. 

And a lot of big budget teams didn't win any WS's, or even make it. Ask Dodger fans how it that feels.

Using WS titles as the only way to be better than mediocre does a disservice to a number of very good teams - and not just the Orioles.

 

[El Gordo]

Mediocre?