It's July 2- Internationale!

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Coker said:

Okay, so the Orioles did sign most of these guys. Of the 36 members on the roster (including the 2 on the restricted list), only 6 players had been signed by a team prior to the Orioles - Bautista, Constante, Cruz, Diaz,  Dominguez, Mena; all pitchers.

 

The majority of the team comes from the Orioles 2014-15 and 2015-16 classes.In the 2015-16 classes, the O's had 20 total signings. 2014-15 had 16. The best I can make out is 22 players on the roster are from the O's signing classes in those years. 

 

Probably low $ guys that signed well after the initial rush.

[hoosiers]

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/25933002//

Kind of amusing to look back and see how often fixing the farm and expanding the Os international presence are mentioned in DD's introductory presser - even a quote about DD's international experiences/contacts from PA.  Yet it seems we have taken a step back from where AM left us internationally after finding EdRod and Schoop and we find ourselves with a bottom five farm system!  DD has pretty much done the opposite of what he said he would do at the presser - shedding draft picks and prospects and under-investing in prospect acquisition - especially internationally.  Nice quote from DD on the free agent market being the "riskiest" yet that's where he has spent the most $ - more than the US draft, more than international draft.  I wonder if Ubaldo's contract by itself is more than the amount spent in the US draft and internationally on prospect acquisition during DD's entire tenure.

Even if DD had brought us a WS appearance or even a win, nothing he has done in his use of the assets at his disposal has hinted that he would try to make this sustainable. 

[24fps]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I don't think you can really frame the argument around one particular player.    We know the free agent market returns about 1 WAR for every $8 mm spent.    So the question is, what does it cost on average to produce 1 WAR from players signed internationally at age 16?     And what does it cost to produce 1 WAR from players acquired in other ways?

Probably a great deal if you factor in the cumulative failure rate of all 16 year-old prospects not named Vlad Guerrero, Jr.  

The linked Hardball Times article calculates the average WAR produced by MLB draft picks 21-30 as a little above 2 total over their first 6 years.  While it doesn't specifically address international 16 year-olds it does provide some perspective.  We're talking long shots here.   I completely agree with the proposition that the Orioles should agressively pursue every opportunity to improve and it bothers me when it appears that they don't but I would be very surprise if they haven't calculated the cost/benefit ratio since MacPhail's time.  

[weams]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

So if a guy comes up and pitches 8 IP of 7 ERA ball that's a lot better than not making the majors at all?

Yes, Yes it is! Because league average is not world average. Or even 16-year-old prospect average. 

[weams]

16 minutes ago, 24fps said:

Probably a great deal if you factor in the cumulative failure rate of all 16 year-old prospects not named Vlad Guerrero, Jr.  

The linked Hardball Times article calculates the average WAR produced by MLB draft picks 21-30 as a little above 2 total over their first 6 years.  While it doesn't specifically address international 16 year-olds it does provide some perspective.  We're talking long shots here.   I completely agree with the proposition that the Orioles should agressively pursue every opportunity to improve and it bothers me when it appears that they don't but I would be very surprise if they haven't calculated the cost/benefit ratio since MacPhail's time.  

If they are spending the money instead on a winning product over a five-year period, who am I to complain. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, weams said:

Yes, Yes it is! Because league average is not world average. Or even 16-year-old prospect average. 

And here we disagree.  As a fan of the team I would rather the kid fail altogether than have him come up and only to hurt the team's performance.

[weams]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

And here we disagree.  As a fan of the team I would rather the kid fail altogether than have him come up and only to hurt the team's performance.

I respect your opinions often. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

I respect your opinions often. 

It's a civil discourse.

[weams]

 

[TradeAngelos]

The yard sale is an overwhelming success this year! That jar is filled with free money!

[TradeAngelos]

48 minutes ago, 24fps said:

Probably a great deal if you factor in the cumulative failure rate of all 16 year-old prospects not named Vlad Guerrero, Jr.  

The linked Hardball Times article calculates the average WAR produced by MLB draft picks 21-30 as a little above 2 total over their first 6 years.  While it doesn't specifically address international 16 year-olds it does provide some perspective.  We're talking long shots here.   I completely agree with the proposition that the Orioles should agressively pursue every opportunity to improve and it bothers me when it appears that they don't but I would be very surprise if they haven't calculated the cost/benefit ratio since MacPhail's time.  

Do the other 29 teams use a different type of calculator? 

[hoosiers]

39 minutes ago, weams said:

If they are spending the money instead on a winning product over a five-year period, who am I to complain. 

The winning product was already in the organization when DD arrived.  Not so much $ spent in that first playoff appearance.  

Of course, back then, PA was pulling in near $75M in Orioles and MASN profits and spending peanuts internationally.  

[Luke-OH]

44 minutes ago, weams said:

 

This is the kind of guy I'd rather the O's acquire with these slots, hasn't hit yet, but is a plus defender at SS.  Was the Mets #11 prospect in 2016.

[24fps]

43 minutes ago, TradeAngelos said:

Do the other 29 teams use a different type of calculator? 

Perhaps.  Clearly each team values this market to different degrees and it looks like the Orioles least of all.  I think it's unlikely that the Orioles have neglected to examine the market from a business standpoint, but it would not surprise me if the lack of interest was also partly due to principles held by Peter Angelos.  I think it's most likely that they have concluded that there are better opportunities for value elsewhere given a limited budget.

[weams]

4 minutes ago, 24fps said:

Perhaps.  Clearly each team values this market to different degrees and it looks like the Orioles least of all.  I think it's unlikely that the Orioles have neglected to examine the market from a business standpoint, but it would not surprise me if the lack of interest was also partly due to principles held by Peter Angelos.  I think it's most likely that they have concluded that there are better opportunities for value elsewhere given a limited budget.

Despite the fact that some folks think the Orioles Re-MASN raked in enormous profits, The amount of payroll that has been expended is in line with a large market team, not a small one as is actually the case.The Ownership and management can be criticized rightly for any of these issues if the pot of gold actually exists. My razor says that they have spent what was there. Possibly in the wrong places. No one doubts that the Angleos family and Dan Duquette can be criticized for many reasons. Jon Shepherd remarked that despite Andy MacPhail, the OS were close to Sano. I purport they may not have been. Though they should have.