Former Orioles Executive Kevin Malone: Orioles Should 'Go For It,' Keep Top Players

[Roll Tide]

7 hours ago, Lucky_13 said:

If it happens I do the following 

See what it takes to get Ivan Nova, if not Scott Feldman 

Trade for R.A. Dickey just for fun 

See if I can get Jarred Dyson so I can have an actual OF in LF 

I buckle my seat belt, hope the additions stabilize the rotation, hope the bullpen returns the form, cross my fingers, and hope to hear Joe Buck tell me the Orioles just won the pennant in October. 

 

 

I hèar you .but are you benching Mancini? Davis and Trumbull are playing so you'd be benching Trey.

The Os need pitching!

[Il BuonO]

On 7/12/2017 at 3:27 PM, Tony-OH said:

 No offense to Kevin,  but it's sounds like there is a reason he's been out of baseball so long. Seems to contradict himself by saying the team should retool and go for it. Retool with what? He doesn't address the very real starting pitching problem by extending Machado and Britton, nor does it address the lack of shortstop or infield prospects in the system to retool. 

Eh....this, x1000.

[Ruzious]

18 hours ago, Frobby said:

It may be a "better" predicter, but is it a "good" one?   The Yankees were outscored in 2013, 2014 and 2016, and yet had a winning record in each of those seasons, and the following ones.

I keep it pretty simple.    The team has a poor run differential because the pitching has been absolutely terrible.    If events occur that convince me the pitching will stop being terrible, then I won't find run differential to be that predictive.    

Those facts you gave don't tell me much.  You gotta tell me how much they were outscored to have much meaning.  If they were outscored by 1 or 2 runs and had 1 or 2 more wins than losses, then your info means virtually nothing.  The O's situation is - they're second to last in the entire AL in run differential.  Were the Yankees in a similar situation in any of those seasons?

At this point in the season, we should understand we are what our numbers show we are.  I think it's delusional to think we aren't.  When you're running a team, you have to make the effort to project where you're headed - not just wait till you've already lost the division.  Look at what it would take to earn a playoff spot?  It's obvious that the odds are completely against the O's.    

   

[Ruzious]

And the objective is to get into the postseason - not just to get a winning record.  

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

And the objective is to get into the postseason - not just to get a winning record.  

There may not be much of a gap between the threshold for making the playoffs and having a winning record.    Right now, it appears 85 wins may be enough.    

[Camden_yardbird]

13 minutes ago, Frobby said:

There may not be much of a gap between the threshold for making the playoffs and having a winning record.    Right now, it appears 85 wins may be enough.    

At the present paces, but you ha e to think the contenders make moves to better the team and perform to higher win ratios.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Camden_yardbird said:

At the present paces, but you ha e to think the contenders make moves to better the team and perform to higher win ratios.

I just did a quick check of the previous 3 seasons.    As of the trade deadline, in 2014 BP projected the cutoff at 87 wins; it turned out to be 88.    In 2015, BP projected 86, which turned out to be correct.    In 2016, they projected 87; it turned out to be 89.     Right now they have the cutoff at 83.5.    So, even with some moves, the cutoff is likely to be pretty low.

[Camden_yardbird]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I just did a quick check of the previous 3 seasons.    As of the trade deadline, in 2014 BP projected the cutoff at 87 wins; it turned out to be 88.    In 2015, BP projected 86, which turned out to be correct.    In 2016, they projected 87; it turned out to be 89.     Right now they have the cutoff at 83.5.    So, even with some moves, the cutoff is likely to be pretty low.

I figured you would know where to get that information.  I also knew it was something around to about a 2 game bump from the projection.

To me a think the most important thing from the Orioles perspective is after the next 7 to 10 games, how many teams are ahead of them in the standings.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, Camden_yardbird said:

I figured you would know where to get that information.  I also knew it was something around to about a 2 game bump from the projection.

To me a think the most important thing from the Orioles perspective is after the next 7 to 10 games, how many teams are ahead of them in the standings.

Yes, I think the number of teams ahead of them is very relevant.   It's one thing to leapfrog 1-2 teams, and something else to leapfrog 5-6 (which is where they are now).