Dan says no extension talks with Schoop or Gausman, reporters don't bother to ask why

[El Gordo]

38 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Couldn't value exist in a reporter asking a question that they know won't be answered?

I doubt it They know Dan's situation, so asking it just makes him look bad. That doesn't help their relationship when they want other info. 

[24fps]

1 hour ago, TonySoprano said:

How would anyone expect Dan to answer a follow-up question of "why no extension talks yet?"  Moreover, how would you answer it?  I get the overall frustration but let's not create controversy; there's enough already to go around.

Not the point.  The point is the questions should be asked regardless of the expected answer.

[TradeAngelos]

No spinning that. Straight from the horses mouth. N-O-P-E. 

Of course Roch claims that they are spending SO MUCH time on "finding pitching" so this is on the backburner. Like it takes more than 15 minutes to pick up the phone and see where everyone is at. 

Pete has already told them it isn't happening, so don't bother. That is the real reason. You got your one MASSIVE contract that shells out a whole 17m a year. Get back to me next decade and I'll throw you a bone to give all the dummies who buy this garbage something to hang their hat on. There are plenty of them. 

 

[Ripken]

They don't ask because Dan can't answer anyway.  Dan can't answer because there is no plan.  It's just sad.

[Going Underground]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

You are confusing "thinly veiled Orioles public relations" with "reporters".

Own a piece of the Roch.Orioles do.Where never was heard a discouraging word.

[Es4M11]

4 hours ago, interloper said:

Exactly. If Schoop repeats last year, he's basically unaffordable. 

"We're the Orioles. We claim to be small market, but spend $160 million on garbage. We can't afford our young stars, but we don't employ any smart tactics typically found in other small market teams. We give Davis $160, but we won't spend to address our actual weaknesses. We impose strict rules upon ourselves that eliminate avenues of talent acquisition. We don't extend young players for reasons completely unknown to anyone. We have no idea who is running the team next year. We ask for too much in trades, but readily trade young pitching for trash. WE MAKE NO SENSE"

Perfectly sums up how I feel about this organization right now. Done with PAs nonsense.

[Can_of_corn]

25 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

Own a piece of the Roch.Orioles do.Where never was heard a discouraging word.

He didn't want to move.

[oriolediehard]

4 hours ago, theobird said:

If this isn't the worst run team in MLB I would like to know who tops this crew. Any guess?

The Mets

[theocean]

I know Brady has been beating the drum that the Front Office needs to be more proactive about extending young players before they get too far along in arbitration. Hopefully, that's the case.

But, the O's just avoided arbitration with Schoop and Gausman. Why would they have started discussing an extension just days after they just finished trying to negotiate for one year?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, theocean said:

I know Brady has been beating the drum that the Front Office needs to be more proactive about extending young players before they get too far along in arbitration. Hopefully, that's the case.

But, the O's just avoided arbitration with Schoop and Gausman. Why would they have started discussing an extension just days after they just finished trying to negotiate for one year?

They could have been discussing both concurrently.

[theocean]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They could have been discussing both concurrently.

If they can't agree on an amount for one year - how are they also going to talk about an amount for five to six years at the same time? It's like asking a girl on a second date and also asking her to get married at the same time. Let's be realistic.

[Frobby]

Just now, theocean said:

If they can't agree on an amount for one year - how are they also going to talk about an amount for five to six years at the same time? It's like asking a girl on a second date and also asking her to get married at the same time. Let's be realistic.

I think teams probably talk both arb numbers and multi-year deals all the time.  We probably did that with Markakis, who signed a long term deal with us on 1/22/09.   Danny Duffy signed on 1/16/17 last year.   A lot of long term deals are signed at arb time.   

[theocean]

Just now, Frobby said:

I think teams probably talk both arb numbers and multi-year deals all the time.  We probably did that with Markakis, who signed a long term deal with us on 1/22/09.   Danny Duffy signed on 1/16/17 last year.   A lot of long term deals are signed at arb time.   

I agree with you - but not when the arbitration trial is in a couple days and you're just trying to find middle ground on a one year deal to avoid the trial.

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, theocean said:

I agree with you - but not when the arbitration trial is in a couple days and you're just trying to find middle ground on a one year deal to avoid the trial.

OK, then they could have been having the talks last week. 

[theocean]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

OK, then they could have been having the talks last week. 

It takes two to tango. By your logic, the Red Sox are terribly run because they should have been talking to Mookie Betts about an extension before his trial. The Astros are poorly run because they signed George Springer to a two year deal and didn't push for a long term extension. Or, the Blue Jays are terribly run because they agreed to a record arbitration number for Donaldson but didn't discuss an extension for their MVP-caliber player: 

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/josh-donaldson-says-blue-jays-yet-make-extension-offer/

At a certain point, as fans, we have to be realistic.