Who's most to blame for this mess?

[Tbone83]

22 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What’s always struck me is that the Orioles acted like a team that was trying to stay within very modest budget growth that offseason, and thus didn’t keep together the team that won the AL East.    At the time, it seemed disappointing but perhaps dictated by economic reality.   I was okay with it based on that understanding.

But then, the very next year, they spent like drunken sailors on Chris Davis and gave a very generous contract to O’Day nearly equal to what Miller got.    It seemed like a complete turnaround in philosophy, and frankly, a stupid way to spend scarce resources, assuming they were scarce in the first place.   (Full disclosure - I was OK with the O’Day signing, opposed to the Davis signing.)   If they had that kind of money to spend, I would much rather have kept Cruz and Markakis.

I’ve often wondered why the spending philosophy changed so drastically in 2015.

 

Good post, I have often wondered the same. The thriftiness after the 2014 season was totally contradicted by the spending not long after. Sadly, all that money was given to the wrong players. Definitely a head scratcher. 

[tntoriole]

32 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Cruz, Miller and Markakis all left before the first reports of Toronto’s dalliance with Duquette.    Those decisions can be second guessed, but I don’t believe they had anything to do with Toronto.    They had to do with Dan’s reluctance to sign Cruz through age 37 and Nick through age 34, and reluctance to spend big money on the bullpen when he already had a very good bullpen without Miller.   By the way, it’s unlikely Miller would have re-signed with us unless we’d offered a lot more than the Yankees paid him, IMO.   He turned down an extra $1 mm/yr from Houston, where he would have paid no state income tax, to go to NY.

What’s always struck me is that the Orioles acted like a team that was trying to stay within very modest budget growth that offseason, and thus didn’t keep together the team that won the AL East.    At the time, it seemed disappointing but perhaps dictated by economic reality.   I was okay with it based on that understanding.

But then, the very next year, they spent like drunken sailors on Chris Davis and gave a very generous contract to O’Day nearly equal to what Miller got.    It seemed like a complete turnaround in philosophy, and frankly, a stupid way to spend scarce resources, assuming they were scarce in the first place.   (Full disclosure - I was OK with the O’Day signing, opposed to the Davis signing.)   If they had that kind of money to spend, I would much rather have kept Cruz and Markakis.

I’ve often wondered why the spending philosophy changed so drastically in 2015.

 

I agree that there are two parts to the winter of 2014. The first part are the decisions Dan made not to resign Markakis, Cruz and Miller.  I put these decsions almost completely on Dan and I will go even farther by saying that I suspect he had to really argue against extending that fourth year to Nick because I think all things being equal, Angelos would likely have extended him.

These decisions were close calls at the time.  I was on the side of resigning all 3at the time, even with the 4 years, age, health..but I realize it could have been bad too.  But, here’s the thing.  This is the only metric GMs get judged on...ALL decisions are close...this trade or that one, sign this guy or that one.  So the fact that Dan made defensible decisions is, to me, COMPLETELY irrelevant.  All three of those decisions turned out wrong.  Dead wrong.  And Dan subsequently made a number of really bad choices that also turned out wrong, dead wrong and we are now the worst team in baseball.  By any metric of any owner, even the most enlightened, supportive owner would fire Dan Duquette based on this outcome.  Outcomes are what matter.  

The second part of what happened that offseason is much murkier and involves the behind the scenes, interpersonal dynamics between a strong minded, egotistical, micromanaging billionaire who values personal loyalty above all else and his chief of staff...oops, I mean GM..lol, who suddenly is in the midst of publically seeking another gig with a hated division rival.  

So what happens?  In my view, it was not so much that Dan was distracted from his day job, although that certainly did happen and was part of it.  No, I see mainly that Dan lost every shred of any influence or trust he may have had with the old man at that point.  And Angelos, rather than just firing him..which is what I would have done, decided again that he would just keep him around since he was paying him anyway.  

For whatever reasons, the decisions Dan made until that winter were generally right on and key, but beginning right then, his decisions, or the decisions made by some other collective Brady, Buck, Angelos hydra...have been disastrous. 

So I blame Dan not only for the decisions that could legitimately be said to be clearly his that had bad outcomes but I also blame him for the decision to get involved in what turned out to be a debacle with Toronto.  Yes, he wanted the job, but he had to know that Angelos was not just going to say, Oh God bless you, Dan, go in peace and with my best wishes.   No, Dan had to know Angelos would go ballistic as soon as he found out and Dan knew he was essentially throwing his relationship with Potter out the window.   Which is what happened...to all of our detriment. 

[atomic]

57 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Cruz, Miller and Markakis all left before the first reports of Toronto’s dalliance with Duquette.    Those decisions can be second guessed, but I don’t believe they had anything to do with Toronto.    They had to do with Dan’s reluctance to sign Cruz through age 37 and Nick through age 34, and reluctance to spend big money on the bullpen when he already had a very good bullpen without Miller.   By the way, it’s unlikely Miller would have re-signed with us unless we’d offered a lot more than the Yankees paid him, IMO.   He turned down an extra $1 mm/yr from Houston, where he would have paid no state income tax, to go to NY.

What’s always struck me is that the Orioles acted like a team that was trying to stay within very modest budget growth that offseason, and thus didn’t keep together the team that won the AL East.    At the time, it seemed disappointing but perhaps dictated by economic reality.   I was okay with it based on that understanding.

But then, the very next year, they spent like drunken sailors on Chris Davis and gave a very generous contract to O’Day nearly equal to what Miller got.    It seemed like a complete turnaround in philosophy, and frankly, a stupid way to spend scarce resources, assuming they were scarce in the first place.   (Full disclosure - I was OK with the O’Day signing, opposed to the Davis signing.)   If they had that kind of money to spend, I would much rather have kept Cruz and Markakis.

I’ve often wondered why the spending philosophy changed so drastically in 2015.

 

I wouldn't blame Markakis on DD.. Seems like team had issues with his physical. 

[Frobby]

I guess the way I see it, I agree that Duquette’s dalliance with Toronto causes much of the subsequent dysfunction in the organization, but I don’t “blame” him for listening to an offer to take a job with more responsibility and for more money.    I do think he bears some of the responsibility for how that situation dragged out for 4-5 weeks after Angelos had made clear that his answer was “no.”    Duquette could have made it clear that he had accepted the owner’s decision, but instead he kind of played this passive-aggressive game where he never publicly complained but seemed to leak to the press that the issue wasn’t over.     If he hadn’t done that, he might not have lost so much influence in the organization.    

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, atomic said:

I wouldn't blame Markakis on DD.. Seems like team had issues with his physical. 

I’m not “blaming” him.    It was a reasonable decision for a team on a tight budget.    I do find it a bit ironic that Nick ranks 5th in games played in MLB from 2015 to now.   If anyone was going to play a full season after having neck surgery in the winter, it was Nick.    You really have to admire his durability.  

[Uli2001]

Repeated bad signings and nonsignings by the front office and bad game management by Showalter (Toronto WC game was only one of many games lost by him) destroyed the locker room. That's what happens when the soldier does not trust or respect the commander. 

[Uli2001]

16 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m not “blaming” him.    It was a reasonable decision for a team on a tight budget.    I do find it a bit ironic that Nick ranks 5th in games played in MLB from 2015 to now.   If anyone was going to play a full season after having neck surgery in the winter, it was Nick.    You really have to admire his durability.  

I would like to have had Nick because he was a great guy and an Oriole, but his play had been declining for some time. Let's not have collective amnesia. I can live with the decision to let him go. Cruz and Miller are a different story. 

[Frobby]

14 minutes ago, Uli2001 said:

I would like to have had Nick because he was a great guy and an Oriole, but his play had been declining for some time. Let's not have collective amnesia. I can live with the decision to let him go. Cruz and Miller are a different story. 

I don’t have amnesia.   I had some spirited debates with Hoosiers and Drungo over how productive Nick would be over the four years.   I recall I expected 6-8 WAR, they expected less.   Right now he’s at 6.1 rWAR, 4.9 fWAR, with a disproportionate amount of that value coming in the first 6 weeks of this season.    Need to see if I can dredge up that debate.    But in any event I was fine (intellectually, not emotionally) with letting Nick go.

[eddie83]

1 hour ago, tntoriole said:

I agree that there are two parts to the winter of 2014. The first part are the decisions Dan made not to resign Markakis, Cruz and Miller.  I put these decsions almost completely on Dan and I will go even farther by saying that I suspect he had to really argue against extending that fourth year to Nick because I think all things being equal, Angelos would likely have extended him.

These decisions were close calls at the time.  I was on the side of resigning all 3at the time, even with the 4 years, age, health..but I realize it could have been bad too.  But, here’s the thing.  This is the only metric GMs get judged on...ALL decisions are close...this trade or that one, sign this guy or that one.  So the fact that Dan made defensible decisions is, to me, COMPLETELY irrelevant.  All three of those decisions turned out wrong.  Dead wrong.  And Dan subsequently made a number of really bad choices that also turned out wrong, dead wrong and we are now the worst team in baseball.  By any metric of any owner, even the most enlightened, supportive owner would fire Dan Duquette based on this outcome.  Outcomes are what matter.  

The second part of what happened that offseason is much murkier and involves the behind the scenes, interpersonal dynamics between a strong minded, egotistical, micromanaging billionaire who values personal loyalty above all else and his chief of staff...oops, I mean GM..lol, who suddenly is in the midst of publically seeking another gig with a hated division rival.  

So what happens?  In my view, it was not so much that Dan was distracted from his day job, although that certainly did happen and was part of it.  No, I see mainly that Dan lost every shred of any influence or trust he may have had with the old man at that point.  And Angelos, rather than just firing him..which is what I would have done, decided again that he would just keep him around since he was paying him anyway.  

For whatever reasons, the decisions Dan made until that winter were generally right on and key, but beginning right then, his decisions, or the decisions made by some other collective Brady, Buck, Angelos hydra...have been disastrous. 

So I blame Dan not only for the decisions that could legitimately be said to be clearly his that had bad outcomes but I also blame him for the decision to get involved in what turned out to be a debacle with Toronto.  Yes, he wanted the job, but he had to know that Angelos was not just going to say, Oh God bless you, Dan, go in peace and with my best wishes.   No, Dan had to know Angelos would go ballistic as soon as he found out and Dan knew he was essentially throwing his relationship with Potter out the window.   Which is what happened...to all of our detriment. 

I don’t get this. 

Almost from the time he was traded for nobody thought that the Orioles would sign Miller. Why would Dan not want to keep a dominant relief pitcher? The reason they signed O’Day was because of Brady pushing for him not to go to Washington.  

Cruz was all about the length of his deal. It was reported that they were willing to go 3 and not 4. Markakis was a medical issue. 

The next year the owner goes out and signs Davis to this huge deal. This is all about the owners personal preference. Angelos has to agree to any money on a deal. At the end it is his call.  

 

[Mondo Trasho]

The right call was made on Cruz, Markakis, and Miller. You don't premium dollars on an aging hitter, a corner outfielder who doesn't hit for power or a relief pitcher who isn't going to be your closer. That is, unless you've got very deep pockets, which the O's do not.

The problem with this team is and has been the foundation of the organization. The failure to consistently develop talent. The emphasis here on "consistently", because they have had success here and there, just not in any sustained way, going back to at least the mid 1990s. That's why they have 14 years of losing, and that's why after a brief 5 year run, they're back to losing again.

An organization can get away with minimum player development if they have the resources to spend on international talent or on the free agent market. But, when those resources are thin, you can't afford to not develop your own players. And while the O's are not the Rays, they aren't the Yankees or Red Sox either.

Dan Duquette is probably not the best executive in baseball history. He was however, the guy who once made the deal to send Delino DeShields to LA for Pedro Martinez (which, if you aren't aware was a steal). He also helped lay the ground work for the Red Sox 2004 WS run. So he's not a slouch.

Buck is Buck. He is in my mind a great manager, even today Yankees fans that I know tell me how much of a mistake it was for them to let him go in 1995.

To me, the blame goes to ownership. It's the one constant this team has had since the 1990s.

[24fps]

No matter how much I drink, every time I think about the Orioles organization and how it's run, I immediately think about East Germany in the 1950's.  Never fails.  It's uncanny...

...and unpleasant.

IMO progress is not possible until Peter Angelos is no longer Head of State.  Do I expect the sons or Minister Brady to be any better?  I depends on whether the network of spies is convincingly dismantled and the corporate culture is rehabilitated.  Then maybe.  I'm not holding my breath.

 

[now]

" guess the issue I have here is we're giving guys like Trumbo 4 years, Hardy a 3 year extension, O'Day 4 years, Davis 7 years"

This gets back to the earlier question about drafting and scouting. Because with scouting comes evaluating, and here's where we do see "bust after bust." With extensions to existing players, as above; and also, even more glaringly, with new acquisitions: Jimenez, Snider, Parra, Cortes, on and on (I would even put Beckham in this category). Chris Tillman and Chris Davis would stand out as the most glaring busts right now, when it comes to O's failed player evaluation.

[tntoriole]

1 hour ago, eddie83 said:

I don’t get this. 

Almost from the time he was traded for nobody thought that the Orioles would sign Miller. Why would Dan not want to keep a dominant relief pitcher? The reason they signed O’Day was because of Brady pushing for him not to go to Washington.  

Cruz was all about the length of his deal. It was reported that they were willing to go 3 and not 4. Markakis was a medical issue. 

The next year the owner goes out and signs Davis to this huge deal. This is all about the owners personal preference. Angelos has to agree to any money on a deal. At the end it is his call.  

 

Where we disagree is you think it was Duquette pushing for 4 years not 3 years for Cruz and Markakis and big bad Angelos saying no. I think Dan did not advocate 4 years to ownership in either situation.  Period.  In fact, he may have advocated strongly against Nick where Angelos might have been persuadeable to go 4 years.  Similarly, I think Dan decided that the pen was good enough and other parts of the team were worth more than going all out in an offer to Miller.  You think Angelos came up with this idea all on his own and  dictated it against what Dan wanted.  I disagree.    

[Camden_yardbird]

The irony of posting a gif of "the professional" when referencing a AAA ball club.

[eddie83]

11 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Where we disagree is you think it was Duquette pushing for 4 years not 3 years for Cruz and Markakis and big bad Angelos saying no. I think Dan did not advocate 4 years to ownership in either situation.  Period.  In fact, he may have advocated strongly against Nick where Angelos might have been persuadeable to go 4 years.  Similarly, I think Dan decided that the pen was good enough and other parts of the team were worth more than going all out in an offer to Miller.  You think Angelos came up with this idea all on his own and  dictated it against what Dan wanted.  I disagree.    

Then why change your mindset a year later? I don’t think Dan pushed for Nick at all. I don’t know about Cruz.

My point is your organizational philosophy flipped flop after one year. Why?  

I have no issue not spending big on a relief pitcher but then a year later you did just that. I have no issue not wanting to risk money on sluggers but then you did at the highest magnitude a year later.  

This is why it looks like a year to year plan around here. I don’t get it. Figure out who you are. They wind up spending big at the end of the run not at the start. Once again that is backwards.