Is There Any Hope to Replicate 1989?

[Aristotelian]

As we are currently the worst team in baseball on the 30th anniversary of our legendary 1988 season (0-21 start, 106 losses), I got to thinking, 1989 turned out to be one of the all time great Orioles teams. Even though they came up short, they surprised everyone in baseball with 87 wins and what was in effect a chance at a "wild card series" against the Blue Jays before there was an actual wild card. I was only 15 at the time. I was not following the details of the roster and the rebuilding process, just the sense of excitement around "Orioles Magic". 

I am curious, for those who followed more closely at the time, what were the keys to 1989? What would be the analogous moves to make now? What were the differences?

The 1989 team does not strike me as a big rebuild. We got rid of Eddie, but Eddie was not really the problem. He OPS'd .836 in 1988. We replaced him with Randy Mulligan who was not really an upgrade but was younger and cheaper.

Tettleton had a big year, going from .750 OPS to .870, a monster season for a C. I can definitely see Sisco bringing some improvement there as he takes over the starting role. 

Worthington became the starter at 3B, providing a solid offensive boost over Schu.

The big upgrade was OF defense. We went from the aging Fred Lynn in CF with Stanicek, Orsulak, and Sheets, to a dynamic OF of Mike Devereaux with Orsulak and a young Steve Finley and Brady Anderson (with Phil Bradley acquired in the second half). Finely and Anderson did not provide much offensively as they would in their prime, but that 1989 outfield could catch the ball! (Team defense went from -2 WAR to +2 WAR). I do think there are some obvious parallels there with the current team, with some young guys who could replace aging veterans, even if they do not hit right away.

The rotation wasn't spectacular. We held over Jeff Ballard, who had a great year with 18-8/3.43 ERA. Bob Milacki, Pete Harnisch, and Dave Johnson provided some new blood. The bigger difference I think was the bullpen, with the emergence of Gregg Olson as an elite closer. Overall, the team ERA went from 4.50 to 4.00. If Harvey matures, a rotation of Cobb, Bundy, Gausman, Harvey, and Cashner could actually be better than 1989. But we absolutely need to find somebody to replace Britton to allow Givens/O'Day to thrive in matchup roles. Could Tanner Scott be the next Gregg Olson?

The big structural differences: we had Cal to rebuild around whereas Manny is gone. The future of the infield is unclear. Maybe Mountcastle becomes our Craig Worthington. Schoop and Beckham could be net as good as Cal and Billy/Rene Gonzalez. Probably need a backup plan if one or both struggles with injury again.

The elephant in the room is the Chris Davis contract. If the organization is wedded to playing him every day, that is going to hold us back. Mancini could easily be our next Randy Milligan, but if he is forced to play LF/DH, he will be our Larry Sheets. 

In short, my takeaway from 1989 is that we could get good fairly quickly if we commit to some young guys and stress defense. We have to eat Davis' contract. Maybe play him some at DH to see if he can find his stroke. We absolutely cannot carry multiple DH's. We need versatile guys who can play defense and help the pitchers keep runs off the board. 

[eddie83]

I almost started a thread similar to this a couple of days ago. 

Hemond made a ton of under the radar moves that worked out. Orsulak and Tettleton in 88 were better in 89.  Phil Bradley, Milligan, Devo. 

There is little reason that the defense will not be significantly improved next year. The rotation definitely has more proven starters now but as you mentioned Olson wa huge in 89. 

The 88 team like this one was dragged down by terrible position players even with Cal and Eddie. If they build a stronger roster with better depth there is no reason next year has to be an ugly one. 

[webbrick2010]

Defense is the key, but I don't think Hays and Mullins are/will be as good as Brady and Steve Finley, and our infield is a mess, but we should really be looking for plus defensive middle infielders even if they hit as bad as Chris Davis

[Aristotelian]

3 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

Defense is the key, but I don't think Hays and Mullins are/will be as good as Brady and Steve Finley, and our infield is a mess, but we should really be looking for plus defensive middle infielders even if they hit as bad as Chris Davis

Unfortunately those guys don't exist in our system, or they would be playing right now. That is who we have to target in the Manny deal. I don't know who that guy is, though. The SS prospects are pretty thin. Gleybar would be ideal but the Yankees will never give him to us.

[eddie83]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

Unfortunately those guys don't exist in our system, or they would be playing right now. That is who we have to target in the Manny deal. I don't know who that guy is, though. The SS prospects are pretty thin. Gleybar would be ideal but the Yankees will never give him to us.

They may have to sign some veterans to fill those roles next year. They need to figure out what they have in Beckham as well. 

If I am the Yankees I go after pitching not Manny.  

[Nite]

Well there are going to be moves this year (bye Manny) that could affect as early as next year. Now assuming we keep our decent to good 4 starters, and find SOMEONE who can pitch under a 5 ERA for the 5th slot the pitching staff is kinda set. The problem with this team is the offense and bullpen. Bullpens can be fixed easier, so the MAIN problem is the offense. Last in the AL in runs scored, by 10... Only up on Miami by 2... Name a Marlins player, yea ok so THAT'S how bad it is. 

 

I think the answer is yes. If this team could score in the 9-10 range of the AL like Texas or Detroit I think they're a .500 team. The fact that they're the worst offense in baseball is 90% of the reason this season is done already. So I can see a major bounce back year for the team next year, because I can't see them being a bottom 10 MLB offense AGAIN next year.

[VaBird1]

I  wonder if Jose Iglesias might help stabilize the infield.  He doesn't hit particularly well, but he is a good fielder.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

Biggest issue will be the 2019 Yankees and Red Sox won't be similar to the 1989 versions.  

[esmd]

It's an interesting parallel.  I expect that we'll see guys like Hays, Mountcastle, Mullins, Harvey, and D.J. Stewart on the team next year in some capacity to go along with younger guys like Sisco, Bundy, Gausman,  and Mancini and veterans like Schoop, Beckham, Cobb, Cashner, etc.  I think there's reason for some optimism, especially if they're smart and move Machado, jones, Britton, Brach, and maybe even O'Day for a decent return (of varying degrees, of course, depending on the value of each player).  They're probably stuck with Trumbo unless he has a monster year, and they are of course stuck with Davis.  But, if the kids hit a little, good things can happen.

It's all going to depend on the prospects, in so far as how fast they develop, or really develop at all.  At this point, I'm looking forward to seeing what happens, since the window has slammed shut on the team as currently constituted.

[eddie83]

9 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Biggest issue will be the 2019 Yankees and Red Sox won't be similar to the 1989 versions.  

This is true and back then there were not unbalanced schedules.

That said the Orioles can still make it a much better product.   

[eddie83]

12 minutes ago, VaBird1 said:

I  wonder if Jose Iglesias might help stabilize the infield.  He doesn't hit particularly well, but he is a good fielder.

I agree. I brought him up when we played the Tigers. I hope we can fill some holes in trades but we know he can play defense. 

[clapdiddy]

I would like to see improved defense like that 1989 club had.  I think that's the route we should be looking to go.   Develop pitching and surround them with good defensive players.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing Chris Davis released if he doesn't figure things out.  The cost is already figured in, and if we're able to put Mancini on first for the next few years, he'll be relatively inexpensive.  Fortunately, there's only 1 more year left after this season on Trumbo's deal.

We'll have a decent rotation if we hold on to our current 4, so it should keep us in most games.   If we move any of those guys, we should be getting back pieces in deals for Manny that could fill in.  I still think the best return we'll get for Manny is teaming him up with Bundy or Gausman.  

[Frobby]

48 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

Defense is the key, but I don't think Hays and Mullins are/will be as good as Brady and Steve Finley, and our infield is a mess, but we should really be looking for plus defensive middle infielders even if they hit as bad as Chris Davis

Agreed.    

I haven’t seen enough of Mullins and Hays to know how good they’ll be defensively, but they’ll be a big improvement on what’s out there now.    Mullins also is just an exciting player to watch.    He may not hit for the average and OBP we’d like, but he’ll make things happen.     

[Slappy]

I think it is possible.  The real key to the '89 team was defense - they had an incredible defensive OF with Finley, Brady, Deveraux, and even Phil Bradley.  Cal was still in his prime at SS, and we were passable elsewhere on the IF.  The rotation was mediocre - I think the '19 rotation could be much more talented than the '89 one.  The '89 bullpen was solid and balanced from both sides.  And that team had real speed, one of the few O's teams in history.

All that said, '89 was a pretty weak year in the AL East.  Toronto won with 88 games.  All the power was in the West, with Oakland, the Angels, and the "Bo Jackson" Royals.  We are going to have to win against really strong NY/BOS teams next year.

The O's look really awful right now and the lineup needs a massive overhaul.  Any short-term plan should be on improving the defense cheaply while getting some prospects to prepare for a run 2-3 years down the road.  

[SteveA]

3 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Biggest issue will be the 2019 Yankees and Red Sox won't be similar to the 1989 versions.  

True but in 1989 you had to finish first to make the playoffs, now you can possibly do it finishing 3rd.