Jump to content

How long does it take REALLY bad teams to get good again??


SteveA

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Back on the main subject, I think you’d need to look at how those terrible teams got so terrible, and how long they’d already been bad before the really awful year in question.   Some of them probably had a pretty good pipeline of minor league talent that hadn’t arrived yet.

Probably most of them had a plan to get back to contention.  I'm questioning the O's plan to build a contender.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 hours ago, Finisher said:

It really depends on the talent in your farm system, the acumen of your decision makers and your competition.

Yeah, I think in our situation we must consider that the Yanks and Sox are stacked for the next 3-4 years (perhaps more for the Yanks). We are not in the AL central. So we need a complete rebuild and shoot to be competitive in 2021 and beyond. Of course, we don't even know who is making the decisions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pastorfan said:

Yeah, I think in our situation we must consider that the Yanks and Sox are stacked for the next 3-4 years (perhaps more for the Yanks). We are not in the AL central. So we need a complete rebuild and shoot to be competitive in 2021 and beyond. Of course, we don't even know who is making the decisions!

It's funny, most of us on here get it. It stinks but it is how you win. Problem is, and has mentioned, our farm system isn't very good now and the Angelos business model isn't to win, but just not to be THAT bad. No real goal to win anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rene88 said:

It's funny, most of us on here get it. It stinks but it is how you win. Problem is, and has mentioned, our farm system isn't very good now and the Angelos business model isn't to win, but just not to be THAT bad. No real goal to win anything.

Or you can be really good and lucky and do what the Yankees did, rebuild without falling under 500.  But the O's aren't capable of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or you can be really good and lucky and do what the Yankees did, rebuild without falling under 500.  But the O's aren't capable of that.

It's the pinstripes.  Players put them on and they are magically motivated to bring their "A game" every day and maximize whatever potential they have (see Gardner, Brett...who wouldn't be this good or annoying on any other team).  As long as a player is mentally tough, you will get their absolute best when they play in New York.  In Baltimore, it is acceptable to underachieve and be bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is pretty impressive how Hemond rebuilt the 89 Orioles lineup from 88. Orsulak and Tettleton were on the 88 team but like Bradley, Devo and Milligan he got them for basically nothing. He also acquired Brady and Hoiles in 88 in trades although both did not pop until 92.  

Our system in 88 was probably worse than it is now. Drafting Olson in 88 was huge for 89 also. 

Like this season in 88 there was a ton of negative performance. Avoiding that is step one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JR Oriole said:

It's the pinstripes.  Players put them on and they are magically motivated to bring their "A game" every day and maximize whatever potential they have (see Gardner, Brett...who wouldn't be this good or annoying on any other team).  As long as a player is mentally tough, you will get their absolute best when they play in New York.  In Baltimore, it is acceptable to underachieve and be bad. 

Take Tanaka off the 14-16 teams and see where they finish. Their payroll allowed them to get away with more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, pastorfan said:

Yeah, I think in our situation we must consider that the Yanks and Sox are stacked for the next 3-4 years (perhaps more for the Yanks). We are not in the AL central. So we need a complete rebuild and shoot to be competitive in 2021 and beyond. Of course, we don't even know who is making the decisions!

Occasionally I will watch some Boston area sports talk shows. They are pretty down on the Sox system and think they need to win now. Sox also have a ton of good players up for FA next couple of years. No doubt Yankees window looks much wider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be curious to know the approximate age of the teams.  Were they young up-and-coming teams or an aged team on the downswing.  I would think the more up-and-coming younger teams probably got back into it faster.  We definitely have an older team without much coming up the pipeline.  I would think that puts us on a slower trajectory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, gmelson26 said:

I would be curious to know the approximate age of the teams.  Were they young up-and-coming teams or an aged team on the downswing.  I would think the more up-and-coming younger teams probably got back into it faster.  We definitely have an older team without much coming up the pipeline.  I would think that puts us on a slower trajectory

We are the Orioles.....every single thing we do is slow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eddie83 said:

It is pretty impressive how Hemond rebuilt the 89 Orioles lineup from 88. Orsulak and Tettleton were on the 88 team but like Bradley, Devo and Milligan he got them for basically nothing. He also acquired Brady and Hoiles in 88 in trades although both did not pop until 92.  

Our system in 88 was probably worse than it is now. Drafting Olson in 88 was huge for 89 also. 

Like this season in 88 there was a ton of negative performance. Avoiding that is step one.  

Economics of baseball is much different now.  As impressive as the turnaround from 1988 to 1989 was, making next year's team a winner seems at least twice as hard.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eddie83 said:

It is pretty impressive how Hemond rebuilt the 89 Orioles lineup from 88. Orsulak and Tettleton were on the 88 team but like Bradley, Devo and Milligan he got them for basically nothing. He also acquired Brady and Hoiles in 88 in trades although both did not pop until 92.  

Our system in 88 was probably worse than it is now. Drafting Olson in 88 was huge for 89 also. 

Like this season in 88 there was a ton of negative performance. Avoiding that is step one.  

Yeah, and he got very little for his trade chip, Eddie Murray (Ken Howell, Brian Holton, & Juan Bell).  He was able to flip Howell for Bradley.  The Boddicker trade (for Brady Anderson & Curt Schilling), though, was fantastic, although neither player was a major contributor in '89.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...