Elias' rebuild is going to be centered around high draft picks and player development

[DrungoHazewood]

On 1/1/2019 at 9:12 AM, Es4M11 said:

 I also believe that there is a segment of the fan base that was still absent during this period of time (2012-2017) because they could see that the club was not built for sustained success, and had no real plan to achieve that goal.

Casual fans, by definition, don't have any real idea of the strategic vision of the organization.  Casual fans see "Orioles beat Royals 4-2" on their newsfeed and are happy.  I'd bet 20-30% of the people at OPACY at any given game couldn't name the starting second baseman, much less outline the 5-year plan for the organization. 

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, interloper said:

Don't care.

You can always make new fans later.  It's not like the Orioels are going to get sent to the International League, and there aren't any MLB-ready, luxury-box-filled mallparks sitting around unused in lucrative markets.

It's a closed league structure with unlikely relocation, so take full advantage of MLB's anti-competitive posture.

[atomic]

2 hours ago, TAMC said:

Houston Metro area about 6.3 million

Plus much different demographics.  

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, TAMC said:

Houston Metro area about 6.3 million

 

2 hours ago, NCRaven said:

That was my point.  Whether you look at the cities themselves or include the metropolitan areas, Houston is huge compared to Baltimore.  There is no comparison.  The only limit for Houston is the seating capacity of their stadium.  Minute Maid has a capacity of 41,168 x 81 = 3,334,608 is the absolute max.  With standing room, OPACY can handle 48,187.  So conceivably, Baltimore could draw 3.9 mil, but it ain't happening!

 

8 minutes ago, atomic said:

Plus much different demographics.  

OK, but in figuring out how many fans the Orioles might draw with a winning ballclub, I care more about their own history than whatever Houston is doing.    At a minimum we know they can draw 2.464 mm as they did in 2014.     My guess is you could tack several hundred thousand more onto that if they had a sustained period of winning. But 3 mm might be a stretch, thanks to the team next door.    

[jtschrei]

23 hours ago, Frobby said:

Let’s focus on the player development side of this.   As a general matter, what are we expecting/hoping to see?

1.    On the pitching side, Elias has his guy in place in Chris Holt.   Last year, the Astros’ top four affiliates all led their leagues in strikeouts, and Elias has alluded to some “secret sauce” that made that possible.   So, I’ll be looking for an increase in our affiliates’ K rates.   Here’s a comparison between us and the Astros:

Low A: Astros 11.1, O’s 8.5

Hi A: Astros 9.7, O’s 7.8

AA: Astros 9.7, O’s 8.2

AAA: Astros 9.8, O’s 8.3

That will be interesting to follow.   Also, Elias has alluded to the Astros’ belief that certain pitching motions are more sustainable for major league success, and that they only drafted pitchers who already had those motions and wouldn’t be forced into doing something against their nature.   He didn’t really get into detail about what they considered a successful type of motion.    But I think we’ll see some turnover in personnel that may give us a clue as to what Elias is looking for.   

2.   On the hitting side, Tony mentioned on his webcast that the Astros looked for hitters with certain swing planes, and only drafted those types of hitters.    So, I think we’ll be looking at a lot of guys trying to adjust their swing planes.  Another thing I expect to see is more emphasis on plate discipline.    Here’s the spread between BA and OBP at the four levels last year:

Low A: Astros .078, O’s .063.

Hi A: Astros .080, O’s .068

AA: Astros .071, O’s .061

AAA: Astros .079, O’s .068

I’m sure there are some other trends I could pick out, but these seem to be pretty easy indicators to follow this year to judge how player development is going on a macro level.   

Great post FRobby. I wonder if these are key metrics for Elias and his staff. I bet they are.

It seems like seeing a jump in the numbers will take at least two years, when the first draft done by the Elias regime gets its players in the system. 

I don't think that coaching alone can change the numbers. I feel like I read DD say somewhere that high OBP is hard to teach. You have to draft guys that already have it if you value it. 

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, jtschrei said:

Great post FRobby. I wonder if these are key metrics for Elias and his staff. I bet they are.

It seems like seeing a jump in the numbers will take at least two years, when the first draft done by the Elias regime gets its players in the system. 

I don't think that coaching alone can change the numbers. I feel like I read DD say somewhere that high OBP is hard to teach. You have to draft guys that already have it if you value it. 

I think you can do both — teach it, and draft guys who have that natural tendency.    I’ll say this, though, 2 of the 4 Astros’ full season affiliates actually dropped in walk rate in the first year of the Luhnow regime.    So, you may be right that it will take a while.   

[weams]

Some of those picks. 

[theocean]

5 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

You can always make new fans later.  It's not like the Orioels are going to get sent to the International League, and there aren't any MLB-ready, luxury-box-filled mallparks sitting around unused in lucrative markets.

It's a closed league structure with unlikely relocation, so take full advantage of MLB's anti-competitive posture.

As someone who grew up in the late 90s and early 00s, the terrible Orioles teams of that time really did have an effect on people my age and whether they had an interest in baseball. I have a few friends that are diehard O's fans, but for the most part, most people my age could care less about the Orioles until 2012.

Between 2012-2016, I noticed a bunch of friends who could have cared less about baseball were now going to Camden Yards or asking if I wanted to catch a game at a bar. They were totally into the O's success, but being new fans - they really didn't understand the game at all. They had no idea about who the players on other teams were or even basic rules.

Now that the O's are back in the gutter and Buck, Jones, Hardy, and all the other favorite personalities are gone - they could care less again. They might come back for another period of success in the future, but they'll be older and busier - so they might not.

I think it is important for a team to at least put a halfway respectable product on the field so that it can be constantly growing the next generation of diehard O's fans. That doesn't mean the O's need to spend in free agency this offseason to try and get to 70 wins - but they need to have a few players who are personable and can at least do a few exciting things to keep people engaged. What do the O's have next year that is going to get a normal fan excited? Trumbombs?

In my case, even when the O's were bad - there was Cal Ripken, at least for a while. That's enough to get you to beg your dad to take you to Camden Yards. But as I got older and Ty Wigginton was the best player..... you get what I'm saying.

 

[Es4M11]

21 hours ago, NCRaven said:

I don't see Baltimore ever reaching 2.98 million, just due to the market size, especially after a third of the market was taken away by the Nats.  In 2017, Houston had a census estimated population of 2.313 million.  Baltimore's was 617 thousand.  The math just doesn't work.

I acknowledge that the Houston area is larger in size and population, and that Houston itself is a more populous city. The city of Houston (627 Sq mi) is huge, and comparable in size to Baltimore City and County combined (679 sq mi) -- Baltimore City and County population combined as of 2016 census estimate was 1,445,690. I don't think it is as simple as pointing to the city populations themselves as evidence to why the Orioles can't reach parity with the Atros in stadium attendance.

Just for reference: The greater Baltimore area -- not including any of the DC suburbs, PA, Eastern Shore/Delaware,  Western MD -- had a 2016 census population estimate of 2,798,886 and an area of 2601 sq mi. The greater Houston area had a 2017 census population estimate of 6,892,427 and an area of 8,858.25 sq mi. The Washington DC/NoVa/SoMD metro area had a 2016 census population estimate of 6,131,977 and an area of 5,564 sq mi -- the SoMD counties themselves account for 2,448,459 of the total population and 2,305 sq mi.

Now obviously Baltimore has lost a significant portion of the SoMD/DC/NOVA market to the Nationals, but it still draws some from those areas - - I have no idea how to quantify it, but that is still a large market area that the Orioles have a significant presence in. I'd be real interested to see how many households tune into MASN to watch the Orioles from SoMD/DC/NOVA. Also factor in the Eastern Shore/Delaware, Western MD, and Southern PA component and the population difference between the cities of Houston and Baltimore becomes less of a factor, IMO.

I went back over the years and looked at the Orioles attendance numbers since 1992. I decided to break it down into 4 different periods of time...

1992-2001 (Camden Yards opens, end of the Ripken era)
Average annual attendance: 3,381,296
Average nightly attendance: 43,573
Average record: 82-80 (over 162 -- factoring in strike shortened seasons)
Playoff appearances: 2

2002-2005 (Post Ripken, Pre Nationals)
Avg annual: 2,626,445
Avg nightly: 32,425
Avg record: 72-90

2006-2011 (Post Nats, Dark Ages)
Avg annual: 1,948,481
Avg nightly: 24,055
Avg record: 68-94

2012-2017 (Buckle Up)
Avg annual: 2,244,378
Avg nightly: 27,765
Avg record: 86-76
Playoffs: 3

In order to get to 3 million annual attendance the Orioles would need to average 37,037 per night -- that's roughly 89% of nightly fan attendance during the 90's. A sustained run of success without ownership meddling could get us there, I think.

[Es4M11]

22 hours ago, Frobby said:

I agree.    If we couldn’t do better than 2.464 mm in 2014, it’s pretty doubtful we’ll ever see 3 mm again.  But I’d like to win 100 games two years in a row and win the World Series like the Astros did and test that proposition.  

That would be a great start. I think if the organization can turn the farm around and get it to a point where it resembles the Astros and Cardinals talent pipelines, and start making sound baseball decisions on a consistent basis (e.g spending money well, no more ownership meddling, etc), then the next period of sustained winning will really re-energize the fan base.

[Es4M11]

20 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Casual fans, by definition, don't have any real idea of the strategic vision of the organization.  Casual fans see "Orioles beat Royals 4-2" on their newsfeed and are happy.  I'd bet 20-30% of the people at OPACY at any given game couldn't name the starting second baseman, much less outline the 5-year plan for the organization. 

No argument here. What I was getting at is that I believe there is still a more knowledgeable segment of the fan base that has not come all the way back yet, for various reasons. I think once the club starts getting out of it's own way and making the right baseball moves on a consistent basis and puts a more exciting, better balanced product on the field then we will start to see those fans come back on a more nightly basis. I'm one of those fans, and I have quite a few friends in my friend group who feel the same way. The last two years I went to two games total. I normally would go to 15 or so a year.

I like the direction things are heading, and I am planning on being back at the Yard much more this coming year.

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, Es4M11 said:

I went back over the years and looked at the Orioles attendance numbers since 1992. I decided to break it down into 4 different periods of time...

1992-2001 (Camden Yards opens, end of the Ripken era)
Average annual attendance: 3,381,296
Average nightly attendance: 43,573
Average record: 82-80 (over 162 -- factoring in strike shortened seasons)
Playoff appearances: 2

2002-2005 (Post Ripken, Pre Nationals)
Avg annual: 2,626,445
Avg nightly: 32,425
Avg record: 72-90

2006-2011 (Post Nats, Dark Ages)
Avg annual: 1,948,481
Avg nightly: 24,055
Avg record: 68-94

2012-2017 (Buckle Up)
Avg annual: 2,244,378
Avg nightly: 27,765
Avg record: 86-76
Playoffs: 3

In order to get to 3 million annual attendance the Orioles would need to average 37,037 per night -- that's roughly 89% of nightly fan attendance during the 90's. A sustained run of success without ownership meddling could get us there, I think.

Nice breakdown.   One small tweak: the Nats were in DC in 2005, so that belongs in your Post-Nats, Dark Ages bucket.   And significantly, the O’s drew pretty well that year, 2.624 mm — better than any year since, including our subsequent playoff years, even though the Nats also drew well that season (2.73 mm, their highest total since the move to DC).    

[Es4M11]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

Nice breakdown.   One small tweak: the Nats were in DC in 2005, so that belongs in your Post-Nats, Dark Ages bucket.   And significantly, the O’s drew pretty well that year, 2.624 mm — better than any year since, including our subsequent playoff years, even though the Nats also drew well that season (2.73 mm, their highest total since the move to DC).    

Thanks! I intentionally left that it there. I did so because being the first year for the Nats, in my estimation they had not yet poached many Orioles season ticket holders.

[RPIgator26]

The Astros became what they are due to a numbers centric unemotional approach. How tall that player was (5'8" for example) made no difference so long as the numbers defined that player in ways that were unimpeachable. BA to OBP spread (or even OPS that captures total bases) so then defines value in a way that conventional baseball thinking at the time maybe did not. The next element toward an ever-increasing "value" to the organization  is not just a high numerator but a lower denominator...... so salary and signing bonus are huge factors into the investment side for that talent- and keeping those numbers in line (or low) alter the final ratio in ways that make the entire  organization money while not compromising significantly to the basis for the final product (baseball skill) of those in the system as prospects. (The Astros A affiliate in NY Penn league sure performed well as an example) Foreign players help there certainly (Cheaper maybe as a whole?) without any adverse impact to the winning as a team of that product, so I loved the spreadsheet from the Hangout site highlight article on which prospect  players have that 5+ year window that might capture management's eye since these new people are statistic savvy in ways that the outgoing guys obviously were clueless about. What would make that spreadsheet truly better is a "value" column that places each player relative to others on the spreadsheet with a numerator that reflects skill/potential and denominator that addresses the cost side. That comparative metric then gives insight to all of us as a hint as to which direction the new management is taking or might take assuming certain desired intents on any prospect in the nearer-term assuming they are budget conscious (owners of small market teams do impose budgets lower than league allowances) while maintaining a keen eye for value in the medium and 5+ future. Ritchie Martin in the rule 5 draft was maybe just such a low denominator find with a numerator that was not bold by itself but together with other numbers was above the bar as actionable toward increasing organization value. 

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, theocean said:

As someone who grew up in the late 90s and early 00s, the terrible Orioles teams of that time really did have an effect on people my age and whether they had an interest in baseball. I have a few friends that are diehard O's fans, but for the most part, most people my age could care less about the Orioles until 2012.

Between 2012-2016, I noticed a bunch of friends who could have cared less about baseball were now going to Camden Yards or asking if I wanted to catch a game at a bar. They were totally into the O's success, but being new fans - they really didn't understand the game at all. They had no idea about who the players on other teams were or even basic rules.

Now that the O's are back in the gutter and Buck, Jones, Hardy, and all the other favorite personalities are gone - they could care less again. They might come back for another period of success in the future, but they'll be older and busier - so they might not.

I think it is important for a team to at least put a halfway respectable product on the field so that it can be constantly growing the next generation of diehard O's fans. That doesn't mean the O's need to spend in free agency this offseason to try and get to 70 wins - but they need to have a few players who are personable and can at least do a few exciting things to keep people engaged. What do the O's have next year that is going to get a normal fan excited? Trumbombs?

In my case, even when the O's were bad - there was Cal Ripken, at least for a while. That's enough to get you to beg your dad to take you to Camden Yards. But as I got older and Ty Wigginton was the best player..... you get what I'm saying.

 

I think they need to be very careful about doing things with the roster to keep fans engaged that aren't going to have a positive impact on wins beyond 80.  I think a large part of the reason that the 1998-2011 Orioles took so long to dig themselves out of their hole was that they devoted $20-40M a year in resources to payroll for wins 60-75, instead of pouring that into development and infrastucture.  We traded prospects and minor league facilities and international development for Jay Payton and Kevin Millar.  And that enabled the Nats to draft #1, while the O's ended up at five or eight or 10.

And after all that Kevin Millar kept 32 extra fans engaged with the Orioles.