Stand Pat!

[RShack]

Is there some sort of consolation prize for finishing above .500? Do you get a trophy? Maybe a nice shiny metal to hang from the mantle? I'm usually with you Peace, but finishing near .500 (and probably being last in your division) is a ludicrous and empty goal.

No it's not. Guys are busting their butts until the very last out. It's important that they have something to show for it at the end of the year. Unless, of course, you think it's a good thing for BRob and Nick to decide they can't wait for FA so they can get out of town... and you think it's a good thing for the young guys to see BRob and Nick say "No way!" about wanting to stay here.

[The Wedge]

To bring levity back to this trainwreck...

SIT DOWN, PAT!

[elsid]

Is there some sort of consolation prize for finishing above .500? Do you get a trophy? Maybe a nice shiny metal to hang from the mantle? I'm usually with you Peace, but finishing near .500 (and probably being last in your division) is a ludicrous and empty goal. The only thing this organization has done consistently is lose. If AM doesn't continue to look to the future and grow the organizational depth, I can assure you the consistency you're looking for will be there...at the bottom of the standings.

Nope, no consolation prize. No nothing. However, if it is that ludricrous and empty of a goal, then why do people on this board talk about how bad the past 10 years have been with no winning seasons.

You have to make progress of some kind. You can't just bank on 2-3 years from now because of what you think you have. Injuries and everything else play a part. This even goes back to the Beane argument. If he doesn't see a chance at winning everything, he retools, looking to make things better next year -- even when he is winning.

Tampa could go from worst to first this year, but the year is not over. They have improved tremendously. So, if they don't win, it is a step in the right direction. If you don't get above .500, you can't improve, unless you want to say 85 losses is better than 93.

[Fan4Life]

No it's not. Guys are busting their butts until the very last out. It's important that they have something to show for it at the end of the year. Unless, of course, you think it's a good thing for BRob and Nick to decide they can't wait for FA so they can get out of town... and you think it's a good thing for the young guys to see BRob and Nick say "No way!" about wanting to stay here.

Your thoughts here are quite relevant and mostly overlooked around here. That said, I'm sure even you (like myself) would trade BRob etal in the right deal. Only we would define the right deal a little differently than many perhaps.

[mweb]

I don't know why you think that, because it's not the least bit true. Maybe you think it's true because I don't buy the deadline deal mania. Look, just because I know that "deadline deals" typically don't amount to much, and are mainly just a lot of message board hype, that doesn't mean I think AM shouldn't trade anybody. If you actually read what I said in the off season, you'd know that I said that making trades was not the key to rebuilding. Because it's not. Fixing the org from top to bottom is, and that takes time. However, it was fine with me to trust AM's judgment about whether he thought he could use trades to jump-start the process by a year or so. But that's all it was: jump starting the process a bit. I also said that using trades to try to do that might help or it might hurt, depending on how the trades worked out in the end. However, I repeatedly said that what mattered to me was whether he did what was necessary to make the O's good all the time once again, and that whether he took an extra year or two to accomplish that didn't matter all that much to me.

So, now you've decided that I think AM shouldn't make any trades in the off season? Why on earth would you think that? Just because I'm not working myself into a frenzy about "deadline deals"? Personally, I don't know if AM is gonna make any of them or not, but I really don't think it matters much either way. I'm certainly not attacking posters who think it might be best to wait until the off season to trade any good guys who might be traded.

I think the folks saying that this year's record doesn't matter don't know what they're talking about. It seems clear to me that having this season turn out better than last season *is* important. Why? Because guys are busting their butts until the very last out, and I don't want them getting to the end of the year with nothing to show for it. I don't want BRob and Nick to decide that playing here is a losing proposition nomatter how hard they try, and that they're better off just waiting for FA so they can leave to escape the losing. I also don't want the young guys knowing that BRob and Nick are counting the days until they can get out of town. I want these guys *wanting* to play in BAL, and seeing progress is a big part of that. If "maximizing value" by making a couple dinky "deadline deals" strips the team of key guys and leads to a season of no improvement by the end, and all we get in return is a couple so-so "prospects", then I think that's a bad thing to do. And I don't think AM will do it either. I think all the fuss about how much money is left on so-and-so's contract completely misses the point. This is real baseball with real live people, not fantasy baseball based on a few numbers.

I think that because you were railing against the "blow it up" crowd in the off-season as well, and I'm sure you will continue to do so.

And once again, you're exaggerating someone else' position, where did I say you didn't want AM to make any trades? Why on earth would you type that? And who the hell is asking AM to trade guys that matter for so-so prospects?

While you're focusing on "real baseball", maybe you should focus on what people are actually saying, and then respond to that without greatly exaggerating what they're saying.

And I hate to break it to you, but real baseball deals with real money and contracts, and that has to be heavily considered by the GM.

[mweb]

No it's not. Guys are busting their butts until the very last out. It's important that they have something to show for it at the end of the year. Unless, of course, you think it's a good thing for BRob and Nick to decide they can't wait for FA so they can get out of town... and you think it's a good thing for the young guys to see BRob and Nick say "No way!" about wanting to stay here.

If that something is a .500 season, I'm pretty sure that won't happen regardless.

And Nick and Brob are going to stay or leave mostly based on what type of money we offer them, not based on whether we win an extra 5 games this year. If winning is what matters to them, then maybe just maybe, it would be best to do what gives us the best chance at becoming a contender. Well that's what the people you are bashing what to do.

[Mackus]

No it's not. Guys are busting their butts until the very last out. It's important that they have something to show for it at the end of the year. Unless, of course, you think it's a good thing for BRob and Nick to decide they can't wait for FA so they can get out of town... and you think it's a good thing for the young guys to see BRob and Nick say "No way!" about wanting to stay here.

I agree that finishing .500 is an important goal, but it is absolutely not more important than setting up the team for the future.

I wouldn't dump guys just to save money for next year. So if someone offers to take Payton, Hernandez, Millar, or Walker off our hands but we think they are useful and will help us reach .500, I wouldn't dump them unless they give us back a real prospect (would still trade Payton Hernandez, and Walker b/c I think they hinder our competitiveness, but would keep Millar).

But, if a team makes a very good offer for someone like Sherrill or Huff, you've gotta take it even if it makes it less likely that we reach .500, IMO. Don't move them for simply the best package, the best package has still gotta meet whatever you set as the reserve price, but if someone meets your demands, you can't hold onto them just because we are making a run at .500.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I don't know why you think that, because it's not the least bit true. Maybe you think it's true because I don't buy the deadline deal mania. Look, just because I know that "deadline deals" typically don't amount to much, and are mainly just a lot of message board hype, that doesn't mean I think AM shouldn't trade anybody. If you actually read what I said in the off season, you'd know that I said that making trades was not the key to rebuilding. Because it's not. Fixing the org from top to bottom is, and that takes time. However, it was fine with me to trust AM's judgment about whether he thought he could use trades to jump-start the process by a year or so. But that's all it was: jump starting the process a bit. I also said that using trades to try to do that might help or it might hurt, depending on how the trades worked out in the end. However, I repeatedly said that what mattered to me was whether he did what was necessary to make the O's good all the time once again, and that whether he took an extra year or two to accomplish that didn't matter all that much to me.

So, now you've decided that I think AM shouldn't make any trades in the off season? Why on earth would you think that? Just because I'm not working myself into a frenzy about "deadline deals"? Personally, I don't know if AM is gonna make any of them or not, but I really don't think it matters much either way. I'm certainly not attacking posters who think it might be best to wait until the off season to trade any good guys who might be traded.

I think the folks saying that this year's record doesn't matter don't know what they're talking about. It seems clear to me that having this season turn out better than last season *is* important. Why? Because guys are busting their butts until the very last out, and I don't want them getting to the end of the year with nothing to show for it. I don't want BRob and Nick to decide that playing here is a losing proposition nomatter how hard they try, and that they're better off just waiting for FA so they can leave to escape the losing. I also don't want the young guys knowing that BRob and Nick are counting the days until they can get out of town. I want these guys *wanting* to play in BAL, and seeing progress is a big part of that. If "maximizing value" by making a couple dinky "deadline deals" strips the team of key guys and leads to a season of no improvement by the end, and all we get in return is a couple so-so "prospects", then I think that's a bad thing to do. And I don't think AM will do it either. I think all the fuss about how much money is left on so-and-so's contract completely misses the point. This is real baseball with real live people, not fantasy baseball based on a few numbers.

You can say deadline deals don't amount to much. However, most deals don't amount to much. Most free agent signings end up overpaid and under-producing. Most minor-league prospects don't pan out.

Do you think we should just ignore making any moves ever again because they are probably not going to work out in our favor?

Do you simply not understand what a "deadline deal" means? If not, I will take this opportunity to explain it, so hopefully it will help you and others see where my side is coming from.

There are two trading deadlines during the season (three, if you include June 1, when teams can start trading free-agents signed the previous off-season, but that doesn't matter for our purposes).

The first is on July 31. This is called the "non-waiver" deadline, because after that date all players on a major-league roster must pass-through waivers before being traded. For the purposes of most teams, this is the most important deadline, because it is the last chance to acquire the very best players available.

Because of this, as teams look to fill needs for a playoff run, they in many cases find themselves willing to pay a higher price for the better players. The selling teams are generally far-enough out of the picture to know what they can make available to the buyers, and that those limited numbers of players have a higher value.

Now, there is also the August 31 deadline, which is the last chance to trade for a player before playoff rosters are set on September 1. That is the last chance to acquire anyone.

Because we have players of high value-like Roberts and Sherrill and Huff-who would likely be claimed on waivers, July 31 is the best chance to acquire the most value for our players.

Now, your next point would likely be something like, "Why not just wait until the off-season?"

Simply put, teams tend to give up more when players are scarce. The off-season offers more time for deals, but also more players available.

The off-season also can diminish the value of a player that can't keep up a hot streak (like is possible for Huff and Sherrill), while at the deadline a team would be banking on them keeping it up the whole year.

Finally, depending on how ready for the majors the players we get in return are, we have two extra months to evaluate them and see how big a part they could play in next year's team. Instead of only having a hand-full of faux-games in spring training to make evaluations, we have a third of a season against real opponents fighting for playoff spots.

I know you like to play Devil's advocate, and I don't have too much of a problem with it. I have played that role in the past when there was too much of a mob-mentality, so I understand where you are coming from.

However, I hope you will answer this post with the same understanding, as opposed to the immature and argumentative tone used by all of us in this thread.

[mweb]

Wait, BTerp, so you are saying you were just playing devil's advocate before???

Not sure that's what RShack is doing either, if it is, that's even worse. It's one thing to play devil's advocate occasionally, but to do it all the time while putting down a bunch of people is absurd.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Wait, BTerp, so you are saying you were just playing devil's advocate before???

Not sure that's what RShack is doing either, if it is, that's even worse. It's one thing to play devil's advocate occasionally, but to do it all the time while putting down a bunch of people is absurd.

Not all the time. But I have in the past.

The problem is not getting so engrossed in fighting what is perceived as a "mob mentality" that you are just arguing for it's own sake when the mob is actually correct.

[mweb]

Not all the time. But I have in the past.

The problem is not getting so engrossed in fighting what is perceived as a "mob mentality" that you are just arguing for it's own sake when the mob is actually correct.

It's hard to believe that's what you were doing or that's what RShack is doing because you and him were/are so consistent with your views.

[BaltimoreGhost]

Nope, no consolation prize. No nothing. However, if it is that ludricrous and empty of a goal, then why do people on this board talk about how bad the past 10 years have been with no winning seasons.

You have to make progress of some kind. You can't just bank on 2-3 years from now because of what you think you have. Injuries and everything else play a part. This even goes back to the Beane argument. If he doesn't see a chance at winning everything, he retools, looking to make things better next year -- even when he is winning.

Tampa could go from worst to first this year, but the year is not over. They have improved tremendously. So, if they don't win, it is a step in the right direction. If you don't get above .500, you can't improve, unless you want to say 85 losses is better than 93.

And look at Tampa when they tried to win with old washed up guys like Greg Vaughn, Canseco, Boggs...It took years of building organizational depth through the draft for them to compete. We can speed up that process a bit by taking what value we have and robbing other organizations of their depth as they desperately scramble to win a title.

[elsid]

And look at Tampa when they tried to win with old washed up guys like Greg Vaughn, Canseco, Boggs...It took years of building organizational depth through the draft for them to compete. We can speed up that process a bit by taking what value we have and robbing other organizations of their depth as they desperately scramble to win a title.

No one was questioning what Tampa did in the past or what the Orioles could do in the future. In fact, two of those, Canseco and Boggs, were just to put butts into seats. However, the issue still remains, in order to draw other personnel in, you have to have something. It doesn't necessarily have to be "something going", but it does have to be something.

Sure, you can try to use pieces of what you have now, in order to help build for the future. What do you do, if no one gives you what you want for them? Do you settle for what you can get? Or do you use a couple of those pieces to help bring in other players as a nucleus.

[Peace21]

So after a few days, does everyone still think we should deal at the deadline? Or Stand Pat?

[Black & Orange]

So after a few days, does everyone still think we should deal at the deadline? Or Stand Pat?

Deal as much veterans as we can. We are not going to be able to really compete with the beasts of the east just yet. We need to get the young guys going...