Chris Davis 2019 and beyond

[weams]

34 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t want to hear that excuse.    Tampa and Oakland may not be great every season, but they’ve managed to be good more often than not without falling into an abyss.   We were 78 games over .500 in 2012-16 and then 80 games under .500 the next two years.    Now we’re 35 games under this season with at least a couple more years of losing in front of us.    Not a great outcome IMO.

Really? Tampa was at the very bottom for a long time before they got to the sustainably mediocre stage. Oakland innovated the entire league. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I certainly was, and don't regret it for a minute.  I enjoyed wins.  And I will again when they eventually come back.

I'm in the I hate losing more than I love winning camp.

[weams]

27 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Sure.   Some were for that, some were against it.    But regardless of where anyone stood on that, the execution of the plan was poor.     There’s no point in re-litigating it all now; what’s done is done and we are where we are.   

I was. I wanted to win during those five years. I hoped we would do better than we did. And several of the trades were bad. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, weams said:

Really? Tampa was at the very bottom for a long time before they got to the sustainably mediocre stage. Oakland innovated the entire league. 

They won 102 regular season games the year before they "innovated the entire league".

[DrungoHazewood]

34 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t want to hear that excuse.    Tampa and Oakland may not be great every season, but they’ve managed to be good more often than not without falling into an abyss.   We were 78 games over .500 in 2012-16 and then 80 games under .500 the next two years.    Now we’re 35 games under this season with at least a couple more years of losing in front of us.    Not a great outcome IMO.

We don't know for sure about the root causes, but the Orioles had at least seven or eight GMs in a row who didn't do much of anything for the organization's future growth and sustainability.  If it was one or two and then they changed course that would be one thing.  But with seven or eight I have to assume Angelos wouldn't allow for the steps necessary to build a long-term sustainable system with investments in the minors, amateur scouting, international development, etc.

If that's the case, I think Duquette did a pretty fair job, better than almost any of his predecessors under Angelos, at winning with shackles on.

[interloper]

8 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

My biggest reason for optimism is I do not believe for one second Elias comes here unless he is on the same page with ownership.

Over time we will find out how it works but it was never going to work with how Peter ran things.  

I think they are mostly on the same page with the majority of the new direction. I do think ownership has the right to have a few caveats when they hire anybody in Elias' role. Certainly Elias had a good enough thing going in Houston where he wouldn't have to say yes if he had a bad vibe. So I think he has about as much control as any GM has had here since PA has been the owner, and thus he's here. The international effort is proof enough.

That said, do I think there was Davis caveat? Yes, of course I do. The Davis Thing cannot be handled by Elias alone, as much as we want it to be. Davis is getting paid an historic amount, it was a deal brokered by Peter himself, there's a lot of baggage there that hugely affects the value of the franchise. He was always going to get this full year, I think, even though I myself have wavered on that here and there. I will not be surprised to see him in ST, either. They will carry him until it is absolutely indefensible from a winning or development standpoint to do so. That time is approaching, but it's not here yet. With some roster reorganization/trades, it may not be there next year either, even with Mountcastle on the roster. 

Does that negate all the good Elias will bring? No, of course not. But yes, we have to wait and see just how much rope Davis gets because sooner or later it will interfere with Elias' plan. That fear is understandable, but it doesn't make Elias a bad GM nor does it make the Angelos Bros. bad owners. It's just not that simple. 

[weams]

26 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They won 102 regular season games the year before they "innovated the entire league".

And had they let it go like that, their window would have shut then. 

[weams]

26 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

We don't know for sure about the root causes, but the Orioles had at least seven or eight GMs in a row who didn't do much of anything for the organization's future growth and sustainability.  If it was one or two and then they changed course that would be one thing.  But with seven or eight I have to assume Angelos wouldn't allow for the steps necessary to build a long-term sustainable system with investments in the minors, amateur scouting, international development, etc.

If that's the case, I think Duquette did a pretty fair job, better than almost any of his predecessors under Angelos, at winning with shackles on.

He came, he said he would win, when he did not he was gone. 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, weams said:

And had they let it go like that, their window would have shut then. 

Tejada, Chavez, Hudson, Zito and Mulder were all more important than any moneyball additions.

Without that traditional core of players they wouldn't even be a footnote.

[weams]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Tejada, Chavez, Hudson, Zito and Mulder were all more important than any moneyball additions.

Without that traditional core of players they wouldn't even be a footnote.

Weren't they all scheduled to leave? 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, weams said:

Weren't they all scheduled to leave? 

When they left they stopped winning 100 games a year.  Barely won 90. 

Almost as if the really good players were the important part.

[weams]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

When they left they stopped winning 100 games a year.  Barely won 90. 

Almost as if the really good players were the important part.

No doubt. Even more proof that a small market team has an unsustainable window of opportunities. 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

51 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

We don't know for sure about the root causes, but the Orioles had at least seven or eight GMs in a row who didn't do much of anything for the organization's future growth and sustainability.  If it was one or two and then they changed course that would be one thing.  But with seven or eight I have to assume Angelos wouldn't allow for the steps necessary to build a long-term sustainable system with investments in the minors, amateur scouting, international development, etc.

If that's the case, I think Duquette did a pretty fair job, better than almost any of his predecessors under Angelos, at winning with shackles on.

Duquette did a good job at acquiring players whose career was going nowhere or were undervalued . Miguel Gonzalez, McClouth, Brach, and O'Day all contributed and weren't hot commodities when they joined the Orioles. 

Also helped that the Orioles hit on some first round draft picks before Duquette arrived. Duquette's effectiveness or perhaps influence waned after his flirtation with the Blue Jays. A behind the scenes look at the Orioles from 2011 to 2018 would make for a fascinating read.    

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, weams said:

No doubt. Even more proof that a small market team has an unsustainable window of opportunities. 

If by small market you mean 90%+ of all sporting teams in the US.  Doesn't mean you sacrifice the future for a shot at the second wild card.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Duquette did a good job at acquiring players whose career was going nowhere or were undervalued . Miguel Gonzalez, McClouth, Brach, and O'Day all contributed and weren't hot commodities when they joined the Orioles. 

Also helped that the Orioles hit on some first round draft picks before Duquette arrived. Duquette's effectiveness or perhaps influence waned after his flirtation with the Blue Jays. A behind the scenes look at the Orioles from 2011 to 2018 would make for a fascinating read.    

Dan didn't acquire O'Day, unless of course you mean when he outbid the Nationals.