Eye On The Prize - Blow It Up

[RShack]

This is a perfectly reasonable opinion. I don't think anybody would have a problem with this even if they disagreed with it.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Some folks were claiming that if you didn't agree that AM absolutely, positively *had* to trade Bedard, then you *wanted* another 10 years of losing.

You can look it up. (And, before one of the Usual Suspects chimes in, no, I'm not gonna do your homework for you, you can look it up yourself as easy as I can.)

Would you wait 5 or 6 years to fix a franchise when you can do it in 3 or 4? Would you wait 4 years to fix a franchise when you can fix it in 2 or 3?

Of course not. But that wasn't the choice. At the time, I said that trading him might speed it up, but it could also make no difference, and it could also slow it down. Meanwhile, some folks at the time were arguing that AM should hurry up and take *less* than what he got.

Look, these things can go either way, and you just never know what's gonna happen. Let's say AM had swapped him for just 3 guys like SG wanted him to do, and let's say Sherrill proved to be just a LOOGY, AJ broke his leg like Newhan did, and Erik was being Cy Young. What would people be saying then? And before you say "Oh, it was almost certain, bad stuff like that just doesn't happen", well, just ask yourself about Glenn Davis. Nobody thought it likely that he was gonna have vertigo, but he did. And now people remember it as one of the worst trades ever. You can't have it both ways.

Now, my point is not those specific details, my point is the same point I made at the time: What matters is that AM fix the franchise from top to bottom. To me, what's important is that he does that, and whether it takes a year or two shorter or longer doesn't matter very much to me. I have no interest in the O's becoming either the Marlins who are up and down like a yo-yo, or the A's who always trade their good guys and who never quite get there.

You're not going to get the same talent Bedard would bring back, but if you have people who know how to evaluate talent, you should get back multiple players that will contribute at the major league level and be under your control for 5 or 6 years at a cheap cost.

I think that's just dreaming. For BRob, maybe, but only if everything goes right and if everybody you get comes through. But to claim that that's what "should" happen, that you can somehow expect multiple guys from one trade to be long-time ML difference makers is just naive. It tells me that you're not thinking straight about the likelihood of "prospects" paying off. And for anybody expect BRob, what you said is just flat-out wishful thinking.

This is where we run into problems. You don't have a clue as to what McPhail would do if he had another Bedard on his roster. Neither do I.... I just don't see why you have to speculate on what McPhail would do if he had another Bedard on the roster to make your point because in reality neither of us has a clue as to what he would do under that circumstance.

Sure we do. Right now, one thing that AM is evidently targeting is SP. He's gonna be looking at either signing a good, megabuck FA to risky long-term deal, or else giving up a ton to trade for a good one, or else giving up more moderate stuff for a run-of-the-mill guy. To think he would trade another Bedard right now is, IMO, just goofy. And it's not that I "have to speculate", it's that somebody said they wanted another trade like the Bedard trade. I think it's entirely reasonable to think that if he had another Bedard, he's keep him.

But there are a couple smaller deals that could fetch us some pretty good talent in return.

Maybe. Maybe not. And the "pretty good talent" may or may not ever make a difference at the ML level. I'm certainly not saying they won't, but acting like it's highly probable is just wrong. Go check out the SABR numbers Boom Boom posted about prospects actually amounting to anything. Even for a Top 10 guy, it was less than half, and after that it got worse in a hurry. And that was for position players, for P's it was way worse than that. That's not me saying that, that was stuff from a SABR journal. And, face it, the smaller deals you're talking about are not gonna get us a Top 10 guy, not even close.

The goal is to be smart about the deals you make and determine the repercussions they could have.

No it's not. The goal is to get better and better. Whether you do that by trades or by other means is 100% irrelevant. It does not matter one bit. However, I'll betcha anything that, the next time the O's go to the WS, most of the 15-guys who matter don't get here by trades, and that probably none of them get here by "deadline deals". Wanna bet?

You have to look at each individual player and situation differently and ask yourself if by trading this player and getting this offer in return, will my team be better in the long run.

That's exactly right. Which is way different than yelling "Blow it up!"

Well, can you just deal with it if that does happen to be the case and not complain about it?

What, are you going to gloat if/when he doesn't?

Hey, I haven't been complaining about AM, that comes from people who think he hasn't made enough trades fast enough. And, as for gloating, what in the world are you talking about? Where have I "gloated" about anything. The only folks who I've ever seen gloating are those who somehow claim that trading Erik somehow "proves" that AM buys their "blow it up" nonsense. The only thing I've said about that is that it's BS conclusion to draw, based on not much. Next time you see me gloat, you point it out OK? And, while you're at it, why don't you call the Actual Gloaters on the same thing when they do it?

[allstar1579]

Hate interjecting with such an intelligent conversation going on, it's been a good read, but I think the question to ask is looking at this team, trade chips and cornerstone's alike, when do we think we could compete? Is it when our young prospects are up with a season or two under their belt? Is it when we can acquire proven ML talent? Then with that time frame considered is when we make our move.

I just really think we are somewhere between "blowing it up" and "tinkering". Looking at opening day next year, we have a couple good young ML pieces in Markakis, Jones, Wieters, Guthrie, Johnson, and Ray. We have a couple solid mid-aged ML pieces in Roberts, Scott, Sherrill, and Huff. That is 10/25 of our roster. Then we have Arietta, Tillman, Reimold, Hernandez, Liz, Olson, Penn, Albers, Patton and Bergeson knocking on the door.

Could we compete in 2010-11 if we signed 2-3 FA and kept our current pieces? Would we get back talent that would be ready to contribute in 2010 by dealing Sherrill or Roberts? Do we have a better shot at resigning Roberts after being more competitive this season than predicted?

There should be no clear cut answer one way or the other. We should accept any overwhelming offers now, concentrate on some key FA in the offseason, and then reevaluate next April how far off we are.

[LuckyHorseshoe]

I deleted this post as the thread has moved on. Took it to private mail

[RShack]

This post is so intellectually dishonest and disingenuous as to be truly despicable.

Thanks for raising the level of the discussion.

[Sports Guy]

What matters is that AM fix the franchise from top to bottom. To me, what's important is that he does that, and whether it takes a year or two shorter or longer doesn't matter very much to me. I have no interest in the O's becoming either the Marlins who are up and down like a yo-yo, or the A's who always trade their good guys and who never quite get there.

This is from Rshack.

This is really the crux of the argument IMO.

I think even Rshack would agree that you trade anyone you get good value for and make the organization better, both now and in the future.

I don't think anyone, for the most, really disagrees with that concept. We can disagree about the players in return or whatever but the basic concept is agreed upon with everyone.

The real different is what Shack is saying here(in the bold)...The idea that he isn't in a hurry...That doesn't make him right or wrong and it doesn't make the rest of us right or wrong either. It is just a patience thing.

Most of us want to win sooner than later...Shack is fine if that it happens later.

Now, for him to say that our way doesn't help us win now and late ror whatever is completely wrong and shows a total misunderstanding for basic principles but really, what it is boiling down to, IMO, is time table.

[Pre-Highlanders]

Just a friendly reminder to all that this is a (great) internet message board about a baseball team. It might not be worth involving your identity in it to the point that a "mean" poster strikes you as "despicable." it might be time to take a walk outside or at least make a mental note that there are tragedies in this world much greater than having one's rebuilding proposal disrespected, and that we undermine our ability to express and feel accurately when we enegage in rhetorical inflation.

[Sports Guy]

Hate interjecting with such an intelligent conversation going on, it's been a good read, but I think the question to ask is looking at this team, trade chips and cornerstone's alike, when do we think we could compete? Is it when our young prospects are up with a season or two under their belt? Is it when we can acquire proven ML talent? Then with that time frame considered is when we make our move.

I just really think we are somewhere between "blowing it up" and "tinkering". Looking at opening day next year, we have a couple good young ML pieces in Markakis, Jones, Wieters, Guthrie, Johnson, and Ray. We have a couple solid mid-aged ML pieces in Roberts, Scott, Sherrill, and Huff. That is 10/25 of our roster. Then we have Arietta, Tillman, Reimold, Hernandez, Liz, Olson, Penn, Albers, Patton and Bergeson knocking on the door.

Could we compete in 2010-11 if we signed 2-3 FA and kept our current pieces? Would we get back talent that would be ready to contribute in 2010 by dealing Sherrill or Roberts? Do we have a better shot at resigning Roberts after being more competitive this season than predicted?

There should be no clear cut answer one way or the other. We should accept any overwhelming offers now, concentrate on some key FA in the offseason, and then reevaluate next April how far off we are.

I think the thing that is overlooked way too many times on this board is to look at what the other teams in the AL are doing.

Let's take our division...TB is set up for years it seems....Boston and NY have improved their farm systems a lot and they have a ton of cash..They aren't going anywhere.

Go to the Central....KC has some good young talent and could be an up and coming team very soon...The Indians have a great GM, solid system and a good foundation for a good long run....The White sox have money and a GM who is aggressive and gets things done...They will probably usually be an 80-95 win team in most seasons....The Tigers have money and a lot of talent and they will be able to spend in the draft and get their farm system back to where it was before all their offseason deals. The Twins are always going to be there because they are so smart.

Then go to the West....Anaheim is one of the best organizations in the sport...Beane has loaded himself up with young talent and Texas has some good pitching coming up on top of an already great offense.

That really leaves us with Toronto and Seattle...Seattle could easily bounce back quickly and Toronto has some young talent and a good staff...They are probably the team teetering towards being bad the most because of some of the contracts they have and a lack of a good farm system.

This stuff can't be overlooked...With the wildcard, we aren't just competing with our division...We are competing with everyone.

Almost every other team is either really good and will usually be good or is building towards something very good.

The Orioles, still IMO, are in the middle. They don't have nearly enough long term to compete with these guys and the only way of getting that is to do these things:

1) Make trades for the young talent you need.

2) Sign a lot of free agents and hope you get lucky with the young pitching.

3) Just wait another 3-5 years and keep adding to the system.

Personally, i think you take something from all 3 of those things. You makes the deals when they work for you, you sprinkle in the RIGHT free agents and then you continue building through International FA and the draft.

For years, the Orioles ignored the trade market and drafted poorly...They spent some money but did that terribly as well.

Now, they are starting to get away from those things and we are looking better but we have miles to go before we get to that finish line and you have a fan base that is tired of losing.

[LuckyHorseshoe]

I have no interest in the O's becoming either the Marlins who are up and down like a yo-yo, or the A's who always trade their good guys and who never quite get there.

Those franchises do that because of money concerns that should never be an issue for the Orioles. If I could build through the farm as those teams have but have the Oriole money to keep my stars here, I would do it in a heartbeat. They dont trade guys for prospects by choice but out of fiscal necessity.

I think that's just dreaming. For BRob, maybe, but only if everything goes right and if everybody you get comes through. But to claim that that's what "should" happen, that you can somehow expect multiple guys from one trade to be long-time ML difference makers is just naive. It tells me that you're not thinking straight about the likelihood of "prospects" paying off. And for anybody expect BRob, what you said is just flat-out wishful thinking.

While we all (presumably) agree that 100% of your trades or prospects dont work out, time comes when you have to make a deal. I dont care if it is 5 for 1 or 1 for 1. I care about value and I care about fit. We do not have a long term answer at SS in the organization. At some point we will likely have to look outside for our starter there. You also neglect the fact that Roberts might not want to sign here. We dont know if he or the team has not stepped up to the plate. I dont know if the team hasnt thrown out a fair market contract. I dont know if Brian has turned down a fair market contract. I dont know if Brian will sign here at any price. The team presumably knows these things or at least has an idea.

Sure we do. Right now, one thing that AM is evidently targeting is SP. He's gonna be looking at either signing a good, megabuck FA to risky long-term deal, or else giving up a ton to trade for a good one, or else giving up more moderate stuff for a run-of-the-mill guy. To think he would trade another Bedard right now is, IMO, just goofy. And it's not that I "have to speculate", it's that somebody said they wanted another trade like the Bedard trade. I think it's entirely reasonable to think that if he had another Bedard, he's keep him.

If I am reading too much into your post let me know but of course he would trade another Bedard if we thought we were getting superior talent in return. Internally I believe we knew he didnt have the intestinal fortitude to be an ace/stopper even if he was a number one starter. We got better value than we gave up. Granted that has to be estimated at the time you pull the trigger and you wont know definitively til down the road but the same can be said for keeping him. Trading a pitcher might end up being a Dennis Martinez or John Maine situation or it might end up being a Bedard situation. Keeping him can be Jim Palmer or could be Sidney Ponson. Those decisions are why the GM gets the big bucks and also why the get the hook. But if you mean literally another Bedard, with his warts as well as his strengths, I say we would make that trade again in a heartbeat. Maybe with a SS instead of Scott this time although Truinfels suspension is worrisome.

"No it's not. The goal is to get better and better.

Here you go again telling someone their opinion is wrong and yours is right. Next person will say "No its not. The goal is win more and more." Then the next person says "no it is not winning more and more. It is making the playoffs". and then the next guy says "No it is not about the playoffs. It is about winning the World Series." And then the next guy says it is not the WS, it is the Olympics . . . bleah

[LuckyHorseshoe]

The flaw in this line of thinking is that Tampa was among baseballs worst over the last 10 plus years. They often drafted in the top two or three slots.

in 2008 Tampa (Beckman) 1st -----O's 4th (Matsuz)

in 2007 Tampa (David Price) 1st -----O's 5th (Wieters) (Point A ***)

in 2006 Tampa (Longoria) 3rd ---- O's 10th (Rowell)

in 2005 Tampa (Townsend) 8th ----- O's 13th (Snyder)

in 2004 Tampa (Neimann) 4th ----- O's 8th (Townsend)

in 2003 Tampa (D. Young) 1st ------ O's 7th (Markakis)

in 2002 Tampa (BJ Upton) 2nd ----- O's 4th (Lowen)

in 2001 Tampa (Brazelton) 3rd ----O's 7th (Smith)(B**Tex 5th,Floyd 4th)

in 2000 Tampa (Baldelli) 6th ------ O's 13th (Hale)

in 1999 Tampa (Josh Hamilton) 1st----- O's 13th (Paradis)

In 10 years of drafting the Rays had the opportunity to draft the best player available 4 Times & their average draft slot was 3rd & never drafting lower than 8th. At the same time the Orioles have never had the opportunity to get the best player and the average draft slot was 8th & they only drafted better than 7th 3 times & out of the top 10 picks 3times. Obviously in 2007 Tampa as everyone else in front of the O's passed on Wieters because of signing concerns. I guess my point is for the O's to do it the way Tampa did we would need 10 more years of Bad baseball (But really 10 more years of WORSE baseball). I realize that the O's picks from the list above outside of Markakis could be blamed on bad selections(I didnt mention Matsuz & Wieters as the jury is still out as they haven't reached the majors yet). But would the Orioles selected the players Tampa did over the same period had they been available?

In that span Longoria 3rd, Delmon Young 1st, BJ Upton 2nd, & Jeffrey Niemann are current pieces of their roster. I am not counting Beckman & Price as the jury is still out). Depite injuries Baldelli was a contributor at the majors for Tampa for a number of years. And we all know about Josh Hamilton So in 10 selections the Rays have busted twice with Wade Townsend & Brazelton.

In that same period only Markakis has made any real contribution to the Orioles or another major league team.

The problem with this is that Jordan has only been running our drafts for four drafts and the current "plan" as set forth by McPhail has only been in place one year. The preceding front office personnel and "plans" have been less than competent so going back ten years is somewhat misleading. I would also say that an argument could be made that Roberts, Maine, and several others have made contributions although all but Roberts could be argued depnding on your definition of "real".

[mweb]

Who is "we"?

Sure. It appears to be a great trade, for all the obvious reasons.

I was never against AM maybe trading Bedard, depending. I hated the idea of losing Bedard, but I thought it might well be advisable, depending.

I disagreed 100% with those who claimed he absolutely, positively had to do it.

I decided to do some research on your posts pre Bedard trade to find out if this was indeed your position.

So far I have this: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56752&highlight=bedard&page=10

"Once whatever trades get done, and we find out exactly who the prospects are, I can't wait to see how people react after that. That will be great fun. Once we get whatever we get, and we're in the middle of 162 games of kids playing like kids, that's when the real fun will start. I predict with 100% confidence that the most of the Very Same People who want to trade proven stars for less-than-top-tier kids now are gonna be wetting their britches when they see what happens on the field. I'll eat crow without any condiments if that doesn't happen. Anybody can feel free to bookmark this and throw it in my face later. You think the panic we see today is bad? You ain't seen nothing yet ;-)"

That was from a Bedard thread. Still have 100% confidence in that? Ready to eat crow?

Not exactly what I was looking for, but it will do for now. Maybe more to come.

[RShack]

I decided to do some research on your posts pre Bedard trade to find out if this was indeed your position.

So far I have this: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56752&highlight=bedard&page=10

"Once whatever trades get done, and we find out exactly who the prospects are, I can't wait to see how people react after that. That will be great fun. Once we get whatever we get, and we're in the middle of 162 games of kids playing like kids, that's when the real fun will start. I predict with 100% confidence that the most of the Very Same People who want to trade proven stars for less-than-top-tier kids now are gonna be wetting their britches when they see what happens on the field. I'll eat crow without any condiments if that doesn't happen. Anybody can feel free to bookmark this and throw it in my face later. You think the panic we see today is bad? You ain't seen nothing yet ;-)"

That was from a Bedard thread. Still have 100% confidence in that? Ready to eat crow?

Not exactly what I was looking for, but it will do for now. Maybe more to come.

I think it's exactly accurate. We were gonna have kids in the rotation, which is what's happened, and they're taking their lumps, which was predictable, and lots of people are freaking about it. So, what's your point?

[Doyle Hargraves]

Maybe we need a forum where banished posters can post when they are on a time-out. Kind of an exile island or prison colony concept, similar to what Australia and Georgia used to be. Then when the ad nauseum bickering starts send the offenders to banish land where they can slug it out until they drop from exhaustion.

[mweb]

I think it's exactly accurate. We were gonna have kids in the rotation, which is what's happened, and they're taking their lumps, which was predictable, and lots of people are freaking about it. So, what's your point?

You have got to be kidding me. Who is freaking out about poor play? It's not most of the blow it up crowd, that much is obvious, and that's who you said would be freaking out.

It's so sad when people can't admit they were wrong when it's blatantly clear that they were indeed wrong.

[Saintbird]

Hey guys check out the o's videos thread it has a lot of videos and some you may never see again I had trouble finding some

[Roll Tide]

When I say look at Tampa, it's not allways where you pick, its how you pick. Yes I agree that If you have the top picks then the odds are with you for not getting a bust but it's not a gaurentee. If you look at the O's thier latter 1st round picks, sup. picks and later round picks are much better in the eyes of some.

Then if you continue to look since 1999, the Orioles are playing Roberts, Olsen, Ray (when he returns), Dcab, Liz, Bedard and Maine Traded, Penn Close, Reimold Close, Not to mention most of our top prospects (weiters and Matuz (sp) excluded) that were all drafted after our 1st pick or even after the first round.

Sorry for the late response ... I agree some have been good & some haven't. Jeffrey Hammonds wasn't & Bedard was. But the top tier picks which you success rates should be pretty the Orioles haven't been all that good (Hammonds, Chris Smith, Beu Hale etc etc etc) Over the same period Tampa was piling up on the stud picks. Certainly blame can be put on our draft selections but also the big difference is the high % guys were gone. Kind of like when we wanted Texeria & Gavin Floyd & would end up with Chris Smith. So we were just good enough to keep from getting the top chips.