Eye On The Prize - Blow It Up

[66-70-83-??]

Getting back to the premise of the thread.....

The Orioles really need to trade Sherrill and Huff....They should be able to get very solid offers for each of these guys...I just hope AM doesn't have too high a price tag on them.

Offer Ramon to the Yanks and Marlins...Offer to pay up to 75% of his contract and don't expect much back at all.

I also think Payton and Bradford should be moved.

I would shop BRob as well.

I like Sherrill a lot.

But, he is the one guy who we must trade.

At the end of the day- he is only a good LH reliever.

He isn't a lights-out closer, everyday player, or SP.

RP's are the most inconsistent performers and the easiest to replace.

We need to parlay Sherrills good season into 2 prospects, now.

I am surprised the Phillies aren't interested in Ramon. Their catcher is awful.

[Greg Pappas]

Well, some things never change, and much of this thread is a good example of one of them.

The same pattern is repeated again, and again, and again, with some folks evidently being willfully blind to it.Here's the pattern:

• The Orioles hit a rough spell and lose a few in a row.
• In response, there are various threads in which somebody shouts "Blow it up!
• In the details that follow the "Blow it up!" chant, the same dogma is repeated like clockwork:
  • The O's suck, and are now showing their true crappy colors
  • There was no chance they would be any good, and this just proves it.
  • AM needs to get back to the One True Path and immediately trade some list of guys, each of whom are 30.
  • The reason he needs to do this is because this version of the team is going nowhere, this season supposedly doesn't count, and the guys who are 30 won't help in the future when the O's finally get good.
  • Therefore, AM must make deals (preferably "deadline deals") to get rid of players X, Y, and Z, each of whom are 30 or more, and get "prospects" in return.

  [*] Then, should anyone (me or anyone else) point out the basic logical fallacies with this idea, the standard response is that we must "want 10 more years of losing".

  [*] At which point, the claim is 100% guaranteed to be made that "We've tried everything else over the last 10 years, and none of that has worked, therefore it's time to "Blow it up!"

  [*] Of course, this claim is not true either. Apparently, some posters cannot tell the difference between bad implementations of good strategy vs. bad strategy. So, they fly like moths to the flame of bad strategy, i.e. "Blow it up!"

Then, when somebody (such as myself) points out how ludicrous this is, the Usual Suspects come out of the woodwork.

They unite in the following chorus:

• Nobody ever said that the O's should try to trade the guys who are 30.
• You're just making that up!
• Despite the fact that there are zillions of posts where people say exactly that we should trade the 30-yr-olds, they simply deny it's true.
• Then, one or more of them will tell *me* that I'm supposed to do their homework for them by finding all the posts where people utter the Same Old Thing.
• When I fail to take orders and do their homework for them, they somehow conclude that this proves that:
  • Nobody ever said that the O's should trade the 30-year-olds for prospects
  • Nobody ever shouted "Blow it up!" to demand that AM make panicky moves at the deadline
  • Everybody uses "Blow it up!" as just a synonym for completely rational and moderate franchise improvement, such as the kind of thing I recommend.

And it's always the same handful of guys who do this.

Frequently (but not always) they rep each other, as a way of offering shared approval of their complete denial about the pattern.

And then, the next time the O's drop a few, the same "Blow it up!" screams will happen again, with the same demands that AM "stick to the plan" and trade the 30-year-olds.

And if anybody points it out, the same Usual Suspects will engage in their usual fantasy-claims that it never ever happened.

Here's what I wonder:

Do these folks really believe that this does not routinely happen?

Or do they realize that it happens like clockwork but, for some reason, they just like to pretend it doesn't?

Anybody know?

RShack... don't you realize that you're part of the "same pattern"? How many dissertations do we need to read from you about your perceptions of the dynamics of certain chat-group mentalities? I rarely say anything negative here, but it's typically condescending and arrogant of you to attempt through your posts to make others feel stupid or beneath your standards of common sense.

You seem to be a smart guy, and you're likely well educated, as your writing style is top notch... it's just that sometimes, well actually more than just sometimes, you seem to post to make yourself feel better about being smarter and more observant than others. I expect that I'll take heat for my comments, but they are intended to point out the hypocrisy in the message you send. My apologies in advance if I offended anyone, staff included.

[DrungoHazewood]

RShack... don't you realize that you're part of the "same pattern"? How many dissertations do we need to read from you about your perceptions of the dynamics of certain chat-group mentalities? I rarely say anything negative here, but it's typically condescending and arrogant of you to attempt through your posts to make others feel stupid or beneath your standards of common sense.

You seem to be a smart guy, and you're likely well educated, as your writing style is top notch... it's just that sometimes, well actually more than just sometimes, you seem to post to make yourself feel better about being smarter and more observant than others. I expect that I'll take heat for my comments, but they are intended to point out the hypocrisy in the message you send. My apolgies in advance if I offended anyone, staff included.

You haven't offended me.

[LuckyHorseshoe]

LOL...What exactly is this post supposed to add?

Anyone with the ability to think and research can come up with a reasonable suggestion as to what it would take to extend/sign certain guys.

Its not difficult...A trained monkey could figure it out.

Here . . . have a banana

Anyone can throw out a number and CALL it reasonable. If anyone could look in a crystal ball and predict the outcome of a negotion months in the future, why post any more detail than "resign Roberts"? After all, any of you trained monkeys can fill in the numbers. If as rumors suggest, we are up against the Yankees in pursuit of Texeira, then we have no idea what kind of dollars it will take. Go explain your concept of "reasonable" numbers to Familia Steinbrenner.

[Sports Guy]

You haven't offended me.

If anything, he held back too much!

[Sports Guy]

Here . . . have a banana

Anyone can throw out a number and CALL it reasonable. If anyone could look in a crystal ball and predict the outcome of a negotion months in the future, why post any more detail than "resign Roberts"? After all, any of you trained monkeys can fill in the numbers. If as rumors suggest, we are up against the Yankees in pursuit of Texeira, then we have no idea what kind of dollars it will take. Go explain your concept of "reasonable" numbers to Familia Steinbrenner.

You can still put up a reasonable prediction.

You have a pretty good idea of the years and money.

[mweb]

I just want to add that the "blow it up" crowd is not reactionary as Rshack suggests. A 5 game winning streak, 5 game losing streak, whatever, it doesn't change what we want done. Sure, there are some who are more easily swayed by how the team is performing, but those are not people who are part of the group that Rshack regularly bashes.

And yes, people, including myself want some 30 somethings traded, but we do not want all of the 30 somethings traded, which you have claimed we do many times. Is that so hard to understand? You have also said this group doesn't want 30 somethings on the O's in the future as well. Obviously an absurd statement.

[AlBumbry]

I like Sherrill a lot.

But, he is the one guy who we must trade.

At the end of the day- he is only a good LH reliever.

He isn't a lights-out closer, everyday player, or SP.

RP's are the most inconsistent performers and the easiest to replace.

We need to parlay Sherrills good season into 2 prospects, now.

I am surprised the Phillies aren't interested in Ramon. Their catcher is awful.

I'm beginning to think this isn't really the case, even though it seems like it is a generally accepted idea. There really doesn't seem to be a whole lot of teams with really good bullpens around . . . if it is so easy to find these guys, why don't teams do it? And if they're so inconsistent, shouldn't we be looking to flip Johnson too, since there is no guarantee that he will be good again next year? And when Ray comes back, if he does well, we should flip him as well, since we'd be able to easily replace him?

I apologize for how this is probably coming off, but this concept of how easy it is to construct a bullpen needs to be challenged a bit I think (you just happened to be the lucky poster ).

[mweb]

I'm beginning to think this isn't really the case, even though it seems like it is a generally accepted idea. There really doesn't seem to be a whole lot of teams with really good bullpens around . . . if it is so easy to find these guys, why don't teams do it? And if they're so inconsistent, shouldn't we be looking to flip Johnson too, since there is no guarantee that he will be good again next year? And when Ray comes back, if he does well, we should flip him as well, since we'd be able to easily replace him?

I apologize for how this is probably coming off, but this concept of how easy it is to construct a bullpen needs to be challenged a bit I think (you just happened to be the lucky poster ).

It's not easy to construct a good bullpen imo, but that's because a lot of relievers are inconsistent and there's typically at least a couple unproven young guys/journeymen in the pen who are even harder to predict.

It is however easier to find relievers who will be good for at least one year because more guys that can be had cheaply perform surprisingly well compared to other positions.

Some relievers are pretty consistent, and those are the elite guys, the ones who get paid a lot(too much if they close) once they are eligible for free agency.

Concerning trades, I think closers are quite overrated, so I'd have no problem trading Ray if he establishes himself as a good closer, and thus has good value on the market. Good relievers who aren't closers are actually underrated imo, so I'd hang onto to them if I thought they were going to continue to be good.

[Sports Guy]

I just want to add that the "blow it up" crowd is not reactionary as Rshack suggests. A 5 game winning streak, 5 game losing streak, whatever, it doesn't change what we want done. Sure, there are some who are more easily swayed by how the team is performing, but those are not people who are part of the group that Rshack regularly bashes.

And yes, people, including myself want some 30 somethings traded. but we do not want all of the 30 somethings traded, which you have claimed we do many times. Is that so hard to understand? You have also said this group doesn't want 30 somethings on the O's in the future as well. Obviously an absurd statement.

And what is always funny is how rshack doesn't ever acknowledge the reason behind wanting to trade 30 somethings.

The idea that they normally tend to decline...That they are expensive and with that, you can get younger talent, doing similar things for less money.

[LuckyHorseshoe]

Huh?

Nice plan- digging up Ruth and Johnson.

I can see you are starting off on the right foot here.

You are doing the same thing that rshack does- generalizing about a whole lot of posters and attributing things to posters that aren't there.

If not, prove it:

Who are THOSE posters who say to sign Teix for whatever it takes?

Who are THOSE posters who say sign CC, BUrnett, Teix, Roberts, Markakis all in this offseason?

Links? Names? Examples?

Baltfan in post 48 of thread titled "Orioles need Burnett" said :

"Let's really go for broke -- Sabathia, Sheets, Burnett, and Teixeira. Hope for a championship. If not sell them all off. Worst that happens is you drop an extra $70 mil next year and don't win."

That is pretty close to what I said. Hopefully you wont nitpick and hold me to a direct quote. I will be back with the rest . . .

[66-70-83-??]

I'm beginning to think this isn't really the case, even though it seems like it is a generally accepted idea. There really doesn't seem to be a whole lot of teams with really good bullpens around . . . if it is so easy to find these guys, why don't teams do it? And if they're so inconsistent, shouldn't we be looking to flip Johnson too, since there is no guarantee that he will be good again next year? And when Ray comes back, if he does well, we should flip him as well, since we'd be able to easily replace him?

I apologize for how this is probably coming off, but this concept of how easy it is to construct a bullpen needs to be challenged a bit I think (you just happened to be the lucky poster ).

Who are relief pitchers?

They are the pitchers, who for whatever reason (lack of stuff or stamina, for ex) couldn't cut it as starting pitchers.

And among the relievers- the ones with the best stuff are usually made to be closers.

So, it is only natural- the middle relievers (ie the ones who don't have the stuff to be closers or the stamina/stuff to be starters) are going to be more in supply and more inconsistent...........or else they would be starters or closers!

On a rebuilding team- worrying about getting good relievers should be last on the shopping list, imo.

[LuckyHorseshoe]

Huh?

Nice plan- digging up Ruth and Johnson.

I can see you are starting off on the right foot here.

You are doing the same thing that rshack does- generalizing about a whole lot of posters and attributing things to posters that aren't there.

If not, prove it:

Who are THOSE posters who say to sign Teix for whatever it takes?

Who are THOSE posters who say sign CC, BUrnett, Teix, Roberts, Markakis all in this offseason?

Links? Names? Examples?

larrytt in the original post of a thread titled "Front office ToDo list by next year" said:

"1) Free Agent Signings: Pay whatever it takes to sign Teixera. "

Any more busy work that any trained monkey can do?

[bigbird]

Getting back to the premise of the thread.....

The Orioles really need to trade Sherrill and Huff....They should be able to get very solid offers for each of these guys...I just hope AM doesn't have too high a price tag on them.

Offer Ramon to the Yanks and Marlins...Offer to pay up to 75% of his contract and don't expect much back at all.

I also think Payton and Bradford should be moved.

I would shop BRob as well.

Would you deal Huff and Sherrill for a package similar to what NYY gave up for Nady and Marte???

[LuckyHorseshoe]

Yet ANY specific idea that gets thrown out on a message board is just fodder for talk. We don't really know whether any specific idea that's thrown out has any basis in reality. So it's not RShack's thing. That's cool. I'm not sure why people are asking RShack for a specific plan (except as a reaction to his criticism of other specific plans). One of his points is (obviously paraphrased) "How the heck am I supposed to know the specifics. I'm not Andy MacPhail on the phone with opposing teams. I don't know and you don't know what is specifically plausible."

I agree with you that if one follows the game close enough and does enough internet 'research', one can throw out proposals that one could speculate might have some basis in reality. That's your thing (you enjoy that kind of speculation). That's cool too. To each their own.

Thank you. I wish I had your knack for a "kinder, gentler" post. This is what I was trying to say and didnt mean to be a jerk when I said it.