Theo Epstein

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Spending more on those two is generally better than spending less.

I'm inclined to agree, but we don't know why all the money wasn't spent.  

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm inclined to agree, but we don't know why all the money wasn't spent.  

 

I agree that we don't, but the trend isn't good.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Do we know how much they spent in the international draft relative to their budget.   Also in the amateur draft.     If I recall we were a few hundred thousand under what we could have spent before hitting any penalty in the amateur.    As for the international, they have definitely stepped up their efforts and their spending sine Elias and Perez came on board.    

As for the Angelos boys it's tough to judge because  the team is in rebuilding mode when it's typical to have a low payroll and 2) we are in uncharted waters with Covid-19 and all of the lost revenue from the 2020 season.     It certainly seems their intentions were to do things differently than their father and what most of us would consider the right way by investing in the amatuer end of the business to get a proper flow of talent coming up through the system.

Which was more than any other team this draft.

 

[Frobby]

59 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Which was more than any other team this draft.

 

I feel you are making a mountain out of a molehill.    The team has a certain amount to spend on the draft.   They choose 6 guys believing that they can get them signed within that budget.   They do a good negotiating and sign all six but end up spending a quarter million dollars less than their budget.   To me that isn’t a problem.    As to international, they are still catching up to the other teams that had commitments from the big ticket guys before Elias and Perez were in our organization.    We knew it would take three years to fully ramp up here.   We made a lot of progress in year one even if we didn’t spend all our allotment because there weren’t enough good players around to spend it on.    Year two is reported to be better than year one but we haven’t seen the results because of the postponement of the signing date. To me we are moving in the right direction there and making excellent strides.    I am not going to judge success or constraints based on whether they spent every last dime.   

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I feel you are making a mountain out of a molehill.    The team has a certain amount to spend on the draft.   They choose 6 guys believing that they can get them signed within that budget.   They do a good negotiating and sign all six but end up spending a quarter million dollars less than their budget.   To me that isn’t a problem.    As to international, they are still catching up to the other teams that had commitments from the big ticket guys before Elias and Perez were in our organization.    We knew it would take three years to fully ramp up here.   We made a lot of progress in year one even if we didn’t spend all our allotment because there weren’t enough good players around to spend it on.    Year two is reported to be better than year one but we haven’t seen the results because of the postponement of the signing date. To me we are moving in the right direction there and making excellent strides.    I am not going to judge success or constraints based on whether they spent every last dime.   

Or Elias is given a budget that is less than the allotment allowed them and he makes draft decisions (going underslot in first round perhaps?) based on those constraints.

I'll accept that your scenario is possible, but I think mine is as well.

As to international, they managed to spend their full allotment the period before but they couldn't find enough players this period?   Did you see the Dodgers just signed a 16 year old that had ties to the Yankees?

 

I might very well be wrong about all of this, but I might be right and if I am it's going to be very hard for Elias to build a winner.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

You're making progress.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or Elias is given a budget that is less than the allotment allowed them and he makes draft decisions (going underslot in first round perhaps?) based on those constraints.

I'll accept that your scenario is possible, but I think mine is as well.

As to international, they managed to spend their full allotment the period before but they couldn't find enough players this period?

The O’s only spent about $2 mm in the 2018-19 signing period — $1 mm by Duquette during the prime signing period (J2 and shortly thereafter) and $1 mm by Elias in the “leftovers” period.    They spent significantly more in 2019-20 but did not use their full allotment because the top players still were not available to them.    We don’t know the exact spending in the 2020-21 period because the signing date was postponed.   But it looks like the number will be higher (we’d reportedly spent $4.9 mm out of $6.48 mm allotted as of July 7) and we’ll have more guys in the $250k+ bonus range and maybe a couple in the $500k+ range.   That’ll be the end of the period where we were behind other teams two years ago and still feeling the consequences.   We should be at no disadvantage in the cycle after this one.   https://www.masnsports.com/steve-melewski/2020/07/with-international-signing-period-extended-can-os-take-advantage.html

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

The O’s only spent about $2 mm in the 2018-19 signing period — $1 mm by Duquette during the prime signing period (J2 and shortly thereafter) and $1 mm by Elias in the “leftovers” period.    They spent significantly more in 2019-20 but did not use their full allotment because the top players still were not available to them.    We don’t know anything about the 2020-21 period because the signing date was postponed.   But it looks like the number will be higher and we’ll have more guys in the $250k+ bonus range and maybe a couple in the $500k+ range.   That’ll be the end of the period where we were behind other teams two years ago and still feeling the consequences.   We should be at no disadvantage in the cycle after this one.   

I am mixed up because of the changing dates.  Didn't Elias say they would not trade any slots his first full season?  I assumed he spent all the allotment if he didn't trade any slots.

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

One conspiracy theory dies and another one is born.   First, it was that the owners wouldn't let Elias truly implement his international signing plan.    That myth was obliterated.   Now we have some cap on draft spending.   Sure, it makes no sense.    Would the owners tell Elias that he needed to stay 200K or 300K under the maximum they had to spend?   Does that make sense?     First it was, Elias was not going to be able to spend on international amateurs.   Now that he has and he and Perez are proving that they are the real deal, it's no longer that they aren't players in the Latin market it's that they haven't been allowed to spend every available penny down there.   A broken clock is right twice a day but a broken record is just plain annoying.

If he isn't able to spend his full allotment than he isn't able to truly implement his international signing plan.

One leads directly to another.

As to why they might limit his spending, that's simple, it's their money.

We know the following.

Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the draft.

Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the International market.

According to the two coaches in question they were let go because of money.

The O's consolidated the ML pitching coach and director of pitching positions which is almost assuredly saving them money.

 

I can see cutting ML spending as close to the bone as possible when a team isn't in contention.  But the draft, the International market, and coaching are areas they should be spending on.

[AnythingO's]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

1 Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the draft.

2 Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the International market.

Relative to the first point, We had about $250K that wasn't allotted but we also signed a bunch of non-drafted guys for $20 K so are we sure it wasn't actually spent? Relative to point 2, player's bonuses from some countries (Venezuela??) aren't reported due to safety concerns so we really don't know what was actually spent. You may be right but there is no way to actually know.

 

[Can_of_corn]

25 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Mr. Elias, we have a draft spending pool of $13,894 but you are not allowed to spend a penny over $13,697,30.     Don't ask us how we arrived at that figure!   Don't ask.   It's a conspiracy theory.   There is no need for you to know!    We just like to save.   $13,697.30.   No more than that!

Aren't they cutting coaches (according to the coaches) over a couple hundred K?

We know the O's left more unspent than any other team.  We know they went with a signability choice at 1-2.

[Frobby]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Aren't they cutting coaches (according to the coaches) over a couple hundred K?

We know the O's left more unspent than any other team.  We know they went with a signability choice at 1-2.

The coaching thing is a legitimate sign of budget constraints.    I don’t buy the draft thing.    

Back on point, I don’t think budget constraints right now are really a sign of bad or stingy ownership.    Let’s face it, 2020 was no picnic for the baseball owners, and 2021 may not be, either.   It’s not surprising that many teams - not just the Orioles - are looking for ways to cut costs.    But I don’t think that impacted the draft, and I doubt it impacted international spending, either.   
 

[Philip]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

The coaching thing is a legitimate sign of budget constraints.    I don’t buy the draft thing.    

Back on point, I don’t think budget constraints right now are really a sign of bad or stingy ownership.    Let’s face it, 2020 was no picnic for the baseball owners, and 2021 may not be, either.   It’s not surprising that many teams - not just the Orioles - are looking for ways to cut costs.    But I don’t think that impacted the draft, and I doubt it impacted international spending, either.   
 

I don’t see how eliminating an entire minor-league team is not a valid excuse for getting rid of some coaches. You’re eliminating an entire team, to include all of the coaching positions that would accrue to that team.

And with the restructuring of the system, it’s a logical that some positions would become superfluous. I think it’s a stretch to call it parsimony.

[Moose Milligan]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

If he isn't able to spend his full allotment than he isn't able to truly implement his international signing plan.

One leads directly to another.

As to why they might limit his spending, that's simple, it's their money.

We know the following.

Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the draft.

Elias didn't spend all his allotment on the International market.

According to the two coaches in question they were let go because of money.

The O's consolidated the ML pitching coach and director of pitching positions which is almost assuredly saving them money.

 

I can see cutting ML spending as close to the bone as possible when a team isn't in contention.  But the draft, the International market, and coaching are areas they should be spending on.

Yeah, I think you're reaching here.  Not every penny needs to be spent for what he needs to do.  It's not like he's not been able to sign picks and expand the international market.

A prudent exercise would be to look to see how many teams spend every last dime of their international budgets and draft budgets.  But I really don't care that much to look.

[bobmc]

10 hours ago, Philip said:

I don’t see how eliminating an entire minor-league team is not a valid excuse for getting rid of some coaches. You’re eliminating an entire team, to include all of the coaching positions that would accrue to that team.

And with the restructuring of the system, it’s a logical that some positions would become superfluous. I think it’s a stretch to call it parsimony.

Wow!    Insert dreamy eyes emoticon .  Your thread posts are alike to good prose with not an ounce of superfluity!    And all written whilst wearing a smoking jacket with a glass of merlot in one hand!  Here here!