Theo Epstein

[foxfield]

Corn,

You have been been vocal about Orioles' management and finances for years.  In general I agree that the Orioles need to spend money to acquire talent, both in the draft and internationally.  Previously ownership has restricted the teams ability to do that.

 

But the current argument really doesn't make sense.  IF the Orioles "restricted" the draft spending pool by 200K or so and the Orioles still signed 6 players.  I would think that was a win.  IF your thoughts are that the Orioles should have spent the extra 200K even if it meant they only signed 4 players...that's fine too.  Either way you argue it, it seems that Elias is the one who made the choice and it would seem to me that his choice was to get as much talent as possible for the full allotment.  Which he clearly did successfully.  

Whether that pays off is certainly debatable.  I just don't see the hand wringing over 200K.  Chris Davis made that much while you read this reply.

Also, the financial implications of Covid are real and I do not doubt that if fans are kept out of games next spring, that teams will continue to cut expenses.  Not just the Orioles.

It remains to be seen if the Sons will or can spend.  I think you and anyone else is correct to remain cautious as to their plans.  But it seems that Elias is getting pretty wide run to implement his plan.  200K unspent doesn't really change that in my opinion.

 

[LTO's]

On 11/19/2020 at 9:55 AM, Can_of_corn said:

I'm not saying they are as bad, just that the purse strings appear to be a lot tighter.

The purse strings are tight for some of the most profitable teams in baseball.  It's really unfair to say this as if there isn't extreme uncertainties in the coming year and beyond. That being said, the calculus hasn't changed in terms of the International market. They are in no obligation to spend all of their money on low upside, older teenagers just because they have those slots. Their timeline for when they said they will be competing for the high dollar prospects still hasn't arrived. When that time arrives and they are not landing the big name prospects then I will be right with you.

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, foxfield said:

Corn,

You have been been vocal about Orioles' management and finances for years.  In general I agree that the Orioles need to spend money to acquire talent, both in the draft and internationally.  Previously ownership has restricted the teams ability to do that.

 

But the current argument really doesn't make sense.  IF the Orioles "restricted" the draft spending pool by 200K or so and the Orioles still signed 6 players.  I would think that was a win.  IF your thoughts are that the Orioles should have spent the extra 200K even if it meant they only signed 4 players...that's fine too.  Either way you argue it, it seems that Elias is the one who made the choice and it would seem to me that his choice was to get as much talent as possible for the full allotment.  Which he clearly did successfully.  

Whether that pays off is certainly debatable.  I just don't see the hand wringing over 200K.  Chris Davis made that much while you read this reply.

Also, the financial implications of Covid are real and I do not doubt that if fans are kept out of games next spring, that teams will continue to cut expenses.  Not just the Orioles.

It remains to be seen if the Sons will or can spend.  I think you and anyone else is correct to remain cautious as to their plans.  But it seems that Elias is getting pretty wide run to implement his plan.  200K unspent doesn't really change that in my opinion.

 

Yes, and to piggyback on @RZNJ's point, taking Elias/ownership to task on saving 200k on 13 million is a bit much.  I'd be pissed if we'd spent, like, 8 out of 13 million, but that's not the case here.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yes, and to piggyback on @RZNJ's point, taking Elias/ownership to task on saving 200k on 13 million is a bit much.  I'd be pissed if we'd spent, like, 8 out of 13 million, but that's not the case here.

I think the more likely scenario is that Elias was given a certain amount to spend on both the draft and the international free agents with the freedom to divide it as he saw fit.  So he cut 200K from the draft and X.XX from the International class.

[Moose Milligan]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think the more likely scenario is that Elias was given a certain amount to spend on both the draft and the international free agents with the freedom to divide it as he saw fit.  So he cut 200K from the draft and X.XX from the International class.

I think the more likely scenario is that you're just straight up wrong, homie.  

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think the more likely scenario is that Elias was given a certain amount to spend on both the draft and the international free agents with the freedom to divide it as he saw fit.  So he cut 200K from the draft and X.XX from the International class.

You really think ownership cut 200K from draft and he magically drafted, signed and spent 13+million and kept the 200K dry.  Really? 

 

And if you do?  Don't you think we have the most amazing GM in baseball history?

[Can_of_corn]

22 minutes ago, foxfield said:

You really think ownership cut 200K from draft and he magically drafted, signed and spent 13+million and kept the 200K dry.  Really? 

 

And if you do?  Don't you think we have the most amazing GM in baseball history?

That isn't what I said.  I'll try again with more numbers.

The O's draft pool was $13,894,300.

The O's International pool was $5,899,600.

What I am positing is that ownership told Elias he had a budget of *hypothetically* 17.5 Million out of the total allotment of $19,793,900.

Elias chose to cut 200K from the draft and ~2M from the International pool.

Now I'm obviously making up the International numbers since I haven't seen a total spent.

It is also possible that other spending falls under this umbrella, maybe he's just given a total budget for everything and he has the choice to make decisions on what gets spent where. 

The overall idea is the same, that the budget given to him by ownership does not allow him to spend fully in these areas.  I think it unlikely that Elias would chose to not spend money on the draft or International players. 

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I think the more likely scenario is that you're just straight up wrong, homie.  

Ditto.   But we’ll never know.   

I’ll just say this: build me a good team worth rooting for.   Do that and I don’t care exactly what you spend and where you spend it.   Draft or sign players who turn into good major leaguers and I don’t give a damn if you spent your allotment or not.   Spend it all with crappy results and I won’t be saying “at least they spent all the available money.”    
 

[Just Regular]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

The O's draft pool was $13,894,300.

The O's International pool was $5,899,600.

Don't know if we'll see the INTL numbers, but to me 2/138ths gets to be a rounding error and 2/6ths doesn't.  Though I'm not totally clear on if with this international pool we were still all on leftovers, in which case I could conceivably understand an unutilized $2M.

 

[beervendor]

On 11/18/2020 at 6:12 AM, Sports Guy said:

First of all, it would be extremely difficult to get someone worse than the Angelos family.  They have arguably been the worst ownership group in pro sports over the last 20ish years.  (Sterling probably worse but PA is right with him..although PA is a better human being of course).

I'm guessing there's a few million Knicks fans who may quibble.

[foxfield]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

That isn't what I said.  I'll try again with more numbers.

The O's draft pool was $13,894,300.

The O's International pool was $5,899,600.

What I am positing is that ownership told Elias he had a budget of *hypothetically* 17.5 Million out of the total allotment of $19,793,900.

Elias chose to cut 200K from the draft and ~2M from the International pool.

Now I'm obviously making up the International numbers since I haven't seen a total spent.

It is also possible that other spending falls under this umbrella, maybe he's just given a total budget for everything and he has the choice to make decisions on what gets spent where. 

The overall idea is the same, that the budget given to him by ownership does not allow him to spend fully in these areas.  I think it unlikely that Elias would chose to not spend money on the draft or International players. 

If the above is true, and Elias is good enough to manage a draft and get everyone signed while restricting $200,000 he is the best GM in history and the pope should canonize him.

The most obvious answer is that he is spending in a way that is designed to maximize return.  Think of it like it's The Price is Right.  He is simply trying to get the best players and as many of them without exceeding the allotments.  $200k on the draft is a razor thin margin.  And we simply do not know what remains unspent on international players. 

Spending just to spend, is the reason #19 is an unavailable number for new Orioles.  If I thought the O's were intentionally missing the opportunity to add talent, as they have in the past, I would concur with you.  

But I would also concede that if your measuring stick is that pool was restricted if not 100% spent, then your *hypotheticals* work as an explanation.  As would many others.  

[MDtransplant757]

7 hours ago, foxfield said:

If the above is true, and Elias is good enough to manage a draft and get everyone signed while restricting $200,000 he is the best GM in history and the pope should canonize him.

The most obvious answer is that he is spending in a way that is designed to maximize return.  Think of it like it's The Price is Right.  He is simply trying to get the best players and as many of them without exceeding the allotments.  $200k on the draft is a razor thin margin.  And we simply do not know what remains unspent on international players. 

Spending just to spend, is the reason #19 is an unavailable number for new Orioles.  If I thought the O's were intentionally missing the opportunity to add talent, as they have in the past, I would concur with you.  

But I would also concede that if your measuring stick is that pool was restricted if not 100% spent, then your *hypotheticals* work as an explanation.  As would many others.  

It's basic economic principle. How can I get the most utility and value from the money I spend? What is the most effective way of doing that?