RANT: It's not even November Yet and...

[zff4]

Years of ownership abusing players with such fabulously oppresive tools like the reserve clause has created an adversarial relationship with the MLBPA that makes any parity adjustments nearly impossible.

The one idea that I think may have some traction is to combine a cap with an enormous adjustment of the minimum salary, currently at 390,000, to a million bucks. Although the older entrenched players may holler, the younger players may outvote their seniors on this. And given the revenues, MLB can afford it.

A cap with a minimum salary sweetener might do the trick.

[hoosiers]

However, every aspect of building a winner through acquiring talent - from being able to pay for more over slot guys, to building the best international scouting programs, to signing FAs - is slanted toward the big market teams. This is what is broken and is only getting worse.

For example, most teams aren't even considering Darvish. I wonder why.

We're only seeing the beginning of this problem and the relative success of big market versus small market teams is already apparent.

I think you are too caught up in the moment. The Os are on a downswing due to poor management. There is no reason a similarly poor downswing could not happen to the Red Sox. If they miss the playoffs for a few years, see a decrease in attendance, etc, that franchise would suffer too and have to cut back in certain areas. We once had the highest payroll in baseball. We once paid exorbitant signing bonuses to top talent that slipped in the draft.

Large market teams have more room for management error. So what. The "broken and getting worse" comments are comical in light of the success of the Rays. Get a grip on reality and figure out how to deal with it instead of whining about the system.

[Tx Oriole]

Stop gaps if you will. You know as well as i do that Angelos is not goig to spend 180 million on one palyer. At least i don't think he would. So the team signs Tex. Big deal you still have a hole at SS, 3rd, pitching. What wpould be the matter of getting a 1st baseman that would be a good player just not the elite of a Tex? Then you can get yur SS, 3rd and pitching. I believe you and many fans will be disapointed because i just don't see Tex signing in Baltimore. I beleive he wants a WS Ring before he wants to go to a team that is rebuilding that is 2 or 3 yearas away. Even his home town team. IMO

[Intimidator301]

Stop gaps if you will. You know as well as i do that Angelos is not goig to spend 180 million on one palyer. At least i don't think he would. So the team signs Tex. Big deal you still have a hole at SS, 3rd, pitching. What wpould be the matter of getting a 1st baseman that would be a good player just not the elite of a Tex? Then you can get yur SS, 3rd and pitching. I believe you and many fans will be disapointed because i just don't see Tex signing in Baltimore. I beleive he wants a WS Ring before he wants to go to a team that is rebuilding that is 2 or 3 yearas away. Even his home town team. IMO

Stopgap players is what got us into a mess. That's why we got stuck with the likes of Payton.

As for Tex, why is everyone looking at it from an 09 point of view? We sign Tex to a 6 or 7 year deal, he's a piece of a puzzle for 2010 and beyond. An really, the drop off in talent after Tex is like jumping face first off a cliff. Your talking Millar coming back territory.

I don't understand why people think its either or. Why can't we add top FA at a position of need (Tex), keep Roberts, while having youth too (Markakis, Jones, Wieters)?.

Even the Twins and A's don't develop a homegrown player at every position.

And its going to get harder and harder to build through the draft. Usually, the top 10 picks are going to be your usual small market suspects. We're already seeing them getting priced out of top young talent for fear of signablity. In doing so, allowing them to fall to, yes I'll say it again, the Yankees, RS, Angels, Dodgers, Mets, Cubs.

Pitt. came close to losing their draft pick this year, and D.C did lose theirs I believe.

[TiredofLosing20]

I am not going to whine about the Orioles because I do believe their problems are do to poor management not salary issues. But I will say that anyone who believes the current system is remotely competitive is just kidding themselves. Yes you can succeed with a smaller payroll but it is an uphil battle. Why should a city like Milwaukee or Pittsburgh be forced to face a bigger challenge solely based on geography and demographics. If MLB wants to maximize the number of fans, they will find a way to get the franchises that are not competitive due to market constraints on a level playing field. Will there be fewer Yankee and Red Sox fans if Tampa and KC are on equal ground?

Since, I think 162 games is a better barometer of trends I have chosen to look at playoff teams to see the impact of payroll dollars. Here are some interesting stats.

There have been 112 playoff teams since 1995. The average payroll ranking of a playoff team is 9.88

The top payroll team has made the playoffs 79% of the time.

The top 5 payroll teams (or roughly 17% of of the league) have accounted for 31% of the 112 playoff teams

The top 10 payroll teams have accounted for 60% of the 112 playoff teams

The top 15 payroll teams have accounted for 78% of the 112 playoff teams

Conversely,

The bottom 10 payroll teams (or roughly 1/3) have accounted for 12% of the 112 playoff teams.

The bottom 5 payroll teams have accounted for 8% of the 112 playoff teams.

I think it is pretty clear that while payroll does not guarantee success it sure helps considerably. It also shows that if you are not willing or able to pay you are severely disadvantaged.

[Intimidator301]

You know what's ironic about this thread?

I really doubt that many Orioles fans thought that baseball revenue sharing was a good idea around 1997, when the Orioles had one of the highest revenues in the league. The Orioles had one of the highest payrolls in the league too at that time.

The Orioles had a great opportunity in the mid to late 90's to really set the team apart as one of baseball's best organizations for a extended period. In the mid 90's, we had the a new stadium that was the envy of the league. We had 3.7 million fans flocking to Camden Yards, and we outdrew both the Yankees and the Red Sox by over 1 million fans each. We were at the top of the list of the teams for which players wanted to play.

The Orioles had over 3.7 million fans come to Camden Yards in 1997. If we had 3.7 million fans coming to our ballpark on a regular basis now, I doubt many of us would be calling for increased revenue sharing.

That's true, and I'm sure the majority of the "Build from within" crowd wasn't complaining when we were throwing $ at Alomar, Surhoff, Key, Myers etc. and making it to the playoffs in 96 and 97. Really goes to show how much winning and losing can change a fans way of thinking.

I was 19 and 20 those last two playoff years, and I must admit I took it for granted. I thought with a new stadium, a rich owner, a new GM that was respected and known for building winners, the playoffs would be the norm, and it was the start of something bigger and better. Man, was I wrong.

[Intimidator301]

I think you are too caught up in the moment. The Os are on a downswing due to poor management. There is no reason a similarly poor downswing could not happen to the Red Sox. If they miss the playoffs for a few years, see a decrease in attendance, etc, that franchise would suffer too and have to cut back in certain areas. We once had the highest payroll in baseball. We once paid exorbitant signing bonuses to top talent that slipped in the draft.

Large market teams have more room for management error. So what. The "broken and getting worse" comments are comical in light of the success of the Rays. Get a grip on reality and figure out how to deal with it instead of whining about the system.

No disrespect, but the "Look at the Rays" cliches get just as old as the RS/Yankee ones.

Not to take anything away from the Rays, but they have been very lucky also. They have had basically all their top picks pan out. That's not to say they don't have tremendous scouts, because they do, but you can't always predict how a prospect will fair in the majors. Picking #1 year in and out made it a little easier.

If a few of those turned out to be busts, they wouldn't be in any discussions right now. Mainly because, they don't have the money to go out and fix mistakes. That's just the plain and simple facts.

Do you think the Rays are going to be able to afford the $15-20 mil signing bonuses in the future? Because that's where we are headed, whether you believe it or not. $20 mil is probably a high number, but the point is still the same. In 5 years, a guy like Longoria or Price would demand a $12-15 mil signing bonus. Heck, we're already seeing guys want $7, 8, and 9 mil.

[Satyr3206]

No disrespect, but the "Look at the Rays" cliches get just as old as the RS/Yankee ones.

Not to take anything away from the Rays, but they have been very lucky also. They have had basically all their top picks pan out. That's not to say they don't have tremendous scouts, because they do, but you can't always predict how a prospect will fair in the majors. Picking #1 year in and out made it a little easier.

If a few of those turned out to be busts, they wouldn't be in any discussions right now. Mainly because, they don't have the money to go out and fix mistakes. That's just the plain and simple facts.

Do you think the Rays are going to be able to afford the $15-20 mil signing bonuses in the future? Because that's where we are headed, whether you believe it or not. $20 mil is probably a high number, but the point is still the same. In 5 years, a guy like Longoria or Price would demand a $12-15 mil signing bonus. Heck, we're already seeing guys want $7, 8, and 9 mil.

The Rays luck hasn't all been good. Josh Hamilton and Delmon Young ring a bell? They have improved how they acquire talent significantly. That's the difference.

Another simple fact is the Orioles at worst are a mid level team as far as payroll goes. If they start winning it wouldn't surprise me to see attendance back over 3 million. That would also translate into more MASN subscribers. That would mean they could go higher with payroll. So it's not appropriate to compare the Orioles to KC or Pittsburgh.

Oh, I'm a build from within guy, but I also see the reasoning to sign FA's. If your ML club has a need it's fine to fill it through Free Agency. I just have a hard time giving long term deals to pitchers.

[geschinger]

No disrespect, but the "Look at the Rays" cliches get just as old as the RS/Yankee ones.

Not to take anything away from the Rays, but they have been very lucky also. They have had basically all their top picks pan out. That's not to say they don't have tremendous scouts, because they do, but you can't always predict how a prospect will fair in the majors. Picking #1 year in and out made it a little easier.

They haven't picked #1 year in and year out. And their oustanding minor league system isn't stocked with #1 overall picks. You could take out the #1 overall picks from their system and it would still be oustanding. People are way to quick to dismiss the Rays with they only did it because they were so bad for so long... It just isn't accurate.

[LookinUp]

I think you are too caught up in the moment. The Os are on a downswing due to poor management. There is no reason a similarly poor downswing could not happen to the Red Sox. If they miss the playoffs for a few years, see a decrease in attendance, etc, that franchise would suffer too and have to cut back in certain areas. We once had the highest payroll in baseball. We once paid exorbitant signing bonuses to top talent that slipped in the draft.

Large market teams have more room for management error. So what. The "broken and getting worse" comments are comical in light of the success of the Rays. Get a grip on reality and figure out how to deal with it instead of whining about the system.

I'm beginning to wonder why I keep having to make the same points over and over again.

1. THIS ISN'T ONLY ABOUT THE ORIOLES! I'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR OBVIOUS SHORTCOMINGS SEVERAL TIMES! Really, why is this so hard to get? :angryfire:

2. The broken and getting worse comment is anything but comical. If you can't get that based on actual evidence, I frankly don't care. Please see TiredofLosing20's excellent post.

3. If you think a conversation about a broken system is whining, tough. I happen to think this is a debate that's germane to the future of baseball. If you don't, I still don't care.

4. You acknowledge my bottom line point in the bolded section. Maybe we could argue about the degree of the problem, but anyone with an IQ above 60 can tell there's a fundamental competitive imbalance in baseball. How on earth can anyone w/o a financial or rooting interest on the side of the benefactors of that imbalance not support changing it?

[Intimidator301]

The Rays luck hasn't all been good. Josh Hamilton and Delmon Young ring a bell? They have improved how they acquire talent significantly. That's the difference.

Another simple fact is the Orioles at worst are a mid level team as far as payroll goes. If they start winning it wouldn't surprise me to see attendance back over 3 million. That would also translate into more MASN subscribers. That would mean they could go higher with payroll. So it's not appropriate to compare the Orioles to KC or Pittsburgh.

Oh, I'm a build from within guy, but I also see the reasoning to sign FA's. If your ML club has a need it's fine to fill it through Free Agency. I just have a hard time giving long term deals to pitchers.

I agree about Josh Hamilton, but I wouldn't put Delmon Young in there as a bust. He hit .288 13 HR 93 RBI and finished the year 2nd in the ROY voting. And that enabled them to land Matt Garza. His attitude issues were a problem, but the talent is there.

And even Josh Hamilton was destined for stardom, if not for his personal demons. And he's showing that now. And I think its a great story.

As for payroll, I don't see any reason the Orioles couldn't carry a top 10 payroll. Usually, anywhere from $88-95 mil will get you in the top 10. But I'm only for that for premium talent like Tex, not a bunch of Payton or Millar types. So, we're pretty much in agreement there I think.

[hoosiers]

I'm beginning to wonder why I keep having to make the same points over and over again.

1. THIS ISN'T ONLY ABOUT THE ORIOLES! I'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR OBVIOUS SHORTCOMINGS SEVERAL TIMES! Really, why is this so hard to get? :angryfire:

2. The broken and getting worse comment is anything but comical. If you can't get that based on actual evidence, I frankly don't care. Please see TiredofLosing20's excellent post.

3. If you think a conversation about a broken system is whining, tough. I happen to think this is a debate that's germane to the future of baseball. If you don't, I still don't care.

4. You acknowledge my bottom line point in the bolded section. Maybe we could argue about the degree of the problem, but anyone with an IQ above 60 can tell there's a fundamental competitive imbalance in baseball. How on earth can anyone w/o a financial or rooting interest on the side of the benefactors of that imbalance not support changing it?

1. I never said it was only about the Orioles. I said it's about teams' management much more than payroll.

2. TiredofLosings information is very general and holds little meaning to me. Has he compared it with the payrolls of other sports with salary caps - like football? Many of this is a self-fulfilling prophecy, anyway. Teams that perceive themselves with a a good chance to compete add free agent talent while those who judge themselves far from competing shy away from or are avoided by quality free agents - like how the Os and Pirates did not pursue top FAs last offseason. Look at the Diamondbacks payroll when they competed and this year as an example.

4. Color me an idiot. "Fundamental competitive imbalance" is a rich statement, but I disagree. Any team should be able to do what the DRays just did after several years of high draft picks. Look at how poorly the Pirates have drafted since selecting Bullington ahead of Upton. If you add Upton, Alvarez and Wieters to McClouth, JBay and another good pick or two from 2003 to 2006 and they are two quality free agents pitchers away from competing successfully in that division for several years with a low payroll to boot.

[osfan83]

I think you are too caught up in the moment. The Os are on a downswing due to poor management. There is no reason a similarly poor downswing could not happen to the Red Sox. If they miss the playoffs for a few years, see a decrease in attendance, etc, that franchise would suffer too and have to cut back in certain areas. We once had the highest payroll in baseball. We once paid exorbitant signing bonuses to top talent that slipped in the draft.

Large market teams have more room for management error. So what. The "broken and getting worse" comments are comical in light of the success of the Rays. Get a grip on reality and figure out how to deal with it instead of whining about the system.

What is comical is using one year of success from the Rays and trying to compare it to the trend in baseball since 1994.

[hoosiers]

What is comical is using one year of success from the Rays and trying to compare it to the trend in baseball since 1994.

I'll take the Rays for the ALEast next year and you tell me the team you want the coin you want to bet.

If you think the Rays are a one year wonder, I will be done with this thread very soon.

[Satyr3206]

I agree about Josh Hamilton, but I wouldn't put Delmon Young in there as a bust. He hit .288 13 HR 93 RBI and finished the year 2nd in the ROY voting. And that enabled them to land Matt Garza. His attitude issues were a problem, but the talent is there.

And even Josh Hamilton was destined for stardom, if not for his personal demons. And he's showing that now. And I think its a great story.

As for payroll, I don't see any reason the Orioles couldn't carry a top 10 payroll. Usually, anywhere from $88-95 mil will get you in the top 10. But I'm only for that for premium talent like Tex, not a bunch of Payton or Millar types. So, we're pretty much in agreement there I think.

Your right. Young isn't a bust but he is a #1 pick thats not with the Rays anymore. And trading him for Garza is how I would like the O's to be run. Trade surplus for needs.

I agree on the payroll issue. No more slugs. I would be fine with them signing Tex. The second round pick he costs probably won't have the career he will. Overall though I feel at least half of your team should be homegrown, mainly to control payroll and have a surplus to trade with.