How far are the O's away from being a winning team?

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

We will have to agree to disagree.  Yes, I think much of the 'heavy lifting' of the rebuild is over, but the rebuild isn't complete until the team is competitive, which it currently is not.  Once enough young talent is in the majors and ready to perform, THEN is the time to complete the rebuild by adding some key free agent pieces to the puzzle and start challenging for playoff spots and the like.  We are not at that point yet unfortunately, hence the rebuild is not yet complete.  The hope of this fan is that enough of the top talent in the minors take sufficient steps forward this year that it can be reasonably justified to feel our 'window' is starting to open, and thus it makes sense to add some free agent talent in the spots our farm system isn't quite ready to fill (a few SP spots maybe, some up the middle infield types, etc).  

I don't disagree at all that the rebuild has been a long, frustrating thing.  All of us wish there could have been a magical switch we could flip and go from one of the worst ran teams in the league to the top quickly.  But that really isn't possible, and to do it right takes time.

You don’t have to start being competitive to better the team.  
 

Look at an example like Nats.  They weren’t there yet when they signed Werth but they signed him anyway.  They won 69 games in 2010.  In that offseason, they gave Werth his deal.  They won 80 games the next year and have basically contended for the playoffs since.  Now, Werth was very up and down for them and I’m not suggesting that he was the reason they started to contend but that signing did tell teams and free agents that the Nationals were ready to spend and contend, even if they were a year away from true contention.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. 
 

Everyone talks about waiting on players to get better.  Why?  What if they don’t?  Or what if they need more around them to get them over the hump, learn how to be professionals, etc...?  The idea that you can’t spend a year too early is just dumb to me.  
 

When a good opportunity is there, you take advantage of it.  And btw, this doesn’t always mean spending on a vet player (at least directly).  The Orioles easily could have been a team that could/should have taken on a mediocre contract to get a good prospect (again, going back to the Giants/Angels thing that Elias said he isn’t really allowed to do).  
 

In other words, there are a lot of ways you can throw around your buying power.  The Orioles aren’t doing anything with that right now and they should be.  Opportunities are there if you want to create them and go after them.  

[owknows]

23 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But you can slow roll promotions and trade off guys in such a manner that you never actually get to critical mass.  That way you never actually have to start adding payroll.

You can. And some might argue that this is what is happening now. And some might argue further, that even this might be motivated by the ultimate desire to improve the long term health of the organization (rather than, as others have suggested outright fleecing of the club)

 

For example, it might be that Covid has created a situation where it isn't sustainable to add payroll to a marginally fiscally sound team until butts can be put in the seats. And that once this limitation passes, it will be possible. Am I certain that this is what's going on? No. Of course not. I don't have access to the books or the minds of those making the decisions. But it is at least conceivable

[Aristotelian]

The Tampa Model would not be the worst outcome. Way better than the 1999-2012 Orioles Model. 

[Tony-OH]

14 hours ago, owknows said:

The Angelos family owned the team before. And they own them now.

The premise being asserted seems to be that the Sons are Cheapskates, and the Father was not.

I offered an alternative explanation.

That perhaps the father spent recklessly. And the sons are not cheapskates, but are attempting to learn from their father's mistakes... And will spend when they deem it prudent and sustainable. It would seem to me that this is a more likely explanation.

I guess time will tell.

I think it's a valid take that this could be what's happening. We really don't know. We do know the Orioles have spend most of their international and drafting money last year and they just invested a pretty good amount of money to build a state of the art Dominican complex.

No matter what the team would have spent this offseason, they were not going to be contenders this year so why spend a bunch of money to try and be a .500 team if you can acquire potential help and give playing time to guys who may be part of the future or used to acquire players for a winning future.

I see the sons as being pretty hands off when it comes to baseball operations so far, at least to the extend of forcing Elias to sign players or resign players like their father did often.

While it's understandable that some people do not give anyone in the Angelos family the benefit of the doubt after they ran this organization into a laughingstock of baseball, the hiring of Elias at least has given me some ray of hope that they are trying to do things right.

I guess I fall into the category of "Actions speak louder than words" and until I have more actions to go off of, I don't have a strong opinion one way of the other.

I will say the absolute travesty of the MASN barebones approach does leave me with a bad taste in my mouth. Also, when I see MiLB broadcasts in low-A ball with HD cameras and center field cameras for their broadcasts, then I watch Bowie and Delmarva (AA) and see a low def behind the plate cameras, its kind of embarrassing for the organization. Bowie has to have the absolute worse AA broadcast when it comes to cameras. It's like they did the absolute minimum and it speaks poorly of the organization that they do not do something about this.

 

[owknows]

7 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I will say the absolute travesty of the MASN barebones approach does leave me with a bad taste in my mouth. Also, when I see MiLB broadcasts in low-A ball with HD cameras and center field cameras for their broadcasts, then I watch Bowie and Delmarva (AA) and see a low def behind the plate cameras, its kind of embarrassing for the organization. Bowie has to have the absolute worse AA broadcast when it comes to cameras. It's like they did the absolute minimum and it speaks poorly of the organization that they do not do something about this.

 

I think this is particularly true in the lean years of a rebuild when you're trying to maintain a generational fanbase, and peering into the future through MiLB voyeurism is something that keeps hope and excitement alive for very little investment.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

But you can slow roll promotions and trade off guys in such a manner that you never actually get to critical mass.  That way you never actually have to start adding payroll.

Is this just a shtick, or do you honestly think that the O’s don’t plan on adding payroll when they think their young players provide a foundation to compete?

Certainly we saw in 2012-17 that the O’s ramped up their spending to try to win.    That’s certainly what Houston did once they felt the team was ready.    So what makes you think this is likely to be different?   Or is that even what you think?

If your answer is, the sons are cheaper than the father, we’ll see about that.  Maybe they will be a little cheaper due to economic factors that have affected the team, MASN and the law firm.   But in general, I expect them to ramp up when the timing looks right in Elias’ professional judgment.   

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Is this just a shtick, or do you honestly think that the O’s don’t plan on adding payroll when they think their young players provide a foundation to compete?

Certainly we saw in 2012-17 that the O’s ramped up their spending to try to win.    That’s certainly what Houston did once they felt the team was ready.    So what makes you think this is likely to be different?   Or is that even what you think?

If your answer is, the sons are cheaper than the father, we’ll see about that.  Maybe they will be a little cheaper due to economic factors that have affected the team, MASN and the law firm.   But in general, I expect them to ramp up when the timing looks right in Elias’ professional judgment.   

The Os did spend on some free agents but for the most part, the increase in payroll was to keep their own and arb raises.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Is this just a shtick, or do you honestly think that the O’s don’t plan on adding payroll when they think their young players provide a foundation to compete?

Certainly we saw in 2012-17 that the O’s ramped up their spending to try to win.    That’s certainly what Houston did once they felt the team was ready.    So what makes you think this is likely to be different?   Or is that even what you think?

If your answer is, the sons are cheaper than the father, we’ll see about that.  Maybe they will be a little cheaper due to economic factors that have affected the team, MASN and the law firm.   But in general, I expect them to ramp up when the timing looks right in Elias’ professional judgment.   

I think the O's are going to stay in the bottom five or so in team payroll. 

As for what I see that makes me think different?  Letting coaches go over money, getting into a contract dispute with Thorne.  Playing service time games with a fringe 100 guy like Mountcastle.  Some of the personnel moves this offseason.

It's new ownership, what have you seen that makes you think they will ramp up spending?

The Astros by this point had already started ramping spending back up.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

The Os did spend on some free agents but for the most part, the increase in payroll was to keep their own and arb raises.

That’s fair.   This team is in a slightly different position than that one, so I think the mix will probably include more FA.  Not necessarily the top end guys.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That’s fair.   This team is in a slightly different position than that one, so I think the mix will probably include more FA.  Not necessarily the top end guys.

Well it should and they shouldn’t be afraid to jump into the deep end of the pool either.

Right now, the Os are setting themselves up for a “Lamar Jackson” situation.  IE, you have cheap players at positions that will command huge dollars but not for several years, so it allows you to spend more freely because of how much cheap help you have.

This is something the Padres did with Manny.  

[Frobby]

46 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think the O's are going to stay in the bottom five or so in team payroll. 

As for what I see that makes me think different?  Letting coaches go over money, getting into a contract dispute with Thorne.  Playing service time games with a fringe 100 guy like Mountcastle.  Some of the personnel moves this offseason.

It's new ownership, what have you seen that makes you think they will ramp up spending?

The Astros by this point had already started ramping spending back up.

Not really, unless you say they were “ramping up” by going from $15 mm to $45 mm.   We’ve spent $144 mm on payroll the last three years (despite being relieved of $33 mm last year due to the short season), whereas the Astros spent $97 mm the first three years of their rebuild.    

The Astros were stuck with one year of Carlos Lee at $18.5 mm; Elias was stuck with four years of David at $23 mm/yr, and three of Cobb at $14 mm/yr (one of which he managed to partially shed).   And the Astros didn’t need to deal with lost revenue from a pandemic.  So, I don’t give them much credit for “ramping up” in year 3 of their rebuild.  They did begin to move seriously in year 4, after winning 70 games in year 3.    I’m hoping we will follow suit if this team can win 70ish games this year, as they are currently on pace to do.   (I’m still doubtful they will be able to keep up that pace, but we’ll see.)

 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Not really, unless you say they were “ramping up” by going from $15 mm to $45 mm.   We’ve spent $144 mm on payroll the last three years (despite being relieved of $33 mm last year due to the short season), whereas the Astros spent $97 mm the first three years of their rebuild.    

The Astros were stuck with one year of Carlos Lee at $18.5 mm; Elias was stuck with four years of David at $23 mm/yr, and three of Cobb at $14 mm/yr (one of which he managed to partially shed).   And the Astros didn’t need to deal with lost revenue from a pandemic.  So, I don’t give them much credit for “ramping up” in year 3 of their rebuild.  They did begin to move seriously in year 4, after winning 70 games in year 3.    I’m hoping we will follow suit if this team can win 70ish games this year, as they are currently on pace to do.   (I’m still doubtful they will be able to keep up that pace, but we’ll see.)

 

You can't hold up the Davis contract as an example of the Orioles willing to spend during the rebuild.

What I meant was the Astros were already doing things like signing Altuve to an extension.

[owknows]

20 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You can't hold up the Davis contract as an example of the Orioles willing to spend during the rebuild.

What I meant was the Astros were already doing things like signing Altuve to an extension.

 

??

Frobby stated that the O's spent $144M over the last three... and subtracting Davis' $69M of that leaves $75M

He also stated that the Astros spent $97M over their three.. and subtracting Lee's 18.5 spent $78.5M

Roughly the same.

And this does not include the $33M in salary relief that the O's got, and the Astros didn't.

 

How does Frobby's point equate to "holding up Davis' contract as evidence of spending during the rebuild"?  It removes Davis from the equation altogether

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, owknows said:

 

??

Frobby stated that the O's spent $144M over the last three... and subtracting Davis' $69M of that leaves $75M

He also stated that the Astros spent $97M over their three.. and subtracting Lee's 18.5 spent $78.5M

Roughly the same.

And this does not include the $33M in salary relief that the O's got, and the Astros didn't.

 

How does Frobby's point equate to "holding up Davis' contract as evidence of spending during the rebuild"?  It removes Davis from the equation altogether

 

You also have the Cobb salary that they probably couldn't shake until this offseason.

My overall point was that by this stage the Astros were adding payroll not continuing to cut.  What they did previously doesn't have any bearing on that.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

You can't hold up the Davis contract as an example of the Orioles willing to spend during the rebuild.

What I meant was the Astros were already doing things like signing Altuve to an extension.

I’m not holding up the Davis contract that way.   I put that in there to concede that the O’s couldn’t have lowered their payroll as low as the Astros did in 2013 even if they wanted to.