Can Mike Elias be as creative as Dan Duquette was in the 2011-2012 off season?

[Can_of_corn]

19 minutes ago, waroriole said:

At least 5

I'm predicting some changes in the CBA. 

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

Having Miley claimed saved them the $1 million buyout of his option.

I’m more interested that they didn’t exercise his option after the season he just had.

[Camden_yardbird]

Nothing I have seen from Elias suggests he has anywhere close to the skills to pull off that off season.

Couple that with yet another disrupted off season due a potential work stoppage and an unknown level of commitment from ownership and I feel like we get another off season of excuses.

[HowAboutThat]

An article in the paper today was talking about Correa being offered $30 million per year. $30 million per year. That’s ridiculous.It is impossible for the Orioles to swim in those waters, but it would be really foolish for anybody to do so. I want to sign some meaningful guys, but not for any obscene contracts like that it’s just not logical.

[Sports Guy]

41 minutes ago, Philip said:

An article in the paper today was talking about Correa being offered $30 million per year. $30 million per year. That’s ridiculous.It is impossible for the Orioles to swim in those waters, but it would be really foolish for anybody to do so. I want to sign some meaningful guys, but not for any obscene contracts like that it’s just not logical.

Lol…there isn’t a team in the majors that can’t pay a player 30M.  There is so much money in the game.  The Os obviously can do it.

[Camden_yardbird]

17 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Lol…there isn’t a team in the majors that can’t pay a player 30M.  There is so much money in the game.  The Os obviously can do it.

If rebuilding means you have to drop your payroll down to sub $60 million I would argue that a small market team can't afford half their salary going to a player with a $30 payroll.

As far as money goes, there is a bit of a bubble right now.  ESPN just drastically reduced the amount of money they pay in and dropped week day games.  While MLB can try and resell those games to a different outlet they likely can't do so for as much.  While TBS money went up with the new contract, overall economics have been hit by COVID, two small market teams don't have regional cable agreements and MLB overall reliance on cable is at risk.  The downfall of cable will be swift when it happens due to availability of a sufficient number of streaming options that meet the needs of current cable payers.

Not to mention, younger generations statistically don't even consider cable and get their entertainment from bounce and binge streaming services.

Now some of this is likely posturing from MLB due to contract negotiations with the players union.  I would not be surprised in the least if a week after the next CBA is signed MLB announces a deal with someone like Netflix for those weekday games ESPN gave up.  But thats still a two way street where MLB is having to straddle the streaming/cable delivery system amid waning interest in its game and some small market teams that are shaky ground to be sure.

It will be interesting to see what happens come 2028 when these deals expire.

[Finisher]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

An article in the paper today was talking about Correa being offered $30 million per year. $30 million per year. That’s ridiculous.

Actually 32 million per STARTING offer. Meaning he'll get even more than that.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Finisher said:

Actually 32 million per STARTING offer. Meaning he'll get even more than that.

It's fine, they can just dip into all those savings from the years they were tanking.

[Frobby]

Conveniently, I updated my thread on $100 mm+ contracts today.   I think with a guy like Correa, it’s not just about the average salary, it’s about the years.   I’d pay him 6/$180 mm without blinking.  10/$300 mm is a very different calculus.   (Not talking specifically about the Orioles here.)

[Moose Milligan]

Correa seems like a prick and I'm assuming he thinks he's worth Lindor/Tatis Jr money.  

Whether he gets it or not remains to be seen.

[Frobby]

20 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Correa seems like a prick and I'm assuming he thinks he's worth Lindor/Tatis Jr money.  

Whether he gets it or not remains to be seen.

He has reason to think it.  He’s been worth 34.2 rWAR in 752 games.  Lindor had been worth 28.0 in 777 games when he signed his deal (which doesn’t begin until next season).

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

He has reason to think it.  He’s been worth 34.2 rWAR in 752 games.  Lindor had been worth 28.0 in 777 games when he signed his deal (which doesn’t begin until next season).

That's interesting, I've always thought of him as a guy who can't stay off the IL so I'm surprised he's already accumulated that number.  He's played in 140+ games twice, obviously can't count 2020 against him.  

[HowAboutThat]

5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Lol…there isn’t a team in the majors that can’t pay a player 30M.  There is so much money in the game.  The Os obviously can do it.

It’s not really an issue of whether it’s possible, it’s an issue whether it’s wise. And it is absolutely unwise. Look at what the Padres, look at the Angels, all this money wrapped up in two or three marquee players and that’s it.

Paying that much money for one player for a single year is certainly possible, but it is also certainly foolish.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Philip

[Sports Guy]

30 minutes ago, Philip said:

It’s not really an issue of whether it’s possible, it’s an issue whether it’s wise. And it is absolutely unwise. Look at what the Padres, look at the Angels, all this money wrapped up in two or three marquee players and that’s it.

Paying that much money for one player for a single year is certainly possible, but it is also certainly foolish.

Not always but I agree it usually is.  The thing is, its not the money per year that is the issue, its the total number of years.

Houston only offered him 5 years.  5/160 is an excellent contract for him.  He would never sign it but you wouldn't regret paying it.  Houston is giving him market value in dollars but not years.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Not always but I agree it usually is.  The thing is, its not the money per year that is the issue, its the total number of years.

Houston only offered him 5 years.  5/160 is an excellent contract for him.  He would never sign it but you wouldn't regret paying it.  Houston is giving him market value in dollars but not years.

Trout is not the reason the Angels haven't been winning.