2023 Early Look Top Prospects

[Sports Guy]

39 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

The entire discussion here is about saving money for the purpose of using it during a winning period. That's the opposite of having zero do do with winning later.

There's a similar argument about 5 more wins this year from a pretty good 32 year old journeyman having zero to do with winning later too. I'm not that black and white on any of it.

I get, and respect, that you disagree with the approach. I don't get that you just discount it as not being a valid possible option.

Because there is nothing valid about on purposely losing for this long period of time.  I refuse to accept that there is any validity to it.  
 

It’s a money grab, that’s all.

[OriolesMagic83]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Because there is nothing valid about on purposely losing for this long period of time.  I refuse to accept that there is any validity to it.  
 

It’s a money grab, that’s all.

When Elias took over after 2018 season, the minor league system was barren.  I believe the O's farm system was 29th, but it was bottom of the barrel, whatever the ranking.  The O's had multiple holes to fill and almost no real prospects.  The O's could have inflated their payroll to $250 mill and maybe finished w/ 85 wins, but that is not sustainable with the O's level of revenue.  What other route should Elias have taken?

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

When Elias took over after 2018 season, the minor league system was barren.  I believe the O's farm system was 29th, but it was bottom of the barrel, whatever the ranking.  The O's had multiple holes to fill and almost no real prospects.  The O's could have inflated their payroll to $250 mill and maybe finished w/ 85 wins, but that is not sustainable with the O's level of revenue.  What other route should Elias have taken?

Well first of all, many of the guys up now or still in the top 15 or so of the organization were here before he got here.  So, the barren system thing is overblown.

Secondly, you don’t have to draft high to build a farm system properly.

Lastly, I’m fine with the tanking early on but to keep doing it is wrong and unnecessary.

[Hazmat]

So...how about those 2023 prospects?

[RZNJ]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Well first of all, many of the guys up now or still in the top 15 or so of the organization were here before he got here.  So, the barren system thing is overblown.

Secondly, you don’t have to draft high to build a farm system properly.

Lastly, I’m fine with the tanking early on but to keep doing it is wrong and unnecessary.

If you think tanking has ZERO to do with getting better in the future then why are you okay with tanking for one or two years?

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

If you think tanking has ZERO to do with getting better in the future then why are you okay with tanking for one or two years?

I was ok with getting rid of the contracts and stripping down the team.  I also am good with getting the high pick.  It’s not a guarantee of anything but it’s the path to take early because I don’t think any amount of FA signings would have made that a competitive team.

[LookinUp]

On 1/28/2022 at 3:00 PM, Sports Guy said:

I was ok with getting rid of the contracts and stripping down the team.  I also am good with getting the high pick.  It’s not a guarantee of anything but it’s the path to take early because I don’t think any amount of FA signings would have made that a competitive team.

And what amount of free agents would have made any of this year's or previous year's teams competitive?

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

And what amount of free agents would have made any of this year's or previous year's teams competitive?

That’s a very loaded and general question with endless answers.  It depends on several factors, including how you are defining competitive.

[LookinUp]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That’s a very loaded and general question with endless answers.  It depends on several factors, including how you are defining competitive.

Yep, and I'd wager that it would have been VERY expensive to even sniff 81 wins in the last few years. Same with this year. Next year, with a bunch of young guys on the come, it makes more sense.

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Yep, and I'd wager that it would have been VERY expensive to even sniff 81 wins in the last few years. Same with this year. Next year, with a bunch of young guys on the come, it makes more sense.

Maybe last year..disagree about 2022.  I think you can be a 75ish win team for a payroll of less than 75M...and maybe not close to that number.