What is Elias' plan to contend and what should it be?

[John Gibson]

22 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

How has losing on purpose helped the farm system outside of maybe the draft (and btw, with how the orioles have drafted, the last few drafts could have happened the exact same way)?

And to say that losing on purpose is a strategy that has worked is the fallacy.  You don’t have to lose on purpose to draft and develop well or have a good intl pipeline or have a top farm system.  None of that is done because of losing on purpose.  Plenty of teams win a lot and build their farm systems well.  It is not a pre-req to lose 100 games to do those things.  
 

The Dodgers draft near the bottom of the league every year and accomplish the same stuff.  The Rays are doing it.  The Cardinals…just to name a few.

Yes, the draft.  The Orioles get a draft pool ~40% higher than they would have if they were a ~75-80 win team.  That makes a huge difference.  The Astros used to do the same - drafting Correa as a 2+m under slot combined with the draft pool of #1 gave them the available room to draft McCullers - another key contributor.  Again, everything the Orioles have been doing including the draft is consistent with the approach that worked for them previously. 

It's not a prerequisite to build a farm system well but it is to go from where the Orioles were to where they are now as quickly as they've done it without the benefit of a top of the draft bonus pool.  

The Dodgers are what the team should aspire to be in keeping the pipeline consistent - a lot of that is INTL which hopefully the Orioles start seeing some results from.  I'm not sure I want the Rays approach of trading anyone who becomes anything of value as quickly as possible to keep the farm stocked.

[Sports Guy]

12 minutes ago, John Gibson said:

Yes, the draft.  The Orioles get a draft pool ~40% higher than they would have if they were a ~75-80 win team.  That makes a huge difference.  The Astros used to do the same - drafting Correa as a 2+m under slot combined with the draft pool of #1 gave them the available room to draft McCullers - another key contributor.  Again, everything the Orioles have been doing including the draft is consistent with the approach that worked for them previously. 

It's not a prerequisite to build a farm system well but it is to go from where the Orioles were to where they are now as quickly as they've done it without the benefit of a top of the draft bonus pool.  

The Dodgers are what the team should aspire to be in keeping the pipeline consistent - a lot of that is INTL which hopefully the Orioles start seeing some results from.  I'm not sure I want the Rays approach of trading anyone who becomes anything of value as quickly as possible to keep the farm stocked.

1). Most of that draft pool difference is tied up in one pick..the highest pick.  Every team drafts guys for above slot throughout the draft.  The pool helps but it’s overblown because it’s mostly spent on one person.

2) your second paragraph is just false. You don’t need to lose on purpose to build a farm system in 3 or 4 years.  That’s absolutely wrong.  The idea that you have bought into that is hilarious and exactly what I mean when I say that these teams have done an incredible sales job on the fans.

3) Well Tampa is right to not get tied down into players long term when they start to decline and get more expensive.  That being said, it doesn’t matter.  Plenty of teams win and build a farm system.  It’s a complete fallacy that you have to lose to do it. 
 

You get one unique player every year when you lose on purpose..that is the higher pick.  You talk about the Astros but they failed on 2 high picks, they just got lucky that Aiken said no and they were able to get Bregman the next year.  You think failure of those picks was part of the plan?  
 

Nothing you are saying proves that losing on purpose for several years is needed.  I’m on board for tanking for a year or 2. Get rid of long term commitments, trade vets, get your higher picks, etc…that’s fine.

Beyond that, all you are doing is lining the pockets of the owners.  Nothing else is being accomplished that couldn’t be accomplished if you were winning games.  

[Tony-OH]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

1). Most of that draft pool difference is tied up in one pick..the highest pick.  Every team drafts guys for above slot throughout the draft.  The pool helps but it’s overblown because it’s mostly spent on one person.

 

Which Elias has used to spread out across his picks to get guys like Mayo, Baumler and Wilems. Whether it works out or not remains to be seen, but I don't see how you think drafting as high as he had hasn't helped the farm system and the rebuild. 

[LookinUp]

So, putting the ML plan on a fun scale:

2018-2021: 1 (no fun)

2022: 3

2023: 6

2024+: 8-10

That seems like the goal, with the 8 in 2024 a bit of a long shot, IMO.

[forphase1]

58 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

(and btw, with how the orioles have drafted, the last few drafts could have happened the exact same way)?

 

You keep claiming this, but I don't think it's true.  We would not have had the same pool of money to deal with so getting some of the overslot guys may not have happened.  Sure, we could still do overslots with less money, but it would not have happened the EXACT same way as we would have had less money, so we probably could not have gotten the EXACT same guys.  You want to discount the philosophy of losing and drafting high, fine.  But you are wrong, it DOES make a difference, both in the draft position round by round, not just the 1st round, and the amount of money you can spend.  We can both speculate what the draft would have looked like if we were picking 7th instead of 1-2, but making factual type claims like you do is wrong.  I certainly doubt how highly ranked our farm system would be if instead of constantly picking in the top 3 the past few years we'd instead of picked in the 7-10 range each time.  

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Which Elias has used to spread out across his picks to get guys like Mayo, Baumler and Wilems. Whether it works out or not remains to be seen, but I don't see how you think drafting as high as he had hasn't helped the farm system and the rebuild. 

Tony, Are the Orioles the only team that signs overslot guys?  Are they the only team taking advantage of that?

Are the only teams that sign overslot guys the teams that draft high?

And btw, I’m not saying it doesn’t help.  I’m saying it’s not needed to build a good farm system.  I’m saying that losing on purpose isn’t need to build a good farm system.  That’s not an opinion.  That’s a fact.  

[LookinUp]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Tony, Are the Orioles the only team that signs overslot guys?  Are they the only team taking advantage of that?

Are the only teams that sign overslot guys the teams that draft high?

And btw, I’m not saying it doesn’t help.  I’m saying it’s not needed to build a good farm system.  I’m saying that losing on purpose isn’t need to build a good farm system.  That’s not an opinion.  That’s a fact.  

It's also a fact that they have more $ with which to go overslot, which means either we're able to go farther over slot (assume an upgrade in our eyes) and/or to go overslot more often (also assume an upgrade in our eyes).

That doesn't mean you can't build a good system lower down. It just means it's harder to do.

[Sports Guy]

19 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

You keep claiming this, but I don't think it's true.  We would not have had the same pool of money to deal with so getting some of the overslot guys may not have happened.  Sure, we could still do overslots with less money, but it would not have happened the EXACT same way as we would have had less money, so we probably could not have gotten the EXACT same guys.  You want to discount the philosophy of losing and drafting high, fine.  But you are wrong, it DOES make a difference, both in the draft position round by round, not just the 1st round, and the amount of money you can spend.  We can both speculate what the draft would have looked like if we were picking 7th instead of 1-2, but making factual type claims like you do is wrong.  I certainly doubt how highly ranked our farm system would be if instead of constantly picking in the top 3 the past few years we'd instead of picked in the 7-10 range each time.  

First of all the first picks could have been cheaper had we drafted them later.  And even if they cost the same, so be it.  Even if Kjerstad is gone and if they picked closer to 10, they could have have Veen.  There are several other top 100 guys that went later as well.  In 2021, we took Cowser.  Again, if you pick later,  maybe you still get him or if not, maybe you take Watson or House or Frelick and still have a similarly ranked player.

Secondly, we definitely could have had Mayo and Baumler and Willems because they were drafted so late.  They would have unquestionably been there for the Orioles to draft.  Would they have definitely been there in those rounds when they drafted?  No. But they would have been available before that and likely for the same or very similar money since they were already well above a lot anyway.  If they took the 7 figure pay day as 4th and 5th rounders, I’m sure they take it going  around earlier.

If we had drafted 10th in 2020, would we have Westburg?  Who knows.  Maybe, maybe not but he was a comp pick.  And if we miss on him, other good players ranked highly went after him, so perhaps we get one of them anyway and that player is ranked similarly.  

They went overslot on Servideo.  Maybe they take a nobody there and spend less.  Ok, so what?  Servideo seems to be a nobody and isn’t someone you lose on purpose for.

Last year, they didn’t really go overslot until Willems in R8.  Clearly they could have taken him in R7 if they wanted to.

So yes, they could have the same or very similar drafts.  
 

 

[forphase1]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Tony, Are the Orioles the only team that signs overslot guys?  Are they the only team taking advantage of that?

Are the only teams that sign overslot guys the teams that draft high?

And btw, I’m not saying it doesn’t help.  I’m saying it’s not needed to build a good farm system.  I’m saying that losing on purpose isn’t need to build a good farm system.  That’s not an opinion.  That’s a fact.  

The other examples you name, Dodgers, Cardinals, Rays, all started at a much greater position that the Orioles who had one of the worst farm systems in baseball.  Think you are frustrated now with the Orioles, try if instead of having a top rated system now they were in the middle of the pack because they didn't get high draft picks nor have the biggest pool to spend on overslots.  It was needed based on just how bad off we were.  It WAS needed based on how far down we were.  Going forward it shouldn't be needed if we draft smartly and keep the pipeline flowing.  As they say, it takes more energy to get a plane off the ground that it does to keep in flying.  We needed this great effort of losing (  ) to get the farm system off the ground as quickly as possible.  Without the higher draft slots and the money that comes with it our farm system wouldn't be nearly what it is now.  The starting base just was that poor in many aspects.  

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

It's also a fact that they have more $ with which to go overslot, which means either we're able to go farther over slot (assume an upgrade in our eyes) and/or to go overslot more often (also assume an upgrade in our eyes).

That doesn't mean you can't build a good system lower down. It just means it's harder to do.

No it’s not.  The Orioles were a garbage farm system for years.  They made everything difficult and drafting higher didn’t help them.

Having a good farm system is hard if you are dumb and don’t do things properly.  That’s it.  That’s the reason it’s hard.  Sure guys dont pan out or get hurt but every team deals with that.  It’s about keeping with it and doing the smart things.  We know the Os didn’t do that for years.

 

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

The other examples you name, Dodgers, Cardinals, Rays, all started at a much greater position that the Orioles who had one of the worst farm systems in baseball.  Think you are frustrated now with the Orioles, try if instead of having a top rated system now they were in the middle of the pack because they didn't get high draft picks nor have the biggest pool to spend on overslots.  It was needed based on just how bad off we were.  It WAS needed based on how far down we were.  Going forward it shouldn't be needed if we draft smartly and keep the pipeline flowing.  As they say, it takes more energy to get a plane off the ground that it does to keep in flying.  We needed this great effort of losing (  ) to get the farm system off the ground as quickly as possible.  Without the higher draft slots and the money that comes with it our farm system wouldn't be nearly what it is now.  The starting base just was that poor in many aspects.  

Great..nothing you say here means they should still be sucking and losing on purpose.  
 

What you are saying here is why they should have ranked to begin with….which I agree with and always have.  

[forphase1]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Secondly, we definitely could have had Mayo and Baumler and Willems because they were drafted so late.  They would have unquestionably been there for the Orioles to draft.  Would they have definitely been there in those rounds when they drafted?  No. But they would have been available before that and likely for the same or very similar money since they were already well above a lot anyway.  If they took the 7 figure pay day as 4th and 5th rounders, I’m sure they take it going  around earlier.

 

 

With overslots the question is not so much would they still be on the board, though of course that does somewhat come into play, but do you have the money to buy them?  Yeah, maybe Mayo and Baumler and Willems are there, but if you don't have the extra money to spend it really doesn't matter.  You believe what you want, and I'm done arguing this with you for now, but getting the larger money base is just as valuable, if not more so, than the actual pick slot.  Can't sign overslot guys if you don't have enough savings from the higher pool and higher picks.

[Tony-OH]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Tony, Are the Orioles the only team that signs overslot guys?  Are they the only team taking advantage of that?

Are the only teams that sign overslot guys the teams that draft high?

And btw, I’m not saying it doesn’t help.  I’m saying it’s not needed to build a good farm system.  I’m saying that losing on purpose isn’t need to build a good farm system.  That’s not an opinion.  That’s a fact.  

It's your OPINION, not a fact. The higher the draft picks, particularly the top five picks the higher the chances of hitting on a impact guy. Spreading that money out has allowed them to get guys for overslot who have looked pretty good so far.  That's a fact.

We get it, you think the Orioles could have spent a bunch of money and finished with 70 wins the last few years and still think they would have five players in the top 100. I find it highly unlikely. BTW, Henderson also got higher than slot to sign. 

Is it possible to draft well lower in the draft, sure. But at the end of the day, that's the direction he went with. what we don't know was whether hat was by his design or because of the budget he was given to operate with as he rebuilt the organization from the ground up. 

Look, Elias has made some mistakes already. Keeping several players including Isaac Matson over Zach Pop was an unforced error on his part, but it's too early to judge him on whether he can build a consistent winner.

At this point, it is what it is and no use gnashing our teeth over the awful records that have made the franchise a laughing stock. 

What I'm personally focused on is the future and the minor league system makes me feel good about it. Would signing Correa make us all feel better, sure, but again, the Orioles have no and probably will never win a bidding war on THE BEST free agent on the market. 

Could they? Sure, they should be able to. But then again MASN should be sending their reporters on the road and broadcasting every home game in spring training, but here we are and we don't know whether they will do anything.

So in other words, Elias is operating with the budget and with the owners that he got. Taking it out on him when we don't know his operational budget seems unfair to me.

 

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, forphase1 said:

With overslots the question is not so much would they still be on the board, though of course that does somewhat come into play, but do you have the money to buy them?  Yeah, maybe Mayo and Baumler and Willems are there, but if you don't have the extra money to spend it really doesn't matter.  You believe what you want, and I'm done arguing this with you for now, but getting the larger money base is just as valuable, if not more so, than the actual pick slot.  Can't sign overslot guys if you don't have enough savings from the higher pool and higher picks.

But again, teams with lower slot pools sign overslots every year.  If only the teams at the top of the draft did it, your argument would have merit but it doesn’t.

And again, maybe they don’t come away with Haskin and Servideo.  Ok.  Maybe they draft 2 UTI players who sign for next to nothing in those slots.  So be it.

I would rather see a 75-80 win team going somewhere and end up with Kjerstad/Veen, Baumler and Mayo than a sh!t team with those guys plus Haskin and Servideo.  

[forphase1]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Great..nothing you say here means they should still be sucking and losing on purpose.  
 

What you are saying here is why they should have ranked to begin with….which I agree with and always have.  

I don't think they are losing on purpose any longer.  But there is a difference between losing on purpose and spending before it's smart to do so.  They should NOT be gunning for the top draft slots any longer, but I don't think we've reached the point of buying high priced FA yet either.  We are in the uncomfortable adolescent stage where we are no longer a child farm system but we aren't quite ready to take the wheel and drive for the playoffs yet.  Doesn't make a great deal of sense to buy a 13 year old a new car when it's going to sit around largely unused for 3 years before the kid is ready to drive.  Next year I hope we turn 16 and can see about buying some new flashy toys.  Yeah, I know the market isn't as good, but I get that now isn't the time to buy either.