Hard to argue with it.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Yardball85 said:

They absolutely, 100% deserve an F.  They can still "rebuild" without completely ignoring improvements to the MLB team.  The two are far from mutually exclusive, despite what some people want to believe.

The idea that people can’t grasp this is one of the oddest things I have seen on this site.

There are a lot of really smart people on here.  They should be able to understand this.

[Il BuonO]

And the idea that Mancini is worthy of a multi year contract is mind blowing. 

[Just Regular]

Stumbled across this Breakdowns widget on Fangraphs.

https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/breakdowns/active-roster

The columns are sortable; about half MLB's Teams forecast 26-man rosters have 0 waivers players.

The 50-75% quarter of Teams have 1.

The Pirates are tied with us for the lead at 6 apiece.

[Hazmat]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd be fine with them not signing viable major league free agents if they were aggressively promoting young players to the majors. 

All they are doing is throwing as cheap a team out there for as long as they can get away with it.

Things are quiet now but just wait until teams start trying to pass Mateo types through waivers late in spring training.  Elias will be ready to pounce!

[spiritof66]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

So what you are saying is that the O's, who won't even get a guaranteed top draft pick out of tanking, shouldn't receive a poor grade because they aren't bothering to put forth actual effort?

Wish I could have tried that with my math teachers growing up.

 

I don't know whether the Orioles are tanking in 2022, though I guess that depends on what constitutes tanking.

I think their priority for 2022 is to fill out a roster with the best of their weak cadre of holdovers plus the cheapest available additions who don't require financial commitments beyond 2021 -- sort of a placeholding team until they start promoting guys during the upcoming season to see, over the next half-season or so, whether they're capable of playing in the major leagues. 

I don't think that's a smart way to build, or rebuild, a contending team. I don't think much of Elias' strategy for rebuilding the team generally; I think the best way to build a team is to gather talent from all  the available sources. Among other things, I Elias (and ownership) has failed to appreciate the harm that's been done, and is continuing, to the team's fan base, and the very significant differences between Houston/the Astros and Baltimore/the Orioles. But you've got to hand it to them: they've fielded a team for about as low a payroll as possible and have avoided making commitments past this year other than Lyles' buyout. 

Part of a math teacher's job was, and I believe still is, to assess how much math each students learned, and at least when I was in school the main standard for making that assessment was to see how often each student came up with the right answers to problems presented on tests (and, I think at the teacher's option, on problems presented in class). I don't know why, in grading the Orioles' off-season, we should be assuming that the standard is how successful they've been in improving their miserable team for 2022, when it's pretty clear that, unlike most teams, they're not trying to do that.

[Three Run Homer]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd be fine with them not signing viable major league free agents if they were aggressively promoting young players to the majors. 

All they are doing is throwing as cheap a team out there for as long as they can get away with it.

I think they are being aggressive to a fault in promoting young players to the majors--that's part of the problem.  They gave a large number of starts last year to guys like Akin, Kremer, Lowther and Wells who had never even established themselves at AAA, and collectively they were awful.  It looks like they are planning to do the same this year.   

I agree that you don't want to make a multi-year commitment to a mediocre veteran player who is going to block a promising prospect, but signing a respectable mediocre veteran 3B and SS, a couple of respectable mediocre veteran SPs and a couple of respectable mediocre veteran relievers to one year contracts won't break the bank and won't block anybody who is important to the team's future.   The cheap-ass approach taken by these owners borders on fan abuse.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Three Run Homer said:

I think they are being aggressive to a fault in promoting young players to the majors--that's part of the problem.  They gave a large number of starts last year to guys like Akin, Kremer, Lowther and Wells who had never even established themselves at AAA, and collectively they were awful.  It looks like they are planning to do the same this year.   

I agree that you don't want to make a multi-year commitment to a mediocre veteran player who is going to block a promising prospect, but signing a respectable mediocre veteran 3B and SS, a couple of respectable mediocre veteran SPs and a couple of respectable mediocre veteran relievers to one year contracts won't break the bank and won't block anybody who is important to the team's future.   The cheap-ass approach taken by these owners borders on fan abuse.

I think those guys are back of the roster filler no matter what you do.

I'm talking about Mountcasle and AR getting held back to maximize team control.  

Probably the top pitchers will be as well.

[forphase1]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

The idea that people can’t grasp this is one of the oddest things I have seen on this site.

There are a lot of really smart people on here.  They should be able to understand this.

It's not that we don't understand it, it's just that we also understand that it makes sense to also not be willing to spend money until the core of the team is ready to compete.  Once you have that decent nucleus of young taken then you spend the money and add to the team.  I know you disagree,  but that doesn't make the rest of us dumb or stupid or unable to grasp your high intelligence concept.  If I was the owner of the Orioles or Ellias I'm not sure I'd spend the money yet and certainly not for some of the deals that have recently been signed.  Again, I know you disagree but in the end there isn't much real difference between a 50 win team and a 70 win team.   Sure, maybe a bit easier on the eyes, but still a losing team.  

[Sports Guy]

33 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

It's not that we don't understand it, it's just that we also understand that it makes sense to also not be willing to spend money until the core of the team is ready to compete.  Once you have that decent nucleus of young taken then you spend the money and add to the team.  I know you disagree,  but that doesn't make the rest of us dumb or stupid or unable to grasp your high intelligence concept.  If I was the owner of the Orioles or Ellias I'm not sure I'd spend the money yet and certainly not for some of the deals that have recently been signed.  Again, I know you disagree but in the end there isn't much real difference between a 50 win team and a 70 win team.   Sure, maybe a bit easier on the eyes, but still a losing team.  

 

I stand by what I said.  People can’t see the forest through the trees and the only reason is because it’s what the Os are doing.  If Elias brought in good players to have a better team this year and did so while continuing to keep an eye on the long term, you would be for it and if you say you wouldn’t, you’re a liar.

 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 

I stand by what I said.  People can’t see the forest through the trees and the only reason is because it’s what the Os are doing.  If Elias brought in good players to have a better team this year and did so while continuing to keep an eye on the long term, you would be for it and if you say you wouldn’t, you’re a liar.

 

At least in previous seasons you could justify it by saying you will get one of the top picks.

Now it just looks like they won't spend.

[forphase1]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

 

I stand by what I said.  People can’t see the forest through the trees and the only reason is because it’s what the Os are doing.  If Elias brought in good players to have a better team this year and did so while continuing to keep an eye on the long term, you would be for it and if you say you wouldn’t, you’re a liar.

 

Maybe you are the one who can't understand, not us.  I said we understand it, but we also understand the opposite viewpoint.  Yes, if the O's signed some guys to get better I'd be ok with it, sure.  But I don't think it's necessary either as I see the other side of the coin.  That's the difference...you feel like YOUR way of doing things is the ONLY right way to go, while for many of us both sides have their pros and their cons, good points and bad points.  It's not MY money, so if the ownership team and management wants to bring in some more stop gap players to make the current team better, then fine, provided it doesn't stop the young development.  If they can find a long term solution at some places where the depth is still questionable, then so be it, i.e. a Correa, though I wouldn't touch that contract he signed.  But I also understand, and don't disagree, with Elias when he says we just aren't at that point yet.  

[Sports Guy]

42 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Maybe you are the one who can't understand, not us.  I said we understand it, but we also understand the opposite viewpoint.  Yes, if the O's signed some guys to get better I'd be ok with it, sure.  But I don't think it's necessary either as I see the other side of the coin.  That's the difference...you feel like YOUR way of doing things is the ONLY right way to go, while for many of us both sides have their pros and their cons, good points and bad points.  It's not MY money, so if the ownership team and management wants to bring in some more stop gap players to make the current team better, then fine, provided it doesn't stop the young development.  If they can find a long term solution at some places where the depth is still questionable, then so be it, i.e. a Correa, though I wouldn't touch that contract he signed.  But I also understand, and don't disagree, with Elias when he says we just aren't at that point yet.  

We are absolutely at the point where the team should try to be better.  It’s absurd to say otherwise.  We are now going into the 4th year and are about to now start wasting years of 2 of the best prospects in baseball, one of which is is already 24 years old and plays a position with a short shelf life..and yet people are perfectly fine with it because they think this means we are better off long term.  
 

The idea people are fine for this to take 6+ years until POTENTIAL real contention is so over the top absurd.  

This isn’t some righteous effort from the team because they aren’t ready.  It’s to save money.  That’s all.  People being ok with that is crazy.  The organization is so f’ing cheap that they don’t even want to pay for meals and hotel rooms for the owners and you think they aren’t spending now because “they aren’t ready”?  Lol  

[Sports Guy]

What happens next offseason when we are “more ready” to spend and the FA list sucks and there’s no one to sign?  Or what happens if there are some struggles and/or injuries by the prospects and not as much development?  Do we hold off again?

Like where is the line drawn and  why should we believe that they will all of a sudden go past that line?

Im not even saying they won’t spend long term.  I think they will.  Whether they spend it properly or not, who knows.  But not spending now is just delaying things as much as possible because they are cash poor and aren’t willing to make the team better right now.  
 

[geschinger]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

We are absolutely at the point where the team should try to be better.  It’s absurd to say otherwise.  We are now going into the 4th year and are about to now start wasting years of 2 of the best prospects in baseball, one of which is is already 24 years old and plays a position with a short shelf life..and yet people are perfectly fine with it because they think this means we are better off long term.  

This isn’t some righteous effort from the team because they aren’t ready.  It’s to save money.  That’s all.  People being ok with that is crazy.

I would have no problem if they brought in additional players as long as they aren't blocking anyone.  Sure would make it more entertaining.

But the bolded makes no sense - no matter what they did this offseason they aren't contending.  Getting two of the best prospects in baseball experience in 2022 is not a wasting them.  In the context of either of their careers it makes no difference if they win 60 or 75 games in 2022.

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, geschinger said:

I would have no problem if they brought in additional players as long as they aren't blocking anyone.  Sure would make it more entertaining.

But the bolded makes no sense - no matter what they did this offseason they aren't contending.  Getting two of the best prospects in baseball experience in 2022 is not a wasting them.  In the context of either of their careers it makes no difference if they win 60 or 75 games in 2022.

No, it’s not wasting them this year although Adley should have been brought up last year and the team should be trying for 500 this year.

But it will be wasting them in 2023 if you aren’t doing a lot more.  Winning 75 games in 2023 means you are going to take these guys into year 3 before POTENTIAL contention and even that potential is only realized if prospects develop AND the team brings in better outside talent.  As you pointed out before, improving 40 games in 2 years isn’t very realistic even if it is possible.

They are at least a year behind where they should be and using the COVID year as an excuse for that is wrong.