How Long Will Elias Stay in Baltimore?

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, interloper said:

I don't understand why @Can_of_corndown voted this. There's nothing offensive or trolling about this post. 

That’s usually the case when anyone downvotes something on this site.  

[geschinger]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

If/when the Orioles get back to winning, they will not have gotten back to win because of losing.  That’s a fallacy.  

Sure it is.  There is no argument with any credibility that can be made that losing and the larger draft pools and higher picks has not helped speed up building a farm system that can (hopefully) lead to sustained winning.  

[Tony-OH]

35 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

What matters is what you can turn that into for a ML winner.

So I stand by what I said…I don’t see him as some hot commodity until he starts to win.  It doesn’t mean he isn’t good at what he does, it just means he hasn’t really proven anything yet and until he does, it’s hard for me to believe that teams are knocking down his door to get him to come to them.

This is where I'm at. Elias is a smart guy and I can see all the interesting ideas he's installed in the minor leagues "Hiring young unknown coaches, focusing on the analytics/systems to improve players, etc" as well as his solid drafting and scouting in the DR. But, until that translates to wins on a major league diamond he hasn't proven anything yet. 

If the Orioles are a contender by next year he could very well start to become a commodity, but until they are a contender, the jury is still out on the rebuild plan.

 

[Moose Milligan]

25 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The bar is so low for this organization that when they do things that make sense and other teams do, we elevate them higher than everyone else.

I agree with that.  

I wasn't trying to be snarky about it, either.  Was genuinely curious about what this team has done that's considered innovative.  As far as I can tell, they're on par with several other teams from an analytics perspective.  Building a great complex in the Dominican was really nice but other teams have those, too.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, geschinger said:

Sure it is.  There is no argument with any credibility that can be made that losing and the larger draft pools and higher picks has not helped speed up building a farm system that can (hopefully) lead to sustained winning.  

You don’t need to lose to build a proper farm system.  Great teams who win 100+ games every year also have great farm systems.  It’s a lie that you have to lose to do it.  I’m not saying you don’t have access to a high pick and that high pick isn’t good to have.

Im saying you don’t need it to produce high level talent and a good farm system.  That’s a proven fact.

And btw, the higher draft pool is essentially based off of the 1 high pick.  The difference between the first and like 10th pool is almost made up of the difference between the 1st and 10th pick.  There is something left over but it’s not a huge amount and it’s certainly not enough to lose on purpose.

[LookinUp]

27 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Got any examples?

Several things. Part of it is intangible. Things I see and hear from players, coaches and ex coaches in interviews.

Part of it is how open minded they are. Did you know they brought in Mike and Brian Roberts because they're trying to see if they can become efficient enough on stolen bases to make it worth it again? I think they number they need to get to is close to 90%, but they're still investigating it. That's the one example off the top of my head that shocked me, but there are others that prove they're leaving no stones unturned.

I think their approach to swing decisions is very unique and data driven.

I think their statistical targeting of players to draft is great. Henderson, Westburg, Norby and Mayo are all guys that look like really good picks who weren't top 5 guys. Others, like Stowers have a chance too. It makes me hopeful that a guy like Willems will be the next one to really show out.

I think they're presenting firehoses worth of data to players, but not forcing it on them. It's essentially a library of information that's available at every level for players who like to think like that. 

I love how they've embedded data people with the teams so they can understand how to make it more practical. (a lot of data people love their products but don't relate it to players/coaches)

I love how they've integrated instruction from level to level. Progression from A to AA isn't just about facing better competition, it's a new development plan with different things to focus on, but it's also integrated enough so that your continuing a player's story instead of totally starting anew with new names, faces and priorities.

I don't take any of this for granted. We've not had it in forever and I feel like other teams aren't doing much of this to the same degree the O's are. 

 

[btdart20]

42 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Got any examples?

To flip the question:  Is the scouting and development areas of the organization better or worse than it was before Elias?  Has the difference from the industry norm grown or decreased?

Maybe he is a “one trick pony.” I don’t think we know at this point.  But I’m not convinced Elias or “the plan” are the problem considering the issues with the org go much further back.  
 

Recency bias aside, I’m much more optimistic about the team’s future than I was 3 years ago.

[Sports Guy]

12 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Several things. Part of it is intangible. Things I see and hear from players, coaches and ex coaches in interviews.

Part of it is how open minded they are. Did you know they brought in Mike and Brian Roberts because they're trying to see if they can become efficient enough on stolen bases to make it worth it again? I think they number they need to get to is close to 90%, but they're still investigating it. That's the one example off the top of my head that shocked me, but there are others that prove they're leaving no stones unturned.

I think their approach to swing decisions is very unique and data driven.

I think their statistical targeting of players to draft is great. Henderson, Westburg, Norby and Mayo are all guys that look like really good picks who weren't top 5 guys. Others, like Stowers have a chance too. It makes me hopeful that a guy like Willems will be the next one to really show out.

I think they're presenting firehoses worth of data to players, but not forcing it on them. It's essentially a library of information that's available at every level for players who like to think like that. 

I love how they've embedded data people with the teams so they can understand how to make it more practical. (a lot of data people love their products but don't relate it to players/coaches)

I love how they've integrated instruction from level to level. Progression from A to AA isn't just about facing better competition, it's a new development plan with different things to focus on, but it's also integrated enough so that your continuing a player's story instead of totally starting anew with new names, faces and priorities.

I don't take any of this for granted. We've not had it in forever and I feel like other teams aren't doing much of this to the same degree the O's are. 

 

How much are you studying other organizations to make this statement?

I don’t think you mentioned anything that’s unusual.

[wildcard]

39 minutes ago, interloper said:

I don't understand why @Can_of_corndown voted this. There's nothing offensive or trolling about this post.

Doesn't really matter to me.   I don't pay attention to down votes.  I didn't even realize he did.  I am going to write what I think is true whether anyone down votes me or not.

[Sports Guy]

11 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

To flip the question:  Is the scouting and development areas of the organization better or worse than it was before Elias?  Has the difference from the industry norm grown or decreased?

Maybe he is a “one trick pony.” I don’t think we know at this point.  But I’m not convinced Elias or “the plan” are the problem considering the issues with the org go much further back.  
 

Recency bias aside, I’m much more optimistic about the team’s future than I was 3 years ago.

This is the thing….people talk about what things were like before.

Who cares?  That’s irrelevant.  Just because you are better than the worst, doesn’t mean you are more innovative than everyone else.

As I said, the bar is so low with this organization that people find big improvements to be the mark of some incredible breakthroughs when in reality, it’s just catching up to what everyone else has been doing for a while.

[wildcard]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Right now he's a one trick pony and they just took the trick away.

Elias should be finished with that trick anyway.  Its time to start winning.

[btdart20]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

How much are you studying other organizations to make this statement?

I don’t think you mentioned anything that’s unusual.

Did the O’s have any of this pre-Elias?

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, btdart20 said:

Did the O’s have any of this pre-Elias?

No but so what?  That doesn’t mean he is some overly innovative guy. It doesn’t mean he’s doing something unusual.  It just means he’s doing what he should be doing.

Im glad he is but let’s not overrate what is being done either.

[geschinger]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

You don’t need to lose to build a proper farm system.  Great teams who win 100+ games every year also have great farm systems.  It’s a lie that you have to lose to do it.  I’m not saying you don’t have access to a high pick and that high pick isn’t good to have.

Im saying you don’t need it to produce high level talent and a good farm system.  That’s a proven fact.

And btw, the higher draft pool is essentially based off of the 1 high pick.  The difference between the first and like 10th pool is almost made up of the difference between the 1st and 10th pick.  There is something left over but it’s not a huge amount and it’s certainly not enough to lose on purpose.

You don't need to lose to sustain a proper farm system.  And if you have other assets you can build that way (see how Seattle built a top notch farm system).  I'm not someone who thinks every team should tank when their window to compete is closed. With the Orioles it was crystal clear that a full teardown/rebuild was necessary.

When Elias arrived - no international presence, no siginifcant trade chips left, and a bad minor league system both operationally and with the lack of talent in the system.  If he spends on FA to put a team on the field that isn't embarassing there is no chance the Orioles farm system to where it's at today.   Higher picks and the higher draft pools it brings has clearly sped things up.  

[LookinUp]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

How much are you studying other organizations to make this statement?

I don’t think you mentioned anything that’s unusual.

It's certainly unusual for the Orioles.

I guess time will tell whether this is sustainably great, particularly after AR and Grayson graduate. I'm bullish on it though. I expect both the international pipeline and the lesser known rule 4 draft guys from the last two years to make a splash this year.

And no, I don't study other orgs. I still think this one is noticeably competent.