Jump to content

Buster Olney misses the point


tywright

Recommended Posts

Whether you agree or disagree with him, he does have a good point which is worthy of consideration.

I happen to agree with the point that signing Teix means little if the team does not win. And whether one agrees or disagrees with the conclusion it is certainly a point worth discussing - whether or not a contract with salaries that high fot that long makes building a roster capable of winning more or less difficult.

To be honest, what annoys me about the Teix discussion is rationalizing the signing based on doing something symbolic for the fan base. I really hope that isn't part of the equation (and really, I doubt it is). Because if it was, it would be very troublesome having a FO focused on acquisitions based on anything other than does this particular move make it more or less likely for us to contend.

As for the argument that it's too soon for a mega sized FA contract that is also an argument with merit whether you agree or disagree in the end. When you are as far off as the Orioles are you need to be trying to acquire as much talent as possible. It might be easier to get a quality 1b and then you might need additional resources to acquire other positions.

We can sign Teix and it may work out in our favor. But I think many here are willing to ignore the significant risk that signing Teix to an 8-10 year contract entails. And I'm not just talking about whether or not he's productive but also about the opportunity costs as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 240
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Put me in the camp with those who don't understand what point Olney supposedly missed. The O's may be able to increase payroll, but we all know they can't buy a championship.

I'm willing to role the dice; I hope they sign Teixeira. But does anyone actually believe spending $20m+ on one player doesn't result in sacrifices somewhere else?!

As for not mentioning the prospects, it wasn't lazy. I follow the minors as close as anyone, but they are just prospects. The Yankees have Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy waiting in the wings. Hughes was a higher rated prospect than Matusz, Tillman, or Arrieta are. In a couple years, at least one of our BIG 3 will get to read on the OH how he was overhyped by the O's organization even though it's not the organization that is hyping them up.

As for the contracts that come off the books after 2009, those are the contracts of our players. That means players (not just contracts) come off the books after 2009. We have to replace those players. We don't have enough prospects to do that from within, so we'll have to go get replacements through trades and free agency. To get something through trade, you have to give something up. And as for free agency, you either have to spend big bucks or go with more mediocre 'stop-gap' players. In other words, with or without Teixeira, either the payroll will go up or the team will likely become worse than it is.

Teixeira helps! $20+m/yr to one player hurts! Does $20m+ to one player hurt more or less than Teixeira helps? In Olney's opinion, the answer is obvious. I think he's wrong that it's obvious, but I don't think he misses the point.

I don't think he missed a point -- I'm just not sure his point was terribly insightful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found the article pretty offensive.

Isn't an upgrade from Millar to Tex a pretty massive one?

If we are to become competitive in a few years, how are we assured that a Mark Texiera type offensive player will be available at that time?

Why can't we spend now towards a competitive team in a couple of years?

Does Buster understand the lack of merit of arguing that only teams competing in the short term can offer a long term deal to a player?

If Tex is going to put those two teams in such a great position to compete, then shouldn't those two teams be offering up the most money?

Is Buster hinting that all non-competitive teams should bow out of the bidding for all quality free agents?

Finally, Olney's article seems to have a complete disregard for the current payroll composition of the Angels and BoSox? It's not the Nats fault those teams can't bid more.

Did Buster write the same thing when the Marlins signed Carlos Delgado a few years ago? Or when the Royals put up big coin to sign Gil Meche? How competitive have the Mariners been during the duration of the Richie Sexson and Adrian Beltre contracts - why was it acceptable for that franchise to sign those guys? It's a shame the Tampa Rays were not after a similar free agent last year since Buster would have written something similar and been 1000% wrong.

I'm sure Buster has no agenda against us or the Nats, but I hope the article hints of Buster starting to grasp that the Angels and Red Sox might not win the bidding war for Tex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the end of 2009, doesn't BAL have almost $20mios coming off the books?

Olney is fine for "passing the time" reading, but I think he's really lacking in analysis. I really have not been impressed with much of anything he's written from a "oh, I haven't thought about THAT before" point of view. He's an okay writer, just not terribly insightful (in my opinion).

Despite my previous post, I'd agree with this. I'd say that someone who looked closer and analyzed the O's situation thoroughly could possibly come to agree with Olney or disagree (but still think his tone and words like "lunacy" are... well... lunacy). But I actually think my defense of Olney's as a valid opinion may give him credit for thorough analysis that he may not deserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well three years from now is there a big bat that is going to want to play in Baltimore? Probably not.

Tex is a bat that has an interest in playing here. That's why we are going after him. We may not have this opportunity again in three years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have in the back of my mind Sonny76's statement last week that if this were up to MacPhail, the O's would have folded up their tent and gone home by now. So there must be a part of MacPhail that agrees with Buster.

Exactly... Whether one agrees or disagrees the argument does merit consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always respected him, but anyone trying to argue that there should be two classes of baseball teams, and that somehow is GOOD for baseball, is missing the big picture. It's almost like we're "tampering" somehow to try and improve our team by signing a player that one of the big market teams covet. There is a team here, and we're trying to compete. If the owner is comfortable writing the check, and he will help us win games, that's all that matters. Bow out? Go to hell. The financial inequity and subsequent competitive imbalance is maddening for all but the select few. But to have the media pile on and tell us to go back to the hull of the ship while the first class passengers light fire to the excess life boats to stay warm.....well, that just pisses me off.

props on a great post, my sentiments exactly, I'll rep u when I have pings to give out again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well three years from now is there a big bat that is going to want to play in Baltimore? Probably not.

Tex is a bat that has an interest in playing here. That's why we are going after him. We may not have this opportunity again in three years.

I don't buy it... If MacPhail follows his plan and we have a team that is winning and potential free agents can picture themselves as the guy who can help take Baltimore to the playoffs there will be plenty of guys willing/wanting to be an Oriole.

It's hard right now as any big name FA can look at where we are and realize that even if they are productive they still aren't going to win at least early on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm with Stotle in that I don't see why the article even discusses the Orioles. If Olney can't figure out that we're potentially on the doorstep of contention because of our MiL talent that is on the verge, then he isn't studying enough. If Wieters, Jones, Markakis, and Roberts do what is expected and just a decent amount of our top flight pitching prospects turn out, we've got a shot in the next couple of years if we sign Texiera.

I would have no problem with the argument that we should wait another couple years to make this sort of move if I saw any sign of another player that fits like Texiera available in the next couple of years. I don't. He plays the right position at the right offensive performance with the right defense at the right age with the right intangibles and he is from the area. That is just a perfect storm. Most free agents that come onto the scene are past their prime. Tex isn't like that. He is a special case.

Putting this piece in place before the remaining pieces are set in stone is a bit risky, but it is what it is. We can't delay his free agency for two more years and I don't see another Tex on the horizon so I don't have any problem with this gamble.

Very good points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm with Stotle in that I don't see why the article even discusses the Orioles. If Olney can't figure out that we're potentially on the doorstep of contention because of our MiL talent that is on the verge, then he isn't studying enough. If Wieters, Jones, Markakis, and Roberts do what is expected and just a decent amount of our top flight pitching prospects turn out, we've got a shot in the next couple of years if we sign Texiera.

I would have no problem with the argument that we should wait another couple years to make this sort of move if I saw any sign of another player that fits like Texiera available in the next couple of years. I don't. He plays the right position at the right offensive performance with the right defense at the right age with the right intangibles and he is from the area. That is just a perfect storm. Most free agents that come onto the scene are past their prime. Tex isn't like that. He is a special case.

Putting this piece in place before the remaining pieces are set in stone is a bit risky, but it is what it is. We can't delay his free agency for two more years and I don't see another Tex on the horizon so I don't have any problem with this gamble.

Great post VaTech...I would rep you but apparently I'm fresh out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Sending Jackson down does nothing, there is nothing left to prove down there. He is taking good ABs, he is working counts, he looks fine in the field etc. I have used the Cowser comp, not to say he should be sent down, in the sense that Cowser looked particularly lost at times during his callup last year. Jackson is facing some professional adversity for the first time as a professional keep running him out there.    The fortunate thing is he isn't hurting the team in a significant way right now, and when it finally does click the Orioles will be just that much better. 
    • Actually move Westburg to 7th so there’s not so many lefties in a row. 
    • I’ll go with: Gunnar SS Adley C O’Hearn 1B Tony RF Westburg 3B Mullins CF Cowser LF Kjerstad DH Holliday 2B  
    • The question is, can he be productive playing just 1-2 times a week? We don't know because he's never really been in that role. Not everyone can stay productive in a part-time role. I think the Orioles will find a way to get him in the lineup 4-5 days a week. He can play corner outfield (except I would not play him in LF in Camden), DH and 1B. He still does not look great at 1B, but he can be serviceable if it means getting his bat into the lineup. That's a decent amount of ways to keep him and others fresh. Santander probably is at risk to sit a bit more than usual, but this also gives the Orioles an opportunity to have a very left-handed heavy lineup against righties at times, with Mountcastle sitting. The Orioles left-handed heavy lineup could be: 1. Henderson - SS 2. Rutschman - C 3. O'Hearn - 1B 4. Santander - RF 5. Cowser - LF 6. Mullins - CF 7. Westburg - 3B (R) 8. Kjerstad - DH 9. Holliday - 2B Imagine having to face that lineup and then have Mountcastle, McCann, Urias and Mateo for pinch running as a bench. Now don't get me wrong, Mountcastle is not going to be benched all that much, but Kjerstad could give Santander, Cowser, Mullins (with Cowser moving to CF), O'Hearn, Mountcastle, and Rutschman when he DHing a day off.  That's a lot of ways to keep him fresh and get his bat in the lineup.  
    • If so, probably just for 2 days or so.  
    • Well, there are now 8 days left in April, so 8 days based on last year.  After that, if I recall correctly, he turns into a pumpkin until October.
    • Kjerstad also has had pretty good success vs. LHP in his career.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...