Are we ever going to spend some money?

[Roll Tide]

5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

There are a lot of reasons why they pitching has improved this season.   Maturity of young pitchers,  the Wall, Holt, new attack pitching philosophy,  great defense,  in no particular order.

Next year the O's have (6) starters: Grayson, Kremer, Bradish, Tyler Wells, Voth, Watkins.   They can make a decision after the season if Lyles is a good eating innings 5th starter or if there is someone on the market that is better.  Means should be back in June/July.   DL Hall's control is a huge question mark even though they O's will have him come to ST as a starter.  There are  a lot of O's starters ahead of him in terms of effectiveness. 

Bautista, Perez, Tate, Krehbiel, Akin, Baker, Vespi should all be back with who ever doesn't make the rotation helping out.  For example Watkins and Voth.

For me the pitching projects better next year than the offense.  Adding Gunnar will help but overall the offense is middle of the pack.

Plus they have the option of putting Akin in the rotation.

Edited August 28, 2022 by Roll Tide

[Frobby]

35 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Starting pitching was hit hard with injuries this year.  Means, Grayson and Tyler Wells.  All will be back next season.  Means probably be delayed for a couple of months.

The injuries to starting pitchers were pretty tough, but on balance I consider this to have been an above average year when it comes to the team avoiding injuries so far (knock on wood).

[owknows]

Quote

Are we ever going to spend some money?

Let's hope not.

[MurphDogg]

I just assumed that this was an old post getting bumped. What an odd post to start at the end of August when the team is playing well.

At this point, I'm not even sure where the Orioles should spend money, outside of a starting pitcher or two.

Gotta think Mountcastle gets one more year to see whether this season was a sophomore slump or not. The outfield of Hays, Santander Mullins and McKenna is pretty set and will end up being worth 9-ish rWAR (plus figuring out whataver we get from Stowers). Mateo and Urias have combined for 5.4 rWAR and the #1 prospect in baseball will almost certainly be on the lineup on Opening Day in the other infield spot.

If you can trade an outfielder or two and non-elite prospects for Trout, that is worth considering, but I wouldn't pay full freight free agency prices on any position player this offseason. 

Kremer, Wells and Grayson Rodriguez have shown enough this season to be penciled into the Opening Day rotation. Could maybe add two more starters, but Means will be back at some point and I wouldn't want to fully block Hall.

Edited August 28, 2022 by MurphDogg

[Can_of_corn]

29 minutes ago, owknows said:

Let's hope not.

Yep, we should definitely trade Adley, Gunnar, ect the second they hit arbitration.

Have to make sure the owners make as much as possible.

[owknows]

14 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yep, we should definitely trade Adley, Gunnar, ect the second they hit arbitration.

Have to make sure the owners make as much as possible.

Stack the farm.

Graduate awesome players.

Play 'em for 5.

Trade 'em as they enter 6.

Re stock with the proceeds.

Keep the conveyor belt filled with awesome players.

Win championships.

Profit.

Baseball is a business.

The objective of business is to make money.

As much money as possible.

The objective of a healthy baseball team is to win championships and make as much money as possible.

If a team can develop a formula that allows them to put an exceptional team on the field every year, contending for championships, and making as much money as they can... that is what they should do.

Despite your suggestion to the contrary... there is nothing wrong with a baseball team owner making as much money as they possibly can, while also fielding an exceptional team. In fact, it should be the objective of every team.

Until recently, the baseball model seemed to be.... spend obscene amounts of money wastefully by buying up every high value player that hits the market, driving player prices (and thus fan prices) through the roof. This strategy has been employed for decades by NY, and California teams, and a few big city flyover teams.

A new strategy seems to be emerging pioneered by Oakland and Tampa, where stocking the farm, getting the most out of control years, trading while still valuable, and restocking the farm. This significantly lowers the cost of putting a winning product on the field, and therefore enhances profit. These teams have however, signed the occasional big contract player.

An advance on that strategy may be coming. From the Orioles. Where monster contracts are proven unnecessary to put a consistent contender on the field. And in general the team strives to get the most value out of a players productive years, and cashes in the downside years for new prospects. All while still maximizing profit and maintaining a healthy business. If this proves to be their pursuit, I wish them well.

This doesn't seem to sit well with folks like you... who have a palpable disgust for the profit motive despite it having provided every good thing you enjoy in your life. But this sentiment seems to be quite common these days.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, owknows said:

Stack the farm.

Play 'em for 5.

Trade 'em as they enter 6.

Re stock with the proceeds.

Keep the conveyor belt filled with awesome players.

Win championships.

Profit.

Baseball is a business.

The objective of business is to make money.

As much money as possible.

The objective of a healthy baseball team is to win championships and make as much money as possible.

If a team can develop a formula that allows them to put an exceptional team on the field every year, contending for championships, and making as much money as they can... that is what they should do.

Despite your suggestion to the contrary... there is nothing wrong with a baseball team owner making as much money as they possibly can, while also fielding an exceptional team. In fact, it should be the objective of every team.

Until recently, the baseball model seemed to be.... spend obscene amounts of money wastefully by buying up every high value player that hits the market, driving player prices (and thus fan prices) through the roof. This strategy has been employed for decades by NY, and California teams, and a few big city flyover teams.

A new strategy seems to be emerging pioneered by Oakland and Tampa, where stocking the farm, getting the most out of control years, trading while still valuable, and restocking the farm. This significantly lowers the cost of putting a winning product on the field, and therefore enhances profit. These teams have however, signed the occasional big contract player.

An advance on that strategy may be coming. From the Orioles. Where monster contracts are proven unnecessary to put a consistent contender on the field. And in general the team strives to get the most value out of a players productive years, and cashes in the downside years for new prospects. All while still maximizing profit and maintaining a healthy business. If this proves to be their pursuit, I wish them well.

This doesn't seem to sit well with folks like you... who have a palpable disgust for the profit motive despite it having provided every good thing you enjoy in your life. But this sentiment seems to be quite common these days.

A few things.

1. It isn't that easy to "stack the farm" when you aren't picking at the top of the draft every year.
2. You said don't spend, what are you doing paying Arb 2 prices for guys?  That's spending more than the O's are right now and this is the level of spending you want.
3. Yep, if you can create a formula that "allows them to put an exceptional team on the field every year, contending for championships, and making as much money as they can... that is what they should do." they should.  That closest we have seen to that has been the Yankees and Dodgers.  Those two teams make huge profits.  It sure ain't the A's and Rays.
4. Ahh yes, the Rays.  Who just signed a guy to a 25M/1 yr contract.  Who just extended their good young player past the five year threshold.  Almost as if they aren't following the path you want the O's to follow. 
5.  FOLK LIKE ME?  WTF do you think you are?

[Too Tall]

Not so much worried about spending this winter as I am the Angelos' Family getting their act together. They have let Elias & Co. build it so far, now don't screw it up with petty "who's the boss?" crap.

This winter will be interesting on a number of fronts. I trust Elias and team to make good moves if the Family doesn't do it's best to mess things up. I prefer to be an optimist. After all, doesn't a successful franchise/business increase in value? 

Am I dreaming we just beat Houston twice at home - the Orioles are in a "wild card race" - the team I thought would be lucky to win 70? People are excited again about Oriole baseball.  I'm excited about Oriole baseball and refuse to get sidetracked right now on who, what, when, and how much. I'm much more concerned about today's game and Tuesday's................

[Moose Milligan]

I’ve never seen a thread here pondering if the Orioles were ever going to spend money. 
 

Anyway, I’d like to believe Elias that they’re going to increase payroll. But he’s a smart guy and I don’t think he’s going to be foolish about who he spends on. 
 

I can easily see a scenario where he’s targeted some guys this off-season and gets into a bidding war of sorts and bows out one the dollars/years get to a point that doesn’t make sense.  He doesn’t add significant payroll, people on here are bitching incessantly about it, meanwhile the 2022 team was better than anyone ever thought they’d be and they’re about to graduate Gunnar Henderson and Grayson Rodriguez.  And other guys in the minors can still keep the minors in a top 10 ranking perhaps. 
 

You snowflakes need to prepare for another offseason of the Orioles not spending significant money and not bringing in big sexy names in free agency.  

[owknows]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

A few things.

1. It isn't that easy to "stack the farm" when you aren't picking at the top of the draft every year.

Yes. That's why players would be traded for prospects when they still have value.

Quote

You said don't spend, what are you doing paying Arb 2 prices for guys?  That's spending more than the O's are right now and this is the level of spending you want.

Sometimes pay Arb1... almost always trade before Arb2. I'm sure there will be exceptions.

Quote

Ahh yes, the Rays.  Who just signed a guy to a 25M/1 yr contract.  Who just extended their good young player past the five year threshold.  Almost as if they aren't following the path you want the O's to follow.

Yes... I noted that the Rays sometimes offer big contracts. And that what I'm suggesting for the Orioles would represent and advance on that strategy.

Quote

FOLK LIKE ME?  WTF do you think you are?

Honest

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

A few things.

1. It isn't that easy to "stack the farm" when you aren't picking at the top of the draft every year.
2. You said don't spend, what are you doing paying Arb 2 prices for guys?  That's spending more than the O's are right now and this is the level of spending you want.
3. Yep, if you can create a formula that "allows them to put an exceptional team on the field every year, contending for championships, and making as much money as they can... that is what they should do." they should.  That closest we have seen to that has been the Yankees and Dodgers.  Those two teams make huge profits.  It sure ain't the A's and Rays.
4. Ahh yes, the Rays.  Who just signed a guy to a 25M/1 yr contract.  Who just extended their good young player past the five year threshold.  Almost as if they aren't following the path you want the O's to follow. 
5.  FOLK LIKE ME?  WTF do you think you are?

1) This is completely false and get proven false every year by teams like the Dodgers and Tampa.  It’s never “easy” no matter where you draft but if you do it correctly, where you draft doesn’t matter.

End of the day, very few players deserve  arb 2, much less arb 3 money and even fewer deserve a FA contract.

There are guys you extend early if you can because they are your elite talent.  Elite guys should always be kept.  Every one else is expendable.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, owknows said:

Yes. That's why players would be traded for prospects when they still have value.

Sometimes pay Arb1... almost always trade before Arb2. I'm sure there will be exceptions.

Yes... I noted that the Rays sometimes offer big contracts. And that what I'm suggesting for the Orioles would represent and advance on that strategy.

Honest

I hate to tell you think but 5 years would be arb 2.

Just kidding I don't hate to tell you.  See I can be honest too!

 

The idea that any team without perfect knowledge can just endless flip guys without ever falling out of contention or taking on a long term obligations is laughable.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

1) This is completely false and get proven false every year by teams like the Dodgers and Tampa.  It’s never “easy” no matter where you draft but if you do it correctly, where you draft doesn’t matter.

End of the day, very few players deserve  arb 2, much less arb 3 money and even fewer deserve a FA contract.

There are guys you extend early if you can because they are your elite talent.  Elite guys should always be kept.  Every one else is expendable.

It's a lot easier when you have the most money and the earliest picks.

Yea, I agree on the rest of this, was why I was so annoyed they bothered with gaming Mountcastle for what is likely to be no gain.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I hate to tell you think but 5 years would be arb 2.

Just kidding I don't hate to tell you.  See I can be honest too!

 

The idea that any team without perfect knowledge can just endless flip guys without ever falling out of contention or taking on a long term obligations is laughable.

I do agree with your last point here.  You have to have some level of a payroll.  I get Tampa does it and proves you don’t but they are a rarity.

That said, I don’t think we need to spend to the level that many on here do.  Topping out at 130ish is fine.  
 

 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

I do agree with your last point here.  You have to have some level of a payroll.  I get Tampa does it and proves you don’t but they are a rarity.

That said, I don’t think we need to spend to the level that many on here do.  Topping out at 130ish is fine.  
 

 

But Tampa doesn't do it. They are spending twice what the O's are.