Schmuck: O's interested in Sexson

[DrungoHazewood]

I'll never really get the fascination most inside baseball men have for pre-vetted MLB mediocre/washed-up/never were players over similar or better minor league journeymen. Yes, Richie Sexson used to be a good player. But at this point he's been in a freefall for years. He never came close to living up to his last big contract. He'd have to overshoot any reasonable projections by miles to just be an average AL DH/1B. He's 34 and he's always had the kind of old player's skills that don't age well.

I mean, I understand wanting to CYA. If Richie Sexson fails you can stand up at the press conference where you release him and say "well, we gave it the ol' college try. We weren't going to win anyway, so we rolled the dice on him getting back to .275/.375/.550 and it just didn't work out." And the old curmudgeonly local sportswriters will probably take it and run with it.

But give the job to Huff and play Oscar Salazar and Nolan Reimold and Luis Montanez and you're putting your butt on the line a little more. If one or more of them fail, your excuse is that you didn't know how to judge talent. You have to explain why you didn't sign that year's version of Carlos Pena instead of toying around with minor league suspects.

I thought MacPhail was big enough to be able to handle this kind of criticism and tell the "why don't you sign somebody I recognize" fans he'd rather build a good team at a reasonable cost. I'm certainly not on the anti-MacPhail lynchmob, but it's starting to look like he isn't.

[Dr. FLK]

But he's "a name". That's what the Os want. We want a guy who the "average fan" has heard of...that's how we sell tickets. Don't you get it?!?! Skills don't matter...at some point, it comes down to name recognition!

[DrungoHazewood]

But he's "a name". That's what the Os want. We want a guy who the "average fan" has heard of...that's how we sell tickets. Don't you get it?!?! Skills don't matter...at some point, it comes down to name recognition!

BJ Surhoff is still available...

[Dr. FLK]

BJ Surhoff is still available...

I wouldn't be shocked...

[33rdst]

I'll never really get the fascination most inside baseball men have for pre-vetted MLB mediocre/washed-up/never were players over similar or better minor league journeymen. Yes, Richie Sexson used to be a good player. But at this point he's been in a freefall for years. He never came close to living up to his last big contract. He'd have to overshoot any reasonable projections by miles to just be an average AL DH/1B. He's 34 and he's always had the kind of old player's skills that don't age well.

I mean, I understand wanting to CYA. If Richie Sexson fails you can stand up at the press conference where you release him and say "well, we gave it the ol' college try. We weren't going to win anyway, so we rolled the dice on him getting back to .275/.375/.550 and it just didn't work out." And the old curmudgeonly local sportswriters will probably take it and run with it.

But give the job to Huff and play Oscar Salazar and Nolan Reimold and Luis Montanez and you're putting your butt on the line a little more. If one or more of them fail, your excuse is that you didn't know how to judge talent. You have to explain why you didn't sign that year's version of Carlos Pena instead of toying around with minor league suspects.

I thought MacPhail was big enough to be able to handle this kind of criticism and tell the "why don't you sign somebody I recognize" fans he'd rather build a good team at a reasonable cost. I'm certainly not on the anti-MacPhail lynchmob, but it's starting to look like he isn't.

This is an excellent point. I have felt this way for a long time. How much of a part does the manager play in these kinds of decisions? I have always felt that old school managers would prefer a player with experience, regardless of his projections, then play a young player with potential. There just too conservative.

[DrungoHazewood]

This is an excellent point. I have felt this way for a long time. How much of a part does the manager play in these kinds of decisions? I have always felt that old school managers would prefer a player with experience, regardless of his projections, then play a young player with potential. There just too conservative.

I think it varies by team, but most people in high positions in MLB organizations are very risk-averse. They seem to almost always prefer player A over player B:

A) 34 years old, 80% chance of a .730-.780 OPS, prior positive MLB experience.

B) 26 years old, 33% chances of a .650, .750, or .850, several brief cups of coffee in the show.

[amateurfan]

What I don't understand is why this information was even given to the press. It's bad enough that they are considering Sexon, but to release the information lacks forethought completely. This is the sort of move that you don't announce until it's done and then are absolutely prepared to explain why you made such a bone-headed mistake. If it was provided to Schmuck deliberately, then it seems it must be because they wanted to gauge the fans' responses. This just makes no sense. The Orioles' FO right now is a PR catastrophe. They have no understanding on how to appease or appeal to their fan-base, their consumers. They are horrific at customer service.

[33rdst]

What I don't understand is why this information was even given to the press. It's bad enough that they are considering Sexon, but to release the information lacks forethought completely. This is the sort of move that you don't announce until it's done and then are absolutely prepared to explain why you made such a bone-headed mistake. If it was provided to Schmuck deliberately, then it seems it must be because they wanted to gauge the fans' responses. This just makes no sense. The Orioles' FO right now is a PR catastrophe. They have no understanding on how to appease or appeal to their fan-base, their consumers. They are horrific at customer service.

Another reason they may have announced it to the press is that they're sending a message to another free agent with whom they are in negotiations. When guys still find themselves unsigned after the holidays they get antsy. An announcement like this might light a fire under them. Hopefully all this Sexon talk will turn out to be is a negotiation ploy.

[Denny]

I do not like Sexson.

What, no crack about how Thorne can't say his name right? Don't let me down, OH!

Actually I was going to mention Palmer continually calling him Richie SEXTON!!

[amateurfan]

Another reason they may have announced it to the press is that they're sending a message to another free agent with whom they are in negotiations. When guys still find themselves unsigned after the holidays they get antsy. An announcement like this might light a fire under them. Hopefully all this Sexon talk will turn out to be is a negotiation ploy.

Yes, good point. I was trying to think of whom BB said AM was targeting. Was it Hinske? If the Front Office is using this as a ploy to get Hinske to sign, or the Rangers to trade us Blalock, good heavens. It's surely not a better situation. If I were Dunn, and just for the sake of argument, the Orioles were one of my suitors and this came out, I wouldn't be scared into signing.

[glenn__davis]

I thought MacPhail was big enough to be able to handle this kind of criticism and tell the "why don't you sign somebody I recognize" fans he'd rather build a good team at a reasonable cost. I'm certainly not on the anti-MacPhail lynchmob, but it's starting to look like he isn't.

I think you (and others) are a little quick to judge MacPhail here on moves that haven't happened yet. We haven't signed Sexson. We don't even know if the Orioles are legitimately interested in Sexson. Yesterday you made a post about Hinske that would have been very fair and legitimate, if in fact that Orioles are seriously considering signing him. But we don't know that they are, other than a snippet from BB.

Now, I agree with you that both of these signings would be bad. But we really have no idea how much "interest" the team has in either of these guys.

[Anlbdz]

I am usually someone who would be fine with us taking a flier on a player of this type. Perhaps he has a decent first half and we can trade him for a prospect or something of that nature, who knows. For some reason i recollected him hitting well against the O's, so I decided to look at his numbers in some AL East Ballparks.....

OPACY .233 .344 .388 .733

Fenway .230 .294 .393 .688

MFYstadium .174 .284 .360 .645

ugh.

He does have decent numbers in the skydome though, maybe we're going to use him as a situational platoon when we play there....

[33rdst]

Yes, good point. I was trying to think of whom BB said AM was targeting. Was it Hinske? If the Front Office is using this as a ploy to get Hinske to sign, or the Rangers to trade us Blalock, good heavens. It's surely not a better situation. If I were Dunn, and just for the sake of argument, the Orioles were one of my suitors and this came out, I wouldn't be scared into signing.

Yeah it's probably Hinske. On the otherhand, they could really be interested in Sexon.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think you (and others) are a little quick to judge MacPhail here on moves that haven't happened yet. We haven't signed Sexson. We don't even know if the Orioles are legitimately interested in Sexson. Yesterday you made a post about Hinske that would have been very fair and legitimate, if in fact that Orioles are seriously considering signing him. But we don't know that they are, other than a snippet from BB.

Now, I agree with you that both of these signings would be bad. But we really have no idea how much "interest" the team has in either of these guys.

That's true - I'll withhold judgment until there's actually ink on contractual paper. But I'm an Orioles fan. Many, many times in the past I've said that and then had to write an article asking why they just signed Deivi Cruz for $2M instead of simply promoting Eddy Garabito.

[amateurfan]

I think you (and others) are a little quick to judge MacPhail here on moves that haven't happened yet. We haven't signed Sexson. We don't even know if the Orioles are legitimately interested in Sexson. Yesterday you made a post about Hinske that would have been very fair and legitimate, if in fact that Orioles are seriously considering signing him. But we don't know that they are, other than a snippet from BB.

Now, I agree with you that both of these signings would be bad. But we really have no idea how much "interest" the team has in either of these guys.

I agree, but am still confused why it's a good idea to publicize it.