Jump to content

Connolly: Don’t see the Os going beyond 2-3 years

Sports Guy

By Sports Guy
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bemorewins Hangout Grand Counsel

Bemorewins

Posted
Posted
Just now, Aristotelian said:

FA players are like buying a new car, they start out at market value and depreciate from there. You've got a depreciating asset on one side versus a liability on the other, but as the player declines all you have is the liability. 

Everything that you said is true. But it is the cost of doing business in baseball.

For all those advocating for this approach claiming we are copying and pasting the Astros approach, I ask you this: What impact do you think this will have on the fanbase and on the Orioles standing in the community? 

I'm just thinking if I as a "diehard" am reacting this way, I wonder how those who already felt alienated by the past or unwilling to trust the Orioles to do the right thing and their fandom has died or waned or for those young people who will only embrace supporting things that are relevant and/or successful; I wonder how this type of garbage helps the organization reconnect with more fans?

I wonder if all of the goodwill that was built back and regained has been lost by this unforced error? Whether it is ownership (which I am almost certain it is) or whether it's Elias who decided to punt on improving the team at the cost of loosing no current talent; the results I am afraid will not be good.

The Orioles can't continue to treat their fanbase this way. It's not a model for longterm viability. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 262
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

turtlebowl
turtlebowl

I agree, I’m not sure what the uproar is. They have a bunch of young players that are entering a long competitive window within our team. I took the comment as Elias is trying to supplement this years

turtlebowl
turtlebowl

I have been or Orioles Hangout out for a long time and as everyone can see I don't post all that often.  Saying that, this thread has angered me to the point to where I am now jumping in.  I really do

yark14
yark14

Gearing up for selling the team.  Peter might not have long left.

Es4M11 Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Es4M11

Posted
Posted
Just now, Sports Guy said:

But he also said this

He is all over the place.

Honestly, I had pretty high praise for him prior to these past few days. The results of these winter meetings and his quotes here definitely take a little of the shine off for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aristotelian Hangout Grand Counsel

Aristotelian

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Yeah you I right I don’t. “Everyone take all the good players that can help you win and make a difference. As for me I will take the leftovers and misfits”.

If that’s his approach that makes out ownership even worse for having hired someone with that type philosophy.

It is hard for me to understand why Elias would want to go super cheap. Does he get the leftover profits if he doesn’t spend on players?

Winning at Moneyball is the ultimate accomplishment for a GM. If he pulls it off he is legendary. If he fails, he had his hands tied while the other guys merely bought their championships. He may not get a kickback but I am sure is getting positive reinforcement from ownership and making a name for himself in the business.

I did have my hopes up for a pivot, if not a 180. But if he is taking his bearings from Tampa there may never be a pivot. Then again, Tampa is the upside case that this approach can work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie83 Hangout Grand Counsel

eddie83

Posted
Posted
Just now, Sports Guy said:

But he also said this

He is all over the place.

He is being honest. I’ll give him that. 
 

Took some guts to say it. Don’t think it was a good PR move.  
 

If he makes some legit moves this will blow over. 
 

If I was in the media I ask Hyde what he thinks about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Can_of_corn Hangout Grand Counsel

Can_of_corn

Posted
Posted
Just now, eddie83 said:

He is being honest. I’ll give him that. 
 

Took some guts to say it. Don’t think it was a good PR move.  
 

If he makes some legit moves this will blow over. 
 

If I was in the media I ask Hyde what he thinks about this?

I don't think it did.

Would take guts to say it in New York.

In Baltimore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mall-O-cup Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

mall-O-cup

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Can’t wait to hear the response to this one. 

I'm reading Elias' quotes and can't help but think this guy just needs to be quiet. ( I wanted to say shut-up. )

This is embarrassing.

Can you imagine the Yankees or Red Sox GM saying these things.

If Brian Cashman ever said these things he'd be eaten for lunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aristotelian Hangout Grand Counsel

Aristotelian

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, RZNJ said:

 He might be right but it begs the question, what is he basing this theory on?

Is he saying we didn’t offer more than 3 years to any FA or just that he doesn’t see us offering more than 3 years to the remaining FA.  I think when a reporter puts something like this out there he owes it to his readers how much is based on inside knowledge and how much is speculation on his part.   It sounds like he knows something but he may not know anything.

I think he has just seen most of the 3+ year players come off the board. By process of elimination there are very few of those players left now and most of the ones that may have been a good fit are gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bemorewins Hangout Grand Counsel

Bemorewins

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, RVAOsFan said:

 

What would cause anybody to actually believe that these are competitive offers? Like everyone else is signing, but the unsigned don't want to sign? Come on! We know the real reason they haven't accepted these "offers" is because they are low ball. The Orioles are going right back to being a laughing stock.

Do you guys think the players on the team don't see this especially after how they operated in the middle of a playoff race last season and think, "as soon as I can, I'm gone"? Why would good players want to be here and have to deal with a non-competitive management and ownership?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • RZNJ
      Craig Kimbrel 2024

      By RZNJ · Posted

      He had a good ERA.  I think his FIP was 3.66 the one year and 4.66 the other.   
    • RZNJ
      George Kirby, the guy pitching against us tonight...could make an interesting option for the the Orioles..

      By RZNJ · Posted

      23 scadoo.
    • TopGunnar
      Bowden on some Os related deadline thoughts

      By TopGunnar · Posted

      I don’t understand why Basallo is untouchable. Don’t we have Adley. Trade Basallo for a #2 if possible asap.
    • Philip
      George Kirby, the guy pitching against us tonight...could make an interesting option for the the Orioles..

      By Philip · Posted

      You bet. See you tonight.  
    • forphase1
      Bring up Mayo already!!

      By forphase1 · Posted

      Difference in trading vets from a team still in rebuild mode versus trading vets from a team with World Series aspirations.  We've not seen him trade vets since the rebuild ended.
    • Bemorewins
      Starting Pitching avail in Free Agency in offseason vs Trade Deadline addition

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      Understood. But here's the thing (given the current economic structure of the game) there are three ways to handle payroll for a winning team (as I see them). One is the Rays/Brewers/Guardians way. Where you have maybe one long term substantive contract (mostly done while player is young and before he has made real money or achieved real fame) and most of the time the contract is an exploitive type deal with a kid from another country who comes from a context of poverty (not judging it is what it is). These teams continuously are reloading/retooling/ and have constant roster reshaping and turnover. The goal is to make the postseason and hopeful every once in a blue moon the stars align while you are there and you may be able to go all the way! While these teams are often good, they are rarely great. And are even less willing to do what it takes to get them over the top IMO. The proof is in the fact that this model has never led to championship success (unless you want to use the Marlins of over 20 years ago from 03'). Another model is the "big spenders model", who spend seriously and have World Series aspirations. Some spend all on FA (like the Padres/Mets) and are super aggressive with trades hoping to augment their talent as they chase championships, but rarely does this work because the foundation of the team is usually built so poorly. They may be good for a season or shorter term but struggle to sustain. Then there are teams like the Phillies/Dodgers who do a combo of developing and spending (let's call that the best of both worlds). Obviously this is the most preferable because you get the short and long term rewards. But it may not be realistic to think that the O's could ever do/have what it takes to fully do both. Then there is the Braves and Astros model. Still a higher payroll but minimizing of risks through extending younger players (Braves) or avoiding most long term contracts (Astros) but paying higher salaries on shorter deals. Obviously both franchises have been successful (won WS). Having said all this the reality exists that if/when you do longer term contracts (extensions or FA deals) for franchise/cornerstone/superstar type players, you most likely won't get the best value on the back end (think Paul Goldschmidt this year). That's just the economics of the game. But the thing is, the owners (especially our new group) have the money and then some to write off those things and keep rolling as "the cost of doing business".  When examining all winners of the World Series in the last decade a pattern is pretty apparent (with exception of the Astros first championship in 17') you have to spend in order to win. 
    • Greg Pappas
      Poll - Would you trade McDermott for Scherzer straight up?

      By Greg Pappas · Posted

      An alternative... also from the Rangers:  Nathan Eovaldi.  FA after this season but has a $20m vesting option for 2025 if he throws 300 innings combined between '23 & '24.  It'll be close.  Between Scherzer (40 this month) and Eovaldi (34) who would you prefer? 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...