Schoenfeld gives Os offseason a D+

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

We were talking about trades .. 
Angelos doesn’t tell Elias what trades to make does he?  Free agents, budget, development costs etc yes but if you have evidence that Elias can’t make trades I would like to see it. 

He will tell him about not taking on contracts.

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Pickles said:

If the Orioles win 90 games this season, but it's largely not because of anything they did this offseason, have the O's proven the assessments wrong?  And were they wrong?

 

Results of these moves have little to do with whether or not they did a good job in the offseason.

[Pickles]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Results of these moves have little to do with whether or not they did a good job in the offseason.

Results of their offseason moves have little to do with evaluating their offseason moves?

[tntoriole]

12 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He will tell him about not taking on contracts.

Ok .. it is all Angelos then.. the season is lost , nothing will ever change ,  Oriole GMs are just puppets .. i get it …as I too have been a die hard fan since 1965 and I detest the Angelos regime. 
But I think this GM has done more even with Angelos than any GM has done under this ownership. 
And I believe Elias has more autonomy in certain areas than you seem to think  he does. 

[Sports Guy]

32 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Results of their offseason moves have little to do with evaluating their offseason moves?

Yes..at least in a way.

I judge these moves when they make them. Some moves don’t work out for various reasons but that doesn’t mean they are bad moves. 

For example, if Irvin sucks and Hernaiz ends up an everyday SS, I still wouldn’t call it a bad trade.  

The reverse is true.  If Frazier is really good, the move is still terrible.

Now? It’s good that the move paid off but the thought process, situation, what you paid, what else you could have done, etc..matter to me in the evaluation process of whether or not it was a good move.

I will applaud them for getting more of the player than they should have though.

[Sports Guy]

21 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Ok .. it is all Angelos then.. the season is lost , nothing will ever change ,  Oriole GMs are just puppets .. i get it …as I too have been a die hard fan since 1965 and I detest the Angelos regime. 
But I think this GM has done more even with Angelos than any GM has done under this ownership. 
And I believe Elias has more autonomy in certain areas than you seem to think  he does. 

What areas does he have more autonomy in that you don’t think I agree with?  

I mean, both sides have publicly stated that they weren’t going to spend a lot more money this offseason.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Sports Guy

[DirtyBird]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes..at least in a way.

I judge these moves when they make them. Some moves don’t work out for various reasons but that doesn’t mean they are bad moves. 

For example, if Irvin sucks and Hernaiz ends up an everyday SS, I still wouldn’t call it a bad trade.  

The reverse is true.  If Frazier is really good, the move is still terrible.

Now? It’s good that the move paid off but the thought process, situation, what you paid, what else you could have done, etc..matter to me in the evaluation process of whether or not it was a good move.

I will applaud them for getting more of the player than they should have though.

Ahhh, got it.

Regardless of actual results, Sport Guy's initial opinion of a move is never wrong.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, DirtyBird said:

Ahhh, got it.

Regardless of actual results, Sport Guy's initial opinion of a move is never wrong.

What would be wrong is if I said, player X will suck and then they turn out to be good.

But the way I’m evaluating the trade, I think it matters when you do it, the process, what else was there, what you spent, etc…

In any move you do, there is always an ability do a different move. How that turns out (like say Frazier Vs Harrison) is an additional way to do it.

I think it was foolish to sign anyone to a deal, so I will hate any move but I can certainly be wrong on how it will turn out.

 

[tntoriole]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

What areas does he have more autonomy in that you don’t think I agree with?  

I mean, both sides have publicly stated that they weren’t going to spend a lot more money this offseason.

Trades 

[Hallas]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Results of these moves have little to do with whether or not they did a good job in the offseason.

I think there's some nuance here.  If, for example, the team goes out and wins a series in the playoffs with this roster + maybe a midseason trade (that they wouldn't have been able to make if they made a trade in the offseason) then I think you could be forgiven for re-grading this offseason much higher.

 

Obviously as it stands this isn't looking so hot.

[Hallas]

3 hours ago, DirtyBird said:

And what team is going to give up a top of rotation starter for what you consider excess depth?

 

Unless the Marlins really wanted Arraez over prospects, we could have beaten the Twins package for Pablo Lopez with players that are largely blocked from the majors.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Hallas

[Sports Guy]

49 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Trades 

So you think he can trade for large contracts and ownership is good with that?

[Pickles]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes..at least in a way.

I judge these moves when they make them. Some moves don’t work out for various reasons but that doesn’t mean they are bad moves. 

For example, if Irvin sucks and Hernaiz ends up an everyday SS, I still wouldn’t call it a bad trade.  

The reverse is true.  If Frazier is really good, the move is still terrible.

Now? It’s good that the move paid off but the thought process, situation, what you paid, what else you could have done, etc..matter to me in the evaluation process of whether or not it was a good move.

I will applaud them for getting more of the player than they should have though.

Well, you're talking process vs. results, and yeah, I agree.  You want to judge the process and not the results.

My question to Frobby was a little different though.

I think it's fair to judge this offseason a C or even D.  But what I'm asking is: What if it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things all that much?

So yeah, if the team regresses then people who have taken your stance on the off-season will look to have been fairly correct, in that the team needed to upgrade and bolster the improvements seen last year through external means.

But what if this team wins 90 games and makes the playoffs?  Then is it still fair to call the offseason a C or D?  And if their success is almost entirely due to guys not acquired in the offseason, does it even matter?

Because while we can evaluate the process, we are not privy to massive amounts of information that go into that process, and ultimately, at the end of the day, this is a results buisness.  

[LTO's]

26 minutes ago, Hallas said:

Unless the Marlins really wanted Arraez over prospects, we could have beaten the Twins package for Pablo Lopez with players that are largely blocked from the majors.

It's very obvious they wanted Arraez, or any established big league hitter, over prospects. Their GM has only been saying this for two years now. Most of the big trades this year have involved big league players.  

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Pickles said:

Well, you're talking process vs. results, and yeah, I agree.  You want to judge the process and not the results.

My question to Frobby was a little different though.

I think it's fair to judge this offseason a C or even D.  But what I'm asking is: What if it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things all that much?

So yeah, if the team regresses then people who have taken your stance on the off-season will look to have been fairly correct, in that the team needed to upgrade and bolster the improvements seen last year through external means.

But what if this team wins 90 games and makes the playoffs?  Then is it still fair to call the offseason a C or D?  And if their success is almost entirely due to guys not acquired in the offseason, does it even matter?

Because while we can evaluate the process, we are not privy to massive amounts of information that go into that process, and ultimately, at the end of the day, this is a results buisness.  

Well I think matters why they won 90 games, right?

I have a ton of confidence in the players who were here to start the offseason and if those guys carry us, I don’t think it changes anything.

The funny part is, outside of the Frazier move, I don’t hate any move. In fact, I like some of them. He problem is, they needed to do more to address the top of the roster so that they go after the better teams with more ammo.

As I have said the whole offseason, the margin for error is thin and this team will not be as healthy as it was last year.  That is already proving to be true.