Jackson Holliday 2023

[deward]

43 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

"We sleep safely at night because Roughned stands ready to visit violence on those who would harm us."  

[Alasdaire]

4 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

Another thing to consider about our system is that while amazing, it is a tad inflated by keeping guys down as long as possible. Most other orgs, guys like Westburg, Cowser and maybe even Kjerstad would be in the bigs now.

I don't think you can call a system that graduated Adley, Gunnar, and Grayson within the past year inflated.

3 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

I'm okay with not always being ranked as a great farm system as long as the Major League team has success to show for it. The Braves AND Astros have a combined ONE singular top 100 prospect this year. I am sure both orgs and fans are okay with that, given all of the recent success that they have had and are having.

It's a strawman argument to act like there are people out there who are content with the minor league system being good even if it never translates to success in the bigs. No one, if asked, would say that.

What I'll say is that I think it would be downright impossible for the O's to be perennially relevant in the 21st century MLB without having a robust farm system. Maybe the strength of the prospects we have now could lead to a title or two if all of the best-case scenarios pan out and we are lucky. But also maybe not. Either way, if the farm isn't perpetually prioritized, it's only a matter of time until we return to the abyss since we don't have anything else to hang our hat on as a franchise in a rigged league.

Let's compare the Royals and Rays. KC was irrelevant for 30 years before the 2014/2015 teams. They got a title and then went right back to obscurity almost immediately afterward and have been there for the decade since. Now they're one of the worst teams in baseball and have the 29th ranked farm system going into this year. Can't outspend anyone or attract any free agents. The most they have to look forward to is moving to a new stadium within the next decade. The Rays still haven't actually won a title. But they're relevant every single year because of their farm system. You have to figure they eventually get the same result as KC (a championship). And for the 15 Rays fans out there, they get to look forward to every season. Reasonable minds can disagree, but I'll take the latter.

[Bemorewins]

2 minutes ago, Alasdaire said:

I don't think you can call a system that graduated Adley, Gunnar, and Grayson within the past year inflated.

It's a strawman argument to act like there are people out there who are content with the minor league system being good even if it never translates to success in the bigs. No one, if asked, would say that.

What I'll say is that I think it would be downright impossible for the O's to be perennially relevant in the 21st century MLB without having a robust farm system. Maybe the strength of the prospects we have now could lead to a title or two if all of the best-case scenarios pan out and we are lucky. But also maybe not. Either way, if the farm isn't perpetually prioritized, it's only a matter of time until we return to the abyss since we don't have anything else to hang our hat on as a franchise in a rigged league.

Let's compare the Royals and Rays. KC was irrelevant for 30 years before the 2014/2015 teams. They got a title and then went right back to obscurity almost immediately afterward and have been there for the decade since. Now they're one of the worst teams in baseball and have the 29th ranked farm system going into this year. Can't outspend anyone or attract any free agents. The most they have to look forward to is moving to a new stadium within the next decade. The Rays still haven't actually won a title. But they're relevant every single year because of their farm system. You have to figure they eventually get the same result as KC (a championship). And for the 15 Rays fans out there, they get to look forward to every season. Reasonable minds can disagree, but I'll take the latter.

1) I said that it is a tad inflated because we appear to prioritize delaying promotions as long as possible. In most other orgs, some of our guys at AAA would have been in the bigs by now.

2) Honest question - Why do you say that the league is "rigged"? If that is the case and the results are already determined before the games are played, NONE of this matters WHATSOEVER.

3) Does the choice have to be that binary between either being like the Rays or Royals? Or could we be like the Astros (my preference) or Braves? Those models have produced championships and appear to have multiple bites at the apple. Not just one (or two) and done like the Royals.

There is a path to sustained success where our owner doesn't have to be consistently awful and miser-like. We can have a competent  front office AND an owner who actually cares about winning and invests in the on-field product. IMO if fans (and media to some degree) don't hold the evil Angelos empire accountable, we have seen time and time again that it will run amok, and will eventually run the franchise into the ground.

John Angelos in particular appears to be counting on fans being ok with this "Rays model" philosophy. That way he never has to spend and can continue to pocket all the profits even as profits spike with the teams continued success. He can cry poor and put no meaningful effort into winning via investment or show any remote interest in the team's success and all will be well.

I don't want that and have no interest in invest time and money into that outcome. 

[Mr-splash]

Sell the farm to win 105 games is a viable strategy when baseball actually had a pennant race. You go all in for a few seasons and go for the pennant. Now we have 12 teams make the playoffs. Now you win 92 games and roll the dice every year. You don't need to sell the farm because you don't need to win 105 games anymore to win a title. 

[Alasdaire]

1 hour ago, Bemorewins said:

2) Honest question - Why do you say that the league is "rigged"? If that is the case and the results are already determined before the games are played, NONE of this matters WHATSOEVER

It's rigged in the sense that there's no salary cap and we're in a division with the Yankees and Red Sox.
 

Quote

 

3) Does the choice have to be that binary between either being like the Rays or Royals? Or could we be like the Astros (my preference) or Braves? Those models have produced championships and appear to have multiple bites at the apple. Not just one (or two) and done like the Royals.

There is a path to sustained success where our owner doesn't have to be consistently awful and miser-like. We can have a competent  front office AND an owner who actually cares about winning and invests in the on-field product. IMO if fans (and media to some degree) don't hold the evil Angelos empire accountable, we have seen time and time again that it will run amok, and will eventually run the franchise into the ground.

John Angelos in particular appears to be counting on fans being ok with this "Rays model" philosophy. That way he never has to spend and can continue to pocket all the profits even as profits spike with the teams continued success. He can cry poor and put no meaningful effort into winning via investment or show any remote interest in the team's success and all will be well.

I don't want that and have no interest in invest time and money into that outcome. 

 

I would not subscribe to a model that depends on a Baltimore-based/Angelos-owned team spending money. Maybe the franchise could play that game for a stint, but I would like to be in the conversation every single year for decades not just because it makes every season enjoyable, but also because I think it's more likely to net us titles over the long run.

If this were the NFL or NBA, it would be viable to compare different models and advocate for our team following one or the other. But this is baseball and you're limited by the realities of how much money you can spend. We're not the Braves. They've been good for the past 30 years, their ownership has deep pockets, and Atlanta is an easy sell to free agents and a massive market. Houston is a step down but in that same vein.

The reality is we're closer to the Royals/Rays. And if their fans suggested they should trade away huge swaths of their farm system immediately and then pivot to spending money to remain relevant, it would sound silly.

[Bemorewins]

31 minutes ago, Mr-splash said:

Sell the farm to win 105 games is a viable strategy when baseball actually had a pennant race. You go all in for a few seasons and go for the pennant. Now we have 12 teams make the playoffs. Now you win 92 games and roll the dice every year. You don't need to sell the farm because you don't need to win 105 games anymore to win a title. 

What do you mean by "sell the farm"? Could you offer one realistic trading scenario where this could be possible?

[Bemorewins]

2 minutes ago, Alasdaire said:

It's rigged in the sense that there's no salary cap and we're in a division with the Yankees and Red Sox.
 

I would not subscribe to a model that depends on a Baltimore-based/Angelos-owned team spending money. Maybe the franchise could play that game for a stint, but I would like to be in the conversation every single year for decades not just because it makes every season enjoyable, but also because I think it's more likely to net us titles over the long run.

If this were the NFL or NBA, it would be viable to compare different models and advocate for our team following one or the other. But this is baseball and you're limited by the realities of how much money you can spend. We're not the Braves. They've been good for the past 30 years, their ownership has deep pockets, and Atlanta is an easy sell to free agents and a massive market. Houston is a step down but in that same vein.

The reality is we're closer to the Royals/Rays. And if their fans suggested they should trade away huge swaths of their farm system immediately and then pivot to spending money to remain relevant, it would sound silly.

The team can spend smart money you know? We don't have to outspend every team in order for ownership to invest in the product in a meaningful way. I don't see anything rigged about not having a salary cap. I think you may be using the term "rigged" in the wrong context. I don't begrudge the Yanks and Red Sox ownership for trying to what they can to be relevant in their communities and to win. No one is forcing the evil Angelos empire to be 29th payroll in baseball, well under the large market Cincy Reds, Pittsburg Pirates, Milwaukee Brewers, Tampa Rays, Kansas City Royals, etc. As a matter of fact, the ONLY SINGLE team that we are outspending is the soon to be relocated Oakland A's. So, again I really don't understand the proposition that we either spend at the top or don't spend at all. In 2018, I believe that our payroll was 180 million.

Might want to go back and check those facts just a but, from 2014-2017 the Braves had loosing seasons for 4 consecutive years.

As far as selling a market, HOU was considered a 'small market' until it wasn't. They didn't even have a television contract for their local market in the 2013 season as they lost 111 games. The Padres were another team that has been traditionally been considered a 'small market' until they got new ownership who decided to spend and invest in the team.

Baltimore is no different than them. If you are willing to spend the money, you will 'attract free agents'. The Ravens NEVER have a problem in that regard. 

And if you are suggesting that ATL or HOU are more desirable places to live than BAL, I want put the suburb that I live in up against ANYTHING from either of those markets. The only places comparable is Sugarland TX (which is a suburb or HOU).

The last statement that you make is almost out of the Angelos PR campaign. "Poor is us, our franchise is so poor, we can't outspend everyone therefore we choose to spend nothing". It doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition. The Rays are outspending us by over 20 million in payroll this year, all while averaging 2,000+ fans per game than us.

We are currently 21st in attendance, but 29th in payroll.

[Mr-splash]

34 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

What do you mean by "sell the farm"? Could you offer one realistic trading scenario where this could be possible?

Trading our top prospects for an ace.

[Alasdaire]

10 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Might want to go back and check those facts just a but, from 2014-2017 the Braves had loosing seasons for 4 consecutive years.

Yeah they're just like us fr.

Quote

And if you are suggesting that ATL or HOU are more desirable places to live than BAL, I want put the suburb that I live in up against ANYTHING from either of those markets. The only places comparable is Sugarland TX (which is a suburb or HOU).

Maybe a house in Owings Mills is a selling point to message board posters from Maryland. But Atlanta/Houston are selling points to professional athletes.

[Bemorewins]

48 minutes ago, Mr-splash said:

Trading our top prospects for an ace.

Would you mind adding a bit more details in terms of a realistic scenario/example of how this could happen?

[Bemorewins]

44 minutes ago, Alasdaire said:

Yeah they're just like us fr.

Maybe a house in Owings Mills is a selling point to message board posters from Maryland. But Atlanta/Houston are selling points to professional athletes.

I don't live in Owings Mills. No offense to Owings Mills but you sound like someone who doesn't know a lot about the area. By ANY OBJECTIVE standard of living (crime/safety, education, income per capita, access to public green space/parks, etc) where I live compares favorably to any place in this country excluding warm year around weather and access to the beach.

Oh and by the way, there are professional athletes that live where I live so again, not sure what your statement really refers to. As you know they have these things called agents, who actually find them realtors, to give them all those pertinent details.

Owings Mills??? HA HA HA 

It might be helpful to brush up on local knowledge of this community.

[Alasdaire]

55 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I don't live in Owings Mills. No offense to Owings Mills but you sound like someone who doesn't know a lot about the area. By ANY OBJECTIVE standard of living (crime/safety, education, income per capita, access to public green space/parks, etc) where I live compares favorably to any place in this country excluding warm year around weather and access to the beach.

Oh and by the way, there are professional athletes that live where I live so again, not sure what your statement really refers to. As you know they have these things called agents, who actually find them realtors, to give them all those pertinent details.

Owings Mills??? HA HA HA 

It might be helpful to brush up on local knowledge of this community.

You pretty clearly don't have a pulse on the sorts of things that athletes value. Apart from the generic quality of life metrics like climate/taxes that still beat Maryland (in the eyes of 20-something athletes), Atlanta/Houston are destinations for athletes because of the scenes/cultures. Baltimore isn't an albatross of a location like Cleveland, but no one without family connections is choosing to play for the O's because of their location. This has nothing to do with where I would choose to live but rather where athletes would.

Anyway. Hopefully we're not picking 1:1 ever again and getting a prospect like Jackson in that way. But look at the Dodgers or Rays; their farms are perennially overflowing despite not picking anywhere near the top of the draft. We can and should forever prioritize the system because we don't have anything else to rely on.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Alasdaire

[Moose Milligan]

On 6/19/2023 at 4:26 PM, Sports Guy said:

He’s 100% on track to debut in 2024.

With this front office? Lol

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by Moose Milligan

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Alasdaire said:

Yeah they're just like us fr.

Maybe a house in Owings Mills is a selling point to message board posters from Maryland. But Atlanta/Houston are selling points to professional athletes.

Yeah I don’t think Owings Mills is a hot destination for anyone that has a choice of what metropolitan area they’d like to live in. 

[Mr-splash]

5 minutes ago, Alasdaire said:

You pretty clearly don't have a pulse on the sorts of things that athletes value. Apart from the generic quality of life metrics like climate/taxes that still beat Maryland (in the eyes of 20-something athletes), Atlanta/Houston are destinations for athletes because of the scenes/cultures. Baltimore isn't an albatross of a location like Cleveland, but no one without family connections is choosing to play for the O's because of their location. This has nothing to do with where I would choose to live but rather where athletes would.

Anyway. Hopefully we're not picking 1:1 ever again and getting a prospect like Jackson in that way. But look at the Dodgers or Rays; their farms are perennially overflowing despite not picking anywhere near the top of the draft. We can and should forever prioritize the system because we don't have anything else to rely on.

Bro, you couldn't pay me to live in Texas. You know Maryland is the richest state in the country with plenty more amenities than a place like Texas. Yea, Texas has low taxes, but that's also why they have crap police, public services, amenities, etc. You really advocating for the economic model of Texas?