Fangraphs’ Ben Clemens: “C’mon Orioles, Do Something!”

[Pickles]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

1. Team's actual W/L record exceeded their expected wins
2. Team's actual runs scored exceeded their projected runs scored

That's the two big ones really.

Now you can feel free to discount both of them but they are realistic reasons to project the team to win substantially fewer games.

Both their expected wins and their actual runs (nice how you want to use the best of both worlds to make your argument: the hypothetical when it is convenient and the actual when it is convenient) last year would have been more than adequate to make the playoffs.

Winning 101 games is unlikely this year.

But I repeat: Why should this team not be favored to make the playoffs as of today as currently constructed?

[RarityFlaherty]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

What I'm a saying is that he could have made a deal that would have strengthened the team for the playoffs that would not have cost him a "blockbuster" level of return and instead decided on a couple of long shots to improve the team.

Do you know all of the offers that were and weren’t on the table for him?  All I’m saying is that we don’t have enough information to say what he will and won’t do this year. 

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Both their expected wins and their actual runs (nice how you want to use the best of both worlds to make your argument: the hypothetical when it is convenient and the actual when it is convenient) last year would have been more than adequate to make the playoffs.

That’s wrong.  If the O’s had scored their expected number of runs, their Pythagorean record would have been 89-73.   See the RH side of the chart here: https://www.fangraphs.com/depthcharts.aspx?position=BaseRuns

i think our odds of making the playoffs this year are pretty decent, but we are by no means a shoe-in.  We need continued growth from our young players and reasonable luck with health.  

[Sports Guy]

16 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Why should this team not be favored right now to make the playoffs?

As I said the other day, as currently constructed, I think they are an 85-95 win team.

They have legit pitching issues and not a lot from within that will fix them..the margin for error on the pitching staff is very thin. If they have more injury issues in 2024 than they have had the last few years, they are in trouble.

But winning 1 run games isn’t a repeatable stat. Clutch hitting with RisP isn’t a repeatable stat. You lost a guy who was arguably your MVp last year. You are now likely relying on more inexperienced guys…now, they are far more talented but the inexperience does matter and there is likely to be some growing pains. 
 

Any given season can play out lots of ways. Replay 2023 and they may win 88 games. Just because they won a lot in 2023 means nothing for 2024.

[Can_of_corn]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

Both their expected wins and their actual runs (nice how you want to use the best of both worlds to make your argument: the hypothetical when it is convenient and the actual when it is convenient) last year would have been more than adequate to make the playoffs.

Winning 101 games is unlikely this year.

But I repeat: Why should this team not be favored to make the playoffs as of today as currently constructed?

Huh?

They won more games than they were expected to and they also scored more runs than they were expected to(from Baseruns).

How is that using the best of both worlds?

Both statements are true, they both exceeded their pythag, which is based on RS/RA and also scored more runs than their offense would indicate.

Since neither of those have been shown to be sustainable they are not likely to continue into next season.

This article is from Sept 20.

Being lazy I'll extrapolate it over 162.

The 2023 Orioles scored 807 runs, they should have scored 775 runs.  (It's off a bit since I'm being lazy and the O's actual runs scored were down from that point in the season).

If you plug 775 RS and 678 RA into the system you get a .556 WP, or 90 wins.  That's the same record as the Rangers and one up on the Blue Jays, two up on the Mariners.  That may or may not have been a WC team.

No idea why I just wasted five minutes doing that when I know you won't pay any attention to it.

Maybe someone else will appreciate it.

 

Edit- Now I see Frobby addressed this as I was working on it and had an easier answer.  Oh well.

 

Edited January 19 by Can_of_corn

[Can_of_corn]

10 minutes ago, RarityFlaherty said:

Do you know all of the offers that were and weren’t on the table for him?  All I’m saying is that we don’t have enough information to say what he will and won’t do this year. 

Sure, but what we do know doesn't seem promising.

They certainly could have done more.

[tntoriole]

18 hours ago, LookinUp said:

Call me on opening day and tell me the same article applies, and he might have a point. But it's January 18. This reminds me of the people freaking out that a stadium lease agreement wasn't in place last summer. It just lacks awareness of when things actually happen. The offseason seemingly used to hit the ground running at winter meetings. It doesn't anymore for whatever reason. I suppose it's because deadlines make deals. That's certainly what it seems like is happening with a lot of talent out there right now.

This is what happens every offseason since Angelos is in charge.  No big signing, no big trades, zip.   And every offseason there are those who say .. oh its only January.. wait and see.   They are always wrong.  
Not that you cannot win without big additions, obviously we have.  But if the expectation is this team under Angelos will ever be anything but the 30th team in making deals or big signings, well that is just not ever going to happen. 
 

My prediction?  An addition of a lower tier starter.. a Lorenzen say .. and a lottery ticket type trade or signing of a reliever like the Cao, Lopez strategy. 
 

Cease, Burnes, Montgomery etc ?  Please lol 

[interloper]

The main issue I see in regards to our playoff hopes is not having Felix. He was responsible for a lot of close wins and we simply will not replicate his success with Kimbrel/Cano, especially in extra inning away games. 

So the logical move is to try to win in other ways like offensive improvement from the young hitters and a rotation addition.

Edited January 19 by interloper

[foxfield]

I think it is fair to want the Orioles to improve. I think it is natural for us to expect something that makes us feel this is happening. 
 

I also think it is true that the Orioles have consistently exceeded expectations over the last two years. All of this raises our expectations and leaves us wondering when we begin managing the club like it expects to contend. 
 

Just expecting improvement from within has worked pretty well, but obviously cannot work eternally.  I would think Elias is aware of this and has a pretty good idea of the constraints from ownership.  
 

I share plenty of angst going forward but remain comfortable that Elias will continue to drive this bus with success. I just don’t see the handwringing helping. 
 

Everyone agrees we need one more starting pitcher. There are still numerous ways to solve that issue. And still time to do so. 

Edited January 19 by foxfield

[Yardball85]

19 hours ago, wildcard said:

Sound like a lot of arrogance from Clemens.  Last year Elias added Gibson, Frazier and Irvin and everyone told him he didn't do enough.    And the O's won 101 games.  This offseason Elias adds Kimbrel and left Gibson, Frazier, Hick, Flaherty and Fuji go and Clemens says he has not done enough.

Maybe Clemens should shut up and consider that Elias knows what he is doing or at least praise Elias for opening space for his blue chip prospects.

C'mon.  The Orioles did not win 101 games because of Gibson, Frazier, and Irvin.  It had nothing to do with Elias's moves in the offseason and who knows, had he gotten a good starter (I was screaming for Eovaldi), the Orioles might not have been swept in the playoffs.

This offseason is no different. Yes, the Orioles are good, and will be good this year.  But that does not excuse Elias from failing to upgrade the team.  Kimbrel for Bautista is a big downgrade, Means' health is still a question mark, and who knows how the prospects will all perform (Cowser struggled last year).  He should be making moves to improve the team.

[Yardball85]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

This whole, well it happened last year so therefore it will happen this year argument is so stupid.

Soooo stupid. 

[RarityFlaherty]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, but what we do know doesn't seem promising.

They certainly could have done more.

I’m not really arguing against you there. There’s definitely more that we could have done, but we’d probably all be pissed if we traded away a lot of talent for a 1 year rental and still didn’t win a World Series. We still have all of that talent to trade now, but now the clock is ticking on most of those guys, so making a trade becomes more necessary every day. Like I said, if we don’t make a meaningful trade by the trade deadline this year, I’ll start to be more pessimistic about it happening like the rest of you. 

[Yardball85]

43 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I'm quite complacent with winning 100 games.

What guarantees do you have that the team wins 100 games?  Sure, I would also say we do not need to make any more moves if we win 100 games (though I would hope we have enough starting pitching for the playoffs).  But it is just as likely that they win 85-90 games and are fighting for a wild card spot as it is they win 100 IMO. 

[deward]

42 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I'm quite complacent with winning 100 games.

I'm comfortable betting that they won't continue to win 100 games every year without making significant external acquisitions here and there. 

[Three Run Homer]

10 hours ago, wildcard said:

Why do veterans need to make market salaries?  Santander, Hays, Mullins, Means, Coulombe are all veterans at this point.

I am distinguishing between players still on their rookie contracts (less than 6 years service time at the start of the season) and players who have 6 or more years service time at the start of the season, who have had a chance to enter free agency (or were extended by their teams before hitting free agency).  That's the critical distinction for a team's payroll--if you have less than 6 years service time your salary is being artificially depressed relative to a market salary because you are under the control of one team.  Salary arbitration compresses the gap between your actual salary and your hypothetical free-market salary, but not completely).  

My point is that world series winners generally have at least a few key contributors who are not just veterans but who are veterans with 6 or more years of service time and thus are making a market salary.