JJ Cooper: Tanking is not why the Orioles won 101 games

[Sports Guy]

14 minutes ago, foxfield said:

Gunner cannot be looked at as a benefit of tanking....Every single team in MLB had a chance to draft him and did not.  And as SG already pointed out, the Orioles were definitely not "tanking" in 2018.  When they did punt, it was prudent and also in character for a cheap team.

Coby Mayo was passed not once, not twice, but three times by every team in MLB.  (I know he was not involved with the OP list of top 10 players in our '23 season.)

Tanking helped the Orioles in their draft position, that is obvious.

But their success is clearly superior drafting and excellent resource management by Elias.  Even if you account for the multiplier affect of having more higher chances...the quality of picks is what has made the difference.  

Rutschman, was not the slam dunk choice of everyone.  Gunner was passed by everyone as was Westburg and Ortiz.

The Orioles clearly tanked in 2019, 2020, 2021.  The only player acquired during that time who impacted the 101 wins in 2023 was Bradish who as the OP pointed out was acquired in the Bundy trade.  You could argue that either way as Bundy was clearly not going to be here long enough to survive the tank.  Moving him was as much for financial reasons and was clearly a move that even non tanking teams make....see Milwaukee Brewers and Corbin Burnes.

 

5 of the 10 players were acquired by Elias and you can debate what the Orioles development by Elias had to do with Bautista who was already here.

Mullins, Hays, Santander and Mountcastle were all here, but clearly given the opportunity to develop during the tank...they were very valuable to the 101 wins, but no one is begging for them on the trade market.

IF the Orioles win the WS in 2024 and Holliday is ROY/MVP in any combination, then the tanking is definitely involved.  But it is also fair to point out that even Holliday when we picked him was not the consensus #1 pick.  Many thought the pick was an example of the O's underslotting to get more talent later.

The Orioles did tank.  From 2019-2021.  That is indisputable.  I think a fair analysis of that time period and how it has impacted the Orioles on the field (in '23) would reach the conclusion that the fruit from that period is still yet to be produced.

 

I think you touched on something here that’s important to note.

I have had this discussion a few times recently on twitter when say BA puts out something about the great system of the Os and people say, well of course..look at all the losing.

First of all, losing and getting a high pick isn’t some guarantee for success in the draft. 

Secondly, and this is getting to what you are saying here, it completely cheapens the work Elias and his team have done. They are doing unprecedented things in the minors in terms of rankings.

 None of it is because of tanking. Tanking helped us get 3 players..that’s it. The only real advantage tanking gets you (or used to) is a high pick. Yes, you get more draft money but again, most of that is for the higher pick. You only gain so much more behind that.

[StottyByNature]

I think we just need to embrace the power of "and" here.  The 2023 Orioles won 101 games because of tanking AND the excellent work the front office did with those advantages gained from tanking.  Put another way, tanking only provides opportunity, it does not guarantee success (see: Pirates, Pittsburgh).

I think some of you are missing the point on the "everyone had a shot at Gunnar" notion.  Sure, that's true, but picking at the top of the second round still helped us.  What if other teams were considering him for the second round (not unreasonable if there were signability concerns) and we simply had the earlier selection?  Picking earlier in any round is always preferable to later.

There is nothing wrong with conceding that tanking provided the opportunity but the front office excelled at capitalizing on those opportunities.  If another front office had the exact same resources the Orioles have had over the last 5 years it is unlikely they would reproduce the same results.  Still, the resources were there for a reason.

[Moose Milligan]

I honestly don't care, I find it kind of weird to be debating about this when it doesn't really matter.  They won 101 games last year, they probable favorites to win the division or at least make a playoff run this year.  They're set up to be competitive for the next 6-10 years.

If anything, perhaps having such a low payroll helped the sale process.  There's no way to know for sure, but is anyone caring about tanking and low payrolls if the end result is new ownership?  

[interloper]

18 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I honestly don't care, I find it kind of weird to be debating about this when it doesn't really matter.  They won 101 games last year, they probable favorites to win the division or at least make a playoff run this year.  They're set up to be competitive for the next 6-10 years.

If anything, perhaps having such a low payroll helped the sale process.  There's no way to know for sure, but is anyone caring about tanking and low payrolls if the end result is new ownership?  

This

[foxfield]

11 minutes ago, StottyByNature said:

I think we just need to embrace the power of "and" here.  The 2023 Orioles won 101 games because of tanking AND the excellent work the front office did with those advantages gained from tanking.  Put another way, tanking only provides opportunity, it does not guarantee success (see: Pirates, Pittsburgh).

I think some of you are missing the point on the "everyone had a shot at Gunnar" notion.  Sure, that's true, but picking at the top of the second round still helped us.  What if other teams were considering him for the second round (not unreasonable if there were signability concerns) and we simply had the earlier selection?  Picking earlier in any round is always preferable to later.

There is nothing wrong with conceding that tanking provided the opportunity but the front office excelled at capitalizing on those opportunities.  If another front office had the exact same resources the Orioles have had over the last 5 years it is unlikely they would reproduce the same results.  Still, the resources were there for a reason.

I am probably splitting hairs, but part of my point was that the Orioles benefit of tanking has not really even produced yet.  Regardless of where Gunnar went he was a result of the horrible failure of 2018.  Nothing from 2018 season, including the draft in 2019 has anything to do with tanking.

I will point out that in 2018, the Orioles started the season with around the 14th or so highest payroll in all of baseball.  It was also only about 100 Million off of #1.   They sold off assets after the break.  Teams do that all the time.  In 2023, the Orioles were 27th in baseball with a $64M or so in payroll...nearly $270M behind the Mets.

The Organization has benefitted from the tanking so yes, I do agree that the word AND has a place in this discussion.  The depth in the Org has given the Orioles a chance to make other moves that have benefited the team in both '22 and '23.  I just think too many make the easy leap to what some in the press were calling a 5 year tank job even as the Orioles were defying people in 2022 by actually winning games.  It was a surprise then, it was still last year.

The tank resulted in favored draft positions in 2020-2022.  But even here, the results are not what they seem.  In 2020, Covid impacted the draft, reducing it to 5 rounds, and also impacted our top pick Heston Kjerstad.  While he has recovered, the Orioles only got 6 picks and still turned them in to Kjerstad, Westburg and Mayo.  

The success rate has at this point, been nothing short of spectacular.  And the waiver pickups and small trades have had an impact even with some swings and misses.

The overall point, is that if ever a team had to go through a rebuild, what the Orioles have done is something that isn't explained by tanking.  Certainly not in 2022 or even 2023 although if I am fair, Westburg had an impact on 2023 and he was a 2020 draft pick with the 30th pick (Supplemental).  What the Orioles are doing and have done so far...if it continues and blooms into a WS title or three, is going to be talked about for a long time.  

Therefore it is important to keep the story straight, less the story becomes "Orioles tank and build dynasty."  The Orioles did tank and it is a part of the story.  But the success of that tanking has barely even been felt yet.  Even here, in 2022, there were folks talking about the 5 year tank from 2018-2022.  (not picking anyone out here)

In hindsite, it looks like DD did a better job than we thought on the sell off and left quite a bit to work with after shedding salary.  And it seems that Mike Elias has set a new standard for how to build a team in both acquiring and developing talent.  (We haven't even begun to talk about International yet)

Now, let's get to the place where he general manages all of it into that dynasty.

 

[TommyPickles]

"The Orioles got 2,006 plate appearances (33% of the team’s plate appearances) and 403.2 innings (28% of the team’s innings) in 2023 from Rule 5 picks, waiver claims and players whose contracts they purchased from other teams.

That’s an absurdly large percentage for a 100-win team. Looking at the 21 100-win teams from 2014-2023, no other team came close to getting that many plate appearances from freely available talent. While the Orioles had 2,006 plate appearances from players in those categories, the other 20 teams combined to have 2,941 plate appearances. The Orioles got 7.8 bWAR from those players. The other 20 teams had 8.7 bWAR combined. Eight teams didn’t get a single plate appearance from a waiver claim, Rule 5 pick or contract purchase."

[Frobby]

I’d agree that tanking had almost no impact on our 2023 team.  But it may have a lot to do with the team’s ability to sustain success over the next 5-10 years.

[EddeeEddee]

3 hours ago, StottyByNature said:

Players don't tank, organizations tank.  That the record didn't drop has nothing to do with the fact that the organization traded off good players for players that would help in the future.  When teams "sell" they are folding in the season for better future odds, aka tanking.

The Lopez trade was definitely tanking as was holding off on starting Adley's service time.  They were trying to cluster their prospects for a window of competitiveness even though he was clearly ready earlier.

 

I disagree that selling per se is the same as tanking.  If they had not sold those players by that point in the season -- and even tried to buy some players -- how many more games could they have won?  Enough to be competitive for a playoff spot?  No.  Tanking is a bigger strategy that is not determined at the mid-point of a season where a team began the season trying to compete.  Selling in that instance becomes a shift in strategy -- not part of an overall tanking strategy.  And I think that midpoint selling for a team that is in the middle of rebuild mode is also not tanking.  It's just trying to accelerate the process of the team trying to get better.

[maybenxtyr]

I don't care how the team got here, just keep winning. 

 

My biggest issue is how some people phrase the current success. They imply that every pick has been 1-1, and that's simply not the case.  It'll take time to play out, but Elias and his group has seemingly done an excellent job of picking...not just in the draft, but even a fair amount of waiver claims have proven decent. It also discredits how well they've done in trades.

[emmett16]

The Orioles are successful because of their development system and being able to identify players that will thrive in their system.  Plain and simple.  

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, emmett16 said:

The Orioles are successful because of their development system and being able to identify players that will thrive in their system.  Plain and simple.  

And that happens whether we win 50 games or 100 games.  Just as it does with the Dodgers, Rays, Cardinals and other teams…which is and always was the point.