How should we look at FA contracts going forward?

[Pickles]

1 hour ago, Bemorewins said:

We did that last season and then got destroyed in our opening round of the playoffs because predictably our starting pitching wasn’t strong enough. 

Will you be satisfied with a similar result this season?

We had two of the top 5 starters in the AL going into the playoffs.  We lost because they pitched poorly.  Not because they were poor pitchers.

Teams don't win 100 games without high-end starting pitching.

[SilverRocket]

I don't think the moneyball approach disappears just because of new ownership. We got Burnes through trading surplus prospects, not spending money. I suspect that will be how we acquire starting pitching going forward too, at least in the near future. I don't envision huge money being spent until at least when the pipeline starts to thin out because our draft picks are lower, which will take a few years.

[wildcard]

Burnes probably gets 7 years/35m per year.  That is 245m with a risk factor that some years he will not pitch at all due to injury.     I would pass on that.

[Matt Bennett]

20 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well first of all, how are you defining an impact starter?  I would guess you didn’t think Bradish would make an impact.

I think out of Povich or McDermott that one of them can give us good enough starter innings. How much of an impact? Who knows. Ceiling is definitely higher with them than Kremer though.  Is Kremer an impact guy. Did you think he would be 2-3 years ago?

Now, a guy like Luis DeLeon?  High impact potential there.  And we will see with guys like Baumeister, who we have seen so little of so far.

You don’t have to spend 9 figures to invest in pitching. You can trade for it. That’s an investment.   You can make more sensible FA signings.

We can just say impact = well above replacement level. Kremer is a great guy to have as our #5 as he would have been on Opening Day if not for the aforementioned starter injuries. I'm sure no one really thought Bradish would be AL Cy Young-4 in his second year in the MLB. That's a fantastic hit by Elias. That and getting Gunnar in the 2nd may be the most impressive things Elias has done? 

To answer your question, no I probably didn't think much of Bradish when we got him as an A Ball pitcher. Would I have bet he individually would be elite? No. But would I bet there'd be an elite pitcher in all the pitching prospects we got back for Manny Machado, Zach Britton, Jonathan Schoop, Kevin Gausman, Darren O'Day, Dylan Bundy, Jonathan Villar, Miguel Castro, Jose Iglesias, Cole Susler, Tanner Scott? Well I'd hope so. Out of them we got Bradish, Kremer, and Tate (1 elite SP, 1 decent SP, 1 reliever and a bunch of names we've forgotten). I'll take it. We'll see what we get any SP's out of the Trey Mancini and Jorge Lopez hauls. 

Now we're in a different position where we aren't selling off assets to get back dart throws. At this point, our conversation will get circular but it will take value in prospects or value in dollars or some combination of both to get more elite talent in the rotation. Don't expect to give middle tier contracts out and get back elite level performance. And I don't think we'll be able to maintain this ridiculous level our farm system is at forever. And we won't be able to have the luxury of sending off 12 years of Joey Ortiz and DL Hall type players for 1 year rentals every year. 

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

Obviously, the years/dollars matter in regard to Burnes.

I can see where Burnes might be the next in line to lay claim to the Verlander/Scherzer crown as one of the preeminent power pitchers of his time...that is to say he goes through his 30s and comes out the other side as one of the top 5 pitchers in baseball for a decade or longer.  He's been durable, he seems to prepare himself in the way that those guys do and I think he will last. 

Of course, it's not my money.

I don't know how the new ownership group will approach free agency and quite frankly, I'm not sure if I really care at the moment.  I'm sure I'll care in the offseason, though.

I will say, I'd really like to see the new ownership spend to lock up the talent we already have before spending on free agency.   

[Bemorewins]

1 hour ago, btdart20 said:

Are you saying you would sign a 7 year deal on whatever beats the rest of the market for Burnes?

Or are you saying Rubenstein and Elias will?

 

But that's really not how I understand the OP posed.  It's more about org building and weighting of FA value to roster construction not specific to where we are currently in payroll.  $30m committed for 7 years today reduces the opportunity to spend differently tomorrow.

Agreed that our playoff odds are high for the next few years.  Balancing the org build/perennial contender ongoing concern with figuring out how to guarantee bumping up the playoff win% odds is the magic question.  Can that be done in the offseason with long term contracts?

I would prefer not to do a 7 year deal. But my point is if not Burnes than who? How long are we going to be able to trade for 1/2 year rental types (like he currently is)? 

If we allow Burnes to walk in FA, then we are going to have to sign someone (who won’t be as good). OR trade one of our top level prospects for a Luzardo or maybe one of the Mariners young controllable starters.

If the Reed Sox were allowed sign a Burnes and we do nothing or go with some kind of patchwork Kyle Gibson signing, they would be real close to catching up to us.

[btdart20]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

I think the whole key to this is Elias, not Rubenstein and I think that’s the part everyone is missing.

And I don’t think Elias would sign off on a deal like that.

Everyone?  Nah.  Some of us have been saying that.

[Bemorewins]

1 hour ago, Matt Bennett said:

Exactly. What is the point of an almost entirely homegrown lineup if you skimp on pitching? 

Put simply, I don't see a way the O's can field an elite rotation during these golden years of almost an entirely homegrown lineup without a significant investment in capital to that rotation. We have Bradish (we'll see + big Tommy John risk?), Grayson, and Kremer (middle/back end guy) locked up for awhile. That's 3 and you need more than 5. We are already on our SP8 and it's April.

Continually repeating the strategy of giving up years of control of very good prospects for a 1 year ace rental doesn't seem like the best way to preserve "long term health" of the organization, as Elias is always referencing. At some point, you get your guy, and you pay him American dollars to continue being your guy. Burnes is that guy for me. Maybe others have someone else in mind for that role. But it will cost. 

I’m in complete agreement with you!

And I don’t hold such dogmatic positions about having to have an all homegrown team. The team was never drafted/constructed to win a championship that way (if that is even possible). 

Other teams have had great systems (Rangers, Astros, Braves, Dodgers) and those players have blossomed into becoming excellent players. But those teams also spend money and take the necessary risk with trades.

They are our main competitors (maybe not the Astros this year - but it’s still early). I don’t think that we can get passed them all without ever spending meaning money to acquire impact players.

[Sports Guy]

16 minutes ago, Matt Bennett said:

We can just say impact = well above replacement level. Kremer is a great guy to have as our #5 as he would have been on Opening Day if not for the aforementioned starter injuries. I'm sure no one really thought Bradish would be AL Cy Young-4 in his second year in the MLB. That's a fantastic hit by Elias. That and getting Gunnar in the 2nd may be the most impressive things Elias has done? 

To answer your question, no I probably didn't think much of Bradish when we got him as an A Ball pitcher. Would I have bet he individually would be elite? No. But would I bet there'd be an elite pitcher in all the pitching prospects we got back for Manny Machado, Zach Britton, Jonathan Schoop, Kevin Gausman, Darren O'Day, Dylan Bundy, Jonathan Villar, Miguel Castro, Jose Iglesias, Cole Susler, Tanner Scott? Well I'd hope so. Out of them we got Bradish, Kremer, and Tate (1 elite SP, 1 decent SP, 1 reliever and a bunch of names we've forgotten). I'll take it. We'll see what we get any SP's out of the Trey Mancini and Jorge Lopez hauls. 

Now we're in a different position where we aren't selling off assets to get back dart throws. At this point, our conversation will get circular but it will take value in prospects or value in dollars or some combination of both to get more elite talent in the rotation. Don't expect to give middle tier contracts out and get back elite level performance. And I don't think we'll be able to maintain this ridiculous level our farm system is at forever. And we won't be able to have the luxury of sending off 12 years of Joey Ortiz and DL Hall type players for 1 year rentals every year. 

 

 

We have plenty of impact level MiLers that we can still trade for impact, longer term pitching.

We can also trade vets for pitching.

And I do expect the farm system to keep being strong and while we may not have high picks anymore (not that you need them to have a strong system), we are also going to have a real Intl program, which we didn’t have before and that can make up for the lack of higher picks.

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I would prefer not to do a 7 year deal. But my point is if not Burnes than who? How long are we going to be able to trade for 1/2 year rental types (like he currently is)? 

If we allow Burnes to walk in FA, then we are going to have to sign someone (who won’t be as good). OR trade one of our top level prospects for a Luzardo or maybe one of the Mariners young controllable starters.

If the Reed Sox were allowed sign a Burnes and we do nothing or go with some kind of patchwork Kyle Gibson signing, they would be real close to catching up to us.

Why can’t we just keep trading for 1-2 year rentals? 

[Bemorewins]

50 minutes ago, Pickles said:

We had two of the top 5 starters in the AL going into the playoffs.  We lost because they pitched poorly.  Not because they were poor pitchers.

Teams don't win 100 games without high-end starting pitching.

One of them was a rookie and we had a back end starter pitching with our season on the line. Not exactly, ideal IMO.

We could have acquire a much better starter than Flaherty at the deadline or signed an impact starter instead of Gibson during that offseason. Texas made those moves and won the World Series.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Bemorewins said:

One of them was a rookie and we had a back end starter pitching with our season on the line. Not exactly, ideal IMO.

We could have acquire a much better starter than Flaherty at the deadline or signed an impact starter instead of Gibson during that offseason. Texas made those moves and won the World Series.

So did the Yankees and they missed the playoffs completely.

We had two top 5 starters.  We had top-end pitching.  They didn't pitch well.  It happens.

Acquiring another starting pitcher would have guaranteed nothing.

[Bemorewins]

20 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Why can’t we just keep trading for 1-2 year rentals? 

I get it. You are marred to a certain way of doing things and that's cool.

IMO given our competition and their willingness to use all the means available in order to improve their teams, we are likely to be fighting an uphill battle, if we are going to be dogmatic about only doing things on the cheap and only having mostly all homegrown players.

Those teams had/have very good systems with very smart people running their orgs as well. And are willing to spend when necessary. 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Bemorewins said:

I get it. You are marred to a certain way of doing things and that's cool.

IMO given our competition and their willingness to use all the means available in order to improve their teams, we are likely to be fighting an uphill battle, if we are going to be dogmatic about only doing things on the cheap and only having mostly all homegrown players.

Those teams had/have very good systems with very smart people running their orgs as well. And are willing to spend when necessary. 

You didn’t answer my question 

[Bemorewins]

3 minutes ago, Pickles said:

So did the Yankees and they missed the playoffs completely.

We had two top 5 starters.  We had top-end pitching.  They didn't pitch well.  It happens.

Acquiring another starting pitcher would have guaranteed nothing.

Would it have hurt?

The Yankees? IMO, they are not and will not be our main competitors for a World Series. The Rangers, Dodgers, Braves those are the teams who have talent on par with ours. That's who we are going to have to beat.