Two somewhat conflicting goals

[Frobby]

1.  Win a World Series as soon as possible.

2. Year in and year out, have a team that’s capable of winning a World Series.  

I think a lot of people would say the first goal is the most important.  Win a WS ASAP, and worry about the rest later.   You never know if you’ll get another shot anyway.  

At the same time, if you want to maximize the number of tithes you win, you have to maximize the number of times you have a legit shot.   And cashing in a lot of chips in an attempt to win ASAP may jeopardize the latter goal.   

For Elias, I think it’s a delicate balance. I think we all see that the O’s have a window through 2027 or 2028 that would be hard to screw up.  But a longer window than that may require sone trade offs between maximizing chances to win it all now, and keeping the window open past Adley and Gunnar’s FA years.  
 

[NedFromYork]

2 has always been my priority.  I don't want a short lived shooting star, followed by a 10 year desert.  I know others may see it the other way.

[interloper]

I think Elias is always going to shade towards more years of contention, because that's what he's told us he will do. And he generally does what he says. 

We'll find out a lot at this deadline. How "all in" do they go to get pitching? Burnes was an "all in" move that managed to skirt the line in terms of not blowing up the farm for 1 year of a guy's service. Really a fantastic trade. 

[Orioles West]

Of course, I love the idea of another WS title or more in my lifetime. I’ve been lucky enough that they won it three times by the time I was 18 (so grateful to witness vast majority of Jim Palmer’s career).

For me, after the decade and a half of losing, I’d almost rather build for the long haul versus an all in for one title and start over (again). If we catch a trophy or two along the way, that’s great. 

Baseball is a grind, I’ve loved this new Adley era, where the O’s can compete with any team in baseball, every single day.

[Say O!]

Interesting parallel here is the Ravens philosophy where EDC has stated in multiple interviews that he does not subscribe to the “all-in” approach to maximize competitive window and instead looks to draft/development to be in contention year-in-year out. 

[Just Regular]

Elias will gain a good view how strong Holliday-Mayo-Basallo are and what Bradish-Grayson become before Adley's time runs out.

His initial 2028 FA year, is he the best or the 6th best Oriole?

Midseason promotions will be interesting as 6.6 seasons of Holliday-Mayo cost about the same as 6.2 seasons and one scenario better prepares those bats for Seth Lugo in ALWC game 1 or Gerrit Cole in ALDS game 1.    Or you can stick with Mateo-O'Hearn if you think it gives you better odds of winning October 2024.

I will say I do think "sustainable pipeline" is enough of a cheapo management talking point I will be disappointed if steps don't occur to maximize chances while the club unsustainably gets to enjoy having the Adley-led group around the roster.

[RZNJ]

I prefer #2.   Last year the joy of the regular season was much greater than the disappointment of the playoffs.   I’ll take 6 months of feeling good over one week of feeling bad.  
 

Elias is never going to be A.J. Heller.  That’s not a bad thing, necessarily.   I’d be pretty surprised, but probably happy, if he made a deal for Garrett Crochet or Mason Miller but he’s more likely to go the Tanner Scott type of route and not give up Kjerstad, Mayo, Basallo, or Holliday.  Probably doesn’t give up Povich, McDermott, or Seth Johnson either.

[Philip]

I think about this all the time. Most teams that won a WS in the last decade was mediocre or worse the next year, except the Astros, who had seven consecutive LCS appearances. But the Astros seem to be nearing the end of their window.

How will they sustain, especially with the ridiculous draft lottery?

The Cardinals and Braves always have a good team and never have a single digit draft pick. I want to always be in the conversation about the top five teams, but it remains to be seen how Mike will handle the pipeline when he’s drafting in the 20s every year.

The orioles won 101 games once and didn’t go to the playoffs. But no one said it was a bad year.

I want a team that is always good, always in contention, and that never gives 47 million to Trumbo or 55 million to Jimenez 

[Philip]

Addendum:

right now, I think it is possible for us to have our cake and eat it too. Despite the screaming, we really have only two needs that can’t be internally satisfied: SP and RP, and a couple of effective trades could satisfy both of those needs.

So we could go all in for a World Series this year, without emptying our farm.

(On the other hand, we had a wonderful team last year and didn’t win a game)

The big question is, how is Mike going to handle The balance of present versus future. 
Well, I hope.

[dystopia]

The goal is to build a dynasty

[G54377]

The Rangers got hot and won a WS despite not really being that great of a team overall. They had a great offense that went nuclear in the postseason, which was enough to overcome a mostly pedestrian pitching staff (both starters and bullpen). If we keep our main core, we should have several WS runs in the next 4-5 years.

[glenn__davis]

For me the random nature of the MLB playoffs just changes the equation so much.  If I could make a huge move that would guaranteed to significantly increase our chances to win the WS?  Sure, I'd be all about that.  But the fact is that making an addition really only increases your odds by a few percentage points at the most.  So is that worth giving up years of cost-control?

I know fans love their team to "go for it" but the fact of the matter is that going for it really doesn't increase your odds in the tournament by all that much.

[SilverRocket]

What happens in the playoffs is a crapshoot. More shots in the playoffs = more chances at the title.

And while I would be happy with a title, what I really want is a dynasty where we win several World Series and are the consensus best team of the era.

[Aristotelian]

Generally 2. I never want another period like 1997-2012 ever again. That has to be the top priority. I pretty much will never support trading an MLB Top 20 type of prospect. Joey Ortiz/Eduardo Rodriguez is about my limit and as much as I appreciate Burnes, even that one hurts a little bit. I'm pretty much always opposed to lengthy contracts for premier free agents entering their 30's. I also don't think baseball is predictable enough that you can simply trade for or sign superstars and guarantee you will win it all (see Mets, Padres). I'm all for reasonable moves to fill gaps but in general something like the old Oriole Way is the way to go.

[Filmstudy]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

1.  Win a World Series as soon as possible.

2. Year in and year out, have a team that’s capable of winning a World Series.  

I think a lot of people would say the first goal is the most important.  Win a WS ASAP, and worry about the rest later.   You never know if you’ll get another shot anyway.  

At the same time, if you want to maximize the number of tithes you win, you have to maximize the number of times you have a legit shot.   And cashing in a lot of chips in an attempt to win ASAP may jeopardize the latter goal.   

For Elias, I think it’s a delicate balance. I think we all see that the O’s have a window through 2027 or 2028 that would be hard to screw up.  But a longer window than that may require sone trade offs between maximizing chances to win it all now, and keeping the window open past Adley and Gunnar’s FA years.  
 

I have this discussion all the time regarding the Ravens.  And the NFL is much more balanced in terms of teams recovering to be good after tanking and having the salary cap as the ultimate master.

In the simplest of terms, I think it is a betrayal of your season ticket holders (who pay every year as opposed to folks with very little financial stake who watch from home and can turn it off at any time) to play the roller-coaster model to maximize an individual year's playoff chances and I'm very glad the Ravens don't subscribe to that model.