Should Rubenstein relieve Mike Elias of his duties?

[HowAboutThat]

An organization needs different skill sets at different times in their development.

Elias has an extraordinary ability to organize, and apparently a good ability to get valuable people for various duties.

It’s also true that the Orioles were in such bad shape that almost anything would’ve been an improvement, but the team is well set up now for future talent acquisition.

However, the ability to trade well is a different skill, and it remains to be seen how well Elias can do that.

Dumpster diving is great, and a significant number of his reject pick ups have turned out well, at least temporarily.

Increasing success may need a different skill set, one where Elias doesn’t excel. Different stages of an organization require different trade goals, and it is undeniable that the deadline trades the last two years did not accomplish those goals.

Even after he traded for Rogers, his main theme was that we had him for two additional years, which certainly implies that that was the main goal of the pick up rather than success on the mound.

I agree that the OP question is kind of silly. But it’s also an opportunity to have a discussion, and that is worthwhile.

[HowAboutThat]

11 minutes ago, Prodigyx said:

After looking back at the Astros drafts from 2012 to 2017 it looks like he completely switched his draft strategy.  Which makes me wonder why. 

 Could it be with Angelos as the owner he knew we couldn't or wouldnt spend big money for pitching?

  Now with Rubenstein as the owner, could he be a little more willing to spend, so that could change his strategy going forward.

If Elias knew Angelos would not spend money on pitching, wouldn’t that make it more likely that he would draft it?

[HowAboutThat]

30 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Maybe they don’t wait because it’s a deal that was presented to them and they liked it. Maybe they didn’t want to risk injury to Norby or Stowers?

And sure, maybe they thought he could help them now but maybe there was more to changing him then they realized and decided to scrap that idea.

The Os didn’t need another starter at the time of the trade. That’s a fallacy.

They had plenty of starters. Guys just got hurt so it makes it look worse.

If you’re correct, we didn’t need Eflin either.

the Os might have had quantity but they certainly didn’t have quality, and Rogers was not better than the mediocre guys we already had, and could not reasonably have been expected to be.

So yes, we did need a good starter.

[accinfo]

20 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

There's no reason he can't be.

So many people want to ignore the fact that the playoffs are a crap shoot.  And I think when people hear that, they literally think it's a metaphor for literally rolling the dice and seeing what comes up.  

Winning it all isn't just about the front office moves, the moves made in the offseason and at the deadline and all of that....  yes, those things are a big part of it.... but it's also about how you finish the season, who do you have that's healthy, who isn't healthy, and are you getting hot at the right time.  Those things all play a part in who wins it all and people either can't grasp that or don't want to grasp that.  And then on TOP of those things is the randomness that is the playoffs itself.

It's been pointed out here ad nauseum but it bears repeating...the Rangers got hot at the exact right time last year.  They weren't world beaters through the regular season.  They're not that good this year.  But for a few weeks there they were on absolute fire and they were on fire when it mattered most.  I don't think anyone considered them at any point last year to be the best team in baseball but that didn't matter.

Same with the Nats in 2019, they caught fire for an extended stretch and then really heated up in the playoffs.  Same with that year the Cardinals won like 82 games but then ended up winning it all.

There's no reason Elias can't be the guy as long as he's building teams that get to the playoffs.  

Great post.  Just build an organization that gets to the playoffs most years and lets see what happens. 

[Sports Guy]

27 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

They did need a starter at the time because Povich and McDermott had been tried and left the team wanting, Suarez and Irvin had struggled, and Kremer was 2-4 with a 4.97 ERA and 5.27 FIP over his last 6 starts. They basically felt good about Burnes, Eflin and Grayson, two of which went down shortly after the trades, proving the team needed more starting pitching depth.

Thankfully, both Suarez and Kremer have pitched better, but Rogers being a pumpkin has put the team in a bind because now both Povich and Irvin are in the rotation and Burnes has struggled.

I’m guessing they weren’t ready to jump off the Kremer boat because of a few bad starts after 2+ years of being a #3 starter and that they felt they had enough to piece together a 5th spot.
 

Now that being said, I think it’s fair to assume they felt they would get more production from Rogers.

[LookitsPuck]

10 minutes ago, HowAboutThat said:

If Elias knew Angelos would not spend money on pitching, wouldn’t that make it more likely that he would draft it?

As evidenced by how he operated, think he felt he was able to trade for it or via other means (Rule V). After all, if you look at the rotation and even the depth this year:

• Corbin Burnes - Elias trade
• Kyle Bradish - Elias trade
• Tyler Wells - Elias, Rule V
• Albert Suarez - Elias minor league contract
• Cole Irvin - Elias trade
• Cade Povich - Elias trade
• Zach Eflin - Elias trade
• Chayce McDermott - Elias trade
• Trevor Rogers - Elias trade
• Grayson Rodriguez - Duquette draftee
• John Means - Duquette draftee
• Dean Kremer - Duquette trade

8 (7 from Elias) of the 12 arms that made a start in 2024 came via trade, 1 via Rule V, 1 via FA (minor league contract), and only 2 were draft picks (pre-Elias). 

It's why I'm super curious what Elias will do with free agency. There is clearly an aversion to drafting starting pitchers high. Maybe he really thinks that free agency, trades, the international market, and drafting later rounds will work just as well if not better once you consider the predictability and less risk of position players.

Edited August 30 by LookitsPuck

[Sports Guy]

24 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

The Mancini trade has netted one start from McDermott and part of the trade that brought Soto. The good part of the Mancini was getting rid of Mancini, who was about to become a pumpkin (And I take no satisfaction in saying that because of Mancini's story).

You always eventually judge the trades by the results. It doesn't matter if the idea was sound, if you trade for a guy and he doesn't perform, that ends up a bad trade. 

That's like saying the Glenn Davis trade was sound because the team needed a power hitting first baseman. 

The Os traded next to nothing for 10 starts.

The thing most are missing here is that deadline trades rarely work out for either side. 

The deal was fine and one you always do when you are in the position the Os were in. I think if you want to complain about something it would be why didn’t the Os get out of Flaherty what the Tigers could. To me, that’s the better conversation to have.

[Ridgway22]

Sorry to pile on, but this is is a silly, eye-rolling, twitter-quality post.

Tony has eloquently laid out the disagreements with drafting pitching strategy, others have taken issue with the prospect promotion schedule, and why on God's Orange Earth is Eloy taking at-bats from Coby Mayo, these mysteries and others all cause much pearl clutching and head scratching amongst the faithful.

That said, no matter who is GM some fan somewhere is going to be complaining that things could be better (they always can be), the GM should be fired, they suck, they are afraid of X because of what happened in his last job, he screwed that up, he should have traded for / drafted this player who has turned out good, he shouldn't have traded for drafted this player that turned out bad,  blah blah blah.

We've been decimated by injuries, 4/5ths of a Major League starting rotation on the IL, our closer and 8th inning guy as well. Oh, and all-star infielder JW.

Elias has earned alot more of the rope you're trying to hang him with.

 

[RZNJ]

17 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Disaster is a huge overstatement. It hasn't worked out but Elias thankfully pulled the plug on the experiment quickly and used the option with a minimum of damage. We are 1-3 in his starts and one of those losses was on the bullpen. Suarez and Irvin stepped up. Hardly a disaster.

The ML pitcher we traded Norby, who could be helping now, for made 4 starts and was deemed so ineffective that he was sent to the minors, where he got rocked.   That is a disaster.   The fact that they limited the harm he might cause for the last 6 weeks hardly counts as a positive as far as the trade goes.     

[LookitsPuck]

I do think it's fair to ask if you buy into this strategy:

1. Commit higher draft pick capital to position players over pitchers
2. Try and find profiles that they like in the mid/late rounds of the drafts in pitchers
3. Use position player capital (and drafted, traded for prospect pitchers) for MLB ready (or soon to be ready) pitchers once there's more predictive data/injuries out of the way via trade
4. Use free agency (remains to be seen under Rubenstein, certainly didn't happen much under Angelos)
5. Focus on international scouting and free agency

I think right now we are still waiting on whether #2 will be fruitful. 

#4 I'm not going to hold against Elias because he did have a history under Luhnow of being able to spend on multi-year contracts. I think if that is unlocked, it'll be a boon for the strategy.

#5 may start paying dividends as early as next year. 

My main criticism about the above is largely about the lack of spending in non-Latin markets for international free agency. Rubenstein really needs to break out that checkbook. We are at a disadvantage here, and it's an unfair one. There's no reason why we can't spend on an Imanaga type, for example. 

I think the strategy can work. But #4 has to unlock because you can't keep trading guys like Baumeister (who I really liked), Zach Showalter (who I really liked and still really like), etc.

#1, #3 have worked. #2 is still TBD, as they've traded some of the arms, but aside from Connor Gillespie, no Elias drafted arms have made the majors. And #5 looks promising, but still early because these kids are young and it took years to get infrastructure and teams in place as well as to get Angelos to open the pocketbook. Duquette really didn't do much here both because he was awkward and didn't have a strategy and also because Peter sucked when it came to international markets.

Edited August 30 by LookitsPuck

[Sports Guy]

12 minutes ago, HowAboutThat said:

If you’re correct, we didn’t need Eflin either.

the Os might have had quantity but they certainly didn’t have quality, and Rogers was not better than the mediocre guys we already had, and could not reasonably have been expected to be.

So yes, we did need a good starter.

  Nothing I said there suggests we didn’t need Eflin.

[dtk9119]

Not ready to do this yet, but the manager needs to go. If you want to give him 1 more season, fine, but the entire offensive philosophy and coaching needs to be jettisoned and overhauled.

[BRobinsonfan]

5 hours ago, Spakman said:

Yeah obviously not gonna happen but you can’t really argue with anything that he wrote.

Sure you can.  Small sample size for the Stowers, Norby comparisons, the impact of the injuries, etc.  Stuff happens.  

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, dtk9119 said:

Not ready to do this yet, but the manager needs to go. If you want to give him 1 more season, fine, but the entire offensive philosophy and coaching needs to be jettisoned and overhauled.

Do you even know what the offensive philosophy of the hitting coaches is?

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, dtk9119 said:

Not ready to do this yet, but the manager needs to go. If you want to give him 1 more season, fine, but the entire offensive philosophy and coaching needs to be jettisoned and overhauled.

I agree. 3rd most runs scored, 1st in slugging, 11th in OBP, 5th in wOBA, 2nd in wRC+, 3rd in EV, 3rd in barrel rate%, 1st in hard hit %..who wants that?  Ugly stats.

Edited August 30 by Sports Guy