Andy MacPhail - Disappointing GM

[JTrea81]

Since there is a lovefest thread for MacPhail, one of many on here, this thread is to counter that and shed light on what MacPhail needs to improve.

Approach to Free Agency:

MacPhail's whole approach to free agency is flawed IMO. I'll break it down.

1. Passive pursuit, waits for the market to be established instead of establishing the market

2. Not willing to sell the Orioles, thinks they should sell themselves

3. Does not "wine and dine" players, poor sales approach

4. Not willing to risk high $ amounts on premium FAs

5. Not willing to significantly overpay to lure FAs here (see #2)

6. Rather would sign multiple lower cost FAs because they are a lower risk than pay for one premium FA.

Heavy emphasis on pitching at the expense of position players.

This is exactly what doomed MacPhail with the Cubs as the Cubs could never produce decent position players from within. I see MacPhail going down the same path with the Orioles as the system is incredibly unbalanced toward pitching, with very few position player prospects from high A to AAA. We've added a bat with Bell, but our trade chips are few and far between unless you start talking about Jones and Markakis and the Big Three, and you know that MacPhail isn't going to trade those guys, so we've got to start adding potent bats via the draft and international signings.

Complete reliance on homegrown pitching - "grow the arms, buy the bats"

The FA market has fewer and fewer quality bats on the market that are in their prime, while more and more quality pitching is being available on the FA market. There will be an enormous amount of pressure put on Matusz, Tillman and Arrieta to peform without having a strong veteran arm to take some of that burden away. If two of those three fail, the Orioles will be sunk. There's way too much riding on the Big Three for success than necessary IMO, when the Orioles have resources to help them out. MacPhail can say that good FA pitchers don't want to play in Baltimore, but it's his job to convince them to do so. Just simply throwing your hands up and ruling out FA pitchers because Baltimore isn't their first choice is a copout IMO.

As for the bats, fewer quality bats means more competition for those bats, and a last place or 4th place team in the AL East is going to have a hard time convincing those bats to play for them, unless MacPhail changes the way he approaches FA (see above). He is going to have to overpay significantly or really make an all out aggressive effort to recruit said FA, getting Ripken and other former players and current players involved etc, something he hasn't done to date.

[Dipper9]

When I saw the thread title, I thought "I cannot believe JTrea is gonna bash MacPhail again." Then I read your post, and you bring up some excellent points. I don't want to but I think the ONLY mistake made by MacPhail thus far was not signing Tex. Not only would it have been awesome for the Orioles, but it would also have hurt the Yankees, and if we ever hope to narrow the gap between us and them, we have to improve ourselves while also keeping them from improving, and that's something we have not yet done.

[hatepaste]

Since there is a lovefest thread for MacPhail, one of many on here, this thread is to counter that and shed light on what MacPhail needs to improve.

Approach to Free Agency:

MacPhail's whole approach to free agency is flawed IMO. I'll break it down.

1. Passive pursuit, waits for the market to be established instead of establishing the market

2. Not willing to sell the Orioles, thinks they should sell themselves

3. Does not "wine and dine" players, poor sales approach

4. Not willing to risk high $ amounts on premium FAs

5. Not willing to significantly overpay to lure FAs here (see #2)

6. Rather would sign multiple lower cost FAs because they are a lower risk than pay for one premium FA.

Heavy emphasis on pitching at the expense of position players.

This is exactly what doomed MacPhail with the Cubs as the Cubs could never produce decent position players from within. I see MacPhail going down the same path with the Orioles as the system is incredibly unbalanced toward pitching, with very few position player prospects from high A to AAA.

Complete reliance on homegrown pitching - "grow the arms, buy the bats"

The FA market has fewer and fewer quality bats on the market that are in their prime, while more and more quality pitching is being available on the FA market. There will be an enormous amount of pressure put on Matusz, Tillman and Arrieta to peform without having a strong veteran arm to take some of that burden away. If two of those three fail, the Orioles will be sunk. There's way too much riding on the Big Three for success than necessary IMO, when the Orioles have resources to help them out. MacPhail can say that good FA pitchers don't want to play in Baltimore, but it's his job to convince them to do so. Just simply throwing your hands up and ruling out FA pitchers because Baltimore isn't their first choice is a copout IMO.

As for the bats, fewer quality bats means more competition for those bats, and a last place or 4th place team in the AL East is going to have a hard time convincing those bats to play for them, unless MacPhail changes the way he approaches FA (see above). He is going to have to overpay significantly or really make an all out aggressive effort to recruit said FA, getting Ripken and other former players and current players involved etc, something he hasn't done to date.

I knew this was coming:

1. Who did you want him to "establish" the market with?

2. Where is your proof?

3. Once again, what proof do you have? First proof that he doesn't do it, and second proof that it matters.

4. Who didn't he risk high $ amounts on?

5. Who did you want him to overpay?

6. Once again, who do you want him to sign?

Difference between your post and the other one is the other one actually had examples.

Also, Joe Jordan wasn't with him in Chicago. So what is it? Does MacPhail get all the credit for not drafting position prospects in Chicago? And no credit for getting guys here?

Who says there is more and more quality pitching available and less and less bats? There were some big bats last year, and some going to be out there this year. And look at the disasters that have been the "big" free agent pitchers out there. Jason Schmidt, Bartolo Colon, AJ Burnett, etc, etc.

[mikezpen]

Does Angelos still restrict spending or interfere in other ways from behind the scenes? That's a big question.

[geschinger]

Since there is a lovefest thread for MacPhail, one of many on here, this thread is to counter that and shed light on what MacPhail needs to improve.

Approach to Free Agency:

MacPhail's whole approach to free agency is flawed IMO. I'll break it down.

1. Passive pursuit, waits for the market to be established instead of establishing the market

2. Not willing to sell the Orioles, thinks they should sell themselves

3. Does not "wine and dine" players, poor sales approach

4. Not willing to risk high $ amounts on premium FAs

5. Not willing to significantly overpay to lure FAs here (see #2)

6. Rather would sign multiple lower cost FAs because they are a lower risk than pay for one premium FA.

Heavy emphasis on pitching at the expense of position players.

This is exactly what doomed MacPhail with the Cubs as the Cubs could never produce decent position players from within. I see MacPhail going down the same path with the Orioles as the system is incredibly unbalanced toward pitching, with very few position player prospects from high A to AAA. We've added a bat with Bell, but our trade chips are few and far between unless you start talking about Jones and Markakis and the Big Three, and you know that MacPhail isn't going to trade those guys, so we've got to start adding potent bats via the draft and international signings.

Complete reliance on homegrown pitching - "grow the arms, buy the bats"

The FA market has fewer and fewer quality bats on the market that are in their prime, while more and more quality pitching is being available on the FA market. There will be an enormous amount of pressure put on Matusz, Tillman and Arrieta to peform without having a strong veteran arm to take some of that burden away. If two of those three fail, the Orioles will be sunk. There's way too much riding on the Big Three for success than necessary IMO, when the Orioles have resources to help them out. MacPhail can say that good FA pitchers don't want to play in Baltimore, but it's his job to convince them to do so. Just simply throwing your hands up and ruling out FA pitchers because Baltimore isn't their first choice is a copout IMO.

As for the bats, fewer quality bats means more competition for those bats, and a last place or 4th place team in the AL East is going to have a hard time convincing those bats to play for them, unless MacPhail changes the way he approaches FA (see above). He is going to have to overpay significantly or really make an all out aggressive effort to recruit said FA, getting Ripken and other former players and current players involved etc, something he hasn't done to date.

I have no problem with the approach to free agency during the stockpile young talent phase. I would hope that he'll be more agressive when in a position where a particular player away from a championship caliber roster. But until that point we're better served staying away from the pricier free agents.

As for the emphasis on pitching over positional players - that is the right approach especially considering we have a good core of young positional talent at the MLB level with Markakis, Jones, Riemold and Wieters. He's added Bell to the mix. I don't see how this is a problem either. Especially considering that once we have a sufficent stockpile of pitching to where we might consider dealing some of it, those assets are more valuable than positional players. When the stockpile is there maybe we can spin some of it off for the next ARam or the next Derek Lee etc...

Reliance on homegrown pitching is the way to go for a team in this position and free agency is not. It may not be the most exciting approach from the fans perspective. Winning the bidding for a big name free agent is sexier for fans but it is not better for the future of the franchise.

[Flosman]

Oh boy. Who would have guessed these were your views. A question for you. Do you really think a GM could do much more than AM has done in the time he has been here. The O's have greatly increased the talent pool they control, they have locked up several key pieces and they have developed a ton of very good looking young talent. Now I think AM could have squeezed a few more wins by spending some money on league average type guys or taking on a ton of additional risk. However, I don't think he could have done nearly enough to get much above or even to the 500 level. So in other words we would have simply been wasting resources IMO. The objective is to make a playoff team. If you are not at that level whats the point of making the sexy moves that still don't get us there?

[TiredofLosing20]

The real question is would JTrea have had these concerns if they would have signed Tex?

[DrungoHazewood]

1. Passive pursuit, waits for the market to be established instead of establishing the market

Maybe he doesn't think that the Vlad negotiations are the best way to do business.

2. Not willing to sell the Orioles, thinks they should sell themselves

Where do you get this?

3. Does not "wine and dine" players, poor sales approach

Really? You seem to be inferring this (and #2) because they didn't have a Mark Teixiera magical mystery tour with his name up in lights on the scoreboard and giant limo driving him up and down Pratt St.

4. Not willing to risk high $ amounts on premium FAs

Why would you break the bank in the early-to-mid stages of a rebuild? I think that's just burning money.

5. Not willing to significantly overpay to lure FAs here (see #2)

Well, good. Market-priced free agents are usually terrible investments, so free agents you have to significantly overpay for would usually be abysmal use of your money.

6. Rather would sign multiple lower cost FAs because they are a lower risk than pay for one premium FA.

Why do you say this? Because they signed Eaton and Hendrickson and Izturis?

My major criticism of your analysis is that you seem to think MacPhail should have a consistent approach no matter where a team is in the success cycle. And you assume that because he didn't do X, Y, and Z when the team was rebuilding, there's almost no chance he'll do that to put a 80- or 85-win team over the top. I think that's a reach, at best. And it makes you seem like you're going out of your way to rip MacPhail for things that haven't happened yet.

[El Gordo]

Please! Why not skip the and cut to the chase. We didn't sign Tex. Was that a mistake or an impossibility?:rolleyestf:

[tom smith]

I knew this was coming:

1. Who did you want him to "establish" the market with?

2. Where is your proof?

3. Once again, what proof do you have? First proof that he doesn't do it, and second proof that it matters.

4. Who didn't he risk high $ amounts on?

5. Who did you want him to overpay?

6. Once again, who do you want him to sign?

Difference between your post and the other one is the other one actually had examples.

Also, Joe Jordan wasn't with him in Chicago. So what is it? Does MacPhail get all the credit for not drafting position prospects in Chicago? And no credit for getting guys here?

Who says there is more and more quality pitching available and less and less bats? There were some big bats last year, and some going to be out there this year. And look at the disasters that have been the "big" free agent pitchers out there. Jason Schmidt, Bartolo Colon, AJ Burnett, etc, etc.

I agree with you and would like to add just one thing. Was this guy in the meetings during Free Agency. How do you know what was said or offered in those meetings. The info out of the warehouse is slow and every joe blow thinks he knows everything that is going on in those meetings and 99% of the time there not even close. I think it's a pretty unfair post.

[Shopay]

I have no problem with the approach to free agency during the stockpile young talent phase. I would hope that he'll be more agressive when in a position where a particular player away from a championship caliber roster. But until that point we're better served staying away from the pricier free agents.

As for the emphasis on pitching over positional players - that is the right approach especially considering we have a good core of young positional talent at the MLB level with Markakis, Jones, Riemold and Wieters. He's added Bell to the mix. I don't see how this is a problem either. Especially considering that once we have a sufficent stockpile of pitching to where we might consider dealing some of it, those assets are more valuable than positional players. When the stockpile is there maybe we can spin some of it off for the next ARam or the next Derek Lee etc...

Reliance on homegrown pitching is the way to go for a team in this position and free agency is not. It may not be the most exciting approach from the fans perspective. Winning the bidding for a big name free agent is sexier for fans but it is not better for the future of the franchise.

I pretty much agree with all of this.

[sector7g]

I'm waiting for the punch line.....

[JTrea81]

My major criticism of your analysis is that you seem to think MacPhail should have a consistent approach no matter where a team is in the success cycle. And you assume that because he didn't do X, Y, and Z when the team was rebuilding, there's almost no chance he'll do that to put a 80- or 85-win team over the top. I think that's a reach, at best. And it makes you seem like you're going out of your way to rip MacPhail for things that haven't happened yet.

Now where is the guarantee that if we go with all homegrown players at various points of their development, that we will win 80-85 games in the AL East? Don't say Tampa because we don't have an "Orioles" to beat up on like they did.

We need to sign premium FAs to get us to 80-85 wins IMO because there is no guarantee that we will reach that mark with all homegrown, young cheap talent.

And I make this crtique because never in the history of MacPhail's tenure overseeing a team was he aggressive in pursuing premium FA talent even when the Cubs needed pieces to put them over the top for the playoffs. He never added that premium bat or arm, choosing to go with lesser pieces.

The track record isn't there.

[Shopay]

1. Passive pursuit, waits for the market to be established instead of establishing the market

Maybe he doesn't think that the Vlad negotiations are the best way to do business.

2. Not willing to sell the Orioles, thinks they should sell themselves

Where do you get this?

3. Does not "wine and dine" players, poor sales approach

Really? You seem to be inferring this (and #2) because they didn't have a Mark Teixiera magical mystery tour with his name up in lights on the scoreboard and giant limo driving him up and down Pratt St.

4. Not willing to risk high $ amounts on premium FAs

Why would you break the bank in the early-to-mid stages of a rebuild? I think that's just burning money.

5. Not willing to significantly overpay to lure FAs here (see #2)

Well, good. Market-priced free agents are usually terrible investments, so free agents you have to significantly overpay for would usually be abysmal use of your money.

6. Rather would sign multiple lower cost FAs because they are a lower risk than pay for one premium FA.

Why do you say this? Because they signed Eaton and Hendrickson and Izturis?

My major criticism of your analysis is that you seem to think MacPhail should have a consistent approach no matter where a team is in the success cycle. And you assume that because he didn't do X, Y, and Z when the team was rebuilding, there's almost no chance he'll do that to put a 80- or 85-win team over the top. I think that's a reach, at best. And it makes you seem like you're going out of your way to rip MacPhail for things that haven't happened yet.

I agree with this as well, especially the bolded language.

[geschinger]

Now where is the guarantee that if we go with all homegrown players at various points of their development, that we will win 80-85 games in the AL East? Don't say Tampa because we don't have an "Orioles" to beat up on like they did.

We need to sign premium FAs to get us to 80-85 wins IMO because there is no guarantee that we will reach that mark with all homegrown, young cheap talent.

And you think there is a guarantee reaching that mark by going crazy with expensive FAs?