This is "blow it up"

[Sports Guy]

This is neither here nor there, but I'm not sure why this is "very telling" to you. The D'Rays have a ton of problems, but they have arguably the best outfield (considering offense and defense) in the major leagues. That isn't surprising when you consider that two of the three starters was a #1 pick in the draft. The lowest draftee was Crawford who was a round two guy I believe.

Name another team where Markakis wouldn't crack the starting outfield line up? I can't think of one off the top of my head. He would start in NY, Toronto, and Boston IMHO. Markakis is performing as just slightly worse than an all star right now. He is a great talent and any team would love to have him.

And Markakis is further along on his development than Crawford and Delmon Young, who has all the ability in the world, has shown to be an impatient hitter.

[DrungoHazewood]

Wow, that is a huge leap to me. What about Cabrera (who pitched better than projected initially), Bedard, Ray, and Markakis? These guys all performed in the majors rather quickly. Is it like a recessive gene that skips a generation?

Do you totally dismiss that it is just a statistical anomaly? I'm not willing to bet that Olson, Hoey, and Penn will pitch great right out of the gate next year, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I'm not dismissing all the issues with this organization as bad luck. There have definitely been some poor decisions made in the last couple years. for instance, I'm completely shocked that Reimold, Knott, and Jimenez weren't called up. However, I have to believe that there is some bad luck/timing/anomaly taking place right now with the young pitching we've promoted.

I have no idea. I don't know if it's a systemic thing, if it's a short term fluke, or bad luck, or pressure from losing or what. I just don't know. And I'm not going to pretend to know.

[eddie83]

The thing that has to be blown up is the way we do business not team itself. Due to our wonderful owner the Front Office has been incapable of having thier vision-whatever that is- play out. I haven't been impressed by our current GM duo but now we finally have a baseball man running the show. I understand the goal isn't to patch a team together but to win a world series. We play in a good market and own our own TV network, so let's us that to our advantages. This team is not as bad as we look right now, not even close. The majority of players impacting these games will not even be here next year. I really do not see where we are much different from where Detroit was in 2004-2005. Things can change much quicker than people think with some postive moves. MacPhail has to be given a legit chance to let things play out the way he wants them to. If the roster is much improved by Opening Day in 2008 all of this uproar over the September call-ups means what? If you can deal some higher paid contracts so be it. What I want to see in the short term more than anything is playing meaningfull games late in the season. The 1992-1993 Orioles were not great teams but both provided enjoyable summers to Orioles fans. Both years we went into September playing for something. It is depressing every year that going into June we are already out of the race. A couple of bats and improving the bullpen-not that I have easy answers - changes the mindset of everyone. MacPhail should first actually fill the holes we have first and then if it doesn't work blow it up. By blowing it up now we are basically blowing up teams built to be .500 at best. Maybe it is a combination of trades or free agents but it can be done. Playing in this division is always going to be tough. I just want to see the Baltimore Orioles be as good as they can be. If that means for right now 3rd place and 88 wins, sign me up because it will have been a fun summer. The value of trading of dumping players this offseason and at the trade deadline next year isn't that big of a difference. Try to win first then blow it up, just don't throw a flawed team out there on Opening Day and hope things turn out in a best case scenario like we have done for years. I say no to a total rebuild. Our dysfunctional front office has cost us, not the decision not to start from scratch.

[RShack]

The Braves haven't had to blow it up as they've got a great minor league system to reload from.

I think you are over-stating the wonderfulness of the ATL farm system circa 1990. Yes, Cox and focused on it for a few years while simultaneously failing to do much with the ML roster. There are others more qualified than I to comment on the state of the O's farm now vs. the Braves farm circa 1990. However, I was in ATL then (and attended their first-ever WS game) and my impression is that Cox had several P prospects and a few position players. I don't know how different it was then from what Flanagan has (and hasn't) done around here over the last few years. However, to suggest that the 1990-91 Braves were stocked to the teeth when they suddenly became good, and therefore didn't need to trade their great players, is just wrong. They didn't have great players to trade. What few very good players they had they did NOT trade.

The reason the Braves have been good for so long is not because of some paint-by-numbers formula. Rather, it is largely explained in one word: Schuerholz. Same thing re: BOS, but the keyword there is Theo. It's not about some simple dingbat formula. It's about having a great talent as your GM. You want a great franchise that is consistently competitive? Then put a highly talented guy in charge and let him do his thing. That is the formula, not all this "trade all the good players" noise.

[RShack]

First of all, the idea is to buy and sell. I have never advocated the Marlins way of doing things...

SG, you consistently argue for a simplistic formula of trading damn near everybody. You have said on multiple occasions that you want to rapidly turnover the entire starting lineup, keeping only Nick. When asked when something like that has ever worked, even once, in the entire history of baseball, you say "who cares?". Your essential argument boils down to acting like a commodities day-trader without any supporting track record of any kind. No thanks to that.

I would much rather bank on the requirement that we need a highly talented guy who truly runs the FO. Unlike your claims, THAT is the approach that has a demonstrated track record. What remains to be seen is whether Little Andy is a highly talented guy. He certainly had the right dad and granddad. Over the next couple years, we're gonna find out what kind of value we get from that gene pool.

[Sports Guy]

SG, you consistently argue for a simplistic formula of trading damn near everybody. You have said on multiple occasions that you want to rapidly turnover the entire starting lineup, keeping only Nick. When asked when something like that has ever worked, even once, in the entire history of baseball, you say "who cares?". Your essential argument boils down to acting like a commodities day-trader without any supporting track record of any kind. No thanks to that.

Well, we may need starters in 3 or so positions anyway.

Tejada is likely to be dealt....If Tejada goes and we are rebuilding, perhaps Mora wants to go.

And we should be trading BRob.

Some of the turnover is going to happen regardless if you want to trade guys or not because of the need to fill positions.

[RShack]

The FO, the owner, and the fans need to look at every player as dispassionately as possible.

Close, but not quite.

It doesn't matter whether the fans look dispassionately.

It doesn't matter whether the owner looks dispassionately.

Two things matter:

(1) The owner truly hands over the car keys to his GM.

(2) The GM is a very talented guy who looks at every player dispassionately.

These two conditions describe ATL and Schuerholz.

These two conditions describe BOS and Theo (more or less).

These two conditions describes the necessary-and-sufficient conditions for BAL and MacPhail.

We don't yet know whether these two conditions are met.

Bottom line: If these two conditions are met, we'll be fine. If they aren't, we won't (nomatter who we trade). Anybody disagree?

[geschinger]

I think you are over-stating the wonderfulness of the ATL farm system circa 1990. Yes, Cox and focused on it for a few years while simultaneously failing to do much with the ML roster. There are others more qualified than I to comment on the state of the O's farm now vs. the Braves farm circa 1990. However, I was in ATL then (and attended their first-ever WS game) and my impression is that Cox had several P prospects and a few position players. I don't know how different it was then from what Flanagan has (and hasn't) done around here over the last few years. However, to suggest that the 1990-91 Braves were stocked to the teeth when they suddenly became good, and therefore didn't need to trade their great players, is just wrong. They didn't have great players to trade. What few very good players they had they did NOT trade.

I was in WPB during that period of time and always at Spring Training. I spent a lot of time on the back fields where I had better access to take pictures. Looking back at the pictures I have it's amazing how many guys went on to have long MLB careers... Guys like Chipper Jones, Klesko, Javy Lopez, Turk Wendell, Al Martin, Vinny Castilla, Steve Avery, Tony Graffanino, Jason Schmidt etc... Not to mention guys who were highly regarded on top prospects lists that didn't live up to the hype - guys like Tyler Houston and Mike Kelly.

The reason the Braves have been good for so long is not because of some paint-by-numbers formula. Rather, it is largely explained in one word: Schuerholz. Same thing re: BOS, but the keyword there is Theo. It's not about some simple dingbat formula. It's about having a great talent as your GM. You want a great franchise that is consistently competitive? Then put a talented guy in charge and let him do his thing. That is the formula, not all this "trade all the good players" noise.

I agree about Schuerholz, he has been a key factor in their success. But it's not him alone, their dynasty was driven by player development. Paul Snyder should not be overlooked. He was key to setting up the foundation for the Braves turnaround and had a huge role in the organization through the 1990s.

As for Theo, I think he's a good GM but in nowhere near the same class as Schuerholz. Like Cashman I think the almost unlimited budget he has to work with inflates his reputation. He's made a lot of mistakes in recent years but w/their budget it doesn't hurt like it would if he made similar mistakes with a <= $100m budget.

[Sports Guy]

I was in WPB during that period of time and always at Spring Training. I spent a lot of time on the back fields where I had better access to take pictures. Looking back at the pictures I have it's amazing how many guys went on to have long MLB careers... Guys like Chipper Jones, Klesko, Javy Lopez, Turk Wendell, Al Martin, Vinny Castilla, Steve Avery, Tony Graffanino, Jason Schmidt etc... Not to mention guys who were highly regarded on top prospects lists that didn't live up to the hype - guys like Tyler Houston and Mike Kelly.

I agree about Schuerholz, he has been a key factor in their success. But it's not him alone, their dynasty was driven by player development. Paul Snyder should not be overlooked. He was key to setting up the foundation for the Braves turnaround and had a huge role in the organization through the 1990s.

As for Theo, I think he's a good GM but in nowhere near the same class as Schuerholz. Like Cashman I think the almost unlimited budget he has to work with inflates his reputation. He's made a lot of mistakes in recent years but w/their budget it doesn't hurt like it would if he made similar mistakes with a <= $100m budget.

No one is in Shuerholz's class IMO.

[utvolzac]

What's the worst thing that can happen if we blow it up, we lose for 10 years? Been there, done that. At least we'd be attempting to try something new. Plus "blowing it up" isn't supposed to be an every year occurance. The idea is to do it once, then develop young talent, and unlike teams like the Marlins, we can actually afford to keep that talent once they develop.

It's time to face reality.

The hole we dug for ourselves is not going to be an over night fix. Big time free agents, impact players that could turn things around drastically, are not coming here. They just aren't. Why would they? Tex might, because he's from here but he could just as easily decide to stay in his old college stomping ground and stay with Atlanta.

Not to mention the incompetance at the warehouse has buried us in horrible contracts, inflating the payroll. I question how much higher of a payroll Angelos will approve. Certainly not enough to drastically turn us into a contender in the next two years. Which brings up an even bigger point.

We are working out of a two year window here. I place the odds of us turning into a championship caliber team in the next two seasons at 5%, and thats generous considering we're probably stuck with guys like Payton, Huff, Baez, etc next year as well.

Assuming we keep everybody, what happens in two years when all our contracts run out at the same time? I shutter to think what the team will look like when that happens, assuming we didn't replace any of our valuable vets with young talent. The time table for a real firesale is running out. In two years, trading Bedard, Tejada, Roberts, etc might not even be an option.

[geschinger]

No one is in Shuerholz's class IMO.

Billy Beane is up there. If he had Schuerholz' budget I think the A's would be extremly successful over an extended period.

[Sports Guy]

What if we blow it up and it doesn't work out and we suck......What have we really lost?

[orioles119]

What if we blow it up and it doesn't work out and we suck......What have we really lost?

Another 10 years... by then, the team could be contracted.

Who'd miss it?

[Fairfax Bird]

What if we blow it up and it doesn't work out and we suck......What have we really lost?

This is an excellent point.

[Witchy_Chick]

No one is in Shuerholz's class IMO.

Terry Ryan.

Witchy