Worse case scenario for a failed "blow up"?

[Sports Guy]

I asked this in another thread but it seems to have been overlooked.

Many people are saying that blowing it up doesn't mean we will win long term. I am not disagreeing with that. No guarantees.

However, let's say that is exactly what happens...Let's say we blow things up and it doesn't end up paying off.....What have we lost?

What is the penalty?

[NewMarketSean]

There is no worst case scenario for blowing it up.

[weemnj]

What is the penalty?------------WHAT WE HAVE NOW!

[Sports Guy]

What is the penalty?------------WHAT WE HAVE NOW!

That is the point....We blow it up and end up back where we are right now...Pathetic.

So, what do we actually have to lose then?

[clapdiddy]

I honestly can't see any penalty for blowing things up. Right now, we're not going to turn this organization around via free agency, because no player in their right mind would come here and the current crop of players is a very bad mix.

There is no "quick fix" for this team. It will be a slow process that would hopefully be less painful by an infusion of young talent.

[nadecir]

That is the point....We blow it up and end up back where we are right now...Pathetic.

So, what do we actually have to lose then?

We will lose a lot of dollars off the payroll even in a worse case scenario. And that is a good thing. Use that saved money for scouting, international player development, and for paying above slot bonus money to draftees, and the savings in payroll dollars becomes a very good thing.

[PoorMike]

I asked this in another thread but it seems to have been overlooked.

Many people are saying that blowing it up doesn't mean we will win long term. I am not disagreeing with that. No guarantees.

However, let's say that is exactly what happens...Let's say we blow things up and it doesn't end up paying off.....What have we lost?

What is the penalty?

Worst case is that we draw 15k a game for several years, no one watches on tv, the Nats are dissatisfied with their share of MASN revenues and sue their way out of the partnership, MASN ceases to exist, the team hemorrages money and moves to vegas in 2015.

It's unlikely to happen, but that would be the worst case.

[NewMarketSean]

Worst case is that we draw 15k a game for several years, no one watches on tv, the Nats are dissatisfied with their share of MASN revenues and sue their way out of the partnership, MASN ceases to exist, the team hemorrages money and moves to vegas in 2015.

It's unlikely to happen, but that would be the worst case.

If the O's still stink in 2015 they can move to Vegas for all I care.

[RShack]

Let's say we blow things up and it doesn't end up paying off.....What have we lost? What is the penalty?

What we have lost is the opportunity to finally do what successful franchises do, and instead add another decade of losing. I'm still waiting to hear a single compelling reason why we should do that. So far, the big answers seem to be (a) to honor your goofy scheme, and (b) because everybody's frustrated and mad.

There is zero point in replacing one form of bad management with another. We need to get past bad management and instead to what good franchises do. And good franchises simply don't do what you want to do. Fantasy teams do, but we're talking Real Baseball here, not Pretend Baseball...

[NewMarketSean]

What we have lost is the opportunity to finally do what successful franchises do, and instead add another decade of losing. I'm still waiting to hear a single compelling reason why we should do that. So far, the big answers seem to be (a) to honor your goofy scheme, and (b) because everybody's frustrated and mad.

There is zero point in replacing one form of bad management with another. We need to get past bad management and instead to what good franchises do. And good franchises simply don't do what you want to do. Fantasy teams do, but we're talking Real Baseball here, not Pretend Baseball...

Huh?

So what do you want to do? Keep doing more of the same?

[Sports Guy]

What we have lost is the opportunity to finally do what successful franchises do, and instead add another decade of losing. I'm still waiting to hear a single compelling reason why we should do that. So far, the big answers seem to be (a) to honor your goofy scheme, and (b) because everybody's frustrated and mad.

There is zero point in replacing one form of bad management with another. We need to get past bad management and instead to what good franchises do. And good franchises simply don't do what you want to do. Fantasy teams do, but we're talking Real Baseball here, not Pretend Baseball...

You honestly make no sense.

What is MORE LIKELY to happen:

Aging, declining players get better or younger, talented players grow together and perform well?

What is the MORE LIKELY scenario there.

[Fan4Life]

You honestly make no sense.

What is MORE LIKELY to happen:

Aging, declining players get better or younger, talented players grow together and perform well?

What is the MORE LIKELY scenario there.

Isn't the question whether we should be trading ALL of our talented players to get younger and one day in the the future better (IE: Blow it up), versus trading a few/some of are talented players and keeping some?

[RShack]

Huh? So what do you want to do? Keep doing more of the same?

If you read things around here, you know what I want to do. Here's what it is:

Realize that successful franchises are successful franchises because they have highly talented guys at GM and because the owner lets those highly talented guys do their thing. THAT is the secret to success.

Silly one-dimensional trade-everybody strategies are not what successful franchises do. That is not how they get and stay successful. A high quality FO is what does it, not SG's simplistic day-trader schemes. Bad management will screw up anything and everything, no matter what their scheme is.

The key thing is not some sound-bite scheme, the key thing is the quality of the FO. Why is this not obvious to everybody? There is no counter-example to this.

[NewMarketSean]

Isn't the question whether we should be trading ALL of our talented players to get younger and one day in the the future better (IE: Blow it up), versus trading a few/some of are talented players and keeping some?

Who are you going to trade and who are you going to keep?

IMO, Roberts, Tejada SHOULD be traded and Bedard should be traded if he won't sign an extension.

[NewMarketSean]

If you read things around here, you know what I want to do. Here's what it is:

Realize that successful franchises are successful franchises because they have highly talented guys at GM and because the owner lets those highly talented guys do their thing. THAT is the secret to success.

Silly one-dimensional trade-everybody strategies are not what successful franchises do. That is not how they get and stay successful. A high quality FO is what does it, not SG's simplistic day-trader schemes. Bad management will screw up anything and everything, no matter what their scheme is.

The key thing is not some sound-bite scheme, the key thing is the quality of the FO. Why is this not obvious to everybody? There is no counter-example to this.

Good FO's make trades. Especially when you cant sign any FA that is worth anything. No one will come here unless its in a trade.