Worse case scenario for a failed "blow up"?

[CEB]

Many people agree on trading Tejada, Mora, Payton, Bradford, Walker and some of the others.

The difference lies with Bedard and BRob(for the most part).

This shouldn't have to be explained every time.

How about explaining it just one time?

Please confirm, in the offseason, General Manager Sports Guy announces that he has blown-up the team by trading Tejada, Mora, Payton, Bradford, Walker and some of the others for prospects.

Any other moves in your blow-up? And what did you do with Roberts and Bedard? Because, by my count, that two starters and three roll players.

[DrungoHazewood]

Sticking with a noisy phrase that means different things to different people will simply guarantee that there will be more tired, circular arguments in which people don't even agree about what they're agreeing or disagreeing about. Maybe you like that sort of thing, I don't know.

It seems odd to me that a more-meaningful label for your recommendations is a long string of jibberish initials. I guess the acceptable choices are limited to either "blow it up" or gibberish. Silly me for suggesting that your ideas deserve more than either one of those lame choices. Never mind.

OGTSOTF TAAA AVPIRFTRPTHTMF WPEOUPAMI RTSSP RSAFSP BTJHTBATOA WHHTSASFATWSTTODPACLTITWOFBATY!

[Sports Guy]

How about explaining it just one time?

Please confirm, in the offseason, General Manager Sports Guy announces that he has blown-up the team by trading Tejada, Mora, Payton, Bradford, Walker and some of the others for prospects.

Any other moves in your blow-up? And what did you do with Roberts and Bedard? Because, by my count, that two starters and three roll players.

BRob has to be traded IMO.

I would also deal DCab in the right package.

Bedard depends on an extension or not.

Now is the time to extend or trade Bedard...Waiting on either is foolish IMO.

[Fan4Life]

For me, this is BLOWING IT UP:

Is the definition of "blowing up" a team really evading people here?

When you "blow up" a team, you scrap the old, unsuccessful plan and launch an entirely new plan that charts a radically different direction for the team's future.

You enact this new plan with sweeping personnel changes that remove the core players, coaches, and management types that once fit with the old plan, but no longer fit with the new plan, and you replace them with guys that do fit with the new plan.

Now if the radical new plan the O's want to enact is to get significantly younger, then IMO it's basically imperative that they trade away the valuable assets they have that can actually contribute significantly toward accomplishing that goal -- Bedard, Roberts and Tejada.

The former two guys could conceivably be building blocks in a new plan (what plan *couldn't* use guys like this), but the catch of course is that the plan itself can't get off the ground unless they are traded for the pieces that can get the ball rolling.

Based on the above, is trading Bedard, Roberts and Tejada while keeping the the coaches and FO personnel considered blowing it up?

[davearm]

For me, this is BLOWING IT UP:

Based on the above, is trading Bedard, Roberts and Tejada while keeping the the coaches and FO personnel considered blowing it up?

The O's already have changed the manager and the GM.

[CEB]

BRob has to be traded IMO.

I would also deal DCab in the right package.

Bedard depends on an extension or not.

Now is the time to extend or trade Bedard...Waiting on either is foolish IMO.

Fair enough. Ambiguity resolved.

Nevertheless, its going to a dreadful team and rival the 2003 Tigers, but that will get you a #1 pick.

[Sports Guy]

Fair enough. Ambiguity resolved.

Nevertheless, its going to a dreadful team and rival the 2003 Tigers, but that will get you a #1 pick.

You are most likely wrong but whatever.

[TGO]

Fair enough. Ambiguity resolved.

Nevertheless, its going to a dreadful team and rival the 2003 Tigers, but that will get you a #1 pick.

We're going to wind up with the #1 pick this year.

[Sports Guy]

We're going to wind up with the #1 pick this year.....

......with an expensive, veteran laden team.

[Fan4Life]

The O's already have changed the manager and the GM.

I had thought about that, but the coaches haven't changed.... yet.....

[CEB]

You are most likely wrong but whatever.

It's a shame I don't have a spare $500 million to lend you so we could both find out.... But of course after that, you'd owe us a bit for pain and suffering....

[Sports Guy]

It's a shame I don't have a spare $500 million to lend you so we could both find out.... But of course after that, you'd owe us a bit for pain and suffering....

You just don't get what people are trying to accomplish.

And besides, even if we had a 50 win team, as long as it is young, talented and heading towards bigger and better things, it wouldn't matter.

[NoVaO]

Thinking about it a little more, a blow-up of this team is going to happen one way or another. They don't have one contract that goes past 2010 and almost all of them end after 2009.

We may see extensions from Bedard and/or Roberts, but that is it. What matters is the direction this team makes. Will they keep signing guys in their 30's to multi-year contracts and keep running around in circles?

I think the blow-up has to start this offseason. I would prefer that they do this all together, as long as the offers are right, so the talent acquired can grow and develop together. But I don't have a problem with a waiting a bit to deal some players, specifically Bedard and Roberts.

The dead weight should be dumped this offseason for whatever we can get:

Payton

Gibbons - I would cut him if I can't trade him

I'm tempted to include Baez in this group, but maybe he can build his value back up

FAs that are gone:

Wright

Bako

Bell

Benson

-question: can Benson become a Type-B FA? Ryan Klesko put up .775 OPS in 05 and did not play in 06, but was still a type-B FA. We can make a deal with Benson to not accept arbitration when offered. Same can be applied to Wright if he decides he still wants to play.

Patterson - if we fail to find a replacement for him and he isn't a Type-B FA, I wouldn't have a problem with him coming back to a 1-year deal.

The First to Go:

Tejada - get the best package of young talent you can get

-if a SS doesn't come back in a trade for him, I guess you could trade for Jack Wilson, or possibly take a chance on Felipe Lopez if he becomes available...just sign a stop-gap for a year or 2. Maybe we could get into the Japanese market and sign this guy: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/search.asp?Q=Tomohiro%20Nioka. Its believed he has the glove to play any INF or OF position

Next to Go:

Cabrera - he is still fairly young and still has potential, but while he still has some value, we should look to deal him. If the offer is for a guy like Milledge or Quentin, its something we should pull the trigger on.

-A 3-team deal could be a possibility with Tejada and Cabrera

The Rest:

We'll have a better idea this offseason on Bedard's contract demands and how interested he is in staying here. I don't think there is any way we can go past the trade deadline next year without trading him or at least being pretty certain he will sign here. His value might be at peak status now, but thats debateable. One thing I am sure of is his value will steadily fall after next year's trade deadline.

Roberts I feel is in the same boat as Bedard. A decision about these guys should be made by next year's trade deadline.

We should probably look to deal the bullpen guys next trade deadline as well.

Maybe move Hernandez next offseason. Unless Millar really collapses next year, we should hold on to him unless we get an offer that exceeds the draft pick(s) we would be picking up for him. I'm ok with Huff for now. I would like to move Mora but the no-trade clause really hurts things.

We can all debate about whether to blow it up or not, but this team is going to blow-up naturally by 2009. The only true question marks are Roberts and Bedard. Once we get an idea of where they stand, and the direction of the team is set, we need to deal with them as soon as possible. I don't want the Orioles to simply let them play out their contracts and then leave for draft picks.

[CEB]

You just don't get what people are trying to accomplish.

And besides, even if we had a 50 win team, as long as it is young, talented and heading towards bigger and better things, it wouldn't matter.

Dude, it was a joke....

Of course I get it. I just don't agree that it's the best approach. They are two very different things.

Not everyone who doesn't agree with you doesn't get it.

[RShack]

You just don't get what people are trying to accomplish.

When people disagree with you, it does not mean that we don't understand. I understand what you want to accomplish. I disagree with some of your assumptions.

We all want the team to get better-and-younger. We all want the org to be a consistent contender. Some of us just don't buy your scheme for how to get there. How many times must someone say this before you accept that reasonable people can disagree without being ignorant fools?

BTW, if through some bizarre series of supernatural events, you were to wind up as an actual-GM rather than a make-believe-GM, this trait of yours is what would guarantee your failure. You think nobody wanted to deal with former O's GM's? In short order, nobody would want to talk to you on the phone simply because you can't accept that other points of view are valid. If you could fix this one super-flaw, I have no doubt that you could work with various folks around here to develop schemes that are much more plausible. It's not that you're stupid, and it's not that you don't have good insights. You are very smart and you do have good insights. You're much better at the whole "let's play GM" game that I will ever be. It's just that your freakin' attitude interferes with the good things you do offer. You are your own worst enemy.

[smart-ass dismissive response arrives in: 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...]