Worse case scenario for a failed "blow up"?

[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.

[RShack]

None of this has anything to do with what we are talking about.

Of course you need smart people making decisions. Thank you Capt Obvious.

And if we have highly talented people running things, then we don't need silly sound-bite solutions like yours. What you propose has never worked ever. Yet you keep on harping on it. Your sound-bite strategy is not a solution to anything, and it completely fails to address the problem. It's nothing but your personal obsession. Too bad so many people here fall for it.

[Fan4Life]

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.

Ok, to me, If you sign Bedard, you can trade Roberts and Tejada. If Bedard won't sign and extension, you trade Bedard and Tejada and Keep Roberts. I am for trading DCab for the right return, however, we need 3-4 guys and a bullpen. Some of those guys may come from within, the rest should be easily acquired between trading Tejada and either Bedard or Roberts.

[weemnj]

And if we have highly talented people running things, then we don't need silly sound-bite solutions like yours. What you propose has never worked ever. Yet you keep on harping on it. Your sound-bite strategy is not a solution to anything, and it completely fails to address the problem. It's nothing but your personal obsession. Too bad so many people here fall for it.

Didn't the Marlins have it work?

[NewMarketSean]

And if we have highly talented people running things, then we don't need silly sound-bite solutions like yours.

Wow, we hired one guy. Before we hired that one guy everyone else was calling for F&D's head. Probably not you, because you think everything is hunky dorey, but everyone else had their eyes open.

What you propose has never worked ever.

That is 100% wrong. Are you just mad you can't come up with a detailed plan?

Yet you keep on harping on it. Your sound-bite strategy is not a solution to anything, and it completely fails to address the problem. It's nothing but your personal obsession. Too bad so many people here fall for it.

This is a message board, is it not? What else do you want us to talk about the weather?

[NewMarketSean]

Didn't the Marlins have it work?

Marlins (2x) and Indians. Tigers made a lot of trades too.

But yeah, they never work.

[Sports Guy]

And if we have highly talented people running things, then we don't need silly sound-bite solutions like yours. What you propose has never worked ever. Yet you keep on harping on it. Your sound-bite strategy is not a solution to anything, and it completely fails to address the problem. It's nothing but your personal obsession. Too bad so many people here fall for it.

You obviously just don't understand the concepts.

And btw, a fire sale has worked..Ask the Marlins.

Now, they haven't had sustained success but that is because they don't have our resources. They don't have the ability to "keep their own".

The Orioles do have this ability and they also have the ability to sprinkle in the FAs and sign the high dollar draft picks that the Marlins can't do.

You just don't seem to get this.

[srock]

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.

Nobody is proclaiming this singular strategy to be the solution. Clearly, it must be implemented with a competent GM else the return in the trades will be Sid Thriftian in their disaster.

You are correct, this organization needs to be led by a competent front office in order to succeed. This fact in no way negates the stance that players should be traded for younger talent. Your argument about leadership is well founded, but it is not a plan to improve the roster. We sit here today debating what types of roster moves would improve the level of talent in the organization. If your argument is "We shouldn't make any trades because the current people in charge of making trades are incompetent," then fine, that is a valid argument. But for the sake of debate, lets take the management out of the equation and debate the merits of this strategy assuming all other things are equal.

[Wingman]

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.

Isn't "having highly talented guys at GM" a sound bite strategy?

Even if it isn't, please elaborate on what a "talented GM" should do, specifically with the O's roster/farmsystem of 2007?

[Sports Guy]

Nobody is proclaiming this singular strategy to be the solution. Clearly, it must be implemented with a competent GM else the return in the trades will be Sid Thriftian in their disaster.

You are correct, this organization needs to be led by a competent front office in order to succeed. This fact in no way negates the stance that players should be traded for younger talent. Your argument about leadership is well founded, but it is not a plan to improve the roster. We sit here today debating what types of roster moves would improve the level of talent in the organization. If your argument is "We shouldn't make any trades because the current people in charge of making trades are incompetent," then fine, that is a valid argument. But for the sake of debate, lets take the management out of the equation and debate the merits of this strategy assuming all other things are equal.

Well said....Good way of stating the obvious.

[Fan4Life]

Nobody is proclaiming this singular strategy to be the solution. Clearly, it must be implemented with a competent GM else the return in the trades will be Sid Thriftian in their disaster.

You are correct, this organization needs to be led by a competent front office in order to succeed. This fact in no way negates the stance that players should be traded for younger talent. Your argument about leadership is well founded, but it is not a plan to improve the roster. We sit here today debating what types of roster moves would improve the level of talent in the organization. If your argument is "We shouldn't make any trades because the current people in charge of making trades are incompetent," then fine, that is a valid argument. But for the sake of debate, lets take the management out of the equation and debate the merits of this strategy assuming all other things are equal.

Be sure we are debating the correct strategy,

Blow it Up - Everyone under 26 years of age goes...

Targeted trades - Keep some guys, IE: Roberts, while trading others: Tejada.

[blueberryale77]

I think the worst case is that they trade some, all, or most of the guys you want to trade, but instead of truly getting young, cheap guys with huge upsides they try to plug holes with mediocre, arbitration-eligible Adam LaRoche types. Of course that would be a horribly stupid thing to do, but the guys who tried to do that last winter still haven't been officially fired, so I still have some fear of it happening.

[Sports Guy]

I think the worst case is that they trade some, all, or most of the guys you want to trade, but instead of truly getting young, cheap guys with huge upsides they try to plug holes with mediocre, arbitration-eligible Adam LaRoche types. Of course that would be a horribly stupid thing to do, but the guys who tried to do that last winter still haven't been officially fired, so I still have some fear of it happening.

Ok...This is legit...But this isn't what i am personally talking about.

But i can understand this concern.

[olehippi]

OK....so we blow it up. We trade our $94 million team....Bedard, Tejada, Roberts, et al....for $24 million worth of young, promising, ML and almost ML ready kids. Then, let's say after 2-3 years, it becomes obvious that most of these guys aren't making anyone believe they are ML players. The only person who wins in this scenerio is Peter Angelos. He keeps $70 million in his pocket, and still makes out like a bandit collecting TV revenues, and the money wasted by O's fans who continue to support his team.

So, what happens when blowing it up fails?

(1) Do we blow it up again and start over?

(2) Or do we select that small core of guys who are solid players, and start building a team around them. But wait!.....We can do this now, and definitely have a better chance of fielding a winning team in 2008, and beyond.

[srock]

So, what happens when blowing it up fails?

(1) Do we blow it up again and start over?

(2) Or do we select that small core of guys who are solid players, and start building a team around them. But wait!.....We can do this now, and definitely have a better chance of fielding a winning team in 2008, and beyond.

(1) Yes

(2) If you only have a small core of guys who are solid players, then revert to (1). If the core group is large enough and talented enough, then go for the build around. I don't think the core is large enough right now, especially considering the lack of depth behind the current position players in the majors.