Jump to content

Worse case scenario for a failed "blow up"?


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

Your link showed the worse records in baseball history...I assume you think this is worse case scenario,...If its not, than the link is meaningless, which was my poitn to begin with.

And if that is your point, that that is worse case scenario, who the hell cares? What is the difference between winning 60 games or 70 games? It means NOTHING!

Now, do you actually have a point???

Yes.

Its obvious you can't grasp it, like many other things.

Please move on and stop embarrassing yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm floored. This team has done seemingly everything wrong for a decade, but nobody seems to be willing acknowledge the likelihood that they would screw up a "blow-up" too.

You see, this works both ways though. I don't think we can take into account front office stupidity when debating the merits of "blowing it up." If we do or do not blow it up we still have the same front office making the decisions.

If we are going to assume they are going to make bad decisions, it really doesn't matter what they do, we'll never win. That's why we are saying they have to take a different approach completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm floored. This team has done seemingly everything wrong for a decade, but nobody seems to be willing acknowledge the likelihood that they would screw up a "blow-up" too.

Its not just strategy, but execution as well.

Of course it is, but if the FO continues to execute as poorly as they have it doesn't matter what strategy is employed to try and improve. When discussing what is the best option going forward I think it's implied that we'd expect the MacPhail regime to execute better than the previous regimes. If we don't think the FO will execute better then what is the point of discussing any strategy for fixing the team's ills? Without better execution any strategy the team employs will be doomed to fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, half of this roster could easily be replaced. I am talking about guys like Bell and Bako as well.

I am not sure many would debate this.

Then you have the main guys left.

I gotta think most here would love to trade Mora just to get rid of the contract.

I believe most people would want to trade Tejada.

I also think a majority are open to trading DCab in the right deal.

Really, to me it boils down to 2 players where the difference really lies..BRob and Bedard.

To me, BRob has to be traded....I go back and forth on Bedard.

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but trading both your middle infielders in the same offseason is foolhardy at best, and a recipe for disaster at worst. And it's also not a move that is going to endear Bedard to his infield (not that it's been playing great lately, but generally speaking this is a good infield) Unless the trades provide for replacements as SS and 2B, then I'd trade one at a time... Tejada or Roberts, fine with me, but not both until the spots can be reliably filled. I don't think the O's are there yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? Where did I saw they'd super blow for just one or two years.

I'm floored. This team has done seemingly everything wrong for a decade, but nobody seems to be willing acknowledge the likelihood that they would screw up a "blow-up" too.

Its not just strategy, but execution as well.

---------------------------

Your Tigers comment is inane.

If you're going to assume they'd screw up any strategy up to and including a blow-up, what are we debating? Seems to me there's no way out given those ground rules, besides blowing up the ownership and management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but trading both your middle infielders in the same offseason is foolhardy at best, and a recipe for disaster at worst. And it's also not a move that is going to endear Bedard to his infield (not that it's been playing great lately, but generally speaking this is a good infield) Unless the trades provide for replacements as SS and 2B, then I'd trade one at a time... Tejada or Roberts, fine with me, but not both until the spots can be reliably filled. I don't think the O's are there yet.

More disastrous than, say, signing a bunch of crappy mid-tier free agents and declaring the team on the path to contention?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have another whole year to try to turn it around before you make that decision.

Seriously? We are a BAD team. We have been a bad team for a decade now. It is shocking to me that people think we can play better and "turn it around" with whom we've got along with adding a player or two. This is the same idiotic view our front office has had the last decade. In my opinion, there is no downside to executing a proper rebuild. I don't care about winning 82 games next year (an unlikely scenario anyhow); I want to legitimately compete most seasons and the way our roster is currently constructed, that is a virtual impossibility. I admire your unflailing optimism but I'm afraid it isn't grounded in reality given our pathetically assembled roster which consists of many aging players who are declining and in some cases weren't even that good to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More disastrous than, say, signing a bunch of crappy mid-tier free agents and declaring the team on the path to contention?

If you can slap 23 singles and 5 doubles, with 3 walks every 103 plate appearances, the Orioles would say - look at us our LF is hitting .280!

I fear this is how we'll end up with Tike in CF and Jay in LF in 2008. (uh-oh, I'm gonna vomit now).:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to assume they'd screw up any strategy up to and including a blow-up, what are we debating? Seems to me there's no way out given those ground rules, besides blowing up the ownership and management.

And if we assume they can formulate and execute a well thought out and prudent strategy, why does it only have to be Blow-It-Up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see, this works both ways though. I don't think we can take into account front office stupidity when debating the merits of "blowing it up." If we do or do not blow it up we still have the same front office making the decisions.

If we are going to assume they are going to make bad decisions, it really doesn't matter what they do, we'll never win. That's why we are saying they have to take a different approach completely.

SG asked what the downside to a full blow up might be.

Yes, its really nice to think about the FO trading everybody for super good minor league talent, the Os going through some tremendous growing pains and then being baller.

My point is that its much harder than one might initially think to successfully implement this, and there is a great downside to it, and I'm not convinced they could execute it properly.

I have no clue why you think I wouldn't want the Orioles to go a different way than they have. I'll repost it again: this team needs to get younger and better. But "blowing it up" is not the only way to get younger.

My point is that "blowing it up" is the most extreme option they have, and its not clear that it is better than other less extreme and less risky options. The options facing this team are slightly more nuanced that 1) try to compete next year or 2) blow it up.

Moreover, the implicit premise that getting better and getting younger are inconsistent is wrong. Its hard to do both, but not impossible.

I want them to make smart decisions. Dumping everybody over 25 or some such none-sense isn't clearly the smart way to go. Nor is trying to win the A.L. East next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but trading both your middle infielders in the same offseason is foolhardy at best, and a recipe for disaster at worst. And it's also not a move that is going to endear Bedard to his infield (not that it's been playing great lately, but generally speaking this is a good infield) Unless the trades provide for replacements as SS and 2B, then I'd trade one at a time... Tejada or Roberts, fine with me, but not both until the spots can be reliably filled. I don't think the O's are there yet.

Recipe for disaster is a good way to describe what the organization has been for 10 years.

What good is it to keep one and not the other? So you can buy a jersey with someone's name on that you have heard? So you can see a star on the field?

If you don't think we can realistically contend the next 2 years and if you don't want to give BRob a 4-5 year deal after 2009, then there is simply no reason to keep him now.

Hell, you may want to give him the deal but who is to say he even wants to sign it?

If we continue to suck the next 2 years, BRob isn't signing here, i can guarantee you that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SG asked what the downside to a full blow up might be.

Yes, its really nice to think about the FO trading everybody for super good minor league talent, the Os going through some tremendous growing pains and then being baller.

My point is that its much harder than one might initially think to successfully implement this, and there is a great downside to it, and I'm not convinced they could execute it properly.

I have no clue why you think I wouldn't want the Orioles to go a different way than they have. I'll repost it again: this team needs to get younger and better. But "blowing it up" is not the only way to get younger.

My point is that "blowing it up" is the most extreme option they have, and its not clear that it is better than other less extreme and less risky options. The options facing this team are slightly more nuanced that 1) try to compete next year or 2) blow it up.

Moreover, the implicit premise that getting better and getting younger are inconsistent is wrong. Its hard to do both, but not impossible.

I want them to make smart decisions. Dumping everybody over 25 or some such none-sense isn't clearly the smart way to go. Nor is trying to win the A.L. East next year.

It is the only way to get younger quicker...Sure, you can get younger over the next 2-4 years without blowing it up but then you are delaying the process...You know, like we have for 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Most quality major league starter's hold their velocity throughout their starts. They may cruise for a bit, but have it when they want it. Typically command goes long before velocity.
    • Do we not want to throw a left hander and take advantage of the spacious left field?
    • Thank goodness a minor league system is not judged on wins and losses, because they are putting many Ws up of late. Delmarva is pretty much an embarrassment right now from the hitting side. The first real wave of international position prospects have been left wanting after the first month or so of the season. The Shorebirds are scoring a league low 2.29 runs per game and slashing a league worse .182/.259/.263/.523. The Tides pitching outside of Povich and McDermott to a lesser extent has been pretty bad minus a few decent relieves in Vespi, Krook and Charles.  Elias/Sig's thought on being able to identify pitching talent through pitch shapes and spin rates through the draft after the 10th round has been a pretty big failure. Armbruster was the flag ship pitcher and he's been a flop this year so far, though I had already seen major red flags from him last year. Not surprisingly these guys struggle at the high levels and why they were available that late. Glad to see Elias made a change in his draft philosophy last year and went after some younger, higher ceiling guys like Forret vs 21-year old juniors in those later rounds.   
    • Akin currently has a FIP of 1.11. He’s struck out 15 and walked 3 in 10 innings without yielding a homer.  I consider that well.
    • There are several advantages to a head first slide.    With a head first slide, the mass of your body (torso) is lunging forward, not pulling backward - you get to the bag quicker. When you tuck a leg to slide, your foot tends to raise up and not hit the front of the bag, whereas, with your hand you can hit the front of the bag and maintain contact with it. You can adjust the direction of your slide going head first and even switch which arm you extend to touch the bag (swim move) to avoid a tag.  Both can have their place.  I was taught to slide with the right leg tucked going into second base.  That way, your face/chest/crotch are not exposed to the throw from the catcher if the fielder misses the throw, and you're facing the outfield and can find the ball easier if there is an errant throw so you can decide quicker if you can take another base. 
    • Briefly, here is the method I use with a DirecTV DVR for all sorts of timing in football analysis: 1. From a recording on your DVR, hit pause at some point shortly before the ball is released by the pitcher 2. While still on pause, use the FF button to advance the video 1 "frame" at a time.  On 1080i, the screen is redrawn 30 times per second, so each click is 1/30th of a second.  On 720p or 1080p, it's 60 frames per second.  So timing should be accurate to either 1/30th (0.033) or 1/60th (0.017) of a second 3. Advance the video to the point of contact--It is easy to go forward, but difficult to go backward, so you need to advance slowly to fin the closest point 4. From that point, count the number of FF clicks until Gunnar hits 3rd base, you should actually be able to see the image move with each click, so it's easier to count these than you might think 5. Divide clicks counted by 30 to get seconds for the event.  For example, if you get 322 clicks, it's 10 and 22/30 seconds (10.73 sec).  This assumes the MASN broadcast is in 1080i. I've been using this method for more than 15 years and you can confirm calibration with an NFL game where the clock is on the screen.  Since you don't have that in baseball, you just have to know whether it's 30 or 60 clicks per second and you'll know that by whether it's an 11 or 22-second triple.
    • Wait, Drungo isn't allowed to make jokes? I thought that post was hilarious given the context. I think better of him for it, though I've always thought highly of him.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...