What adjustments do you think AM will make to contend in this division?

[El Gordo]

Enough of that new age #$%^. Just because you're too lazy to carry a grudge doesn't mean the rest of us are.

I wasn't aware I was a member of a tag team, but if Theobird agrees with me, it's much more likely to be old age than new age. I wont speak for Shack :laughlol:

[Guest rochester]

Hand raised...

May I ask what may be construed as a silly question?

I understand, and agree with in a majority of instances, AMs not wanting to "buy" the pitching. I do not agree with it if we are an 80-85 win team and Roy Halladay is available.

I understand the buying the bats thing but can not get over the hump of understanding why we would wait to do so "when we are ready to contend?" Isn't that telling everyone that we are not serious yet? Y'now, step over this line....STEP over THIS line...Oh sure, that sounds good in theory, but what happens if our young guys (Pitchers mainly) do not pan out??

For example, take Tex (please)... IF, all things being equal ($$$) and IF we even had a chance to get him here why in the heck would you wait? just because we were a couple of years off??

IMO, that thinking will make you always a "couple of years off."

If Matusz, Tillman, Bergy, etc. continue to grow and you add a "Halladay-type" TOR would we be that far behind rotation-wise in the AL East. Would a "Tex" or "Vlad in his prime" make the offense that much better, including those around him to contend in the AL East?

We do not have the "inventory" to make a real difference-making trade IMO. Of sure, I hear from those that are a bit down on Arrieta and other, younger guys that are "out of sight - out of mind" to most on here, or even AJ because he slumped in the second half and got hurt....

IMO we just do NOT have the extra talent necessary to make a huge acquisition right now. What? Luke Scott, Guts, even Pie? They are just not going to get it done...Guts for Hardy may make sense and could be an excellent move but...it ain't gonna get us closer - it becomes an excellent move with a real TOR on board. We have to get a TOR that can also help with the kids...

[Moose Milligan]

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88374

Still don't think he'll do much this offseason. Prepare to be disappointed, everyone.

[mweb]

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88374

Still don't think he'll do much this offseason. Prepare to be disappointed, everyone.

If he does nothing I will be disappointed, but I won't be disappointed if he doesn't go out and get premium players.

[Moose Milligan]

If he does nothing I will be disappointed, but I won't be disappointed if he doesn't go out and get premium players.

I got your freakin premium right here...

[RShack]

Why bring up what his dad did?

What not what Shuerholz did?

For the exact same reason people bring up what Earl Weaver did. People don't bring up what Casey Stengel did, or what Whitey Herzog did, because they had nothing to do with the Orioles being good all the time. And having the Orioles be good all the time is what matters. Now, I realize that you think baseball people should be treated like inanimate property, and be bought and sold like bean futures, but most fans don't look at baseball like that, thank God. Most people look at baseball as being about people, not just numbers and dollars, and most fans of a given team have as their point of reference the people who are associated with the success of their team. The fact that you don't appreciate that is your loss, not mine, and you're certainly not gonna interfere with me having reference points that are rooted in Oriole greatness.

When somebody seems confused about what AM's job is, and starts talking as if his job here is the same as the Twins job or the Cubs job, one way to clarify what they're missing is to simply point out the ways that his job here is not like the Twins job or the Cubs job. Those jobs were different than his Orioles job. The obvious reference point for clarifying what his Orioles job requires is to point out that it's to do what his father did here, just updated for modern times. Which is exactly what I said. There are zero good reasons why anybody who knows what they're talking about would disagree with that. Apparently, the fact that it might also turn out to be a great story bugs you and Soprano. I can't imagine why it would. Perhaps you don't like good stories and prefer to be cynical instead, but I don't really know. What I do know is that we've finally got somebody rebuilding the Oriole Way in ways both large and small, in ways that are clear and tangible, and in ways that are atmospheric and intangible. Which is exactly what the franchise needs and has been missing for the last quarter-century.

The fact that the guy doing it happens to be the kid of the guy who presided over the invention of the Oriole Way just makes it a better story. Whether that connection is an accident or not is one of those unknowable things. Personally, I think this is the job that AM's previous life experience prepared him for, beginning when he was a kid growing up in Baltimore, a kid who named his dog Brooks, and who grew up listening to both his dad and granddad talking about running major league ballclubs, who was there when his Dad came home from work every day and overheard him telling his Mom about how his day went, when he was busy creating the tradition of the Baltimore Orioles being good all the time. I believe AM when he says he told his fellow GM's that coming back here to do that same job was his dream job. I think getting to actually do your dream job is both rare and important. I think we're lucky to have a GM who sees running the Oriole as his dream job, and who spent the last 20 years practicing up, getting ready to do it. But you certainly don't have to believe any of that. If you wanna think that has no bearing on anything, go right ahead. Like I said, it's your loss, not mine.

[RShack]

I understand, and agree with in a majority of instances, AMs not wanting to "buy" the pitching. I do not agree with it if we are an 80-85 win team and Roy Halladay is available.

There's an exception to most rules.

Let's talk about it when we're an 85-win team with 3 or 4 very good homegrown SP's and some freak like Halladay is available...

I understand the buying the bats thing but can not get over the hump of understanding why we would wait to do so "when we are ready to contend?" Isn't that telling everyone that we are not serious yet?

It's not saying we're not serious. It is saying we're not ready yet. That's not BS, it is being dead serious.

As for the timing of it... you bake the cake first before you put the icing on it... you get the wagon built before you harness the horse to it... you get the troops in position before you launch the attack... you round third base before you head for home... and you don't find any sport that invites metaphors more than baseball does ;-)

I figure the truth is that, while he knows he's gonna need plenty of offense, he doesn't know exactly where he needs to add it yet.

[TonySoprano]

Personally, I think this is the job that AM's previous life experience prepared him for, beginning when he was a kid growing up in Baltimore, a kid who named his dog Brooks, and who grew up listening to both his dad and granddad talking about running major league ballclubs, who was there when his Dad came home from work every day and overheard him telling his Mom about how his day went, when he was busy creating the tradition of the Baltimore Orioles being good all the time.

It's the *twenty-two* year part of his "life experience" in Minnesota and Chicago, that you say doesn't apply here. Lee's old war stories count more. Yeah, that's logical.

[RShack]

It's the *twenty-two* year part of his "life experience" in Minnesota and Chicago, that you say doesn't apply here.

That's not what I said. Can't you read? I said the Twins and Cubs were where he was practicing up for this job. In neither place did he have the situation he has here. Yet in MIN, he got 2 rings, and in CHI he got the Cubs closer to the WS than anybody has in the last 60+ years. Leave it to you to call that a reason for pessimism. But whatever. Once we see how it turns out, we'll see who's right: You with your failure scenario, or me with the dream job scenario. Only one way to find out.

Lee's old war stories count more. Yeah, that's logical.

What on earth are you talking about?

[TonySoprano]

That's not what I said. Can't you read? I said the Twins and Cubs were where he was practicing up for this job. In neither place did he have the situation he has here. Yet in MIN, he got 2 rings, and in CHI he got the Cubs closer to the WS than anybody has in the last 60+ years. Leave it to you to call that a reason for pessimism. But whatever. Once we see how it turns out, we'll see who's right: You with your failure scenario, or me with the dream job scenario. Only one way to find out.

Those "practice" jobs were different, but you don't say how. I say they were easier than the rebuilding job he has now. What say you? Don't dance around and tell me they were different again.

Were they more or less of a challenge than the one he has facing him now?

In both of those "practice" jobs, his teams failed more times than they succeeded. That's his record.

But here in Baltimore, he's extra-specially motivated, gazing at old pictures of him and his dog named Brooks. He won't quit until he succeeds here, or so the story goes. That is, unless the commish job opens up first.

When I say that Andy may get us to the playoffs, but sustained success is doubtful, that's equated to a "failure scenario." But when Andy got the Cubs closer to the series, even if they lost more overall than they won, in your book, that's not a failure scenario but something positive.

[Fan4Life]

IMO, that thinking will make you always a "couple of years off."

If Matusz, Tillman, Bergy, etc. continue to grow and you add a "Halladay-type" TOR would we be that far behind rotation-wise in the AL East. Would a "Tex" or "Vlad in his prime" make the offense that much better, including those around him to contend in the AL East?

This is my feeling as well. I've pretty much embraced it around here though as most knowledgeable posters here do not view us as an organization that can afford adding a $20M pitcher as well as 1-2 more $15M additions at pitching or offensive upgrades. So, we're stuck with what we have until we reach 80-85 wins which may be 1-2 years away or 10-12.

[RShack]

Those "practice" jobs were different, but you don't say how. I say they were easier than the rebuilding job he has now. What say you? Don't dance around and tell me they were different again.

Were they more or less of a challenge than the one he has facing him now?

Oh, of course his job here is harder. So what? Everybody agrees with that. I think winning consistently in the AL East is the hardest GM job there is. Unlike SG, I think being a successful GM with any MLB team is a hard job, and going up against BOS and the MFY's is the hardest of all. So what? Look, if you wanna whine about how hard and unfair it is, and say it can't be done, that's your problem, not mine. It says a whole lot more about your outlook than it does about the quality of the job that the Orioles will do in the end.

Who's better prepared to do the BAL GM job, both personally and professionally? A guy who's won before and who sees the job as his dream job, or somebody mythical Other Guy? Is there somebody you'd rather see have the job than him? If so, who? Who do you want to have the job instead of AM? If that's not the issue, if you think we have the best guy for the job, then what's your point? You think people should moan and groan about how hard the job is? You think people should predict failure? Well, you can do that if you want to. Personally, I'm not interested in a doomsday attitude that masquerades as "being realistic". That's what pessimists always say, "I'm just being realistic." But it's empty BS to say that the Twins and the Cubs tell us whether the Orioles will be successful.

• In MIN, he found himself with the job tossed in his lap by accident at a time when he was ill-prepared to do it. He got two rings anyway. Those were the first rings for that franchise in over 60 years, since they were the Senators who had Walter Johnson. That franchise got created in 1901, and here we are 108 years later. In that whole time, the franchise has a grand total of 3 rings, and AM has 2 of them. Leave it to Soprano to call that failure.

  .

• In CHI, he wasn't working for a human owner who cared about civic success, he was working for a big media corporation and had the job that all corporate executives have: look after corporate profits. Plus, it was, well, the Cubs, who haven't won in over 100 years. AM got them to within 5 outs of a WS, and it took a *Cubs fan* doing a reverse-Jeffrey Maier to keep them out of the WS on AM's watch. But somehow that's AM's fault? The fact is that he got them closer to a WS than anybody has since WWII when all the real ballplayers were in the service. If you look at real seasons with real ballplayers, AM got them closer to a WS than anybody has since 1938. Leave it to Soprano to look at the Cubs' best postseason outcome in over 70 years and call it a track record of failure.

In neither case was he in the situation he's in now, with an owner who wants his legacy saved, with a job description to make the team succeed in the best division in baseball. Unlike the other two places, there is zero chance that he's being told to make money in a weak division. We know he had the eke-by situation in MIN, and we know he had a profit-first corporate job in CHI.

Why on earth would you think that a competent professional doesn't learn from professional experience? You think he could have pulled off the Bedard trade when he was a 30-something rookie GM? Why on earth would you think the environment and job context doesn't matter? You are happy to point out how his Dad accomplished infinitely more in BAL than he did in NYC. You think he suddenly got stupid when he moved there? You think succeeding with the Orioles' resources was somehow easier succeeding with the MFY's? Or maybe, just maybe, the fact that his MFY-bosses were a mega-corporation (CBS) that really didn't care about baseball had something to do with it? How can you take a record from one city where the franchise was owned by a profit-driven mega-corporation and transplant the results to another city where the team is owned by a local person who has a demonstrated interest in civic issues? Face it, you can't, but you keep trying to do it anyway.

But here in Baltimore, he's extra-specially motivated, gazing at old pictures of him and his dog named Brooks. He won't quit until he succeeds here, or so the story goes. That is, unless the commish job opens up first.

Nice. To characterize his personal ties to the job as "gazing at old pictures of him and his dog named Brooks" just proves that you're not serious and don't have a point. And claiming that his agenda is to bide time here until he bails for the Commissioner job just proves the same thing again. I don't know why you have an agenda against the guy, but you sure seem to. You seem pretty sure he can't turn the franchise into being consistently good. In contrast to you, I think he can. I think he gives us the best shot we've had in a very long time. For me, the only "can't" that's involved in it is that I can't wait to see what happens, and the only "won't" that's involved is that I won't say the Baltimore Orioles are doomed to failure. Like most people, I can see they're on the right track. Why anybody would wanna conclude it probably won't work is beyond me.

You act like somebody said his job here is easy, but nobody ever said that. Going head to head with BOS and the MFY's is probably the hardest GM job there is. So what? Unlike you, I'm not interested in constantly whining that there is no guarantee of success. Evidently you enjoy adopting a "Bah Humbug" attitude, and you certainly can do that if you want to. But I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in watching the Orioles get back to being good all the time again. I've been waiting for the Orioles to get back to that, ever since the Oriole Way got destroyed after Hoffberger sold the team. The fact that it's hard to succeed in the AL East is what it is. You think it means things are gonna suck and AM will fail. I think it's just gonna make it feel better to watch both BOS and the MFY's go home while the Orioles are still playing in the Fall. Along the way, I expect we'll have to listen to you constantly moaning that we're the underdog and that we shouldn't give the team or AM too much credit. Your problem is that you don't seem to know the difference between being a loser and fighting an uphill battle. If you don't believe in winning uphill battles, then there's no point in being an Orioles fan. The Orioles have won uphill battles before, they did it for 30+ years. Of all the teams in baseball, the Orioles own history proves it can be done. They've done it before. There's no good reason to conclude that they can't do it again, and that's true no matter how eager you are to look on the dark side.

[hoosiers]

I'm going to stop you right there. Having a plan, and executing it to success are two different things. I believe the youth movement plan is the way to go. However, there is nothing is Andy's past record to indicate that he is able to build sustainable, as in long-term success.

He had six losing seasons out of ten in Minnesota; eight losing seasons out of twelve in Chicago. In twenty-two seasons, the longest winning streak he had is two years. Compare that to the records of Epstein and Cashman, with all the resources at their disposal. In terms of payroll, Andy's Cubs were the Red Sox of the NL Central, averaging the second highest payroll in their division during his twelve seasons (highest in '99, '02, and '04)

Andy may get us to a winning season, and may even get us to the playoffs one year. I have real doubts that he'll be able to build long-term, sustainable success, particularly in this division.

If Tillman and Matusz go the way of Prior and Wood, AM isn't going to win much here either.

AM seems like a pretty straight up guy. I'm sure he has learned from his ChiCubs and Minn experience to operate at a higher level with the Os. AM knows where the bar is to make the playoffs and I'm sure he expects his re-building efforts to clear that bar.

[TonySoprano]

Shack, it's really simple. You like looking at the highlight reel. Yes, Andy had three remarkable years.... out of *twenty-four*. BTW, the 1984 Cubs also were very close to reaching the Series, and my history books tell me that was long after WWII, but we've had that discussion before. Three remarkable years, and eight winning seasons...out of *twenty-four*.

I look at the big picture, not the highlight reel, the overall record, the one that has Andy presiding over a losing team, two out of every three years for nearly a quarter of a century. Leave it to Shack to think that's someone who has been an overall success. Leave it to Shack to think that a guy who failed 2/3 of the time, in so-called "practice" jobs which we both agree weren't as hard as this one, has what it takes to turn straw into gold here. Leave it to Shack to dream that a guy whose teams have never had a winning record more than two years in a row, can do just that in Baltimore, and sustain it.

Why on earth don't you recognize that a guy twenty-four years on the job develops certain habits, certain tendencies, and becomes a little set in their ways?

I said, "I have real doubts that he'll be able to build long-term, sustainable success, particularly in this division." Yeah, it's just me, right Shack?

Not to be too pessimistic, but this may take a long time, or may never happen. With the Yankees and Sox in our division, I don't expect this team to win 90+ games consistently, and I think it will be tough to be perennially over .500. More likely, we can hope to win 90+ in the years when most things go right, be over .500 in an "average" year, and to be not too far below .500 when a number of things go wrong. If we were able to make the playoffs 2 times in the next 5 years, and only be below .500 once, I'd consider that to be a very good job by Andy. That probably wouldn't equate to 59 games over .500 over the next 5 years.

IMO, Frobby pretty well described the Orioles' goal. When you're staring a $200M revenue imbalance in the face you're doing great if an average year is 85 wins. The way the AL East has been set up no team outside of Boston and NY is going to consistently win 90+ games. The Jays, O's and Rays are in a situation where only their peaks (in performance + luck) are going to be in the "probably makes the playoffs" range.

Funny, I think of myself as one of the more optimistic posters on the board, but I don't see the O's averaging 95 wins over any appreciable length of time. So long as NY and Boston remain strong -- and I don't see why they wouldn't -- there just isn't room for three teams to all average 95+ wins playing in the same division. More realistically (yet still optimistically), by beating Boston and NY more often than we have in recent years, we can drag them down to the 92-94 win level, and hopefully have the occasional year where we are able to squeak by one of them.

Let's never forget that as good as Boston has been, they've won one division title in the last 14 years. It is ridiculously hard to compete with the Yankees with their unfettered spending.

How many teams are above .500 every year? In the NL, the Phillies have been over .500 for 7 years in a row, the Dodgers 4 years in a row, the Cubs 3 years in a row. That's it, in the entire NL, for teams over .500 each of the last 3 years.

In the AL, you have the Yankees 17 years in a row, the Red Sox 12 years in a row, the Angels 6 years in a row. That's it for AL teams who have had a winning record more than 2 years in a row. In fact, only the Twins and Tampa have had even 2 winning years in a row.

Now you factor in that we play in the same division as the two teams with by far the longest winning streaks, and you see just how hard it would be to be a perrenial winner in our division.

Had Pete Angelos let Pat Gillick run his job the way some say he lets Andy do his, we had a better chance for success. I'll take Pat's record over Andy's any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[MikeAD]

I would like to think AM changes and offers the big deals when they are right, but I don't think he will. I also question how this team is going to change when this young core hits free agency. When that happens, our payroll is going to have to go up quick or we are going to have to find new players. Now, if AM does things the way he likes to, this probably won't be a problem. Build players, trade them when you need to and keep a flow of players coming in.

It's going to take a lot to compete in this division (obviously) but I do have faith that AM's plan will be more successful at competing than any other thats been brought up/considered.