Does AM and Ownership Have the Pulse of the Fans?

[MemorialStadKid]

Yeah, maybe if we all weren't afraid like you are and so super brave the Orioles would win every game!

People keep telling me that we can't afford to take one single chance on any high quality free agent because the time isn't right.

Fine, I said I understand the concept, but when will be the right time? How much longer will we have to tolerate this piecemeal approach to team building instead of adding players that add an impact to the team?

Tell me Manny Ramirez didn't make a difference to the Red Sox?

Or Tex to the Yanks?

Or Vlad to the Angels?

Or CC to the Yanks?

We don't get Lackey, okay, I am somewhat in agreement with that, but it doesn't seem like we're EVER in the hunt to get better because I know that there are better guys than Jay Payton out there or Eaton or Hendrickson, etc. that we could have signed.

Why are we complacent with signing horrible stopgaps that don't even live up to the barest minimum of what a MLB-level player should be? We don't seem to get stopgaps that perform anywhere close to an MLB-level.

How am I "wrong" for wanting this to change?

MSK

[Icterus galbula]

Why isn't it? It most likely would still mean last place so how in the hell would that not be every bit as bad?:scratchchinhmm:

I decided not to get into an argument about semantics with you. I've seen what you can do with that before. "Every bit as..." means something. If you don't mean it, don't type it.

Stepping back out of this thread...

[Old#5fan]

I decided not to get into an argument about semantics with you. I've seen what you can do with that before. "Every bit as..." means something. If you don't mean it, don't type it.

Stepping back out of this thread...

You weren't involved in the proposed bet anyway so why stick your nose in? I love people who do that yet would be too scared to bet me themselves!:laughlol:

[RShack]

People keep telling me that we can't afford to take one single chance on any high quality free agent because the time isn't right.

Fine, I said I understand the concept, but when will be the right time? How much longer will we have to tolerate this piecemeal approach to team building instead of adding players that add an impact to the team?

You already know the answer, I don't know why you're pretending otherwise. It's been repeated a zillion times: When our good young guys have had a chance to turn the O's into a decent team instead of a crappy team. Once that happens, the stage is set. This is not a difficult concept, it's actually quite a simple concept. I don't think you're stupid, and I don't know why you're playing dumb about it. By not being in a knee-jerk hurry (that's bogusly justified by referring to stuff that happened way before AM even got here), it not only means the time is right, but it also means that a FA who we'd actually want to get would consider coming here. Face it, nobody who's worth a damn wants to go to a last place team.

In the meantime, there is nothing about the current approach that is "piecemeal". That's a goofy descriptor. It's not like AM is just doing random stuff. I don't know why you're pretending that there is anything piecemeal about it.

Now, are you gonna pretend that you don't already know what I just said? I'm quite sure you already do know it but, for reasons unknown, you're intent on maintaining your bizarre-ideas ratio...

[Old#5fan]

You already know the answer, I don't know why you're pretending otherwise. It's been repeated a zillion times: When our good young guys have had a chance to turn the O's into a decent team instead of a crappy team. Once that happens, the stage is set. This is not a difficult concept, it's actually quite a simple concept. I don't think you're stupid, and I don't know why you're playing dumb about it. By not being in a knee-jerk hurry (that's bogusly justified by referring to stuff that happened way before AM even got here), it not only means the time is right, but it also means that a FA who we'd actually want to get would consider coming here. Face it, nobody who's worth a damn wants to go to a last place team.

In the meantime, there is nothing about the current approach that is "piecemeal". That's a goofy descriptor. It's not like AM is just doing random stuff. I don't know why you're pretending that there is anything piecemeal about it.

Now, are you gonna pretend that you don't already know what I just said? I'm quite sure you already do know it but, for reasons unknown, you're intent on maintaining your bizarre-ideas ratio...

The point is all the young guys aren't going to pan out. That is a given the even the most Pollyanist OHer would admit. Having some proven talent to supplement the development of the youngsters by a star veteran presence while giving them a confidence boost would only be helpful. Plus, it would improve the team by signing or aquiring at least one top name/talent guy per year. Waiting for the majority of these young players to develop may never happen. That is also a given.

[TiredofLosing20]

Fine, I said I understand the concept, but when will be the right time? How much longer will we have to tolerate this piecemeal approach to team building instead of adding players that add an impact to the team?

MSK

I said this in another thread but bears repeating (as Shack said) for the zillionth time. If we are having these same arguments this time next year you will find a lot more company on your side of the fence. Many of us believe that this year (more than any other year) will tell us a lot about what we already have and what we will need. In other words we will have a lot more information on how best to allocate our resources on external solutions. If we are not "aggressively" finding solutions to our weaknesses in the upcoming offseason than I for one will become very critical of the FO.

[Lucky Jim]

You weren't involved in the proposed bet anyway so why stick your nose in? I love people who do that yet would be too scared to bet me themselves!:laughlol:

To be clear, you're saying that you don't have the intestinal fortitude to back up w/ action the words you've put "on the record", i.e., that we're going to be every bit as bad if not worse?

Tell you what: no big changes, and make the bet six games better than last year.

If they're six games better, you'll leave the board for a year. If they're not, I will. Fair?

That's a 70 win season against an AL East that you've said is getting better and better while we stand idly by. So, clearly, if they win six more games against tougher competition, we're a better team.

[Old#5fan]

To be clear, you're saying that you don't have the intestinal fortitude to back up w/ action the words you've put "on the record", i.e., that we're going to be every bit as bad if not worse?

Tell you what: no big changes, and make the bet six games better than last year.

If they're six games better, you'll leave the board for a year. If they're not, I will. Fair?

That's a 70 win season against an AL East that you've said is getting better and better while we stand idly by. So, clearly, if they win six more games against tougher competition, we're a better team.

That is still a 92 loss team which is a horrible team by any standard IMO. Make it 89 losses which would be at least 73 wins which is 9 wins better than last year and change it to where the loser is off the board the entire off season (not a full year as I think that is too harsh win or lose) and I will take your bet. I am not stupid as I do realize Toronto is not getting better but with the loss of Haliday probably very much weaker. The Orioles should finish ahead of them. Where they won't gain any significant ground is against the Sox and MFing Yankees. That's a lock.

[Lucky Jim]

That is still a 92 loss team which is a horrible team by any standard IMO. Make it 89 losses which would be at least 73 wins which is 9 wins better than last year and change it to where the loser is off the board the entire off season (not a full year as I think that is too harsh win or lose) and I will take your bet.

Whatever. You're all talk.

To be clear, by your definition, eight games better than last year is "as bad or worse".

I'm glad to have exposed both you and MSK for what you are.

[Old#5fan]

Whatever. You're all talk.

To be clear, by your definition, eight games better than last year is "as bad or worse".

I'm glad to have exposed both you and MSK for what you are.

Yeah, when you are still that many games below 500 what the hell does it matter? You still are a horrible team.

[Lucky Jim]

Yeah, when you are still that many games below 500 what the hell does it matter? You still are a horrible team.

That's not what you said. Like I said, all talk.

[Old#5fan]

That's not what you said. Like I said, all talk.

All talk? Sounds like that is what you are if you think only losing 90 games next season is any kind of an "improvement." Can your standards get any lower? I recall when the Orioles were winners not the sorry losers they have become now and the whipping boys of the AL East division.

[Lucky Jim]

All talk? Sounds like that is what you are if you think only losing 90 games next season is any kind of an "improvement." Can your standards get any lower? I recall when the Orioles were winners not the sorry losers they have become now and the whipping boys of the AL East division.

You can do your clumsy rhetorical dance all you like. It doesn't change the fact that I've exposed you as an attention-seeker who's afraid to back up his definitive pronouncements with anything more than another goofy-ass jig.

[Old#5fan]

You can do your clumsy rhetorical dance all you like. It doesn't change the fact that I've exposed you as an attention-seeker who's afraid to back up his definitive pronouncements with anything more than another goofy-ass jig.

Is a 90 loss team not still a horrible baseball team? Yes or no? (Now we will see who is "dancing."):laughlol:

[TiredofLosing20]

This is quality entertainment...