Warehouse Excuses - Nothing Ever Changes!

[Mad Mark]

I've already stated on the board that I find sustained success boring. I'm not interested in that.

Wouldn't by any chance be a former Braves fan, would you?

Taken out of context, your quote makes no sense. But within the context that when winning becomes expected, anything less is a letdown, I can understand it...to a point

Personally, I don't think the Orioles are hurting for money.

Based on what? You have an inside source on financial side of the Warehouse?

I don't think signing Holliday hurts their chances of sustained success. What I have a problem with is how they spend their money. There is plenty of evidence over the past three years that suggest the Orioles are not interested in winning so much as winning at their price.

Is this also based on your extensive knowledge of the Orioles finances, or are you riding into battle under JTrea's "the Orioles are Cheap" banner? I believe the Orioles are interested in winning--within their budget--which is a lot different than being interested in winning "at their price", whatever that price may be.

I'd rather win a WS once every 8 years than make the playoffs for eight straight years and not win it at all. Furthermore, it'd be shocking to have a WS champion not make the playoffs in at least two other years.

I think you're smoking crack here. All you can really ask for--unless you're a Yankee$ fan--is to get to the playoffs; once you're there you're subject to the whims of the short series. I'd be happy to make the playoffs for eight straight years; happier still to make the WS eight straight. I'd be saddened and disappointed if the Orioles made eight straight WS and didn't win any...until I remember they made three straight (1969-70-71) and brought the trophy home only once.

[RShack]

This is a really good post. I've bolded an interesting section. I agree we're a mid-market team.

I think that's up in the air, depending on how things go. The BAL-WAS market is #4 in the nation. We're just at a place where the RSN hasn't grown into much yet, and where both cities have lousy teams. All of that could change. Don't know if it will, but it could. And, since any Gnats success will subsidize the O's via MASN, I hope all 3 parts of that do change for the better.

[Sports Guy]

I'm not trying to be difficult... I just don't understand the urgency to get a LT SS option, and now Tony agrees with you. I mean, certainly we do need one, but we have Izzy, all year. Not much of a hitter but you can't find much better defensively. And, to me, it's not at all out of the question to sign him for another year or even more.

I see it that AM has a whole year plus to find JUST the right option. Why rush it?

I agree...and that's terrible.

I do agree that he has more time to do it but getting the player in here now gives them a jump start and one less thing to worry about as the season goes on.

[scOtt]

I think that's up in the air, depending on how things go. The BAL-WAS market is #4 in the nation. We're just at a place where the RSN hasn't grown into much yet, and where both cities have lousy teams. All of that could change. Don't know if it will, but it could. And, since any Gnats success will subsidize the O's via MASN, I hope all 3 parts of that do change for the better.

But Baltimore alone is like #14 or so? We do have the unique distinction of having the only RSN with TWO ML teams, but we are still only Baltimore. Not Balto./Wash. I hope you see what I mean.

[scOtt]

I agree...and that's terrible.

I do agree that he has more time to do it but getting the player in here now gives them a jump start and one less thing to worry about as the season goes on.

So you see an earlier signing/deal as a luxury? Get him in now and developing? I can agree with that.

[RShack]

Over the past 30 years, how many teams have actually done this?

And I don't mean that sucked before...I just mean who has had a decade of sustained success at this level?

Atlanta, Boston and NY....Who else?

Those are the obvious ones. You could add the Dodgers of the late-70's to late-80's, but that's probably debatable. Same thing about the Cardinals of late. Go back a little farther, and the Orioles are the other obvious one, and the MFY's before them, but that doesn't fit within the 30-year window you mentioned.

It's a small number of franchises who are special. It's hard to do. That's the whole point.

[orayole]

There's a difference between spending money and wasting it. I think AM knows the difference.

This is sig worthy. I'm too lazy to do it though.

[Sports Guy]

Those are the obvious ones. You could add the Dodgers of the late-70's to late-80's, but that's probably debatable. Same thing about the Cardinals of late. Go back a little farther, and the Orioles are the other obvious one, and the MFY's before them, but that doesn't fit within the 30-year window you mentioned.

It's a small number of franchises who are special. It's hard to do. That's the whole point.

Exactly..that is the point.

The point is you keep asking people to name the teams that have done it...Teams barely do it without a bad start, yet your criteria asks for someone who has turned a franchise around and had sustained success...which is defined by you as a team that is playing meaningful games in September for 10 straight years.

Yes, you are probably right...No team has done that very quickly or at least, very few. So, enough of asking that question and setting that ridiculous criteria.

[El Gordo]

I agree...and that's terrible.

I do agree that he has more time to do it but getting the player in here now gives them a jump start and one less thing to worry about as the season goes on.

A long erm SS solution is coming from one of two sources. Trade, or draft/trade for prospect. To trade for an exhisting ML SS who could be a long term solution, like Escobar, we need to be sure of our SP enough to be able to move at least one. We aren't there yet IMO. To get the solution from a trade for a low level prospect, or drafting one, won't be urgent, because it takes time for them to develop into a ML SS. In this case we would have to continue with Izzy type stop gaps until they are ready. So your contention that SS is an urgent need to be filled now is wrong IMO.

[RShack]

But Baltimore alone is like #14 or so? We do have the unique distinction of having the only RSN with TWO ML teams, but we are still only Baltimore. Not Balto./Wash. I hope you see what I mean.

I see what you mean, but I don't buy it. That's an arbitrary distinction that does not reflect reality.

The reality is that, when the O's are good, they get lots of fans from the DC area, both at the ballpark and watching on TV.

The area they pull from is the 4th biggest market in the nation. It's just a fact...

[mweb]

Good for you...Who said that you did say this?

There is a general overall feeling on this board that AM should wait...That's absurd.

You get the talent when you can get it.

There is a general feeling that AM should wait unless someone who really makes sense is available. Many don't feel Lackey and Holliday make enough sense at the cost it would take to overlook the timing. Same with trading for AGon.

I don't think you would do what it would take to get any of those 3 guys either, so I'm not sure who you're referring to in your complaints regarding people and perhaps AM looking more beyond this off-season.

Concerning your last line, talent can be gotten in any off-season. There is nothing special about this one where there should be an urgency to get premium talent.

[RShack]

Exactly..that is the point.

The point is you keep asking people to name the teams that have done it...Teams barely do it without a bad start, yet your criteria asks for someone who has turned a franchise around and had sustained success...which is defined by you as a team that is playing meaningful games in September for 10 straight years.

Yes, you are probably right...No team has done that very quickly or at least, very few. So, enough of asking that question and setting that ridiculous criteria.

Look, if you don't want or expect the O's to be good for a sustained period, that's up to you. But I do. And because I do, it's only sensible to look at what we can learn from other examples of achieving that. In the cases where a crappy franchise got turned around to be a consistently good franchise, it took longer than I think AM is on a pace for. Now, I agree that we won't know for sure until we see how good the O's become and for how long, but it's dumb to say this isn't an issue that matters. Just because you have an unrealistic time frame, with no examples to support it, that doesn't mean the issue doesn't matter. To the contrary, for anybody who wants to see the O's be good all the time again, it is exactly the issue that matters...

[mweb]

I'm not trying to be difficult... I just don't understand the urgency to get a LT SS option, and now Tony agrees with you. I mean, certainly we do need one, but we have Izzy, all year. Not much of a hitter but you can't find much better defensively. And, to me, it's not at all out of the question to sign him for another year or even more.

I see it that AM has a whole year plus to find JUST the right option. Why rush it?

There is no urgency. Between now and next winter, AM should find an upgrade at SS, so that is enough time to keep him from being desperate. Plus, who even knows who's available and for how much? Without knowing that or how much effort he's putting into finding a SS, or his long-term plan for SS, it's hard to be overly critical imo. There's no reason to assume he's not looking into it.

[RShack]

I'm not trying to be difficult... I just don't understand the urgency to get a LT SS option, and now Tony agrees with you. I mean, certainly we do need one, but we have Izzy, all year. Not much of a hitter but you can't find much better defensively. And, to me, it's not at all out of the question to sign him for another year or even more.

I see it that AM has a whole year plus to find JUST the right option. Why rush it?

Plus, he's got more than a year if that's what it takes. No reason why he can't re-up Izturis if he wants to.

It won't make the folks happy who think it's somehow crucial to have a bat at SS, but that doesn't matter...

[Wind Rider]

This is a really good post. I've bolded an interesting section. I agree we're a mid-market team. When was the last time the best or even one of the top 3 FA available in an offseason went to a mid-market team or lower? I'd call NYA, NYN, BOS, CHN, LAA, and LAN the clear big market teams. ATL is on the cusp of big market. SFG and CHA are on the cusp.

2008

TEAM--REVENUES--COST--EARNINGS

SFG------196-------174------22

ATL------186-------181-------5

ORIOLES--174------147------27

Then factor in what a great stadium and tax deal we have plus MASN ownership and we look a whole lot more like big market. If we had a winning team we've have a lot higher gate receipts and our revenues would be higher than theirs

The thing which really helps the Orioles is their costs are so low. This gives us higher earnings which will skyrocket this year.