A question for the MacPhail doubters

[Lucky Jim]

"That's crazy" and "Makes no sense" - did SG steal your account? Very unFrobby-like.

If AM thought this was an 85 win team, he would be spending the $ and dealing the prospects to get us to 95 wins. It's clear AM does not believe this is an 85 win team. We'll see whether AM is correct or not in this judgement.

Again, do we really think FOs look at their team as black-and-white "85 win" or "83 win" teams?

I think MacPhail absolutely thinks this team could win 85 games this year with a realistic probability (say 20%). But that 20% probability doesn't mandate spending money to compete this year, when the amount needed will shrink over time, and the information added this year will add to the efficiency of the decision-making.

Anyone who thinks that mortgaging the future (in cash or prospects) for a 85 win team is basically asking the O's to hire Bill Bavasi as GM. Kudos.

[hoosiers]

Again, do we really think FOs look at their team as black-and-white "85 win" or "83 win" teams?

I think MacPhail absolutely thinks this team could win 85 games this year with a realistic probability (say 20%). But that 20% probability doesn't mandate spending money to compete this year, when the amount needed will shrink over time, and the information added this year will add to the efficiency of the decision-making.

Anyone who thinks that mortgaging the future (in cash or prospects) for a 85 win team is basically asking the O's to hire Bill Bavasi as GM. Kudos.

Who here has advocated mortgaging the future?

When the NYY acquire Javy Vasquez for Austin Jackson - is that mortgaging one's future? Certainly not in $ as it's a one year investment. In prospects, not really - one prospect who profiles as an average MLer when Vazquez is likely to provide draft picks when he leaves after this year.

When we acquired Millwood, did we mortgage our future?

[Lucky Jim]

Who here has advocated mortgaging the future?

When the NYY acquire Javy Vasquez for Austin Jackson - is that mortgaging one's future? Certainly not in $ as it's a one year investment. In prospects, not really - one prospect who profiles as an average MLer when Vazquez is likely to provide draft picks when he leaves after this year.

When we acquired Millwood, did we mortgage our future?

Sorry - that was probably unclear unless taken in the context of my earlier quote. I'm talking about trading long-term value for short-term gain and trying to bump an (85)(20%) team up to something like a 93-95 win team.

You've read enough of my posts to know that my point is always (consistently) about timing acquisitions so that you're either leverage toward a playoff run or building to that point.

For the Yanks, the future is now, of course.

[Arthur_Bryant]

"That's crazy" and "Makes no sense" - did SG steal your account? Very unFrobby-like.

If AM thought this was an 85 win team, he would be spending the $ and dealing the prospects to get us to 95 wins. It's clear AM does not believe this is an 85 win team. We'll see whether AM is correct or not in this judgement.

The flaw in this argument is that some of the prospects are potentially part of those 85 wins. That's unless you're counting only players who definitely will not be on the roster in 2010 (Britton, Joseph, etc.), and I don't think those alone will bring back the kind of talent you're talking about. Any major trade will involve players who are ML-ready or very near, and then you're altering the calculus of those 85 wins.

[Sports Guy]

Sorry - that was probably unclear unless taken in the context of my earlier quote. I'm talking about trading long-term value for short-term gain and trying to bump an (85)(20%) team up to something like a 93-95 win team.

You've read enough of my posts to know that my point is always (consistently) about timing acquisitions so that you're either leverage toward a playoff run or building to that point.

For the Yanks, the future is now, of course.

If the Orioles can obtain a player, that is in a position of need, for a package of young players(a package that makes sense for us), do you think they should do it?

[Lucky Jim]

If the Orioles can obtain a player, that is in a position of need, for a package of young players(a package that makes sense for us), do you think they should do it?

It really depends on the package and the position. I've been with you all along about shortstops, remember.

[Sports Guy]

It really depends on the package and the position. I've been with you all along about shortstops, remember.

Well, it would be a SS, first baseman or good young starter.

What i am basically asking you is this...

Do you think the Orioles should wait to make a big deal or do you think they should look to improve the team, for the long term, right now?

[Hooded Viper]

If the Orioles can obtain a player, that is in a position of need, for a package of young players(a package that makes sense for us), do you think they should do it?

I think this is a resounding yes. I also thing AM would do it as well which leads me to believe no such deal exists. As of yet anyway. I really don't think AM is sitting in his office not thinking of how to get better players on this team. It is his job afterall. If such a deal is out there then I have confidence that he will make it.

[HotTubMan]

Considering we are in a rebuilding phase that was supposedly to last five years, if the O's do win 83-85 games this year then MacPhail has done one heck of a job and second guessing does no one any good.

I personally don't think we win that many this year but do expect to see progress in all areas which is a must for Trembley. I do think he will be fired unless the O's have a more productive second half than the first.

Since it's time to be judged on wins, Trembley must put up a respectable win-loss percentage in the second half. Another swoon and he's gone..period.

MacPhail will have another season to be judged on the wins though....unless we do lose 100 this year... That could make a few more termites come out of the woodwork.

I think we see enough progress for step c of the rebuilding but not enough to keep Trembleys job......just my two cents.

Happy New year to all...

[Lucky Jim]

Well, it would be a SS, first baseman or good young starter.

What i am basically asking you is this...

Do you think the Orioles should wait to make a big deal or do you think they should look to improve the team, for the long term, right now?

There are very few 1B prospects out there that I'd trade for. And I think certain deals should be waited on - for instance FA deals. Young players who are pre- or arb-eligible are a different issue.

We should always be looking to improve the team long-term. I don't see that many options for that. And those options probably aren't going away, are they?

[Sports Guy]

There are very few 1B prospects out there that I'd trade for. And I think certain deals should be waited on - for instance FA deals. Young players who are pre- or arb-eligible are a different issue.

We should always be looking to improve the team long-term. I don't see that many options for that. And those options probably aren't going away, are they?

Who knows...Maybe a guy develops even better and becomes untouchable?

Maybe a package we could get a certain player for right now, we won't be able to get him for in 6 months because some of those players have been hurt or faltered.

[Lucky Jim]

Who knows...Maybe a guy develops even better and becomes untouchable?

Maybe a package we could get a certain player for right now, we won't be able to get him for in 6 months because some of those players have been hurt or faltered.

Sure. But you're ignoring that that fluidity exists on both sides. Just as many folks are likely to progress as prospects as regress. Top-10 lists always have 10 players.

[Sports Guy]

Sure. But you're ignoring that that fluidity exists on both sides. Just as many folks are likely to progress as prospects as regress. Top-10 lists always have 10 players.

Absolutely..Oppurtunities will always exist...But why do they have to wait for it?

If an oppurtunity is put in front of them today and it makes sense for the team, why shouldn't they do it?

[Lucky Jim]

Absolutely..Oppurtunities will always exist...But why do they have to wait for it?

If an oppurtunity is put in front of them today and it makes sense for the team, why shouldn't they do it?

I'm not sure what you're getting at SG. And I don't mean that in a snarky way. Are we saying that the Orioles are passing up deals that could offer long-term answers? Or are you simply responding to my earlier posts?

Because those posts did not address prospect-prospect deals or prospect-pre-FA deals. If we make one of those, then I'll be fine with that. Dealing pitchers is dicey, of course. And I'd rather do it later than sooner, because the comfort with which we can do it is vastly different if Matusz, Bergesen and Tillman establish themselves this year than if we try to do it before they have.

[alexei606]

Who here has advocated mortgaging the future?

When the NYY acquire Javy Vasquez for Austin Jackson - is that mortgaging one's future? Certainly not in $ as it's a one year investment. In prospects, not really - one prospect who profiles as an average MLer when Vazquez is likely to provide draft picks when he leaves after this year.

When we acquired Millwood, did we mortgage our future?

Actually, NYY sent Jackson, Phil Coke and Ian Kennedy in the 3-way with Detroit and Arizona and got back Granderson. The big "loss" for the NYY was the raw, but high ceiling 19 yr.old pitcher Arodys Viscaino (M. Cabrera was not the centerpiece and Atlanta confirmed that) for Vasquez. But, I do agree with your premise, that Jackson plus Coke (RP) and Kennedy (back end SP) are and a 19 yr pitcher, plus an avg at best OF is mortgaging the future.