Blame MacPhail

[Singleton]

So the question is why haven't we?

Why are we relying on Brandon Snyder and/or Josh Bell?

And it may be too late to trade Tillman at his peak value because we waited.

I like criticizing a GM for not making a trade that we don't even know was possible.

[mweb]

It's not possible to win without premium talent.

As I've stated, they don't necessarily have to be paid like $20 million per season/$100 million+ contract players, but they have to produce like one would.

Right now the Orioles do not have that type of positional player, yet. And they won't be winning anything until they do.

As I pointed out to you the other day, the 2008 O's had 3 such players according to your definition. They easily beat TB's top 3 players in WAR that year who you pointed out as an example of premium players that don't cost 100 million. Yet they still weren't any good as a team.

Nick was the top guy out of that group, so yes, the O's do have a player that can be a premium player, at least some years. Others have the talent to do that as well.

[mweb]

And that would satisfy you? If we were 4-8, AM would have had a good offseason?

Yeah, it would be great if we won 78 games instead of 74 or whatever it happens to be. Huge difference there!

[JTrea81]

Yeah, it would be great if we won 78 games instead of 74 or whatever it happens to be. Huge difference there!

Those 4 games could be huge in 2011 and 2012. That's the point. Were we to acquire a LT option, we'd have them for those years and beyond as well.

[catharpinO'sfan]

How do 4 wins from a 78 win season matter two years later? Please explain.

[JTrea81]

How do 4 wins from a 78 win season matter two years later? Please explain.

We'd win 4 extra games this year, and already have those 4 games for 2011 and 2012. Meaning we would have to add one less player in the offseason.

It's called ramping up the talent when you can.

Now there's no way barring a miracle that this team will compete in 2011, none.

[catharpinO'sfan]

"What you have just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul." I felt this was appropriate, IMO.

[mweb]

Those 4 games could be huge in 2011 and 2012. That's the point. Were we to acquire a LT option, we'd have them for those years and beyond as well.

A few games can also be huge in 2014 and 2015 when we're paying a guy way too much for his production and he prohibits the team from adding or mantaining wins elsewhere.

And if we have a decent shot at contending starting in 2011 or 2012, go after top players to help starting then. But I know you love Holliday, AGon, and Tex which is fine, but to act like those three are the only options in terms of building a winner is wrong.

[geschinger]

Those 4 games could be huge in 2011 and 2012. That's the point. Were we to acquire a LT option, we'd have them for those years and beyond as well.

It's those beyon that are the problem. Paying Holiday 20+m is probably not the worst thing in the world for the first year or two. It becomes a detriment to winning the 2nd half of that deal when you have 20+% of a team's payroll resources tied up in a mid 30s player unlikely to give you anywhere near $20m worth of production. Your approach would not be a bad one if MLB played by the NFL rules and we could cut Holiday when he stops producing anywhere near $20m a year worth of production. But unfortunately we cannot and that is why Holiday would be been a terrible risk for the Orioles to take.

[JTrea81]

A few games can also be huge in 2014 and 2015 when we're paying a guy way too much for his production and he prohibits the team from adding or mantaining wins elsewhere.

And if we have a decent shot at contending starting in 2011 or 2012, go after top players to help starting then. But I know you love Holliday, AGon, and Tex which is fine, but to act like those three are the only options in terms of building a winner is wrong.

The Orioles had plenty of payroll room for the next 4 years before certain players went to arbitration.

When they want to add players in two years, they will have even less payroll room much faster.

The time to add expensive talent was last offseason and this coming offseason. We blew one opportunity, we can't afford to blow another one.

We have to add 15 wins to this team in one offseason with what we already have, and that's if the offensive talent bounces back to what it is supposed to be at.

[mweb]

The Orioles had plenty of payroll room for the next 4 years before certain players went to arbitration.

When they want to add players in two years, they will have even less payroll room much faster.

The time to add expensive talent was last off-season and this coming off-season. We blew one opportunity, we can't afford to blow another one.

We have to add 15 wins to this team in one off-season with what we already have, and that's if the offensive talent bounces back to what it is supposed to be at.

Your financial analysis doesn't make much sense here. So because the payroll will naturally go up in years to come, it's imperative to add expensive guys in their prime who will still be around when the payroll gets higher, but won't still be in their prime?

So with that strategy, we'll have little to no payroll room during some of the years we are supposed to contend, yet they big contract guys we do have won't be likely to be having their best years with us.

I'd rather wait until the guys 1st and 2nd years are likely to have more of an impact towards contending and we have a better idea of what we need.

If we still need to add 15 wins to the team from outside of the franchise, then the young talent isn't developing as well as hoped for, and we won't be in good shape regardless of having a Holliday or AGon.

And if the raising salaries of the young guys becomes a problem in the future, than that problem would be significantly greater if guys like Holliday and Lackey were included on the payroll.

[RShack]

BTW with Pie's injury, and Reimold's gimpyness, Matt Holliday looks a lot better now doesn't he?

No, he looks exactly the same...

[JTrea81]

Your financial analysis doesn't make much sense here. So because the payroll will naturally go up in years to come, it's imperative to add expensive guys in their prime who will still be around when the payroll gets higher, but won't still be in their prime?

So with that strategy, we'll have little to no payroll room during some of the years we are supposed to contend, yet they big contract guys we do have won't be likely to be having their best years with us.

I'd rather wait until the guys 1st and 2nd years are likely to have more of an impact towards contending and we have a better idea of what we need.

If we still need to add 15 wins to the team from outside of the franchise, then the young talent isn't developing as well as hoped for, and we won't be in good shape regardless of having a Holliday or AGon.

And if the raising salaries of the young guys becomes a problem in the future, than that problem would be significantly greater if guys like Holliday and Lackey were included on the payroll.

We'd better be contending in the next 4 years otherwise signing Markakis was for nothing.

And you try to frontload the contracts in those 4 years for the LT FA deals you do sign.

[mweb]

We'd better be contending in the next 4 years otherwise signing Markakis was for nothing.

And you try to frontload the contracts in those 4 years for the LT FA deals you do sign.

I didn't say anything about not contending in the next 4 years. But if the young players flop as a group, yeah, we likely won't contend during his contract. The chances of contending wouldn't be good at all with Holliday and/or AGon either, but at least they would have a higher chance of one day being on a contending O's team just due to being signed for longer. So that's one way to make a negative a positive.

Frontloading doesn't make sense financially and the O's aren't likely at all to do that.

[geschinger]

We'd better be contending in the next 4 years otherwise signing Markakis was for nothing.

And you try to frontload the contracts in those 4 years for the LT FA deals you do sign.

I don't think there is any scenario one could come up with where frontloading a contract makes sense for a team unless the total compensation is significantly less.