Seems like MacPhail "gets it"

[Sports Guy]

The first time around with Beattie and Flanagan didn't we hear about wanting to work on development in the minors, going younger, and building up the young pitching?

Well, the minors did get better and they did build up the pitching(to their credit)...They just didn't do enough of this and they did practically nothing else.

Maybe it's more legit with MacPhail running things as opposed to two guys who were most likely over their head, but after so many years I'll expect more medicore signings of guys who do nothing for us instead of trades like you've proposed to LA, Arizona, and the Mets that would actually help build a real nucleus here in Baltimore.

Well, i think this is the correct way to think....How can we realistically think any different as fans?

[rolliefingers]

As others have said, this is nice to hear. But let's see some results. Bedard, Tejada and Roberts are by far our most valuable commodities. So let's get some young talent for them and focus on 2010, when Erbe, Rowell, Spoone and the rest might be ready.

Here's where we're pretty much set for the future:

C Wieters

1B

2B

SS

3B Moore...fine starting 3B if we have a lot more offensive weapons elsewhere

LF

CF

RF Markakis

DH Reimold, maybe

Guthrie

Loewen

Penn

Liz

etc.

Aside from Markakis, there's not a complete sure thing on that roster. There's him, and then a ton of talented guys who need time to develop.

Bedard for Kershaw, Kemp/Loney and Hu.

Roberts, Walker, Bradford and cash for Milledge and Humber.

Tejada for Callaspo and Quentin.

C Wieters

1B Loney

2B Callaspo

SS Hu

3B Moore

LF Quentin

CF Milledge

RF Markakis

DH Reimold

Guthrie

Kershaw

Humber

Loewen

Penn

Liz

etc.

As I said in a previous thread, I'd buy season tickets to watch that team.

[bej6789]

Reading that article makes me feel better about a lot of things, lets hope he continues and follows through with his thoughts. It's one thing to say "we're not close to a playoff team" and then it's another thing to change that.

That being said, I think the right thing to do here is blow it up from top to bottom. The idea of building this team up from the farm system is the right thought. Here's what I'd do:

1. Offer Bedard a competitive deal in the range of a Roy Oswalt type deal (I believe that was around 83 million). If he declines, trade him. The Orioles aren't going to be good within the next two years, so the hope that we get to be a competitive team and entice him to sign with us is a joke. We're not getting that much better within the next two years. If he doesn't want to sign with us this offseason, he won't next offseason, for sure. Trade him to the NL to like the Mets or Dodgers for 3-4 great prospects and really load up the farm system.

2. Trade Tejada. There is no "move to 3rd" option for him, he's a marketing chip for a team that isn't going anywhere while he's still going to be productive. Give his spot to Luis Hernandez or Scott Moore (at 3B). Get the 2 "high ceiling" prospects that a rival exec. said we could get for him, stick em in AA or AAA with the guys we get in a Bedard deal and let them grow up together. Get them used to the roles they'll be playing if they hopefully reach the majors so there is no adjustment process to a new position.

3. Keep Brob. I know I know I know he's also another one of our most marketable pieces. But there's NOTHING beyond him in the system (that may apply to Bedard and Tejada, as well), but Brian Roberts strikes me as the player who could stick around for the long haul if he see's some nice improvements, rather than being 1 foot out the door already like Bedard. He plays the game the right way, he's a great leadoff hitter and he's irreplaceable. I'd keep him, unless I get at least 3 top notch prospects.

4. Gutting the front office, except for Joe Jordan. Flanny has to go, plain and simple. He's been around the losing culture for quite awhile, so it's time to see that nice little window close.

5. The coaching staff needs to be re-tooled. BJ Surhoff is a must. Same with a guy like Mike Bordick. Players who played the right way and did it for awhile. It's time to start getting some life injected into this ballclub.

6. Continuing the development of a relationship with Scott Boras. Good players go through him, and if it means negotiating a 2 year deal with Corey Patterson, then so be it. It's a necessary evil that needs to be dealt with. Wieters was the start of something great, lets keep it going.

[Sports Guy]

As others have said, this is nice to hear. But let's see some results. Bedard, Tejada and Roberts are by far our most valuable commodities. So let's get some young talent for them and focus on 2010, when Erbe, Rowell, Spoone and the rest might be ready.

Here's where we're pretty much set for the future:

C Wieters

1B

2B

SS

3B Moore...fine starting 3B if we have a lot more offensive weapons elsewhere

LF

CF

RF Markakis

DH Reimold, maybe

Guthrie

Loewen

Penn

Liz

etc.

Aside from Markakis, there's not a complete sure thing on that roster. There's him, and then a ton of talented guys who need time to develop.

Bedard for Kershaw, Kemp/Loney and Hu.

Roberts, Walker, Bradford and cash for Milledge and Humber.

Tejada for Callaspo and Quentin.

C Wieters

1B Loney

2B Callaspo

SS Hu

3B Moore

LF Quentin

CF Milledge

RF Markakis

DH Reimold

Guthrie

Kershaw

Humber

Loewen

Penn

Liz

etc.

As I said in a previous thread, I'd buy season tickets to watch that team.

You could probably get Milledge and Humber for BRob by himself.

[BaltBird 24]

Well, i think this is the correct way to think....How can we realistically think any different as fans?

Which is why I'll take all of what anyone with the Orioles says as suspect until they can actually prove that they will follow through with it.

Nothing would make me happier than to wake up one morning and see that the O's have decided to cut ties with Mora, Tejada, Roberts, and the rest of the crew that have failed to help bring a winning season in their tenures as Orioles.

[wildcard]

McPhail and Trembley say it is all about pitching. They can evaluation all the want. I still say they are not going to come up with a better future then Bedard, Guthrie and Loewen.

I see them adding a veteran starter and I will not be surprised one bit if it is Trachsel. He had 18 starts this year where he went 5 innings or more and gave up 3 runs for less. The was in 29 starts. I don't see them finding anyone that will do better.

Then for the fifth spot it will be a spring training shoot out between Burres, Penn and Olson.

This team's progress is all about getting Loewen, Penn and Olson to pitch to their potential. The O's have waited on these guys to be ready for the majors for years. Their time has come. I would think that the rotation by the end of 2008 will be Bedard, Guthrie, Loewen, Olson and Penn. That is a future.

I would wait another year on trading Bedard if he does not sign this off season. Trading a #1 pitcher is not something that the team should do lightly. He is too hard to replace. I think that will be the conclusion of the organizational meetings.

If the young rotation really does come together by the end of 2008 then Bedard will sign because he will see a future in Baltimore.

[Sports Guy]

McPhail and Trembley say it is all about pitching. They can evaluation all the want. I still say they are not going to come up with a better future then Bedard, Guthrie and Loewen.

I see them adding a veteran starter and I will not be surprised one bit if it is Trachsel. He had 18 starts this year where he went 5 innings or more and gave up 3 runs for less. The was in 29 starts. I don't see them finding anyone that will do better.

Then for the fifth spot it will be a spring training shoot out between Burres, Penn and Olson.

This team's progress is all about getting Loewen, Penn and Olson to pitch to their potential. The O's have waited on these guys to be ready for the majors for years. Their time has come. I would think that the rotation by the end of 2008 will be Bedard, Guthrie, Loewen, Olson and Penn. That is a future.

I would wait another year on trading Bedard if he does not sign this off season. Trading a #1 pitcher is not something that the team should do lightly. He is too hard to replace. I think that will be the conclusion of the organizational meetings.

If the young rotation really does come together by the end of 2008 then Bedard will sign because he will see a future in Baltimore.

This is a joke right?

Every year we say our future rests on Loewen, Olson, DCab, etc.....

We need other guys to rest our future on...We need more talent.

Only way to get that talent is to make several trades.

[rolliefingers]

You could probably get Milledge and Humber for BRob by himself.

There's a wide range of possible values for BRob. I don't think he's worth Milledge and Humber alone, but hey, couldn't hurt to try. He's certainly a very valuable player, and he'd fit in perfectly on that team.

Looking at that new lineup, it does seem like a pipe dream, but it really isn't that far off. Maybe sub Kershaw and Loney with Elbert and LaRoche - who knows.

Bedard, Roberts and Tejada are certainly going to be the foundation of our team going forward...except, in the form of the players we get back for them.

This is the time to do it. All three are at or near the peak of their value - or, in Tejada's case, as high as he'll be again.

[rolliefingers]

This is a joke right?

Wildcard doesn't joke.

[Sports Guy]

There's a wide range of possible values for BRob. I don't think he's worth Milledge and Humber alone, but hey, couldn't hurt to try. He's certainly a very valuable player, and he'd fit in perfectly on that team.

You overrate Humber IMO.

Looking at that new lineup, it does seem like a pipe dream, but it really isn't that far off. Maybe sub Kershaw and Loney with Elbert and LaRoche - who knows.

If Kershaw isn't in the deal, i don't trade Bedard to the Dodgers...Elbert had surgery to repair his labrum.

I actually think i may prefer LaRoche to Loney to be honest with you.

[RShack]

sports guy...i like you..but you are insane!

If we just dealt our best pitcher and arguably our best veteran player along with a guy who hit nearly 20 Home Runs with nearly 80 RBI's after missing a month of the season..do you really believe that even with some quality prospects...we can be that much better someday..do you really???

I can see moving Tejada, Cabrera and trying to get out from under some contracts(Gibbons and maybe Mora) but the liklihood of us making all of the moves above sounds desperate..and panic button stuff. No way we make all those moves...unless Macphail is a complete idiot. I GUARENTEE WE WONT MOVE BEDARD..AND ROBERTS..I GUARENTEE IT..

Sports guy....ask your doctor and see what Paxil can do or you!

Roy, I haven't read the rest of this thread, but my guess is that you just triggered 2 things:

1. A response of "you just don't get it".

2. A bunch of follow-up posts about specific trade ideas.

This is what always happens when you question the premise.

Here's how I think this works:

• Take a 100 point scale, where 0 = "doing nothing", and 100 = "cleaning house and trading everydamnbody".
• SG thinks 100 is the One True Path. I think this is because he views this as a commodities problem, one in which being attached to anybody is a flaw, and one in which all short-term concerns are red herrings that must be bravely ignored. "Sell that commodity while it's high" is all that matters. He does not see baseball as anything beyond that.
• Nobody but nobody favors 0. But if you don't take the 100 position, some folks assume you do. No middle ground is permitted. Moderation is labeled as stupid half-measures that are equivalent to 0. So, even if you would place yourself at 60 or 75 or 80, you are treated as if you are advocating 0. It doesn't matter what you say, it's all or nothing, so if you don't say 100, then you're accused of supporting 0. (It's very similar to our modern politics ;-)
• Personally, I think there are good things about being attached to what you have, if you show good sense and are selective about it. I also think there are practical reasons which dictate that you cannot and should not do everything at once. But this is always met with a response of "you don't get it".
• I think that SG has some good insights, but I think there are things that he doesn't get either, such as the value of stable attachments and the need for steady, gradual improvement. But, since he doesn't even see these things, he truly believes that I am somehow blind. He doesn't get that I'm seeing some real things too, things that he fails to see. His only explanation for disagreement is that the other person fails to see things with his laser-like clarity, and therefore just don't get it.

I think it comes down to some folks not being able to recognize their blind spots. We all have blind spots. It's just that SG thinks that any disagreement with him is proof that everybody else has a blind spot. He doesn't believe that he might have some too. So, if you see something he doesn't, it's a case of you failing to see properly. In the meantime, he gets a lot of support. I think part of this is because he's selling answers that are both easy and decisive. And easy-yet-decisive answers always have some audience (which is another way in which this is similar to our modern politics).

[Sports Guy]

Roy, I haven't read the rest of this thread, but my guess is that you just triggered 2 things:

1. A response of "you just don't get it".

2. A bunch of follow-up posts about specific trade ideas.

This is what always happens when you question the premise.

Here's how I think this works:

• Take a 100 point scale, where 0 = "doing nothing", and 100 = "cleaning house and trading everydamnbody".
• SG thinks 100 is the One True Path. I think this is because he views this as a commodities problem, one in which being attached to anybody is a flaw, and one in which all short-term concerns are red herrings that must be bravely ignored. "Sell that commodity while it's high" is all that matters. He does not see baseball as anything beyond that.
• Nobody but nobody favors 0. But if you don't take the 100 position, some folks assume you do. No middle ground is permitted. Moderation is labeled as stupid half-measures that are equivalent to 0. So, even if you would place yourself at 60 or 75 or 80, you are treated as if you are advocating 0. It doesn't matter what you say, it's all or nothing, so if you don't say 100, then you're accused of supporting 0. (It's very similar to our modern politics ;-)
• Personally, I think there are good things about being attached to what you have, if you show good sense and are selective about it. I also think there are practical reasons which dictate that you cannot and should not do everything at once. But this is always met with a response of "you don't get it".
• I think that SG has some good insights, but I think there are things that he doesn't get either, such as the value of stable attachments and the need for steady, gradual improvement. But, since he doesn't even see these things, he truly believes that I am somehow blind. He doesn't get that I'm seeing some real things too, things that he fails to see. His only explanation for disagreement is that the other person fails to see things with his laser-like clarity, and therefore just don't get it.

I think it comes down to some folks not being able to recognize their blind spots. We all have blind spots. It's just that SG thinks that any disagreement with him is proof that everybody else has a blind spot. He doesn't believe that he might have some too. So, if you see something he doesn't, it's a case of you failing to see properly. In the meantime, he gets a lot of support. I think part of this is because he's selling answers that are both easy and decisive. And easy-yet-decisive answers always have some audience (which is another way in which this is similar to our modern politics).

Who would have guessed it?

Rshack makes a post that has nothing to do with baseball!

This was such a better place when you were gone.

[wildcard]

This is a joke right?

Every year we say our future rests on Loewen, Olson, DCab, etc.....

We need other guys to rest our future on...We need more talent.

Only way to get that talent is to make several trades.

If McPhail means what he says, that it is all about pitching then his evaluation at the organizational meetings is likely to say keep Bedard. The O's are not going to get better pitching then that.

Yes, they need to trade. Miggy and DCab are the most likely candidates. Hernandez appeared to quit in August and Sept. Trembley knows if he quit or was hurt. I do not. If he quit I would not be surprised to see him go.

There will be a lot of talk around moving Huff, Payton, Gibbons, Millar and Mora. If they can, they probably will. I just don't know if they can and get anything useful in return.

[Sports Guy]

If McPhail means what he says, that it is all about pitching then his evaluation at the organizational meetings is likely to say keep Bedard. The O's are not going to get better pitching then that.

Yes, they need to trade. Miggy and DCab are the most likely candidates. Hernandez appeared to quit in August and Sept. Trembley knows if he quit or was hurt. I do not. If he quit I would not be surprised to see him go.

There will be a lot of talk around moving Huff, Payton, Gibbons, Millar and Mora. If they can, they probably will. I just don't know if they can and get anything useful in return.

Again, if you get rid of these guys all you are going to do is sign more mediocre vets to replace them because that is all we will be able to do to replace them.

[mweb]

I'm not as extreme as SG on this, but I mostly agree with him. We don't need to trade Brob and Bedard, but I support trading them, and if we can't extend Bedard, we really need to trade him. We need to focus on getting more young talent.

The only way I'd be ok with not rebuilding is if we can put together a legit contender next year, which would be very difficult to accomplish.