Decision 2010: Win Now or Rendon Later?

[Malike]

How in the hell has winning the World Series become some pseudo-strategic rationale?? Isn't that the whole point of the organization??

I want the O's to win the World Series. If I think losing most of their games in the remainder of a lost season will get them closer to becoming a champion, then how does that make me a bad fan?

Let me lay out two different scenarios for you. Choose the one you would prefer:

2010: Orioles finish 62-100

2011-: Orioles have a 5% more likely probability of winning the World Series

2010: Orioles finish 70-92

2011-: Orioles have the same probability of winning the World Series

Obviously there are caveats and extraneous factors that ultimately influence how likely the team is to win a championship. However, if you believe that Rendon will have a Longoria-type impact, then it's entirely reasonable to sacrifice wins in the present for a greater long-term reward.

It's really no different from giving young players experience. We're hoping that Tillman, Arrieta, and others will provide greater returns in the future despite up-and-down results in the short-term. Do you agree with that philosophy or would you prefer the O's sign 4 vets to $10+ million deals to maximize short-term results?

What exactly is the "Evan Longoria - Type impact"? Evan Longoria, is a very good player. He is not the sole reason that Tampa became good. Hes a very good hitter. If we're following the criteria set in another thread earlier, he would not be considered among the "elite" because he's never posted a .900 OPS. He has a career fielding percentage of .957, and I'm too lazy at this hour to go looking up Fielding Bible stats.

Longoria is going to be a very good player, for a long time. Lets not pretend he's the type of player who can carry a franchise on his back, because he's not that type of player.

30 HR's and 110 RBI is great out of your third baseman, especially if he's not a liability defensively, but if we had Evan Longoria on this team all year, we'd still suck. I don't want the O's to lose a single game, because, unlike you I know that this team is a lot further away than a player who has an "Evan Longoria Type-impact".

[24fps]

How in the hell has winning the World Series become some pseudo-strategic rationale?? Isn't that the whole point of the organization??

I want the O's to win the World Series. If I think losing most of their games in the remainder of a lost season will get them closer to becoming a champion, then how does that make me a bad fan?

Let me lay out two different scenarios for you. Choose the one you would prefer:

2010: Orioles finish 62-100

2011-: Orioles have a 5% more likely probability of winning the World Series

2010: Orioles finish 70-92

2011-: Orioles have the same probability of winning the World Series

Obviously there are caveats and extraneous factors that ultimately influence how likely the team is to win a championship. However, if you believe that Rendon will have a Longoria-type impact, then it's entirely reasonable to sacrifice wins in the present for a greater long-term reward.

It's really no different from giving young players experience. We're hoping that Tillman, Arrieta, and others will provide greater returns in the future despite up-and-down results in the short-term. Do you agree with that philosophy or would you prefer the O's sign 4 vets to $10+ million deals to maximize short-term results?

First of all, forget your two different scenarios, they’re both equally irrelevant. And while we’re at it we can discard your 4 veteran $10 million straw men. Let’s examine your premise:

It's not so much rooting for your team to lose. It's rooting for your team to do what gets itself closer to winning a championship. If people think that losing and getting Rendon will get the O's closer to winning the World Series than winning a few more games and missing out on Rendon, then I don't see any flaw with that line of thinking.

This is the old “ends justifies the means” argument wearing a pretty dress and lipstick. History repeatedly shows us the “flaw with that line of thinking”.

Winning and losing is measured two ways during the course of a baseball season. For most fans, especially the lazy or shallow ones, the equation is purely a function of aggregate wins and losses most often contemplated in the abstract. It’s a place lacking nuance where only a World Series championship has value and everything else is modestly differentiated failure at best. It’s extraordinary how widespread this point-of-view has become and tragic in it’s lack of simple human perspective.

For others, I suspect including most players, it’s 162 discrete contests each with a tangible risk of personal and/or group failure. For the best players it’s personal every day and this is the point that shouldn’t get lost. This is what the hell I mean by “pseudo-strategic rationale”. For people who choose to indulge in contests of any type - and this includes baseball fans by extension IMO - the best ones are ashamed by losing and no amount of intellectualizing will take away the sting of each game lost.

Finally, don’t talk to me about “lost seasons” because this is the most pernicious notion of all. If standards are abolished, then anything is acceptable including losing if couched in the proper language. This is the “greater good” argument so beloved by politicians and other con men large and small.

Teddy Roosevelt has a famous quote which is just as relevant today as it was 100 years ago:

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."

Screw Rendon.

[Araqnid]

How in the hell has winning the World Series become some pseudo-strategic rationale?? Isn't that the whole point of the organization??

I want the O's to win the World Series. If I think losing most of their games in the remainder of a lost season will get them closer to becoming a champion, then how does that make me a bad fan?

Let me lay out two different scenarios for you. Choose the one you would prefer:

2010: Orioles finish 62-100

2011-: Orioles have a 5% more likely probability of winning the World Series

2010: Orioles finish 70-92

2011-: Orioles have the same probability of winning the World Series

Obviously there are caveats and extraneous factors that ultimately influence how likely the team is to win a championship. However, if you believe that Rendon will have a Longoria-type impact, then it's entirely reasonable to sacrifice wins in the present for a greater long-term reward.

It's really no different from giving young players experience. We're hoping that Tillman, Arrieta, and others will provide greater returns in the future despite up-and-down results in the short-term. Do you agree with that philosophy or would you prefer the O's sign 4 vets to $10+ million deals to maximize short-term results?

How about this, which team is most likely to go to the WS?

1) A superhero Rendon who can knock in 45 HR, 140 RBI, 1.000 OPS and rescue damsels in distress during the seventh inning stretch (which is pure speculation at this point). This team is complemented by ok pieces, but pieces that ultimately added up to the worst record in baseball to land Rendon and a few veterans here and there.

2) Decent contributions from many, if not most, of our young players showing that in the future, this group of players can be a very good team. That team still lands one of the very good pitchers in this draft.

If we draft Rendon, we don't know what he'll do. He'll likely be very good, admittedly, but he won't be enough to carry a franchise. Having the three cavalry perform well, 2-3 terrific BP arms, a great CF and RF and a star catcher are likely to at least create a good team, which with careful, targeted, FA acquisitions can be a great team.

Getting Rendon means that the plan failed. I'd rather miss out because this team was better than worst.

[VTmook213]

How about this, which team is most likely to go to the WS?

1) A superhero Rendon who can knock in 45 HR, 140 RBI, 1.000 OPS and rescue damsels in distress during the seventh inning stretch (which is pure speculation at this point). This team is complemented by ok pieces, but pieces that ultimately added up to the worst record in baseball to land Rendon and a few veterans here and there.

2) Decent contributions from many, if not most, of our young players showing that in the future, this group of players can be a very good team. That team still lands one of the very good pitchers in this draft.

If we draft Rendon, we don't know what he'll do. He'll likely be very good, admittedly, but he won't be enough to carry a franchise. Having the three cavalry perform well, 2-3 terrific BP arms, a great CF and RF and a star catcher are likely to at least create a good team, which with careful, targeted, FA acquisitions can be a great team.

Getting Rendon means that the plan failed. I'd rather miss out because this team was better than worst.

I don't understand why everyone thinks this is an either-or situation.

The choices are not:

1) We have Rendon and everyone else sucks, or

2) We don't have Rendon and everyone else is good

It IS possible for the young players to continue to play well and improve over the second half of the season while the Orioles still end up with the #1 pick. This is not an either-or situation.

[Araqnid]

I don't understand why everyone thinks this is an either-or situation.

The choices are not:

1) We have Rendon and everyone else sucks, or

2) We don't have Rendon and everyone else is good

It IS possible for the young players to continue to play well and improve over the second half of the season while the Orioles still end up with the #1 pick. This is not an either-or situation.

A) Pittsburgh is only 1 game ahead of us, so theoretically if we improve at all, we lose the #1 pick. We also have 3 more teams within 5 games. There is definitely a shot that if we improve by only a little bit we could play ourselves out of the top 3 picks.

B) The question is Win Now OR Rendon Later. This assumes that one choice is to win now and sacrifice the supposed #1 pick. The other choice would be to lose now and get that pick. This is 100% an either-or. If it wasn't there would be a 3rd choice.