Adding some patience

[DrungoHazewood]

Last year you couldn't, at least in the AL East.

Every AL playoff team scored 780 runs or more.

You only need to go back two years to find an AL East playoff team that was league-average in runs scored, but 2nd in the AL in runs allowed.

In '06 the Jays won 87 games with an average offense and the 5th-best run prevention in the league.

In the AL East you have to have a good offense to go along with your pitching and defense.

If you define "good" as "average".

And it's a lot harder to only allow 600 runs than it is to score 780. There were only two teams to allow 600 runs or less and they were both in the NL West in pitcher's parks - SD and SF.

A much more reasonable goal is to bring the runs against to 700 and boost the offense to that 780 mark.

You do realize that getting to 780 runs doesn't require the O's to sign any premium sluggers, right? They scored 782 runs with middling free agent Aubrey Huff as their best offensive player. They scored 768 runs in 2006 with no one over a .900 OPS, and only Tejada over .825. They scored just shy of 800 runs in 2000 with no 25-homer hitters on the team, and their two highest OPS players traded at the deadline.

And OPACY is certainly not condusive to run prevention so we'd likely need to alter the park or move completely as well.

You know better than this. It's all about context. A good run prevention team might allow 575 runs in PETCO, or 750 in Colorado. The strategy is valid no matter what shape the numbers take.

[El Gordo]

Number one, run prevention is still a problem, at least based on full season results. But we have reason to think that our run prevention will be substantially better in 2011 than in 2010, based on how the team performed the last two months.

I think by that same logic, the gap we need to close on offense may not be as bad as it seems by looking at full-season numbers. The O's scored at a 665-run pace after Buck arrived, compared to the 585-run pace they were on before. Considering that the league as a whole was down about 60 runs/team from 2009, that still means that the team's run-scoring pace under Buck, relative to the league, was down about 16 runs compared to the team's pace relative to the league in 2009 (when it was already below average) -- about 56 runs below average for 2010 (under Buck) compared to 40 runs below average in 2009. To me, that's a pretty realistic assessment of where the team was by the end of the year offensively, with BRob back in the lineup, etc.

It is not unheard of for a team to contend with an offense that is a little below average (see the 2008 Rays as an example), but I do not think we can count on that. So, in my mind we do need to find, say, 50 runs of offensive improvement from outside sources and then hope that internal development boosts us from average to above average.

If you upgrade 1B, SS, 3B, and LF, to league average OPS, you can get those 50 runs.

[JTrea81]

You only need to go back two years to find an AL East playoff team that was league-average in runs scored, but 2nd in the AL in runs allowed.

In '06 the Jays won 87 games with an average offense and the 5th-best run prevention in the league.

But they still missed the playoffs right? The Blue Jays in 2008 were #1 in runs allowed in baseball, but they had no offense and only scored 714 runs. Even though they only allowed 610, they still missed the playoffs because they didn't have enough offense.

You do realize that getting to 780 runs doesn't require the O's to sign any premium sluggers, right? They scored 782 runs with middling free agent Aubrey Huff as their best offensive player. They scored 768 runs in 2006 with no one over a .900 OPS, and only Tejada over .825. They scored just shy of 800 runs in 2000 with no 25-homer hitters on the team, and their two highest OPS players traded at the deadline.

Offense is down all over the league so it's not as easy to get to 780 as it once was. But it is still easier to get there than to reduce our runs allowed to below 700. Considering we were at 613, we are going to need a 170 run boost and that isn't going to come from all internal improvement. This team is going to have to acquire some sluggers. They only have 4 positions + internal improvement to get 170 runs.

[Frobby]

But they still missed the playoffs right? The Blue Jays in 2008 were #1 in runs allowed in baseball, but they had no offense and only scored 714 runs. Even though they only allowed 610, they still missed the playoffs because they didn't have enough offense.

Offense is down all over the league so it's not as easy to get to 780 as it once was. But it is still easier to get there than to reduce our runs allowed to below 700. Considering we were at 613, we are going to need a 170 run boost and that isn't going to come from all internal improvement. This team is going to have to acquire some sluggers. They only have 4 positions + internal improvement to get 170 runs.

As I said earlier in the thread, I wouldn't take 613 as my baseline. I'd take the post-Buck 665 as my baseline. It's not like anyone did anything amazing on offense after Buck arrived -- we just had BRob healthy and loosened up a little. Find me 50 extra runs from outside (not as easy as it sounds, by the way) and I'll count on internal improvement for the other 50 or so.

[e16bball]

You know better than this. It's all about context. A good run prevention team might allow 575 runs in PETCO, or 750 in Colorado. The strategy is valid no matter what shape the numbers take.

Obviously, I agree that there's more than one way to skin the cat here, from a run differential standpoint. We don't need to be an 800 run offense to win 90+ games.

But I think JTrea's point here about needing a fairly vast offensive improvement shouldn't be discarded entirely. The Rays, thanks to excellent pitching and elite defense, gave up the fewest runs in the AL East (649) this season. Aside from the 2008 Blue Jays (610 runs), this is the lowest total in the division this decade, which indicates first that the game is different now, but also that 649 runs leading the division isn't simply a one-year aberration.

With that in mind, would you agree that there's some realistic baseline or minimum for runs allowed given the circumstances in which this team plays? By "circumstances," I mean the park, the expected level of opposing offenses in the division, and a payroll limited such that we're not going to be able to realistically afford to stockpile multiple proven aces. It seems to me that, realistically, it would take a minor miracle for the Orioles to allow any fewer than 630-640 runs given these circumstances.

And if you accept that there is some floor to Oriole run prevention, would you agree that, based on that floor, there is also realistically a related number of total runs that we must eclipse if we expect to contend? Even if we reduce runs allowed to 630 (a pipe dream, in my opinion), we'll still have to score at least 770 runs to compete. Which is some 100 runs more than the 665 run pace Frobby indicates we posted under Buck.

In other words (to sum up a story I've probably made unnecessarily long), would you agree that even though there are a multitude of ways to construct a contending team (and no talismanic answer such as "get a big bat" or "get an ace), the odds of the Orioles contending without adding at the very least 100 runs are pretty slim?

I don't mean this as support for the idea of signing Werth or trading for Fielder if a prohibitive price is attached. But I do think we're going to have make a very substantial jump in runs scored somehow before we're going to have any chance to contend.

[MrOrange82]

I think Jordan's strategy in the last two drafts makes 1 and 2 tough to assess. He targeted a number of yet-to-break-out JuCo and HSers, which means you need to wait a couple of years to see if the development you are expecting will come to pass. I think 1 and 2 could have been simplified somewhat for the near term by targeting a few more developed HSers and 4-yr collegians, but that's just personal preference. If you trust Jordan as an evaluator, and everyone I've spoken with says he's a good one, then I think you need to give Jordan the rope he needs. Hopefully he's getting the right people and development is capable of bringing them along.

I think 2012 is certainly a reasonable target date for competing. Had 2010 not been wasted, I think 2011 could have been a competing year. I believe that the pen needs very little tweaking and that there are enough young arms to plug in that little if anything should be spent there (except in a trade if you can take on an unwanted contract as a secondary addition -- like Grienke/Soria).

I think the rotation can be very good. I've had 2011 circled as Matusz's first front-end year since draft day and I think he can reach it. I also believe Bergesen is an adequate back-ender already with room to reach 3/4 production. Tillman or Arrieta should be capable of producing a 4/5 as of next year. Guthrie should be a 3 with 2 upside. Adding someone like Grienke in a trade or Darvish should he post is a nice option if it's there, and could help negate the need for a big bopper.

I was not a fan of the positional moves made by MacPhail last year and I'm struggling to think of one that helps them moving forward. Hopefully he can shore up 3B/1B/SS with smart moves. The magnitude of those moves is dependent on how much growth you believe you'll see in Wieters/Jones/Reimold/Bell next year, and whether or not there is regression from Pie/Roberts. The foundation is here for an offense capable of 4.5-5 runs a game if you make smart signings/trades at 3B/1B/SS. One of those as a good trade or savvy upside signing could make this a good offense. Add a big producer next off-season when you see what that last hole is. If you haven't seen growth from Wieters/Jones/Bell/Reimold and the young staff, you aren't competing anyway so you start to reload.

To directly answer your question, I am withholding judgment on MacPhail until this off-season is over. That was my decision back in the 2009 off-season and I think it's still reasonable. He isn't in a position to make BAL a playoff team next year, but the chess moves have to start coming out. Last winter was all checkers, and that doesn't fly in the AL East.

Very interesting...thanks!

[Arthur_Bryant]

I think Jordan's strategy in the last two drafts makes 1 and 2 tough to assess. He targeted a number of yet-to-break-out JuCo and HSers, which means you need to wait a couple of years to see if the development you are expecting will come to pass. I think 1 and 2 could have been simplified somewhat for the near term by targeting a few more developed HSers and 4-yr collegians, but that's just personal preference. If you trust Jordan as an evaluator, and everyone I've spoken with says he's a good one, then I think you need to give Jordan the rope he needs. Hopefully he's getting the right people and development is capable of bringing them along.

I think 2012 is certainly a reasonable target date for competing. Had 2010 not been wasted, I think 2011 could have been a competing year. I believe that the pen needs very little tweaking and that there are enough young arms to plug in that little if anything should be spent there (except in a trade if you can take on an unwanted contract as a secondary addition -- like Grienke/Soria).

I think the rotation can be very good. I've had 2011 circled as Matusz's first front-end year since draft day and I think he can reach it. I also believe Bergesen is an adequate back-ender already with room to reach 3/4 production. Tillman or Arrieta should be capable of producing a 4/5 as of next year. Guthrie should be a 3 with 2 upside. Adding someone like Grienke in a trade or Darvish should he post is a nice option if it's there, and could help negate the need for a big bopper.

I was not a fan of the positional moves made by MacPhail last year and I'm struggling to think of one that helps them moving forward. Hopefully he can shore up 3B/1B/SS with smart moves. The magnitude of those moves is dependent on how much growth you believe you'll see in Wieters/Jones/Reimold/Bell next year, and whether or not there is regression from Pie/Roberts. The foundation is here for an offense capable of 4.5-5 runs a game if you make smart signings/trades at 3B/1B/SS. One of those as a good trade or savvy upside signing could make this a good offense. Add a big producer next off-season when you see what that last hole is. If you haven't seen growth from Wieters/Jones/Bell/Reimold and the young staff, you aren't competing anyway so you start to reload.

To directly answer your question, I am withholding judgment on MacPhail until this off-season is over. That was my decision back in the 2009 off-season and I think it's still reasonable. He isn't in a position to make BAL a playoff team next year, but the chess moves have to start coming out. Last winter was all checkers, and that doesn't fly in the AL East.

Plus rep for a reasonable, balanced summation. Reasonable to me, anyway, because I agree with nearly all of it.

I don't preclude a breakthrough year from Tillman or Arrieta, though; if that happened, this could be a very good staff, and an offense averaging 4.5 to 5 RPG would make things interesting.

Wish I had more faith in MacPhail's ability to pick 'em, though. His choices and generally inept maneuvering in filling the corner infield spots last winter do not inspire confidence.

[DrungoHazewood]

Obviously, I agree that there's more than one way to skin the cat here, from a run differential standpoint. We don't need to be an 800 run offense to win 90+ games.

But I think JTrea's point here about needing a fairly vast offensive improvement shouldn't be discarded entirely. The Rays, thanks to excellent pitching and elite defense, gave up the fewest runs in the AL East (649) this season. Aside from the 2008 Blue Jays (610 runs), this is the lowest total in the division this decade, which indicates first that the game is different now, but also that 649 runs leading the division isn't simply a one-year aberration.

With that in mind, would you agree that there's some realistic baseline or minimum for runs allowed given the circumstances in which this team plays? By "circumstances," I mean the park, the expected level of opposing offenses in the division, and a payroll limited such that we're not going to be able to realistically afford to stockpile multiple proven aces. It seems to me that, realistically, it would take a minor miracle for the Orioles to allow any fewer than 630-640 runs given these circumstances.

And if you accept that there is some floor to Oriole run prevention, would you agree that, based on that floor, there is also realistically a related number of total runs that we must eclipse if we expect to contend? Even if we reduce runs allowed to 630 (a pipe dream, in my opinion), we'll still have to score at least 770 runs to compete. Which is some 100 runs more than the 665 run pace Frobby indicates we posted under Buck.

In other words (to sum up a story I've probably made unnecessarily long), would you agree that even though there are a multitude of ways to construct a contending team (and no talismanic answer such as "get a big bat" or "get an ace), the odds of the Orioles contending without adding at the very least 100 runs are pretty slim?

I don't mean this as support for the idea of signing Werth or trading for Fielder if a prohibitive price is attached. But I do think we're going to have make a very substantial jump in runs scored somehow before we're going to have any chance to contend.

I completely agree that the Orioles need to upgrade their offense to have a reasonable shot at contention. What I disagree with is the idea that they have to either trade multiple young players for a guy like Fielder or Gonzalez, or have to sign a guy like Werth to a nearly $100M contract.

I think the most reasonable approach is to sign or trade for the best quality first baseman and/or third baseman who'll come to Baltimore on a decent contract. Someone in the Lee/Berkman range, or trade for a Blanks or an Alonso. The addition of Lee and Alonso, for example, would probably be at least a 50 run improvement over Atkins/Wigginton/Bell/Tejada. Maybe more. Then count on another 50 runs out of gains from Markakis, Jones, Wieters, and having Roberts play 120+ games. Then try to find a shortstop with a .675 OPS, and that'll get you another 25 runs or so. Just that puts you 10-15 games ahead.

No need for busting the bank, no need for draining what's left of the farm system. If you can add a Beltre or a Konerko or something like that, great, that just pushes them ahead that much more. But there's just no reason to go into the offseason expecting or demanding the O's sign or trade for 3-4 high-dollar stars. It's not realistic, and it's not necessary.

[Sports Guy]

I completely agree that the Orioles need to upgrade their offense to have a reasonable shot at contention. What I disagree with is the idea that they have to either trade multiple young players for a guy like Fielder or Gonzalez, or have to sign a guy like Werth to a nearly $100M contract.

I think the most reasonable approach is to sign or trade for the best quality first baseman and/or third baseman who'll come to Baltimore on a decent contract. Someone in the Lee/Berkman range, or trade for a Blanks or an Alonso. The addition of Lee and Alonso, for example, would probably be at least a 50 run improvement over Atkins/Wigginton/Bell/Tejada. Maybe more. Then count on another 50 runs out of gains from Markakis, Jones, Wieters, and having Roberts play 120+ games. Then try to find a shortstop with a .675 OPS, and that'll get you another 25 runs or so. Just that puts you 10-15 games ahead.

No need for busting the bank, no need for draining what's left of the farm system. If you can add a Beltre or a Konerko or something like that, great, that just pushes them ahead that much more. But there's just no reason to go into the offseason expecting or demanding the O's sign or trade for 3-4 high-dollar stars. It's not realistic, and it's not necessary.

Yep...I have been saying that I would like to see Lee and Alonso.

Having alonso here, as our long term solution(but one you don't have to rush) would be great. The thing is, to get him we probably need to trade Guthrie and I doubt the Orioles do that.

[Frobby]

Derrek Lee -- 4.24 P/PA

Adam Dunn -- 4.11 P/PA

Brandon Inge -- 4.11 P/PA

Paul Konerko -- 4.07 P/PA

Carlos Pena -- 3.95 P/PA

Victor Martinez -- 3.89 P/PA

Adrian Beltre -- 3.75 P/PA

Every single one of these guys is above the Orioles' team average of 3.71. And almost every SS in baseball is more patient than Cesar Izturis (3.32 P/PA). I'd really like to see us add some patient hitters, and then with BRob hopefully playing a full season maybe we won't be 29th of 30 teams in walks.

Bump....

JJ Hardy averages 3.89 P/PA for his career, 3.99 last year.

Mark Reynolds averages 4.16 P/PA for his career, 4.31 last year.

Derrek Lee averages 4.05 P/PA for his career, 4.24 last year.

The team has done a great job in this regard and the results next year will be noticeable.

[wildcard]

Bump....

JJ Hardy averages 3.89 P/PA for his career, 3.99 last year.

Mark Reynolds averages 4.16 P/PA for his career, 4.31 last year.

Derrek Lee averages 4.05 P/PA for his career, 4.24 last year.

The team has done a great job in this regard and the results next year will be noticeable.

How about Reimold in 2009?

[adamwolff11]

How about Reimold in 2009?

Reimold was 3.98 in 2009.

[UMDTerrapins]

Gotta figure Roberts and Markakis have good numbers here too. Assuming Lee and Reynolds bat 3/4 I assume this sets the tone nicely for the rest of the lineup.

[fernandodfcosta]

Gotta figure Roberts and Markakis have good numbers here too. Assuming Lee and Reynolds bat 3/4 I assume this sets the tone nicely for the rest of the lineup.

Markakis 4.04 and Roberts 4.20.:clap3::clap3::clap3:

[El Gordo]

Derrek Lee -- 4.24 P/PA

Adam Dunn -- 4.11 P/PA

Brandon Inge -- 4.11 P/PA

Paul Konerko -- 4.07 P/PA

Carlos Pena -- 3.95 P/PA

Victor Martinez -- 3.89 P/PA

Adrian Beltre -- 3.75 P/PA

Every single one of these guys is above the Orioles' team average of 3.71. And almost every SS in baseball is more patient than Cesar Izturis (3.32 P/PA). I'd really like to see us add some patient hitters, and then with BRob hopefully playing a full season maybe we won't be 29th of 30 teams in walks.

We have. Last year:

Reynolds 4.31

Hardy 3.99

Lee 4.27

To go with:

Nick 4.04

BRob 4.20

Wieters 4.00

Luke 3.93

Only Pie and Jones lack patience in this years lineup.