AM – you have a credibility problem

[Hank Scorpio]

I believe his contract expires after the 2011 season. So, I'd say the next 10 months are sink or swim -- assuming he wants to stay.

Okay let me re-state - "pass or fail."

[JDubs]

Say what you want about Sports Guys and his little quips, but he almost always adds his analysis along with this posts.

More like he almost always adds little 'quips' to his analysis.

[sangar]

Do you view this next couple of months as a sink or swim time for MacPhail?

Pretty much, yeah. I like what he has done so far and it is time for him to put up or shut up. At this point I would say I'm modestly optimistic and very open minded. He doesn't necessarily have to complete the job now but he has to make serious progress.

To me, your assertions concerning his credibility are incorrect. Everything else was Rep worthy.

[BaltimoreTerp]

It's not about credibility, it's about actions. MacPhail has largely done what he said he would do. But now, he needs to begin making his move.

This is the key for me, and why I disagree with the spirit, of not the facts, in the OP.

If MacPhail had come in here three-plus years ago, saying that he was going to have the Orioles in the playoffs within a short period, or guaranteeing big free-agent signings or trades for established players, or expressing a desire to throw unlimited sums into the amateur markets, than sure, he would have a credibility problem. However, he did not do that. Everything he has laid out has been about building from the ground up.

Anyone that seriously sees a credibility issue either was expecting way too much compared to what was said, or is focusing on too many of the details (signing Garrett Atkins and Adam Eaton, just to give an example) instead of the overall goal of creating a foundation and establishing the Orioles as a realistic destination for players to add to a building team.

Among every baseball writer and expert that we have seen comment on the subject, I don't remember* one that has suggested anything other than success, at least on the part of building a foundation.

*That's not to say there weren't any of those reports out there, just that I don't remember seeing them myself or posted here. They very well could exist, and I'm sure some do.

However, all of that has ended. As Frobby said in the quoted post, and Tony said before him, this offseason is different. The foundation is there, and even if it isn't 100% finished it is far enough along that waiting another year to build on what we have is just a waste. There are moves to be made, and some that need to be made.

If going into next season there is no obvious progress in answering at least some of the remaining questions about this club, then Andy MacPhail (and, if you want to believe he has a hand in this, Buck Showalter) will have a credibility problem. Right now, though, what he has is an opportunity to avoid a credibility problem and put the club on the best possible standing for next year and beyond.

Will he do it? We'll know in three months.

[Stotle]

Which organizations are best represented at large showcases and events?

Well, the easy answer recently is Toronto. They had everyone else outgunned anywhere from 3-to-1 to 6-to-1 in Jupiter and have instituted a qualitative aspect of scouting that utilizes a large number of eyes recording data, in addition to traditional "scouting" takes of their evaluators.

Tampa, LAA and Boston are probably the orgs I see most frequently, though Arizona, Colorado and Kansas City have made impressions on me at events in the past.

At the area level (I'm only quasi-informed here, since I do part time work) in the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and SoCal I've seen the same group of scouts from 6 ot 7 orgs at every single event/game I've gone to in that region. I've at least spotted one BAL evaluator at each "major" showcase/event I've attended, but the org falls into the category of noticeably light. That is really what sticks in your head, since you aren't really counting how many times you see evaluators from orgs -- it's more along the lines of "I haven't seen anyone from organization X all weekend."

EDIT -- to be fair, and this just occurred to me, I should point out that showcases in Calif. will obviously make it easier for an organization like LAN or LAA to send extra evaluators who reside in the area -- ditto TAM and FLA at Florida showcases. BOS is always there, regardless. I can't think of a game/event I've attended and not seen a BOS evaluator.

[LookinUp]

I view the next 12-18 months as sink or swim time for MacPhail.

I would never judge someone based on an offseason, even if he traded Matusz, Jones and Wieters for Prince Fielder's fat hump. I'd at least let the season pan out before I called for his head.

I believe his contract expires after the 2011 season. So, I'd say the next 10 months are sink or swim -- assuming he wants to stay.

I agree with this to an extent. If he acquires a non-flashy guy who turns in a big year, coupled with further progression from in house guys, and we end up with an 82-86 win team, I can at least say we're really moving in a positive direction.

I'd still question if he'll do what it takes to get us over the hump, but it would buy him some time.

However, if he leaves positions w/o real players like last year, it's a pipe dream to think we'll get that many wins, regardless of our August/September performances.

[LookinUp]

To me, your assertions concerning his credibility are incorrect. Everything else was Rep worthy.

This might seem like semantics, but I'm not saying AM has no credibility. I am saying he has a credibility problem. I understand that you probably disagree with that (which is fine), but it's a distiction with a difference.

To illustrate, I'll pose some simple questions.

Do you have significant doubts that AM will make strong moves to significantly upgrade 1b, ss and 3b this offseason?

Do you have significant doubts that he'll take the financial risk to offer arbitration to Millwood?

Do you have significant doubts that he'll step up in scouting/signing amateurs beyond the Rule IV draft?

He's in this position to build a stud winner. If you have significant doubts that he'll do even one of the above, much less all three, than I'd argue that he has a credibility problem with you too.

Are you really telling me that you don't have significant doubts that he'll do what it takes in all facets of the job to make us into a world class organization?

[Shopay]

It's not about credibility, it's about actions. MacPhail has largely done what he said he would do. But now, he needs to begin making his move.

This is pretty much says it all.

[waroriole]

I would add my opinion, but I'll just say I agree with most of what Stotle, Hank and Frobby have said so far. I've given him the benefit of the doubt thus far, but it's time to see things put into place at the ML level. This offseason, we need to fill glaring holes at 1B, 3B, and SS (though this one could be tough, depending on non-tenders). If we don't do that, then I will seriously doubt whether AM is up to this job.

[bird watcher]

More and more I start to think that the best course of action, for the sake of the next 10 years, is to operate in the red for the next 5. It doesn't really make "short term" business sense to operate in the red but when you can't get over the hump there is certainly a school of thought that values carrying short term debt for long term revenue enhancement.

I don't know that AM is capable of valuing red ink. He seems too "prudent" when it comes to short term expenditures which smacks of a lack of trust that revenues will grow to meet the liabilities.

I certainly can't prove that running significantly in the red would get different results but I can sure as heck tell you that running in the black isn't working (at least on the field).

[Sports Guy]

I view the next 12-18 months as sink or swim time for MacPhail.

I would never judge someone based on an offseason, even if he traded Matusz, Jones and Wieters for Prince Fielder's fat hump. I'd at least let the season pan out before I called for his head.

IMO, that's way too much time plus, his contract expires.

He gets this offseason to redeem himself.

[sangar]

This might seem like semantics, but I'm not saying AM has no credibility. I am saying he has a credibility problem. I understand that you probably disagree with that (which is fine), but it's a distiction with a difference.

To illustrate, I'll pose some simple questions.

Do you have significant doubts that AM will make strong moves to significantly upgrade 1b, ss and 3b this offseason?

Do you have significant doubts that he'll take the financial risk to offer arbitration to Millwood?

Do you have significant doubts that he'll step up in scouting/signing amateurs beyond the Rule IV draft?

He's in this position to build a stud winner. If you have significant doubts that he'll do even one of the above, much less all three, than I'd argue that he has a credibility problem with you too.

Are you really telling me that you don't have significant doubts that he'll do what it takes in all facets of the job to make us into a world class organization?

I have no 'significant' doubts regarding the overall success of his plan, to date, and I think it is premature to question his credibility in any regard. So far the man has done exactly what he said he would do.

One can question his ability, but his integrity is intact.

[Enjoy Terror]

This whole thread would have been appropriate in February; it's barely November.

[NewMarketSean]

My signature for 2010 was no excuses. It still holds true for this offseason. As for "credibility", I think it's a poor word choice. AM has not said he will go out and spend like crazy. It's not like he said that and we don't believe him. He has said the same stuff he's said since he's been GM and we fans have little faith he will do enough to make this team a lot better in 2011. That is what it comes down to.

[Hank Scorpio]

IMO, that's way too much time plus, his contract expires.

He gets this offseason to redeem himself.

What happens on the field is much more important than what happens off of it, and while I concede that the two can be related I submit to you the 2009 offseason of the San Francisco Giants.

*insert "Giants aren't in the AL East" retort here*

What if AM signs LaRoche, Izturis and Joe Crede and they win 85 games next year because the pitching takes a huge stride forward?

Let him walk?