So, what is being built?

[Stotle]

Well the pitching and Wieters won't get more expense for several years with none of them eligible for arbitration any time soon. With Roberts, Reynolds and Markakis you have payroll certainty since they're under contract. Even if they pay someone like LaRoche 3/$21, that's not a killer contract that they wouldn't be able to unload, at least in part, if they have an opportunity to upgrade at 1B. Guthrie and Scott could be trade chips later this season that could bring in a talented young player at the deadline.

What we have to hope for is to build a team with excellent starting pitching and a solid supporting cast so that the team is in a position to be competitive every year. Then have the occassional season where everything clicks and a few players play above their norms. For example, the '83 O's did not have all-stars at every position. But they did have excellent pitching, Eddie Murray and Cal Ripken with a supporting cast of capable, but not star, players. Granted, the Yankees of that era were not quite what they have become, budget wise, nor was Boston. I understand that. But, you don't have to outspend or out produce them at every position to be successful.

I think the notion is nice, but I'm not sure this meshes with the realities facing Baltimore. Let's use a specific year -- 2013:

Markakis -- $15million (2014 left and 2015 club option at $17.5M)

Roberts -- $10million (last year on contract)

Reynolds -- $11million club option (if BAL wants him)

LaRoche -- $7million (last year on contract, using your above contract)

Jones -- Between $5-10million (last year of arbitration)

Bergesen -- Between $1.5-3 million (second to last year of arbitration)

Wieters/Matusz -- Arb eligible (maybe $1-3million a piece if BAL is lucky and both have blossomed?)

That means, depending on if BAL needs/wants Reynolds, you are looking at $50-60 million for those eight players. Best case that leaves you, what, $30-50 million to spend on around 17 spots, or ~$4million per slot.

A chunk of the above goes away over the next two years. Does BAL have comparable talent in place to replace them? I would assume that's the Machado/Givens/Schoop/Hobgood/Bundy class. If that class hasn't taken huge strides forward, isn't BAL sort of limited to trying to go all out in 2013 and 2014? Do they have the flexibility to do that?

This is where I get tripped up. I don't see the flow of players BAL will need to keep momentum moving forward. I see one group of young players that has arrived and may or may not be competitive. But is that really "building" anything? Putting together one group of players with serious holes outside of pitching?

[Sports Guy]

I think you make a number of excellent points. On the starting pitching, I would point out health ultimately was the undoing of Chicago's starting pitching. So far, at least, that does not appear to be an issue for our young pitching. JJ Johnson, Berken and Patton are good examples of what I'm getting at. All three have had injuries that would cause you to no longer consider them part of the core starting pitching group. But, because AM built a large "inventory" of quality starting pitching, health has not hampered our ability to develop a strong group of young pitchers, with Matusz, Bergesen, Arrieta and Tillman already pitching significant ML innings and Britton knocking on the door. And, it allowed him to trade Hernandez for a power bat that we have been missing for some time.

I agree with you entirely that we must do much better at identifying, drafting, signing and developing amateur talent through our minor league system. The Hobgood pick, as an example, has the potential for huge disappointment, at this point. But then, Machado could prove to be a stud for years to come. Hoes has solid potential at 2B and will probably start the season with Avery at AA - and we know how close that can be to the bigs. Admittedly, that's not much, but it may provide some help in the near future. And, one thing AM has done is show a willingness to pay for over-drafted players. Now, if only they could stay healthy.

I'm not trying to sugar coat the O's current position. I just think that there is a way out available. But, like you, I'm waiting for AM to show that he can find that way. You seem convinced that he can't or won't. I still have hope.

He will have to get lucky IMO.

All of our young players will have to develop and stay healthy...Also, we are going to need to find our David Ortiz...IE, a guy(or 2) that was cast away for nothing and ends up being a superstar. You never know, maybe Reynolds will be that guy.

I say that because right now, we aren't developing any superstars at the minor league level and AM doesn't want to spend the mega dollars or trade the mega package of players it takes to get one of those superstars...So, you need to be lucky.

One more thing that I need to clarify here...I do not feel AM is the GM to take us to where we need to go in this division. In most other divisions, I think he would be good enough. That being said, my blame still rests at the feet of PA. He is still the #1 problem. I think AM's tendancies feed well into PA's mindset but I still believe PA is the #1 issue here.

[Stotle]

I believe after the 2011 season, it will be much more clear where the O's are as an organization.

I don't disagree that the base is here for a good team. But the heart of the matter is "what is being built?" Look ahead three years and are you confident in the core being maintained/augmented?

If 2011 shows BAL is a low- to mid-80s team, do you believe that is enough to make BAL a desirable landing spot for FA? Outside of Pujols/Fielder, are there impact FA out there in 2012?

If teams honestly do not like anything in the BAL system as trade pieces, is BAL destined to hope for big breakouts just so that they have potential trade chips? If they do trade them, how are they going to replenish the ML team when the time comes?

I believe in building organizations. I think winning at the ML level is best achieved by creating a winning process for acquiring, developing and nurturing talent at all levels. Is there any indication BAL is building an organization? What is the evidence outside of this current group of players?

[Slappy]

Sometimes I think Stotle would rather teams be ranked by prospects.

[baltfan]

Here is the path to success in 2011

Adam Jones - OPS 810

Matt Weiters - OPS 875

Nick Markakis - OPS 830

JJ Hardy - OPS 780

Brian Roberts - OPS 790

Reynolds - OPS 840

Reimold/Pie - OPS 790

First Base - OPS 800

Luke Scott - OPS 850

Matusz - 3.40 ERA

Guthrie - 3.90 ERA

Tillman - 4.20 ERA

Bergeson - 3.80 ERA

Britton - 4.30 ERA

Yes, a lot of things have to go right. But in general the above could happen and this team could win 85-88 games. Then you hope that Weiters and Jones continue to improve, you bring in a big bat (maybe Fielder--who I think is going to find a depressed market for himself), and you hope the pitching continues to get better. In the meantime, you also hope the Yankees get old quick, the Rays struggle from the all of the defections, and people have misjudged the Sox offseason much like they did Seattle's last year when everyone was calling the Seattle GM a genius (not to suggest the Sox would fall close to the depths of Seattle or even to .500).

[Sports Guy]

Totally agree with Stotle.

In some of my recent discussions with Jtrea, i talked to him about wanting to build an organization.

Trea(not trying to pick on him) wants to spend a lot of money now and because of what he wants to do and the way he wants to do it, would need to spend big money later too. Why? Because he isn't really interested in building a real organization.

He is interested in looking at the short term and just hoping things work out long term.

That's not how we can do things.

The Orioles have seemingly built a team for right now, full of good young talent. But what do they have beyond that talent? What do they have that will sustain a winning club? What do they have that will elevate a winning club to a contending club?

[Sports Guy]

Sometimes I think Stotle would rather teams be ranked by prospects.

Now, there is an intelligent response...I know I am glad you jumped into this very good thread to offer this incredibly insightful analysis. Way to contribute!

[Matt]

What an excellent, albeit depressing, post. One point in particular (among a number of good ones) caught my interest: What are the Orioles doing better than everyone else? If the answer to that is not "nothing," then my guess is that it's "limiting blunders." Is that enough? Is it enough to work really, really hard at not being stupid? Or, do we need to actively do something better than literally everyone else in our division, if not the league, if not MLB overall?

The Orioles seem to have taken the position that limiting mistakes and making incremental improvements is the way to narrow the large gap that exists between themselves and contending teams. My sense is that it will take more than that...

[Three Run Homer]

An interesting discussion, and I can understand the despair that this team will ever be able to compete in the AL East. A few observations:

(1) There's no reason the O's shouldn't be able to get free agents to come here, losing team or not. Detroit was able to sign Magglio Ordonez coming off a last place season. It was an excessive contract, but Ordonez helped the Tigers win a pennant. The O's need to be willing to break the bank for the right player. They did that when Pat Gillick was the GM. I don't know whether the current restraint on free agents is due to Angelos or to MacPhail, but either way it's a serious impediment to the team's ability to contend in the AL East.

(2) We should shop guys like Guthrie, Scott and even Roberts around, but in the current environment I don't think that they would bring back a great haul of prospects. Teams have wised up to the fact that young, cheap players with upside are the most valuable commodities in baseball, and they won't give them up unless they get a proven impact player back--and even big stars like Cliff Lee have yielded disappointing returns in recent trades.

For the most part, you just can't get great prospects back for mid-range players any more--for one thing, teams like the O's are constantly undercut by teams that are willing to give away mid-range talent just to get salary relief.

(3) I tend to agree with the doom and gloom, but I have to say that there's at least some chance that we're underselling the young talent we already have. The 2010 Orioles did not have any impact players, it is true. But there's still a chance that Matt Wieters can be a .300/.400/.500 kind of hitter, and if you combine that with Gold Glove caliber defense at catcher, you've got yourself a frontline star who could be the best player on championship team. Adam Jones has progressed each year in the big leagues; I don't think he's hit his ceiling yet, and he's already a good player. I still think that Matusz will be a legitimate number one starter when all is said and done, and I think there's a decent shot that Tillman or Britton will evolve into a 1-2 starter.

If everything breaks right, or even if a majority of things break right, I think this team could contend for the playoffs even without adding an impact arm or bat from outside--although the odds would be a lot better if the front office was willing to spend what it takes to sign an impact player through free agency.

[Stotle]

Sometimes I think Stotle would rather teams be ranked by prospects.

I think this undersells the larger points I'm trying to make, but I guess I'm not making them well.

[Singleton]

MacPhail tried to do that. The market wasn't that strong, so he went the other direction with BRob. I have no problem with that.

My main disappointment is that we're moving so slowly in Latin America, and our drafting just hasn't been that good. All the problems at the major league level are a consequence of the fact that we have an insufficient supply of good young talent rising up from the minors.

I am not that worried about payroll flexibility. I think we have plenty, both short run and medium run.

This. The "plan" (assuming we take for granted that it was intentional) started to look pretty darn good. We were moving to the majors a solid group of young players with strong tools.

Lets acknowledge that Weiters, Matusz, BB, Arieta, Tilman, Reimold, Bell (i know he's shown little), all hit the big leagues at the same time. Britton too just a tad later. That's a pretty strong group to build around and lets be fair -- not many teams have a core to hit at the same time as this. The problem is that now the tank is empty.

For the plan to work the team could not let this happen!!! The big Bedard trade, the draft of Weiters and Matusz -- it really only works if you keep it going.

And we didn't.

This is where the plan has broken down. At this point, I don't think the team had great options. I personally don't think a Werth or even Crawford contract makes a lot of sense. Maybe that's me being narrowminded.

I'd have liked them to trade Guthrie, Scott and the like for younger talent (Lawrie etc). Perhaps they tried and found young talent wasn't moving for what we had to offer. More likely, they were concerned that either it would be perceived as another rebuild or that the young talent wouldn't make it and it would be a lightening rod for an ever increasing angry fan base (what is left).

Not sure where we go from here. First, we have to hope the team is committed to locking up its young talent that blossoms. Second, we need to fix our pipeline --- ohh..yesterday. We absolutely, positively can't have a dry spell like we're having. Third, we have to capitalize when we have a trade chip that is perhaps overvalued or at peak value in get younger -- hopefully budding stars - to go with our core.

I don't know if management (and I'm not just talking AM) is ready to do the job.

[Stotle]

This. The "plan" (assuming we take for granted that it was intentional) started to look pretty darn good. We were moving to the majors a solid group of young players with strong tools.

Lets acknowledge that Weiters, Matusz, BB, Arieta, Tilman, Reimold, Bell (i know he's shown little), all hit the big leagues at the same time. Britton too just a tad later. That's a pretty strong group to build around and lets be fair -- not many teams have a core to hit at the same time as this. The problem is that now the tank is empty.

For the plan to work the team could not let this happen!!! The big Bedard trade, the draft of Weiters and Matusz -- it really only works if you keep it going.

And we didn't.

This is where the plan has broken down. At this point, I don't think the team had great options. I personally don't think a Werth or even Crawford contract makes a lot of sense. Maybe that's me being narrowminded.

I'd have liked them to trade Guthrie, Scott and the like for younger talent (Lawrie etc). Perhaps they tried and found young talent wasn't moving for what we had to offer. More likely, they were concerned that either it would be perceived as another rebuild or that the young talent wouldn't make it and it would be a lightening rod for an ever increasing angry fan base (what is left).

Not sure where we go from here. First, we have to hope the team is committed to locking up its young talent that blossoms. Second, we need to fix our pipeline --- ohh..yesterday. We absolutely, positively can't have a dry spell like we're having. Third, we have to capitalize when we have a trade chip that is perhaps overvalued or at peak value in get younger -- hopefully budding stars - to go with our core.

I don't know if management (and I'm not just talking AM) is ready to do the job.

Good post. Touching on a couple points (the bolded):

1. The only value I see in going after Werth/Crawford is that I don't necessarily see a long term play for BAL. If the target years (with this crop) have to be 2012-14, maybe it makes sense to get a big contributor while available, as long as that contributor is producing in the 2012-14 range. It's certainly debatable whether those two fit the description of procuding 2012-14, but that would be my argument for getting them (if I had to make one).

2. It is a huge failure if BAL has to now "start" fixing the pipeline. Should have been more important than any single item AM took on 3.5 years ago.

[Stotle]

Not to point that the O's decide to chase Fielder (though they might) but to the point they can sign some additional talent and depth to eliminate the remaining gap between low 80's wins and contention.

My issue with this thought is that in order for BAL to be an above-.500 team, the current roster will need to perform well. That means that getting improvement from the roster a year from now is going to require more than Hardy/LaRoche/Reynolds upgrades. Are those "next tier" pieces even going to be available? Does BAL have the MiL pieces to trade for them at that point, and if so would BAL even entertain the idea of moving the MiL talent?

[hoosiers]

A chunk of the above goes away over the next two years. Does BAL have comparable talent in place to replace them? I would assume that's the Machado/Givens/Schoop/Hobgood/Bundy class. If that class hasn't taken huge strides forward, isn't BAL sort of limited to trying to go all out in 2013 and 2014? Do they have the flexibility to do that?

Aren't most organizations in this boat? Aren't most organizations in a big whole if an entire draft does not produce?

IMO, this is mostly worst case scenarios being painted here. Which is my first point.

My second point is that we have a lot of young talent in this organization. People go ga-ga over the Kansas City farm system, but Hosmer and Moustakas were taken before Wieters and Matusz. And we also have Arrieta from the 07 draft. If we had our three still in the minors, we could have five top 50 guys. We have a lot more talent than folks give us credit for and the griping regarding our minor league system ignores the young talent we already have in the majors.

The third point is that we are competing in the AL East. It's a 90 win minimum to get to the playoffs. We would be a good team with upside in most other divisions, IMO, and that casts a pall on most moves we do.

[Singleton]

Good post. Touching on a couple points (the bolded):

1. The only value I see in going after Werth/Crawford is that I don't necessarily see a long term play for BAL. If the target years (with this crop) have to be 2012-14, maybe it makes sense to get a big contributor while available, as long as that contributor is producing in the 2012-14 range. It's certainly debatable whether those two fit the description of procuding 2012-14, but that would be my argument for getting them (if I had to make one).

2. It is a huge failure if BAL has to now "start" fixing the pipeline. Should have been more important than any single item AM took on 3.5 years ago.

Yep. For me, Werth/Crawford just aren't the guys to shell out that kind of dollars and years. If Agon were a FA this year, that could make sense. There are others. But had they "gone for it" with Crawford, I would have appreciated the effort and hoped for the best.

My greatest disappointment with AM is #2. Looking at our system for the last year -- how could you not make MAJOR changes? The status quo clearly ain't working. I will admit that I'm not close enough or know enough to be certain where the trouble spots really are (I got some theories though) but inaction makes no sense to me at all.