Photo

BSL: Multiple Paths From Here To Contention


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#41 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 16 December 2020 - 01:06 AM

Chris, I'm not sure what your point on MacPhail is.  He was terrible at his job.

 

I never have re-found the post but TonyP did an interview with him in 2010 (I believe) and basically asked him what they were spending money on (because we had no ML payroll).  MacPhial started talking about some software development they wanted to use internally to track minor leaguers.  I mean, ok, if you want to develop some software and buy some hardware, great, but if that's the first thing that comes to mind when justifying what's happening, that's embarrassing.

 

Or the "State of the Orioles" which is a good idea....but not when you say nothing and sit there in your sweater vest flipping your pen in the air.  Come on.

 

I question whether you've gone back and read the stuff posted here back then.

 

What is this team's direction?

 

Your post from Camden Chat. HERE

 

How will the Orioles put fans in the stands?  You had them a 75 win team in post #2 there.

 

Here's some predictions You are at 74 here.

 

I could post dozens more threads from the last 4-5 pages here.

 

I posted recent comments on MacPhail in the Phillies section.  5+ year debacle there....and he got to do everything there you said you wanted him to do here....still no results and he's basically out.  Phillies got to rebuild for 3 years with no accountability, leverage IFA, high draft picks, Middleton wanted them to spend 'stupid money'.  They got to trade for All-Stars and sign the biggest names in FA.....and....they might be a 5th place team handed over to Dombrowski.

 

MacPhail is/was bad at his job.  The results are in.



#42 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 16 December 2020 - 01:22 AM


You've made the assertion before that fans are being treated like dirt, I continue to disagree. 

Much rather be told honestly, "We're not in a position to compete, this is what we're doing about it," ...

 

It's only dirt if you aren't OK with losing.

 

I've said many times that the purpose of rebuilding is to defer accountability (Owwnership, FO) for winning.

 

You have suggested there's no evidence of that.

 

YOU ARE THE EVIDENCE

 

vs. 1998-2011 where we're told, "We're trying! If things go right, we might reach .500." 

 

For whatever reasons, you seem to view these eras as if there's nothing anyone could do.

 

If you have no plan for winning, you are going to struggle to win.  The problem is - and has always been - the people that are deciding how the Orioles go about their business.  You discount the only common factor across all of those teams/years.  All of the post-Gillick structures have a common theme, except from 2012-2014.



#43 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 16 December 2020 - 07:21 AM

Chris, I'm not sure what your point on MacPhail is. He was terrible at his job.

I never have re-found the post but TonyP did an interview with him in 2010 (I believe) and basically asked him what they were spending money on (because we had no ML payroll). MacPhial started talking about some software development they wanted to use internally to track minor leaguers. I mean, ok, if you want to develop some software and buy some hardware, great, but if that's the first thing that comes to mind when justifying what's happening, that's embarrassing.

Or the "State of the Orioles" which is a good idea....but not when you say nothing and sit there in your sweater vest flipping your pen in the air. Come on.

I question whether you've gone back and read the stuff posted here back then.

What is this team's direction?

Your post from Camden Chat. HERE

How will the Orioles put fans in the stands? You had them a 75 win team in post #2 there.

Here's some predictions You are at 74 here.

I could post dozens more threads from the last 4-5 pages here.

I posted recent comments on MacPhail in the Phillies section. 5+ year debacle there....and he got to do everything there you said you wanted him to do here....still no results and he's basically out. Phillies got to rebuild for 3 years with no accountability, leverage IFA, high draft picks, Middleton wanted them to spend 'stupid money'. They got to trade for All-Stars and sign the biggest names in FA.....and....they might be a 5th place team handed over to Dombrowski.

MacPhail is/was bad at his job. The results are in.

We aren't disagreeing about MacPhail's overall effectiveness. I've said as much multiple times. You adding these links shows you don't get that.

But MacPhail did operate a plan which helped allow for 2012.

And going back to the expectations for a second...you keep presenting this as some type of gotcha.

There is always a window of possible results. Which I know you know because you argue all the time for building a team that has a chance of playing up.

I fully agree that the 2012 Orioles played to the top (maybe even exceeded) of their window. They were exactly what you want to see so often, a team built that has a chance to do that.

That's fine.

The '13-'16 Orioles were also varying examples of that. I think the baseline talent and expectations were generally higher than recognized by most entering seasons...but same thing. There was a window of expectations and they generally played up.

#44 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 16 December 2020 - 07:29 AM

It's only dirt if you aren't OK with losing.

I've said many times that the purpose of rebuilding is to defer accountability (Owwnership, FO) for winning.

You have suggested there's no evidence of that.

YOU ARE THE EVIDENCE


For whatever reasons, you seem to view these eras as if there's nothing anyone could do.

If you have no plan for winning, you are going to struggle to win. The problem is - and has always been - the people that are deciding how the Orioles go about their business. You discount the only common factor across all of those teams/years. All of the post-Gillick structures have a common theme, except from 2012-2014.

No, it's not dirt at any level.

The Orioles are a business.
They are telling you directly how they are going to operate. You can choose to support or not.
But you aren't being treated poorly.

I argued all the time in 98-11 there were things they could be doing. Frankly many similarities at times to what you argue for now.

That's one possible path.

What I argued for most of the time prior to AM was a wholesale rebuilding that was not happening (and then during AM's tenure I argued for a more effective rebuilding).

That's another path and frankly I think it's going to lead to better results quicker and sustained success longer.

#45 Old Man

Old Man

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 16 December 2020 - 08:39 AM

One Path - Just win baby! :)



#46 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 17 December 2020 - 01:58 PM

We aren't disagreeing about MacPhail's overall effectiveness. I've said as much multiple times. You adding these links shows you don't get that.

But MacPhail did operate a plan which helped allow for 2012.

And going back to the expectations for a second...you keep presenting this as some type of gotcha.

 

I still don't understand what you think MacPhail did in his "plan" that led to anything. You keep saying that as if there's some merit to it which but you never suggest what you actually think that is.

 

He had 4+ years to rebuild with zero accountability to produce a a result in the W column.

 

After 4+ years of 'rebuilding' the perspective (locally and Nationally) was that the Orioles had a poor team (67-74 win), a MiL system in the bottom third of the league, little to no opportunity to compete in 2012, and may - in fact - need to start rebuilding over.

 

MacPhail wasn't looking to get out of Baseball when he left, he just wanted (I guess, imo) to blame the failures of "Phase 3" on someone else.  If he thought he had done a great job and he wanted to get credit for the manifestation of his great work, he certainly could have stayed to be part of it.  Any time something went well, he had no issues showing up for an interview to explain how he did it.

 

It's not a 'gotcha', at least in the way you are trying to frame it.  People change the truth to fit their narrative.  That's certainly true for the MacPhail era.  I'm pointing out what they're saying isn't the truth.  MacPhail's time certainly served a purpose, at least from my perspective of what that purpose was (nothing to do with winning, ever).

-------------

 

...and there's a point in there if we want it wrt your article.

 

We haven't really accomplished anything unique for the future.  Any lineup you wanted in 2018 for a future season (one you never were comfortable defining) you could have had with or without rebuilding under Elias.  That doesn't mean the time doesn't have some value...I think there are things that will likely be good...but none of the good things (we don't know, TBD) are unique to the Win Position they've taken from 2019-2021.

 

The (still vague) lineups you promote along 'multiple paths to contention' are basically Dan's system and 2022 or 2023 FAs.

 

So if you think the Purpose of Rebuilding is to create some unique future opportunity to Win, OK, but there's no evidence in that from either the MacPhial (2008-2011) for the following years (2012+) and you (this article) aren't making any specific reference to any accomplishment from the 2019-2020+ season for competing in 2022 and 2023+.  "Payroll flexibility" is not an accomplishment.

 

Of course, I think both the MacPhail and Elias eras have a different Purpose (and different from each other) than the refrain you believe to be true (some Plan for future winning).  



#47 Old Man

Old Man

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 17 December 2020 - 02:10 PM

MacPhail wasn't looking to get out of Baseball when he left, he just wanted (I guess, imo) to blame the failures of "Phase 3" on someone else.  If he thought he had done a great job and he wanted to get credit for the manifestation of his great work, he certainly could have stayed to be part of it.  Any time something went well, he had no issues showing up for an interview to explain how he did it.

 

It's not a 'gotcha', at least in the way you are trying to frame it.  People change the truth to fit their narrative.  That's certainly true for the MacPhail era.  I'm pointing out what they're saying isn't the truth.  MacPhail's time certainly served a purpose, at least from my perspective of what that purpose was (nothing to do with winning, ever).

-------------

I believe Andy left because his father was dying and he wanted to spend time with him. 

 

Andy did this team a huge service and laid the groundwork out for Sarasota facility build up and change the ownership meddling culture, allowing DD to step in and function in the GM slot. It worked pretty darn well as they were the winningest team in the AL for 5 years.


  • Mike B likes this

#48 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,618 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 17 December 2020 - 02:19 PM

I believe Andy left because his father was dying and he wanted to spend time with him. 

 

Andy did this team a huge service and laid the groundwork out for Sarasota facility build up and change the ownership meddling culture, allowing DD to step in and function in the GM slot. It worked pretty darn well as they were the winningest team in the AL for 5 years.

People do not want to give Andy any credit for the foundation, that he left for Dan.  AM did a lot of good for the organization.  He left a much better base for Dan than Dan did for Elias.  Not even close..  


  • BSLSteveBirrer and Old Man like this
@mikeghg

#49 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 17 December 2020 - 02:33 PM


 

There is always a window of possible results. Which I know you know because you argue all the time for building a team that has a chance of playing up.

I fully agree that the 2012 Orioles played to the top (maybe even exceeded) of their window. They were exactly what you want to see so often, a team built that has a chance to do that.

That's fine.

The '13-'16 Orioles were also varying examples of that. I think the baseline talent and expectations were generally higher than recognized by most entering seasons...but same thing. There was a window of expectations and they generally played up.

 

Maybe you aren't saying this as directly as you appear to be here, but my goal as a Baseball Executive would be to draft last every year.

 

That means I have the best record in the league and I never need to sign a compensated FA.

 

My goal isn't to build a middling team and then play up.

 

Being the Best Team each year is about results, not just Talent accumulation.  We know there's more to winning because the team with the most perceived Talent rarely has the best record (and certainly doesn't always win the WS).

 

What the 2012 to 2016 time frame proves is that the formula for winning is different than just Talent accumulation.  The Orioles certainly did not have the most Talent in the League over those 5 years, but they did produce the best record and make the Playoffs 3 times.  That doesn't mean the goal is to have lesser teams (although I'd argue Buck liked to use that angle as a tool for performance).

 

I want to accumulate the most Talent, but I'm realistic to know that in a Division with 4 well-resourced (Brains, Money) Teams, my ability to accumulate the most Talent will be pretty difficult and I'm confident getting 3 unique draft picks in 3 years isn't going to solve that issue.  

 

Since the most important factor for winning won't be Talent accumulation....because I have to do the other things whether I have the most Talent or not (see: all teams)...I'm confident 3 high draft picks over 3 years don't solve that problem either. 

 

Draft last every year.



#50 Old Man

Old Man

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 17 December 2020 - 03:06 PM

People do not want to give Andy any credit for the foundation, that he left for Dan.  AM did a lot of good for the organization.  He left a much better base for Dan than Dan did for Elias.  Not even close..  

You are right, but I believe that was not Dan's intention. 

 

I think after Toronto came kicking the tires, Dan's key to the executive wash room was removed, and he was no longer the GM and in all practical purposes, Peter became GM and DD was his lackey.

 

 

IMO



#51 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,618 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 17 December 2020 - 03:10 PM

You are right, but I believe that was not Dan's intention. 

 

I think after Toronto came kicking the tires, Dan's key to the executive wash room was removed, and he was no longer the GM and in all practical purposes, Peter became GM and DD was his lackey.

 

 

IMO

I think Peter lost confidence in DD.  I don't think Peter decided to be the baseball version of Jerry Jones but I do think he meddled on a regular basis.

I think Dan wanted to go to Toronto.  I think his agents(s) had a deal worked out and Peter killed the whole thing.  He should have let Dan go.  


@mikeghg

#52 Old Man

Old Man

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 17 December 2020 - 03:18 PM

I think Peter lost confidence in DD.  I don't think Peter decided to be the baseball version of Jerry Jones but I do think he meddled on a regular basis.

I think Dan wanted to go to Toronto.  I think his agents(s) had a deal worked out and Peter killed the whole thing.  He should have let Dan go.  

I dont doubt that one bit, even a non meddling Peter has to be a difficult person to work for.

 

I think the franchise would have been better off, if he had just let him go.

 

Peter the lawyer firmly believes a man's contract should be honored until the end date. No reupping or letting somebody out early.


  • Mike B likes this

#53 RShack

RShack

    Fair-weather ex-diehard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,993 posts

Posted 17 December 2020 - 07:39 PM

I still don't understand what you think MacPhail did in his "plan" that led to anything. You keep saying that as if there's some merit to it which but you never suggest what you actually think that is.

 

He had 4+ years to rebuild with zero accountability to produce a a result in the W column.

 

After 4+ years of 'rebuilding' the perspective (locally and Nationally) was that the Orioles had a poor team (67-74 win), a MiL system in the bottom third of the league, little to no opportunity to compete in 2012, and may - in fact - need to start rebuilding over.

 

MacPhail wasn't looking to get out of Baseball when he left, he just wanted (I guess, imo) to blame the failures of "Phase 3" on someone else.  If he thought he had done a great job and he wanted to get credit for the manifestation of his great work, he certainly could have stayed to be part of it.  Any time something went well, he had no issues showing up for an interview to explain how he did it.

 

It's not a 'gotcha', at least in the way you are trying to frame it.  People change the truth to fit their narrative.  That's certainly true for the MacPhail era.  I'm pointing out what they're saying isn't the truth.  MacPhail's time certainly served a purpose, at least from my perspective of what that purpose was (nothing to do with winning, ever).

-------------

 

...and there's a point in there if we want it wrt your article.

 

We haven't really accomplished anything unique for the future.  Any lineup you wanted in 2018 for a future season (one you never were comfortable defining) you could have had with or without rebuilding under Elias.  That doesn't mean the time doesn't have some value...I think there are things that will likely be good...but none of the good things (we don't know, TBD) are unique to the Win Position they've taken from 2019-2021.

 

The (still vague) lineups you promote along 'multiple paths to contention' are basically Dan's system and 2022 or 2023 FAs.

 

So if you think the Purpose of Rebuilding is to create some unique future opportunity to Win, OK, but there's no evidence in that from either the MacPhial (2008-2011) for the following years (2012+) and you (this article) aren't making any specific reference to any accomplishment from the 2019-2020+ season for competing in 2022 and 2023+.  "Payroll flexibility" is not an accomplishment.

 

Of course, I think both the MacPhail and Elias eras have a different Purpose (and different from each other) than the refrain you believe to be true (some Plan for future winning).  

 

You don't know when to stop.

 

AM did the job with both feet and one arm shackled by PA. 

When he told PA to take the job and shove it (politely, of course), PA was greatly surprised.  

This led to PA giving DD a longer leash and fewer (but still significant) constraints than what AM had.

We never saw DD able to do what he wanted.

 

Nonetheless, the *combination* of DD and the players AM left for him resulted in Buck giving us a team that achieved the best record in baseball over a 5-yr period.  

 

Refusing to acknowledge all this is foolish.


  • Mike B likes this

 "The only change is that baseball has turned Paige from a second-class citizen to a second-class immortal." - Satchel Paige


#54 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 17 December 2020 - 11:31 PM

People be crazy.


  • russsnyder likes this

#55 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,058 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 18 December 2020 - 09:46 AM

Drafting last every year sounds so good. And clearly its not wrong.

 

But it totally fails in any kind of even wish list unless you are one of a very few teams such as the Yankees and Dodgers.

 

Drafting last every years = spending huge every year. Period.



#56 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,618 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 18 December 2020 - 10:13 AM

I dont doubt that one bit, even a non meddling Peter has to be a difficult person to work for.

 

I think the franchise would have been better off, if he had just let him go.

 

Peter the lawyer firmly believes a man's contract should be honored until the end date. No reupping or letting somebody out early.

I think we have current evidence that your last statement is very true.


  • Old Man likes this
@mikeghg

#57 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,592 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 18 December 2020 - 10:21 AM

I'd like to move away from MacPhail and head back to Chris's article.  If anyone wants to continue the MacPhail discussion, let's find a different place to do it (Phillies, PM, new, other).

-------------

 

Initial considerations

 

1) So I agree with everything Chris includes at the beginning in terms of the 2021 setup.  I think it's the most reasonable view of where the Orioles are going into the 2021 season.  I'd guess there could still be some changes (trade Severino, Armstrong), but that's fine for now.

 

Internal options

 

2) I'm not as high on Diaz.  Chris would seem to be at the high end of the Diaz perspective.  If he was a league average guy, IMO, that would be good for him. I don't need to create space for him, but whatever.

 

3) I don't really agree with the alignment of the MiL IFers.  Sure it will sort itself out at different levels, but you still have to start somewhere.  I think Westburg is the least likely of the candidates to stay at SS.  I think this all really starts with Henderson and whether you believe he can stick at SS.  If he's not the SS, Servideo certainly seems like the next most likely guy to stick there, based purely on defense and offensive upside.  Westburg would seem most likely to get pushed over to 2B or 3B and he could likely move faster at either one of those positions (also, he's much more likely to be a top10 2B than a top10 SS).

 

4) Promoting guys in the 2020 draft class for 2022 is like promoting guys from the 2019 class this year.  Does anyone think Joey Ortiz should compete for the SS or 2B job by mid-year? He's sort of similar to Servideo (I like Servideo better, whatever)...both 4th rd picks, similar college numbers.  If you think guys are ready, OK, and under the right contract conditions I'm OK allowing a guy to learn at the ML level, but that's an approach that should have some fairly buffered expectations.

 

5) There's lot of places to put this comment, but there's any number of people out there suggesting guys like Rutschman, Hall and Rodriguez could be ready sooner than later.  I don't think you see any of those top guys (they held back Mountcastle as long as they could) until the Orioles have the #1 MiL system.  That likely means you need to hold their Rookie status going into the 2023 season....so SEP '22 would be the earliest we add them to the ML lineup.

 

Questions.

 

6) All of these questions are fine, but there's nothing unique about the answers from 2021 for 2022.  You had questions in 2019, 2020, you'll have them for 2021 and 2022 and 2023 too.  There is nothing unique about what you learn in 2021.  There's 4 boxes and you could be in any one of them and those answers could like different 12 months later.  Sometimes you'll be right, sometimes you'll be wrong, sometimes it rains. 

 

It's just the same thing I keep saying....you're going to have to make choices.  Waiting to know something in 2021 doesn't make your choices better.  For example, Chris likes Diaz.  He's been promoting him for a while.  What's the metric where he doesn't get a chance in 2022 if he follows the schedule in this article?  If you like a guy and want to project him, as long as he's ~1SP, you keep him in there.

 

You have the same questions for 2022.  You never have to wait to do something for answers because you NEVER really have answers.  Unless you're Mike Trout. Is he available?

 

You do whatever you think is the best you can do (whatever your plan is) could be 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, whatever....you do it and then you go throw down.

 

FAs before 2022.

 

7) It always has felt like this is where Chris wanted to go but he hasn't really been willing to say this is the thing.  As we discussed in the Correa thread and another one, if you wanted Correa and Bryant now, you could basically put together the team you're looking for in place now and wait on Rutschman, Hall and Rodriguez.

 

2022

 

My guess would be that the Orioles continue to work backwards in payroll for the 2022 season.  Cobb will be gone. If the COVID outlook improves there's no reasons for Davis to be here.  I'd suggest ARB players like Mancini and Santander get traded.  They'll likely have pretty close to the minimum salary profile you can have (+Davis 17M).

 

John and Lou have 2 things they likely need/want to accomplish

Elias still has his biggest thing to accomplish.

 

We'll see where 2022 leaves the team. 

I think the outlook in 2023 can be reasonably good. 

I don't think it's a 95 win team, but it could be a pretty good team looking to compete.

It is basically the same opportunity in 2023 regardless of what you wanted to do in 2019, 2020, 2021 or 2022.



#58 Old Man

Old Man

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts

Posted 18 December 2020 - 10:31 AM

I think we have current evidence that your last statement is very true.

It goes all the way back to when he purchased the team.

 

How many opt outs did you see this team give out, over the past couple of decades?



#59 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 155,717 posts

Posted 18 December 2020 - 10:37 AM

5) I'll bet any amount of $ you'd like that without major health issues we see each of Rutschman, Rodriguez, and Hall before Sept. 2022.

 

7) I've never had firm names in-mind. My point has always been you'll have payroll flexibility to address your primary needs when you are ready to augment what exists. It just so happens that the FA market is going to match-up nicely with need. 


  • Mike B likes this

#60 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,618 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 18 December 2020 - 11:09 AM

5) I'll bet any amount of $ you'd like that without major health issues we see each of Rutschman, Rodriguez, and Hall before Sept. 2022.

 

7) I've never had firm names in-mind. My point has always been you'll have payroll flexibility to address your primary needs when you are ready to augment what exists. It just so happens that the FA market is going to match-up nicely with need. 

I will be very disappointed if we do not see any of the three mentioned before Spetember of 22.  I think we could see at least one late this coming year.


@mikeghg




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=