98 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

Yeah SP is kinda the biggest weakness on the team and not a clear FA avenue. Also, if you believe in the system there are more position players coming than there are spots to play them. I am pretty much expecting a biggish trade this offseason, with of course no idea at all who might be involved.

A team needs based trade certainly could make sense such as the O's trading a young infielder or two for a young SP.

[makoman]

Sure, there have to be alternatives to plan A, but I'd try very hard to convince free agents to come here before trading off significant young talent.

I apologize for being repetitive about this, but the amount of short-term money invested in someone such as Verlander should hardly matter. I'd offer pretty much whatever it takes to land him on a 2 year deal and then still have plenty of money left over to pursue more talent.

But where does Ortiz or Mayo play if you like some combo of Gunnar, Westburg, Norby? Even if you say move someone to 1B, then Mountcastle is excess, and that's not even accounting for Mateo. Flip any of those names if you like them better than another. There's too many IF, a good problem, but the point of developing excess is to use them in trades.

 

edit: yeah you kinda just said that right above

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Who do you think could be signed for a 3-year deal?

 

I could see Verlander and Abreu on short deals.  3-years makes sense for Verlander, similar to what Scherzer just signed.  I was thinking it'd take 4 for Abreu.  JD Martinez probably would sign for 3.  I don't see any big SP other than Verlander going for 3, but perhaps that's a spot better sought via trade.

 

$70-80M total is only $35-45M in additions.  That'll go real quick if you're signing anyone who is actually above average.  That would be the very low end of what could be acceptable.

Im hoping Im wrong and its closer to a 100 mil payroll but Im gonna keep it conservative. 70 is the minimum where I wont bitch. For this year that is. Who is signing for 3 or less?? Older vets and prove it guys. But there are enough vets out there at least as starting pitches that can help the team. Someone like Brantley on the offensive side. I also expect 1 or 2 trades for arb 2 or arb 3 guys

[mweb08]

But where does Ortiz or Mayo play if you like some combo of Gunnar, Westburg, Norby? Even if you say move someone to 1B, then Mountcastle is excess, and that's not even accounting for Mateo. Flip any of those names if you like them better than another. There's too many IF, a good problem, but the point of developing excess is to use them in trades.

edit: yeah you kinda just said that right above

Yeah, I'm good with trading some excess. All those guys don't need to play next year though so I wouldn't force it. It's also unlikely that they'll all be be good. So maybe they can properly identify who won't be good and trade them, but otherwise I'm good with having some competition for playing time and some prospect depth. Or if a fair trade can be worked out as I said in my prior post, that's cool too.

Also, I'm on board with shopping Mountcastle. That's one of the spots I'm most interested in upgrading.

[dude]

The first article of the off-season is intentional.

 

I was literally going to write something like....I get that you guys think we're going to do something, but the Orioles off-season is going to be pretty busy doing something not involving the roster....then The Sun puts out the article to lower your expectations.  

 

I'm not saying they won't do anything, they'll do some fringe stuff, we'll sEve.

----------

 

I'm ok with doing more. If they do more and prove me wrong, awesome.  Prove me wrong.

....but there's nothing they are going to do that going to move the needle this offseason to a 90+win team on paper. 

 

Personally, I think the Team is generally fine.  You have a good combination of players that have youth and upside and you need to figure out some of the non-Talent stuff and then you show up and play your butt off.  I'm not desperate to spend money and don't think any modest spending moves the needle.  Bribing guys to be here means they don't really want to be here.  We need guys that want to be here.

 

It's not a good market.  None of these guys have reasons to come here other than money and this ain't the 'get it done' FO/Ownership. They'll be busy, but it's not about adding to the roster. I'd guess they'll still do some things people will want to hang their hat on, but none of the rebuilding crowd will do anything but make more excuses for them.  If they were going to do something, they could have done it any time previously.  There's nothing unique about where they are today.

 

I think the payroll will be around 50M (even if they make a handful of moves) and it doesn't really bother me.

[Mackus]

I dislike everything in that post.

Not necessarily saying you're wrong, but if you're right about what they'll do, I'll hate that decision by the organization. It'd be an abomination.

And I strongly disagree with the idea that the team is good enough as is and only needs minor, fringe additions. I think that anyone ok with a $50M payroll (and what that means about the roster) doesn't really care about trying to be good. If they do that, it should bother you.

 

What 2035 laid out earlier is about the minimal amount of investment that will make me think the team cares at all.  Even that is sketchy, but at least its something.  If they return with the same roster next year plus a better backup catcher, I'll be furious.

[Mike B]

Time will tell but if our payroll is only 50M next year, a lot of what has been done the last few years has been a lie.  Just to be clear I do not mean Elias and his team.

If we do not make a significant investment in a key starter and a middle of the order bat, I will be disappointed, but not entirely surprised.

[bmore_ken]

And I strongly disagree with the idea that the team is good enough as is 

Sadly I think Elias will disagree with you and act accordingly this offseason. 

[You Play to Win the Game]

I'm not so sure Mack. I agree fully with the notion that you add, there's just absolutely zero justification for sitting still. But I think I disagree that on paper this team could be an 83 win team again. I don't think the pitching turn around was a fluke - and the young guys will be a year older with more reinforcements on the way. Again, still will be pissed if they assume this and act accordingly, but I do think the baseline is fairly strong.

[Mackus]

But I think I disagree that on paper this team could be an 83 win team again

 

I think they could win 83 games again, but that would again be overachieving their current roster.  It wouldn't be nearly as much of an overachieve as 2022 was, but it'd still be an above 50th percentile result.  I'd peg the current roster for a mid-70s expectation.  That team could exceed expected results and get to 85 or even more wins. I certainly don't think it's impossible or even very improbable.  But its not the expectation.  If you wanna aruge they are a low 80s win team on paper already, my disagreement is small, but that still is a team you should be adding to rather than holding pat.

 

I wanna raise that expectation, and to do that we need to add and more than just $10-15M in payroll.  Do that, and then you've got insulation against some unexpected backsliding and you've got further upside incase you get the internal development you're hoping for.  Rising tide raises all boats, kind of thing.  Add talent so you can have the benefit of continued performance and/or improvement from guys already here but aren't totally reliant on it.  Pretty sure you agree with all that so I'm just emphasizing.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I think they could win 83 games again, but that would again be overachieving their current roster.  It wouldn't be nearly as much of an overachieve as 2022 was, but it'd still be an above 50th percentile result.  I'd peg the current roster for a mid-70s expectation.  That team could exceed expected results and get to 85 or even more wins. I certainly don't think it's impossible or even very improbable.  But its not the expectation.  If you wanna aruge they are a low 80s win team on paper already, my disagreement is small, but that still is a team you should be adding to rather than holding pat.

 

I wanna raise that expectation, and to do that we need to add and more than just $10-15M in payroll.  Do that, and then you've got insulation against some unexpected backsliding and you've got further upside incase you get the internal development you're hoping for.  Rising tide raises all boats, kind of thing.  Add talent so you can have the benefit of continued performance and/or improvement from guys already here but aren't totally reliant on it.  Pretty sure you agree with all that so I'm just emphasizing.

Yeah, I think just a small disagreement - but not really, because I agree fully with the second paragraph. There really no excuses.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

I think we are in a similar situation (how we got here is way different but that's a different discussion) to when the O's were a decent team with a shot at a wild card. I wanted DD to go for it. We all knew the things that we needed to add to make us a legit threat but he kept going the dumpster diving route. Fine as you try and build a team but a weak ass approach IMO to try and get over the hump.

 

We have proven that we are now a team that is competitive but has a couple of glaring holes to make us a legit threat. So the question this winter is will the FO try and cheap its way to another run or will they really go for it? Either can work and either can fail. But your odds go way up if you go for it. Spend prudently and/or make some serious trades but this winter will be telling.

[weird-O]

I think we are in a similar situation (how we got here is way different but that's a different discussion) to when the O's were a decent team with a shot at a wild card. I wanted DD to go for it. We all knew the things that we needed to add to make us a legit threat but he kept going the dumpster diving route. Fine as you try and build a team but a weak ass approach IMO to try and get over the hump.

 

We have proven that we are now a team that is competitive but has a couple of glaring holes to make us a legit threat. So the question this winter is will the FO try and cheap its way to another run or will they really go for it? Either can work and either can fail. But your odds go way up if you go for it. Spend prudently and/or make some serious trades but this winter will be telling.

DD only looked in the dumpster, because Angelos didn't value pitching, and wouldn't approve any significant investment in arms

[Old Man]

DD only looked in the dumpster, because Angelos didn't value pitching, and wouldn't approve any significant investment in arms

DD had some nice draft picks.

 

You have to give credit where credit is due.

[weird-O]

DD had some nice draft picks.

 

You have to give credit where credit is due.

Agreed, but that's a whole other conversation. I'm defending his dumpster diving, because he had no other choice. If I recall correctly, he hadn't been around long enough to develop a farm system, and he inherited a mostly barren wasteland in the minors. So he didn't have anyone to leverage in a strong trade. 

[weird-O]

I looked back: DD inherited the 8th best ranked system. Then Manny and Schoop graduated and they dropped to 18th the next year.

[dude]

I think we are in a similar situation (how we got here is way different but that's a different discussion) to when the O's were a decent team with a shot at a wild card. I wanted DD to go for it. We all knew the things that we needed to add to make us a legit threat but he kept going the dumpster diving route. Fine as you try and build a team but a weak ass approach IMO to try and get over the hump.

 

We have proven that we are now a team that is competitive but has a couple of glaring holes to make us a legit threat. So the question this winter is will the FO try and cheap its way to another run or will they really go for it? Either can work and either can fail. But your odds go way up if you go for it. Spend prudently and/or make some serious trades but this winter will be telling.

 

So I don't really agree with this and it goes to some of the stuff Mackus is saying and I'll respond to that too.

 

There are zero glaring holes.  That doesn't mean you can't improve a position or create more floor or a little bit of ceiling,...but there were real things those '12-'16 Teams needed to do.  2023 is in a different place. Today, you have layers of young players (nothing really to do with non-competitive behavior) that you can play.  You can't even play them all.  

 

THIS Team has proven it can be competitive, but THIS season isn't the floor going forward.  You can spend a bunch of money and actually be worse than this year because you're (may be) chasing the wrong things.

[bmore_ken]

DD only looked in the dumpster, because Angelos didn't value pitching, and wouldn't approve any significant investment in arms

So you have a source in the warehouse that tells you that's changed with the brothers in charge? Because I'm not confident it'll be any different with the brothers and Elias. 

[BSLSteveBirrer]

So I don't really agree with this and it goes to some of the stuff Mackus is saying and I'll respond to that too.

 

There are zero glaring holes.  That doesn't mean you can't improve a position or create more floor or a little bit of ceiling,...but there were real things those '12-'16 Teams needed to do.  2023 is in a different place. Today, you have layers of young players (nothing really to do with non-competitive behavior) that you can play.  You can't even play them all.  

 

THIS Team has proven it can be competitive, but THIS season isn't the floor going forward.  You can spend a bunch of money and actually be worse than this year because you're (may be) chasing the wrong things.

We can just agree to disagree

[Mackus]

So I don't really agree with this and it goes to some of the stuff Mackus is saying and I'll respond to that too.

 

There are zero glaring holes.  That doesn't mean you can't improve a position or create more floor or a little bit of ceiling,...but there were real things those '12-'16 Teams needed to do.  2023 is in a different place. Today, you have layers of young players (nothing really to do with non-competitive behavior) that you can play.  You can't even play them all.  

 

THIS Team has proven it can be competitive, but THIS season isn't the floor going forward.  You can spend a bunch of money and actually be worse than this year because you're (may be) chasing the wrong things.

 

Starting pitching has glaring holes.  You can't start Rodriguez, Bradish, Kremer, Wells, and Hall for 2023 even with Maine due back plus/minus July and say that everything is covered.  Fix one or two of those spots and then hope to gain a surplus later on.

 

Offense there isn't a glaring hole, but there are 3-4 spots that are only covered with barely passable options right now.  You don't have to improve any particular one of those spots, but going into the season with those same pieces would be a clear mistake beforehand.  Fix one or two of them.

 

There certainly isn't less to do now than there was from 2012-2017.