10 replies to this topic

[BSLRoseKatz]

Feel like this is a good exercise to get everyone's expectations on the record before the season starts, please list...

 

1. The amount of wins the O's need for this season to be a resounding success, an A+ season

2. The amount of wins they need for an acceptable outcome, a B- season

3. The amount of wins where if they don't reach it, this year is a failure or at least a major disappointment 

[BSLBobPhelan]

1. 90+
2. 85-89
3. <82

[BSLRoseKatz]

1. 90 - Good round number and it'd mean you're at +7 from the prior year

2. 86 - That was the amount of wins they needed for the playoffs last year 

3. 81 - They need to be at least .500 this year. Can't clear .500 and then go backwards with largely the same roster.

[You Play to Win the Game]

90+

81+

78+

[Mackus]

1. One more than the first eliminated team (i.e. A+ from me if you make the playoffs)

2. 82

3. 80

 

#2 and #3 are so close to me because of the lack of buy-in from management over the offseason.  Another over .500 season would be progress (even if its not literally more wins) and I'll be at least content with that result, but any backsliding will get my dander up and re-open the wounds of this devastating offseason.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I prefer wins and think we will get them but the pure number of wins dont mean as much as proving this young core is legit. Maybe Hyde is a suspect manager. Maybe we get nothing from the non or fringe core guys. If enough of the young core guys prove they are legit and belong the difference between 75 wins and 90 wins is minimal. I want 90 wins but I need to know this roster is set for the long haul.

[Mike B]

90

 

84

 

less than 80

[Pedro Cerrano]

1. Playoffs
2. Meaningful games in late September
3. Out of contention by 9/1

No firm #s but that’s where I’m at

[makoman]

1. Playoffs
2. Meaningful games in late September
3. Out of contention by 9/1

No firm #s but that’s where I’m at

I was going to give #s but this is really what I feel. Acceptable is matching what they did last year.

[dude]

1. Playoffs
2. Meaningful games in late September
3. Out of contention by 9/1

No firm #s but that’s where I’m at

 

This is where I'm generally at too.  My only change would be 'out of contention' date to the trade deadline. We should be having a conversation about 'what we need to do to compete' (and the varying opportunities) at the trade deadline.  If we're not even in the conversation, that is bad.

[dude]

...<<break from post above>>....

 

Feel like this is a good exercise to get everyone's expectations on the record before the season starts, please list...

 

1. The amount of wins the O's need for this season to be a resounding success, an A+ season

2. The amount of wins they need for an acceptable outcome, a B- season

3. The amount of wins where if they don't reach it, this year is a failure or at least a major disappointment 

 

Shouldn't this be the conversation EVERY season?  Everyone will answer this question as you asked it, but some may suggest there's context to it (the specific Orioles situation) related to this season through the lens of Year 5 of 'rebuilding'.  

 

The 2023 team has nothing to do (or expected to have) anything to do with non-competitive behavior over the last 4 years.

 

Many someones, if the Orioles do make the Playoffs, will crown it as an achievement causal from non-competitive behavior.

 

The assessment you asked for should be EVERY season.  Make the Playoffs, fall short trying or the season is a failure.  Regardless of the approach or the result, the Team should be doing all of the other things away from the Major League Club to compete now and into the future.

 

If the question you wanted to ask is "What are the [2023 win totals] that make the last 4 years of non-competitive behavior (failure) acceptable"....that is a different question although some people are answering that question  with their answer to the more generic question.

 

Nothing can happen in 2023 to justify non-competitive behavior.  The 2023 Team could be a better team than we currently project it to be even if we won more games in each of the last 4 years.  With appropriate credit to the things the Organization has done well, none of it has anything to do with intentionally losing.