20 replies to this topic

[BSLChrisStoner]

MASN: Elias: "In terms of intangibles, I think we have a lot going for us"

https://www.masnspor...ot-going-for-us

[dude]

What a comically sad entry.

 

I mean, when I read the title, I thought I was going to read something about how Winning is more than just Talent and you get this ridiculousness.

 

I guess intellectual honesty isn't going to be a thing.

[weird-O]

I didn't think it was ridiculous, but it was very much a Capt. Obvious story. Of course winning teams are more attractive than losing teams. 

[dude]

I didn't think it was ridiculous, but it was very much a Capt. Obvious story. Of course winning teams are more attractive than losing teams. 

 

Right, but Roch is writing this entry as if...

 

1) they've actually accomplished something in that respect.  That's laughable. 

 

There's the narrative for the Gibson signing as if he picked BAL over TOR.  Gibson was unvaccinated on the last list I've seen published (2022?)...while Canada had changed their National Policy headed into the 2023 season (remember some Orioles couldn't play in Toronto in 2022), there's still a lot of risk for those unvaccinated, given the people in charge north of our border.

 

They haven't signed a single competitive contract yet.  They haven't really signed a multi-year deal and we don't seem likely to.  We're also crediting The Wall with something that hasn't happened.

 

2) and as if their past efforts were reflective of something other than gross incompetence. 

 

Syd Thrift was asleep.  He was hired to do the bidding of Peter and his sons.  Frank Wren left after 10 months (new, credible guy looking for first opportunity) because of the interference.  They didn't want a GM (they literally abandoned the title), they wanted a front.  Thrift was wiling to be a front.  For a good portion of those years, the Orioles wanted to be second in the bidding.  It served the purpose of a narrative of commitment without the consequence of commitment.  The things they did were dumb because they were dumb.  That's the limitations of a shadow FO that lacks authority.  That was true of every post-Gillick thru DD FO.  We see it head back that way after the post 2014 Toronto debacle.

 

The Orioles never had an issue with the "intangibles" to generating interest.  They play in the best park with awesome tradition and a super forgiving fan-base and media.  Everyone loves to play here, especially if they have a chance to play here.  Recruiting should be simple.

 

The Orioles are only (ever) limited by their own approach.  Period.  Elias can act like something is different in his conversations but there's no difference in the results of acquisition.  If you had to describe the vast majority of his acquisitions, the category would be "waivers".

 

It's year 6, how about we do something before we start taking laps. 

Orioles won 83 games in year 4 and 101 games in year 5 with no products of "rebuilding".

[weird-O]

Right, but Roch is writing this entry as if...

 

1) they've actually accomplished something in that respect.  That's laughable. 

 

There's the narrative for the Gibson signing as if he picked BAL over TOR.  Gibson was unvaccinated on the last list I've seen published (2022?)...while Canada had changed their National Policy headed into the 2023 season (remember some Orioles couldn't play in Toronto in 2022), there's still a lot of risk for those unvaccinated, given the people in charge north of our border.

 

They haven't signed a single competitive contract yet.  They haven't really signed a multi-year deal and we don't seem likely to.  We're also crediting The Wall with something that hasn't happened.

 

2) and as if their past efforts were reflective of something other than gross incompetence. 

 

Syd Thrift was asleep.  He was hired to do the bidding of Peter and his sons.  Frank Wren left after 10 months (new, credible guy looking for first opportunity) because of the interference.  They didn't want a GM (they literally abandoned the title), they wanted a front.  Thrift was wiling to be a front.  For a good portion of those years, the Orioles wanted to be second in the bidding.  It served the purpose of a narrative of commitment without the consequence of commitment.  The things they did were dumb because they were dumb.  That's the limitations of a shadow FO that lacks authority.  That was true of every post-Gillick thru DD FO.  We see it head back that way after the post 2014 Toronto debacle.

 

The Orioles never had an issue with the "intangibles" to generating interest.  They play in the best park with awesome tradition and a super forgiving fan-base and media.  Everyone loves to play here, especially if they have a chance to play here.  Recruiting should be simple.

 

The Orioles are only (ever) limited by their own approach.  Period.  Elias can act like something is different in his conversations but there's no difference in the results of acquisition.  If you had to describe the vast majority of his acquisitions, the category would be "waivers".

 

It's year 6, how about we do something before we start taking laps. 

Orioles won 83 games in year 4 and 101 games in year 5 with no products of "rebuilding".

As for section 1, I didn't know Canada's vaccination stance was a factor in Gibson signing w/ Baltimore. That certainly changes the narrative.

 

With section 2, I couldn't agree more. If they could afford to be at or near the top payroll in all of MLB for a stretch in the 90's, when at least one division rival already had their own RSN, they can afford to spend now. They were in the mid to upper $100M in 2017. That's why I'm firmly in the camp of fans who knows better than to expect to see the O's reel in a big fish.

 

With all that said, I respectfully say that you're reading far too much into a Roch article. Everyone knows what purpose he serves.  

[Ravens2006]

Basically anything written by "Roch" for "MASN" is not worth reading.  Carries the same value as a press release from John Angelos himself.

[dude]

As for section 1, I didn't know Canada's vaccination stance was a factor in Gibson signing w/ Baltimore. That certainly changes the narrative.

 

For clarity, I have never spoken or have any specific information wrt Gibson and his signing.  I put that thought in the Gibson thread originally.  It was more, when they were trying to sell him picking "Baltimore over Toronto", I thought..."I bet he's unvaccinated".  Looked up the most recent list and he was on it (2022).

 

That doesn't mean he didn't want to straight up pick Baltimore.  He's going to say the exact same things regardless, but to use this as some kind of macro example within the discussion would seem lacking at best.

 

That we put terrible signings like Segui and Cordova into this discussion as a foil to the current FA success (which doesn't exist) is absurd.

 

In 2018, regardless of the how, why and results....the Orioles signed Alex Cobb.  And again, we may not like some of the results, but before that, they signed Ubaldo Jiminez.  I'm not defending either signing, would have preferred different things and a different approach to well, just about everything, but the fact is those were more significant signings (perception) than anything (heck, everything) the Orioles have done in FA over the last 5 years.  Mike Mussina extended in Baltimore before the subsequent sillyness.  Scott Erickson.  Jimmy Key.

 

The Orioles have signed guys like Tejada, Palmerio and Javy Lopez.  Hey, Albert Belle. They've extended guys like Roberts, Jones, Markakis and Hardy well into FA years.

 

We can talk about the context for any of those, but to act like it's never happened before and The Wall is some thing, and act like we've actually done something (we haven't) and then use comparisons to guys like Segui and Cordova....seems, at best, intellectually dishonest.

 

A John Angelos shadow FO leveraging a senile Thrift as the front isn't the baseline for comparison.

[BSLChrisStoner]

  Frank Wren left after 10 months (new, credible guy looking for first opportunity) because of the interference.  

 

Negative ghost-rider. 

[dude]

Basically anything written by "Roch" for "MASN" is not worth reading.  Carries the same value as a press release from John Angelos himself.

 

I'm not going to go that far.  I think Roch does some good stuff.  I think talking to himself in his mailbag is ridiculous and then trying to defend not doing it make it worse....but he does lots of good stuff.  He has some access...although he recently quipped about "new changes to the Wall" (I think he said he looked out the window or something like that) and we should be reminded that at this point in 2022, he had zero idea the most significant renovation to any MLB stadium was about to happen.  

 

...but access is always going to come with some price.  You don't get access, especially in Baltimore, if you aren't part of the team at some level.  That's not to suggest he can't have some independence, but who gets to openly question/attack the people that sign their paycheck?

 

I don't expect him to have complete independence and honestly, like I already said, it's a friendly media environment in Baltimore and that's actually an attraction, if you can sell it.

 

With all that said, I respectfully say that you're reading far too much into a Roch article. Everyone knows what purpose he serves.  

 

That said, I think there's actually a good angle for the "intangibles" narrative...because the Orioles didn't win 101 games last year because of impact trades, signings or rebuilding.

 

Use this outlet to sell the Team nature and 2+2=6.  We didn't 'out-Talent' the League, they had a good team and played their asses off.  Use that as a catalyst for the work you are doing (or about to do).

 

Instead we're selling FA signings we haven't done and aren't going to do (hey, I'm ok being wrong, do good things) compared to the terrible signings of an utterly incompetent era.

 

I get it's hard to do a bunch of entries when there's so little going on, but at least survive the simplest factual scrutiny.

[dude]

Negative ghost-rider. 

 

Are you going with "fired" or the reason being the plane/Cal thing.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Are you going with "fired" or the reason being the plane/Cal thing.

 

It was much more personal than the plane / Cal thing; though that was legitimately on the list. 
But bottomline is he was 100% forced out. 

[dude]

It was much more personal than the plane / Cal thing; though that was legitimately on the list. 
But bottomline is he was 100% forced out. 

 

...and he was forced out because he expected to have more authority where there was a lot of 'influence' from the shadows and he wasn't going to be the compliant little bitch they wanted.

 

If you like the different nuance (that has nothing to do with this thread) of another perspective to get to the same point (that does have something to do with this thread), I accept.

[BSLChrisStoner]

...and he was forced out because he expected to have more authority where there was a lot of 'influence' from the shadows and he wasn't going to be the compliant little bitch they wanted.

 

If you like the different nuance (that has nothing to do with this thread) of another perspective to get to the same point (that does have something to do with this thread), I accept.

 

No, he was forced out for something much more personal non-baseball related. 
 

[Ravens2006]

No, he was forced out for something much more personal non-baseball related. 
 

 

What would that have been?

[BSLChrisStoner]

What would that have been?

Let's call it personality clash.  But it wasn't about between the lines.  And he wanted to stay.
Just saying Dude saying he left because of interference isn't right at all.  That's not what happened.

[BSLChrisStoner]

For clarity, I have never spoken or have any specific information wrt Gibson and his signing.  I put that thought in the Gibson thread originally.  It was more, when they were trying to sell him picking "Baltimore over Toronto", I thought..."I bet he's unvaccinated".  Looked up the most recent list and he was on it (2022).

 

 

The Orioles have signed guys like Tejada, Palmerio and Javy Lopez.  Hey, Albert Belle. They've extended guys like Roberts, Jones, Markakis and Hardy well into FA years.

 

We can talk about the context for any of those, but to act like it's never happened before and The Wall is some thing, and act like we've actually done something (we haven't) and then use comparisons to guys like Segui and Cordova....seems, at best, intellectually dishonest.

 

Those things happening 'before' aren't particularly relevant.  
That the O's were once a destination, doesn't mean they had any current cache.

Their '17 - '21 teams were horrible. Obviously some by design.
They had to become relevant again, and show success for what they were doing internally to have any appeal externally again.
Perfectly fine to say it hasn't made a difference yet (could argue Kimbrel) with actual results in-terms of acquisition... but perfectly reasonable to believe that the conversations Elias is having with Agents now is different coming off a 101 year, and a team that looks well-stacked for sometime.

[BSLChrisStoner]

That said, I think there's actually a good angle for the "intangibles" narrative...because the Orioles didn't win 101 games last year because of impact trades, signings or rebuilding.

 

Use this outlet to sell the Team nature and 2+2=6.  We didn't 'out-Talent' the League, they had a good team and played their asses off.  Use that as a catalyst for the work you are doing (or about to do).

The entire infrastructure of the organization was changed from the bottom up...  rebuilt if you were... with Elias taking over the organization.  Improvements in Scouting (not just International investment for the first time), but with their Advanced Scouting.  With a better use of Analytics and preparation.   No more times where you have someone like Britton leave the O's for NY, and say it was a night / day difference in-terms of what NY was doing vs. what Baltimore was doing.  

These improvements in advance scouting, analytics, and coaching... leading to better development through out the organization, including the ML level....  which is probably why we've seen the O's be able to identify players, and see them out-perform prior expectations. 

Would the O's still have had draft picks without tanking? Yes.
Could the O's have made those internal changes (International Scouting, Advance Scouting, Analytics, Development) without tanking? Yes. 

But they built with a systematic plan. 
Tear down.  Remove obligations. Lose. 
Create depth, develop, build a core on a similar timeframe...
 

Now what they should be doing with the minimal payroll is extending players they want through their arbitration years (harder every day... some should / should have been done prior to promotion.  Holiday would be the next example), and adding difference making talent to the core they've created. 

 

Call it whatever you want. 
Say the O's could be in the exact same scenario they are had they elected to try and win some games in '18-'21.

I'll acknowledge there are multiple ways for teams to be built.
I'll acknowledge they could have tried to be more competitive in '18-'21, and probably not have hurt their overall process. 

But imo, it should be acknowledged they operated a plan...  rebuilt the organization entirely (including gaining additional draft spending money by not trying to win a few more games in '18-'21), and are now set-up for an extended run of opportunity because of how they choose to build. 

 

[dude]

I have a lot of comments on what you wrote, but some people seem to struggle with handfuls of simple English words, so let me shorten it some to 2 points.

 

..... had they elected to try and win some games in '18-'21.

 

You mentioned 2018 multiple times as if they weren't trying to win in 2018.  In the context of this thread (signing players because of external Organizational perception) Alex Cobb was a more significant signing than everything combined Mike Elias will have done over now 6 years.  They were trying to win in 2018.  We can argue the merits of it or what they could/should have done, but there's no perspective where they didn't think they were trying to win.

 

You want to grind me out over the word 'left' that contextually has the exact same relevance whether it's 'left' or 'forced out' or 'fired'....but you seem completely comfortable making up the 2018 thing, completely out of context.

 

The Orioles wound up picking 1st in 2019 (Elias first season) for the exact same reasons (the other thread) the WhiteSox are picking early in the 2024 draft.  Or the Astros when they picked Correa at 1-1. Or the RedSox a couple years ago when they got to draft Mayer at 1-4.  None of those teams were planning on drafting early, the Performance imploded for reasons outside of "Talent".

 

Why those Teams failed or the 2023 Orioles succeeded should the the angle on this 'intangibles' discussion. 

[Mackus]

I'll acknowledge there are multiple ways for teams to be built.

I'll acknowledge they could have tried to be more competitive in '18-'21, and probably not have hurt their overall process. 

But imo, it should be acknowledged they operated a plan...  rebuilt the organization entirely (including gaining additional draft spending money by not trying to win a few more games in '18-'21), and are now set-up for an extended run of opportunity because of how they choose to build. 

 

 

Disagree with only the bolded, especially as it pertains to the points you acknowledged above.  The team is now set up (or rather, would be if ownership was invested in any meaningful way...but that's a different topic) for a long run because of how well they executed the fundamentals and not just because of the specific plan that they chose to implement.  Like you said above, there are many ways they could've gone about this, including not completely punting from 2019-2022 (the 2022 punt attempt was blocked by the players and coaches).  The reason we're so well set up is primarily because of them kicking ass at the things that would've been a part of all of those reasonable plans, and not because the plan that they did choose gave them significantly greater opportunities for future (now present) improvement than the others did.

 

Holliday will end up being basically the one unique thing (as dude likes to describe it) that will have come out from the years of tanking that we couldn't have gotten if we'd tried to be not quite as embarrassing.  I think he's a big part of the future picture, so its not meaningless, but he hasn't been any part of getting to this point and nearly everything else we've got we could've also had in a non-tank model over those seasons.

[dude]

Call it whatever you want. 

Say the O's could be in the exact same scenario they are had they elected to try and win some games in '18-'21.

I'll acknowledge there are multiple ways for teams to be built.
I'll acknowledge they could have tried to be more competitive in '18-'21, and probably not have hurt their overall process. 

 

Here's why this (should be) important.

 

You comments avoid like 4 or 5 or 6 years worth of context where you (and many others) argued vehemently that there was only one way.  You read a book that wouldn't even have been written if the (factually proven) cheating scandal had broken earlier.  Nobody has been called more names than me.  I've stood on an island (and I think it was you) suggested how I thought I could be right and everyone (everyone) else is wrong. 

 

Today, you avoid ALL of the context of the things you've (and many others) written and defended for years and act like, now that the facts are in, I wasn't really right and well, you weren't really wrong.

 

For clarity, let me point out why this is (or again, should be) important.  I couldn't care less that "I'm right".  I don't post to be right. My view is not a defense of uninformed ideology that I must hold onto and I don't generate any self worth from the internet.

 

In the context of discussion in the public square (what this is) we should align ourselves with truth and move away from uninformed group think. Being wrong is ok, we can all learn and move forward. in the arenas of Baseball and everywhere else.

 

We should kill any merit of "rebuilding" in the Baseball community.  All of the things you like that the Orioles have done are centric in my plan and should be in anyone's.....but we hold onto the "Myth of Rebuilding" not because it has merit, but because we refuse to let it die.  It's a tool for a purpose that has nothing to do with winning more Baseball games, ever.

 

Predictable like the Sun tomorrow morning, nearly everyone will try and align any success the Orioles have (and we've already seen it, despite the meritless nature of it) with "rebuilding" and the further we move forward, the more adamant people will be about it's importance because they are further separated from the facts of today. 

 

The Orioles won 101 games without the merits of rebuilding and there's zero accountability for the meritless nature of rebuilding across all Teams, but this community WILL NOT LET IT GO. 

 

Terrible ideas and a lack of accountability for the consequences is a pretty common theme in a lot of areas of this community (non-Baseball).