93 replies to this topic

[TwentyThirtyFive]

The Dodgers just got through the playoffs pretty easily with Flaherty, Buehler, Yammamoto and BP starts. You need solid, consistent SP but IMO having a true ace is overrated. I just dont want to invest in Burnes. Mostly because of his peripherals and just natural concerns about any pitcher but also because of the above.

[Mackus]

The Dodgers just got through the playoffs pretty easily with Flaherty, Buehler, Yammamoto and BP starts. You need solid, consistent SP but IMO having a true ace is overrated. I just dont want to invest in Burnes. Mostly because of his peripherals and just natural concerns about any pitcher but also because of the above.

 

One example of it working doesn't mean its a the best idea.  The Dodgers themselves have shown they don't think that's a great strategy, as they've invested incredibly heavily in pitching (Yamamoto, Glasnow, Ohtani) coming into this year.

 

I think there is wisdom in the idea of the longterm outlook of pitching being so risky that its not worth the squeeze to sign even a stud pitcher to a super long-term deal.  But I don't think there is wisdom in saying a true ace is overrated.  It's not, neither in the regular season when they give you a great chance of winning every time they take the mound nor in the postseason when they can ramp up and be used even more often.  The extreme cost to acquire that ace may not be worth the risk, but if you have an ace, they are wildly beneficial.

[Mackus]

I think the O's and Rubenstein will eventually be willing to spend up to just under the luxury tax threshold ($241M in 2025).  All my plans and projections are based on that assumption.  Not saying they up payroll to that level immediately, but I think within a few years we could be in the $225M range plus or minus.  That's in the 10-15th in MLB range.

 

If we think they'll only go to $150-175M max, that changes a lot of the risk/reward calculus.  Being a bit more bullish on how much they can spend, that makes me more willing to throw a lot of it at Burnes.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

One example of it working doesn't mean its a the best idea.  The Dodgers themselves have shown they don't think that's a great strategy, as they've invested incredibly heavily in pitching (Yamamoto, Glasnow, Ohtani) coming into this year.

 

I think there is wisdom in the idea of the longterm outlook of pitching being so risky that its not worth the squeeze to sign even a stud pitcher to a super long-term deal.  But I don't think there is wisdom in saying a true ace is overrated.  It's not, neither in the regular season when they give you a great chance of winning every time they take the mound nor in the postseason when they can ramp up and be used even more often.  

 

One example of it working doesn't mean its a the best idea.  The Dodgers themselves have shown they don't think that's a great strategy, as they've invested incredibly heavily in pitching (Yamamoto, Glasnow, Ohtani) coming into this year.

 

I think there is wisdom in the idea of the longterm outlook of pitching being so risky that its not worth the squeeze to sign even a stud pitcher to a super long-term deal.  But I don't think there is wisdom in saying a true ace is overrated.  It's not, neither in the regular season when they give you a great chance of winning every time they take the mound nor in the postseason when they can ramp up and be used even more often.  

To clear up my take here.  Obviously I prefer  stud SP. Appreciate what Burnes gave us this year. Love the way Bradish was trending at the end of last year and into this year. I just dont think its neccessary or smart to pay out a huge contract for one. Especially for a franchise that is going to have a payroll that is middling(if we are lucky)

[ivanbalt]

Everyone would like to keep Burnes, including me.

 

What's the top limit of a contract you offer him.

What Mackus said (7/245) or maybe a little more to the dollars.

[Mackus]

To clear up my take here.  Obviously I prefer  stud SP. Appreciate what Burnes gave us this year. Love the way Bradish was trending at the end of last year and into this year. I just dont think its neccessary or smart to pay out a huge contract for one. Especially for a franchise that is going to have a payroll that is middling(if we are lucky)

 

Whether the juice is worth the squeeze is certainly up for debate.  Its an expensive squeeze, for sure.  And what percentage of our overall payroll that represents is a big factor.

[BaltBird 24]

Burnes numbers started to improve once he started to throw his sweeper more often over the last month of the season.

In September he had a 1.20 ERA in 30 IP, 31K, a WHIP under 1, and an OBA of .194.

There was talk he was holding his arm back for FA. Maybe he unleashes the full arsenal for whoever signs him to the mega contract.

[dude]

What Mackus said (7/245) or maybe a little more to the dollars.

 

responding to you and Mackus here....

 

Let's just round up to 250M.  Burnes plays the 2025 season at 30 years old.  If Burnes wants 250M, the years, structure....none of that really makes any difference UNLESS your priority is on the optics of the contract (Total value, NPV, AAV).

 

If he just wanted to stay in Baltimore for 250M, My guess would be that's pretty easy to accomplish.

 

You'll likely have the Mets involved in his market.  They will be comfortable leveraging money to accomplish anything in ways the Orioles won't be. 

 

If Burnes wants to be an Oriole, just lay down the number and figure out the structure. My guess is that's not an option and they (Boras) are looking for a protracted courting that consumes the industry for a while (Soto too).  If Burnes doesn't sign here early, my contract is off the table.  Totally uninterested in him (like most pitchers that do this) limiting their offseason workouts to minimize injury potential before they lock in their guaranteed money. 

 

Now and get ready or forget it.  I'm comfortable suggesting we should forget it. 

 

Execute the plan now.  

[Mackus]

  If Burnes doesn't sign here early, my contract is off the table.  Totally uninterested in him (like most pitchers that do this) limiting their offseason workouts to minimize injury potential before they lock in their guaranteed money. 

 

I think this is an intriguing idea, that I probably wouldn't have considered much before Snell and Montgomery really stunk it up (at least early in Snell's case) after a late start.  I think "now" is probably too aggressive with it, so would question what you mean exactly by "early", but sometime in January as a final offer makes sense in order to get a normal ramp up to the season.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I wish Stoner would execute a plan

[You Play to Win the Game]

I think the O's and Rubenstein will eventually be willing to spend up to just under the luxury tax threshold ($241M in 2025).  All my plans and projections are based on that assumption.  Not saying they up payroll to that level immediately, but I think within a few years we could be in the $225M range plus or minus.  That's in the 10-15th in MLB range.

 

If we think they'll only go to $150-175M max, that changes a lot of the risk/reward calculus.  Being a bit more bullish on how much they can spend, that makes me more willing to throw a lot of it at Burnes.

Are you on crack?

[Mackus]

Are you on crack?

I'll be disappointed if Rubenstein runs the team like the Angelos family. I don't think he needs to pull profit from the team to maintain his lifestyle. We went to $150M ten years ago, getting back there seems like a bear minimum and a little more plus inflation to get to $225M seems plausible assuming revenues support it which I think they do.

Again don't think we get anywhere near there in 2025, but trending upward over time to that approximate max. I'll believe it when I see it, but also have optimism that it's possible.

[ivanbalt]

responding to you and Mackus here....

 

Let's just round up to 250M.  Burnes plays the 2025 season at 30 years old.  If Burnes wants 250M, the years, structure....none of that really makes any difference UNLESS your priority is on the optics of the contract (Total value, NPV, AAV).

 

If he just wanted to stay in Baltimore for 250M, My guess would be that's pretty easy to accomplish.

 

You'll likely have the Mets involved in his market.  They will be comfortable leveraging money to accomplish anything in ways the Orioles won't be. 

 

If Burnes wants to be an Oriole, just lay down the number and figure out the structure. My guess is that's not an option and they (Boras) are looking for a protracted courting that consumes the industry for a while (Soto too).  If Burnes doesn't sign here early, my contract is off the table.  Totally uninterested in him (like most pitchers that do this) limiting their offseason workouts to minimize injury potential before they lock in their guaranteed money. 

 

Now and get ready or forget it.  I'm comfortable suggesting we should forget it. 

 

Execute the plan now.  

After last offseason's failure with Snell and Montgomery, Boras and Burnes may not be looking for the protracted courting.  One can hope at least.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I'll be disappointed if Rubenstein runs the team like the Angelos family. I don't think he needs to pull profit from the team to maintain his lifestyle. We went to $150M ten years ago, getting back there seems like a bear minimum and a little more plus inflation to get to $225M seems plausible assuming revenues support it which I think they do.

Again don't think we get anywhere near there in 2025, but trending upward over time to that approximate max. I'll believe it when I see it, but also have optimism that it's possible.

Agree. Im optimistic we get back to being middle of the pack payroll wise. Also agree its not going to be overnight

[BSLMikeLowe]

No surprise, but it’s now official that Montgomery exercised his $22.5M option for ‘25.

[dude]

After last offseason's failure with Snell and Montgomery, Boras and Burnes may not be looking for the protracted courting.  One can hope at least.

 

I think if we went through the evidence of past results/behavior/response, we'd see that there's no accountability on Boras' part.  The groin strike he took last year (again) to his approach will likely incentivize the opposite of the behavior you're looking for this offseason with the best pitcher and hitter in a pretty limited player market.

[dude]

Again don't think we get anywhere near there in 2025, but trending upward over time to that approximate max. I'll believe it when I see it, but also have optimism that it's possible.

 

I agree that Rubenstein and Co will have a different/better approach to the payroll, but where we separate some is that it won't be about expanding the payroll.  If the payroll expands, they'll do it and if the right sets of conditions presented themselves, could easily see them headed up beyond past....but it won't be because they are looking to spend the money.

 

I think PGAs approach and Rubenstein's approach may wind up more similar (John was for completely different reasons out of necessity).

 

I think the quotes that some have highlighted from a recent article get cherry picked out of context.  The most important thing there was a willingness to spend "when the opportunity presents itself".  That's good and correct.  I'll keep arguing that you (the player) have to want to be here.  The PGA version of that was more of a loyalty thing that they valued the players they knew.  I think Rubenstein will be have a wider net there (not only internal relationships) but you still have to want to be here.

 

That's my point about Burnes.  If he said, "hey, I really like it here in Baltimore, let's figure this out", then I say there's a pretty good chance.  Burnes didn't pick Boras to be his agent because he wanted a more limited end-game financially.  If Corbin wants to make me wrong here, go for it. <<...and Dave, I'm gonna need more than a hat.>>

[dude]

7/$245M is my upper bound.  Haven't thought how things like opt outs and options and deferrals could alter the value, so there is a lot of fuzz around that.  

 

I don't think the years mean as much as the total, but I'll throw together my offer.

 

8/250

 

20M SB

25M per year (2025-2032)

30M final payment (3032)

25M Team option (2033) - if team option is exercised, final payment is deferred over 2 years without interest (2034/35 @15M)

25M Team option (2034) - if second team option is exercised, final payment is deferred over 4 years, without interest (2035-38 @7.5M)

Burnes can reduce final payment to 15M and become a FA (reject team option) so that winds up 8/235 to Os and he can pursue the Scherzer/Verlander scenario

Both options wind up being 10/300

 

To the 'sign early' discussion...it's 250M guaranteed.  If you don't want to play in Baltimore for the next 8+ years for 250+M, that's fine, but at 250M, we're not going to keep negotiating.  You want to be here or you don't.  No hard feelings if you don't, but I'm moving on immediately to Luis Castillo and/or the other scenarios above.  

[BSLChrisStoner]

I'm not interested in giving him 7 or 8 years, just to spread out the total dollars. 

 

Everyone would want him for 3-4 years. 
Pump up the AAV over a max of 5 years. 

The O's can certainly do that given the limited payroll obligations they have elsewhere, even as some get into their arb years.

The higher AAV might scare off other teams who would prefer to spread out the total dollars, and are brushing up against the cap.

 

Rather have the 'pain' of paying him more per year than you might prefer in the years you expect him to be productive, vs. having him on the books for anything when he figures to be done. 

 

Yes, realize those spread out dollars on extended deals will look that much cheaper 7-8 years from now.

[Mackus]

I think the idea of a shorter term deal for more per year will only be feasible if his overall market is lower than I'd expect.  If he can get 7 or 8 years at $35M a year, he's not going to sign for 5/$200M instead.  But if he can only get 6/$200M, then maybe you can convince him to take 4/$160M instead.  I'll be very surprised if he takes that type of deal, but I like the idea if you can convince him.