Photo

BSL: On BA's Top 10 Oriole Prospects and a Sustainable Future


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 27 October 2014 - 07:36 PM

Today Baseball America released their list of the Top 10 O's prospects, and the group was headlined by the usual suspects. Bundy and Harvey are #1 and #2 on the list, but the talent level predictably drops off from there. The O's farm system produced some high major league talent this season with Kevin Gausman, Jonathan Schoop, and Caleb Joseph making significant contributions to a squad that made a deep run into the playoffs. This means some new names come into the mix, and highlights the much talked about deficiencies of the O's system.

 

http://baltimorespor...-system-future/


@JeffLongBP

#2 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,765 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 27 October 2014 - 10:05 PM

Bundy, Harvey and Sisco are real prospects if healthy.

Walker is borderline for me but I was encouraged by him this year and I think he is closer to being a solid, but likely unspectacular, regular in the majors.

After that, it gets ugly.

This has to be improved on long term.
@BSLRobShields

#3 FFH

FFH

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:24 AM

 

Today Baseball America released their list of the Top 10 O's prospects, and the group was headlined by the usual suspects. Bundy and Harvey are #1 and #2 on the list, but the talent level predictably drops off from there. The O's farm system produced some high major league talent this season with Kevin Gausman, Jonathan Schoop, and Caleb Joseph making significant contributions to a squad that made a deep run into the playoffs. This means some new names come into the mix, and highlights the much talked about deficiencies of the O's system.
 
http://baltimorespor...-system-future/


Good points at the end of the article concerning offseason decisions.

I wonder, is 2015 really their year? Do you think there's a light at the end of the tunnel for the minors if they continue to use the same philosophy in their player development?

#4 RShack

RShack

    http://tinyurl.com/fake-news-BS

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,483 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:55 AM

IMO the whole challenge is to avoid the trap of thinking about it in either-or terms... as in *either* the go for it in 2015 and face a later rebuild *or* they somehow weaken their 2015 chances to benefit the farm system... that's a false choice.   The hard part is how are DD and Buck gonna avoid that... which is why it's a good thing that they're in charge rather than the likes of us...


 "You say you've lost your faith, but that's not where its at.

  You have no faith to lose, and ya know it" - Bob Dylan


#5 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 07:51 AM

Here's the thing. At the moment, I believe that we have 1 first round pick, 1 second round pick, a second round competitive balance pick and probably at least one first round compensation pick and maybe a second for 2015. In 2016 we'll likely have 1 first round pick, 2 first round compensation picks, a second round pick and possibly a competitive balance pick. That should be enough to add some young talent into the system. If this team doesn't sign Markakis then we'll have a good bit of extra money that can be used on the international market. A lot of teams can't sign the top guys for the next few years.

 

Losing Wieters, Cruz, Markakis and Davis will hurt. So will losing O'Day, Norris and Chen. We should have enough money to replace some of that talent though. I'd expect us to have at least an extra $30-50 million if we lose all of those players. You can do a lot with that sort of money.



#6 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:38 AM

Here's the thing. At the moment, I believe that we have 1 first round pick, 1 second round pick, a second round competitive balance pick and probably at least one first round compensation pick and maybe a second for 2015. In 2016 we'll likely have 1 first round pick, 2 first round compensation picks, a second round pick and possibly a competitive balance pick. That should be enough to add some young talent into the system. If this team doesn't sign Markakis then we'll have a good bit of extra money that can be used on the international market. A lot of teams can't sign the top guys for the next few years.

 

Losing Wieters, Cruz, Markakis and Davis will hurt. So will losing O'Day, Norris and Chen. We should have enough money to replace some of that talent though. I'd expect us to have at least an extra $30-50 million if we lose all of those players. You can do a lot with that sort of money.

 

Yeah, so I made a point to not mention the draft for one very simple reason. Those draft picks are (besides being a complete crapshoot) liable to be a wide variety of talent levels and MLB ETAs. For example, they could take guys like Finnegan who will be in MLB within a year if they think they can win in 2016 also. So we can't just say "we have a lot of draft picks, that will re-stock our farm system". We don't know that. Theoretically, that's 100% correct. In reality though, it's not something we can rely on.

 

It's also a pretty big stretch IMO to discuss them using $$$ on the international market to replenish the farm system. Not that it's not a great idea (it is), it's just unlikely.


@JeffLongBP

#7 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:39 AM

IMO the whole challenge is to avoid the trap of thinking about it in either-or terms... as in *either* the go for it in 2015 and face a later rebuild *or* they somehow weaken their 2015 chances to benefit the farm system... that's a false choice.   The hard part is how are DD and Buck gonna avoid that... which is why it's a good thing that they're in charge rather than the likes of us...

 

At a certain point it's not a false choice. Ask the Phillies. or the Yankees.

 

I'm not saying the O's are down that path yet, but you do have to prioritize one timeframe or another. Otherwise you're just treading water and hoping you don't get too much worse while other teams are getting better.


@JeffLongBP

#8 JeffLong

JeffLong

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,826 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:47 AM

Good points at the end of the article concerning offseason decisions.

I wonder, is 2015 really their year? Do you think there's a light at the end of the tunnel for the minors if they continue to use the same philosophy in their player development?

 

Personally I think it's tough. There's the bird in the hand (2015) versus the two in the bush (2017+) where you kind of have to decide what kind of team are you. We always talk about the core, but realistically you have two cores. So the question is, what is your best bet for a World Series?

 

My gut tells me that trading Davis & Wieters for near-MLB ready talent and going after the WS in Hardy's last year as an Oriole is the way to go. That said, it won't hurt the team too terribly to maintain status quo for 2015 and hope to make a run at the postseason either (though losing Davis & Wieters for draft picks rather than prospects would hurt their long term fortunes).

 

It's give and take. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either build the system through trades OR build the system through the draft and make a run at the playoffs now. You can try both, but you're only going to hurt the prospects of either happening unless you're extremely careful about how you do it.


@JeffLongBP

#9 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:50 AM

Yeah, so I made a point to not mention the draft for one very simple reason. Those draft picks are (besides being a complete crapshoot) liable to be a wide variety of talent levels and MLB ETAs. For example, they could take guys like Finnegan who will be in MLB within a year if they think they can win in 2016 also. So we can't just say "we have a lot of draft picks, that will re-stock our farm system". We don't know that. Theoretically, that's 100% correct. In reality though, it's not something we can rely on.

 

I agree that they may fail. But the fact is that we should be expecting more draft picks than usual and they have a chance of success. There's greater potential that our 2015 and 2016 drafts could help our system because we have all of those extra picks. Likewise drafting nobody in 2014 definitely hurt the system.

 

The Phillies and Yankees are stuck because they signed players to large deals and those players have fallen apart. The Orioles aren't close to that boat. Jones, Jimenez, Yoon and Hardy are the only guys we have under contract in 2016.


  • JeffLong likes this

#10 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,339 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:05 AM

At a certain point it's not a false choice. Ask the Phillies. or the Yankees.

 

I'm not saying the O's are down that path yet, but you do have to prioritize one timeframe or another. Otherwise you're just treading water and hoping you don't get too much worse while other teams are getting better.

 

It's give and take. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either build the system through trades OR build the system through the draft and make a run at the playoffs now. You can try both, but you're only going to hurt the prospects of either happening unless you're extremely careful about how you do it.

 

I agree with Rshack....it is a false choice.  There's reasons that the Phillies nad Yankees take the path thay've taken, but it's their job to weigh those things and figure out the short-term and long-term plan.

 

Nothing prevents you from doing both.  There's certainly different risks, but the Orioles are getting suckered into the Phillies/Yankees mode right now....because we get a little lucky with a group over a 3 year span.  Let's bring that back to Melewski's comments in the BA writeup.....he suggests the Orioles have "proven" that 2012 and 2013 aren't flukey with their 96 win effort in 2014.  Maybe, but you have to realize that there is (IMO) limited upside moving forward with this group.  If OAK does anything for Billy Beane, it's that the market limitations JUSTIFY the turnover he needs to do regardless.  When you're in NY....you can't use market limitations to make (and take) competitive sustainment risks.  

 

The Orioles ARE getting locked into that right now.  The best SS in the AL is playing 3B...but we HAVE to sign JJH (who I really like...nothing personal) to a 3/40 deal.  Many people think it's a great deal.....

 

 

....but I'd have rather gone after someone like Javier Baez or Makiel Franco and slide MM over.  Both of those teams could deal those players from depth, but you have to do something to help them.  Both of them have bad contracts they'd probably like to unload so...

 

If you did something with the Cubs where they get Tillman and something for Edwin Jackson and Baez (maybe you get a 3rd team like SEA or SD involved with Tillman) then you are accepting the risk between Jackson and Tillman (as a bridge to HHarvey in 2017) and the rookie (Baez) versus the veteran (Hardy)....it could still work out great in 2015.....but you get add a longer term piece and aren't eating up resources.

 

Same in Philly.  They played Asche this year and Franco will push him.  They need to get rid of Howard......if you took 25M of Howard's contract could you do something like ZDavies and Bridwell for Howard, cash and Franco?

 

I'm not saying those are the exact deals, but it's certainly a framework to work around.  Today our answer is to overpay Hardy.  Nobody noticed how many more balls were in the dirt to 1B this year?

 

You have situations in both LAD and PIT where they have some high end OFers that are blocked and the Orioles are good fits with several different packages including talent and money.

 

If the Orioles had Carl Crawford and Joc Pederson on the corners this year versus DeAza and Markakis....would that be OK?  The first option is cheaper and has more long-term potential.  Could we bat Joc Pederson 3rd this year?  Could we still win with that?....or are we desperate to have Markakis no matter what?

 

PIT is playing Bell at 1B in the AFL to try and pretend that he's not blocked in the OF.  Even if that happens (I say it won't, whatever) there's still Austin Meadows there...also blocked....are they moving him to 3B?  If you sign Nick (2+), then go get Meadows to be your longer term plan at leadoff.

 

Right now....the Orioles don't plan for a player package, they are sort of assuming whatever falls to them will work.  It's actually been very successful the last couple of years, although I question it's viability as a longer term strategy.

 

DD says "our best players will come from within" because he doesn't want to (not allowed to) compete for top talent in FA....OK....but if you are going to do that (I've said this before)  you need to have a system that can legitimize that position and I'd suggest it's not there.



#11 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,339 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:30 AM

..... the international market. A lot of teams can't sign the top guys for the next few years.

 

It's also a pretty big stretch IMO to discuss them using $$$ on the international market to replenish the farm system. Not that it's not a great idea (it is), it's just unlikely.

 

So I'm not a big international guy....I think if you're doing everything you can, you certainly want to use it.....but it's not a requirement for long-term success....

 

However.....and I rarely say this for IFAs....I'm all in for a guy that could be our top prospect next year...

...Vlad Jr.

 

I started the discussion in the Minors section (Chris added it to the International thread) but there's a handful of things that COULD work in the Orioles favor if they chose to leverage them.

 

The Orioles don't work at the top of the IFA market, so if they just went balls-out to sign him...and never signed another IFA for >250k....who cares....they don't really use the market anyway.

 

You have 3 things.  Money, Opportunity and Relationships.  

 

Money: The Orioles have the money if they want to.....although this is one of the areas that I have issues with the Hardy contract.  You are paying hardy ~33M over the next 3 years.  Howard, Franco and Vlad Jr is likely the same 33M.

 

Opportunity: If the guy is looking to play RF....there's a zero% chance I want to lock in Nick for 4 years.  A team like the Dodgers (because of their OF situation) can't leverage the opportunity that the Orioles could present. Get to the Majors (and begin your HoF career...yeah...I know) as soon as you can.

 

Relationships: So this is where the Orioles are typically a disaster, but FF has brought some historical credibility to the Organization and both FF and DD were in Montreal when they added Vlad Sr.  It's possible that's a huge chip that no other team can match.

 

I'm confident that the Orioles have a better feel for the opportunity than I do, but Vlad Jr gets me off Josh Bell and onto other options with those resources.  

 

If we're allowed to get presents in July....that would be a good one for Oriole Land. 



#12 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,765 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:50 AM

You have to do everything..international market, draft, trades and utilize the comp pick system.

We potentially have a bunch of comp picks coming our way over the next year.
  • JeremyStrain likes this
@BSLRobShields

#13 aurelius

aurelius
  • Members
  • 458 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:07 PM

When a GM says "our best players will come from within", it's because he thinks that's what the listener (the fans) wants to hear, within the context of whatever was being asked.

OTOH a GM would never present a "win now" and "build sustainably for the future" as an either-or option. That is because when a GM speaks, he is telling the listener (the fans) what he thinks they want to hear.

 

My point is you really can't trust what a GM says publicly, especially when he's making general/philosophical statements about the team and it's direction. Probably the only exception to that is when a team is a train-wreck and they have to admit it's a rebuild. Even then, they'll insist "we're still trying to play for something right now". It's GM-speak and it's mostly meaningless.



#14 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,339 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:28 PM

When a GM says "our best players will come from within", it's because he thinks that's what the listener (the fans) wants to hear, within the context of whatever was being asked.

OTOH a GM would never present a "win now" and "build sustainably for the future" as an either-or option. That is because when a GM speaks, he is telling the listener (the fans) what he thinks they want to hear.

 

My point is you really can't trust what a GM says publicly, especially when he's making general/philosophical statements about the team and it's direction. Probably the only exception to that is when a team is a train-wreck and they have to admit it's a rebuild. Even then, they'll insist "we're still trying to play for something right now". It's GM-speak and it's mostly meaningless.

 

I disagree.  When people in leadership positions say stuff like that....and DD has said it many times, in different forums over several years.....it's about expectation management.

 

He's telling the fans that they shouldn't expect the team to competitive at the front of the FA market or make major trades.  He's telling you they'll continue to use a value management strategy for player acquisition.  And he backs up those words with his actions.

 

If that's going to be true....in a thread about Oriole prospect rankings.....then you'd hope to see more front end talent depth.  That's the issue.  We've traded away a number of guys (ERod, Hader) that could be part of that internal promotion system.

 

I agree with Matt (and others) that the next year or so is a great opportunity to start adding some depth to the system given the number of upper picks they should have....but they still have to do more with those picks....and it doesn't solve the lack of significant help at the top of the system.

 

If you don't pursue external options and you don't have internal options....you'll run out of options.



#15 aurelius

aurelius
  • Members
  • 458 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:46 PM

Yah, I left out the expectation management being part of the drill. There is that.... keeping everyones' expectations in check is a good thing for GMs to do, if he likes his job.



#16 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 12:53 PM

The Os strategy in previous years - right or wrong - has been to allocate nearly all available money to the major league club to try and maximize current wins, while saving enough money for the draft to sign their picks and using whatever few dollars are left over to go after international players.  This strategy is the reason why we're gone after guys like Baez, Walker, Gonzalez, Atkins, Vlad and Cruz (it doesn't always fail).

 

It's possible, maybe even probable, that in 2015 we'll end up signing someone like Markakis or LaRoche or an expensive reliever like Uehara or Soriano. If we get one of those guys and keep Norris (using the sixth starter in the bullpen instead of McFarland) then we'll probably be in the same situation as those other years.

 

But this club doesn't have so many holes. It's not impossible that we might end up with extra money not spent on the payroll because there's no need. And if so there could be money to spend on international players. If the Os were to sign Aoki and Young plus trade Norris then we'd probably be $15 million under budget. I tend to think that some of that money could be allocated to the international market.

 

I'm beginning to wonder....



#17 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,339 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 28 October 2014 - 01:16 PM

If the Os were to sign Aoki and Young plus trade Norris then we'd probably be $15 million under budget. 

 

I don't agree with a lot of that post (I think it's different then you've suggested), but beyond that, ....

 

....I'm curious as to what you think the budget is.



#18 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 01:38 PM

I don't agree with a lot of that post (I think it's different then you've suggested), but beyond that, ....

 

....I'm curious as to what you think the budget is.

 

$115-$120 million. $125 isn't out of the question.



#19 RShack

RShack

    http://tinyurl.com/fake-news-BS

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,483 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 03:12 PM

At a certain point it's not a false choice. Ask the Phillies. or the Yankees.

 

I'm not saying the O's are down that path yet, but you do have to prioritize one timeframe or another. Otherwise you're just treading water and hoping you don't get too much worse while other teams are getting better.

 

The Phillies and the MFY's painted themselves into a corner, no doubt about that... but that says nothing about anything, except how having too much money can make you stupid.

 

Again, I don't agree that you have to prioritize one thing over the other.  Maybe that's what you have to do if you're a hobbyist about it, like we are... but that's all we are: hobbyists.   It's easier that way.  Easier to build for the future at the expense of now, and easier to build for now at the expense of the future.  Doing both is way harder, and beyond what we know how to do.  We don't know enough, we just know what we know, that's all.  But being a hobbyist is way different than having a job where you (a) know all the details we don't, and (b ) think about this stuff 12 hours per day.  

 

In other words, DD's whole job description boils down to "don't do what Jeff says you have to do"   :wink:


 "You say you've lost your faith, but that's not where its at.

  You have no faith to lose, and ya know it" - Bob Dylan


#20 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,765 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 28 October 2014 - 05:41 PM

This is why I would prefer to trade a guy like Norris. High salary and has value...save the money and get some youth. You certainly arent giving up on anything if you make a move like that.
@BSLRobShields




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners