SB Nation User Blog: yurizanow

Interesting Article About Free Agents and Losing Teams

yurizanow — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:19:31 -0000

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/sky_andrecheck/12/10/free.agents/index.html

This was on the Sports Illustrated baseball page. It's kind of interesting food for thought about what happens to teams that aren't successful and as a result avoid signing free agents. I've put two interesting quotes below.

For GM's who figure that their teams will probably not contend, it seems like a smart strategy to not squander resources by signing free agents who won't help win a pennant. But is this really the right choice? In principle maybe, but reality is another story.

While waiting for a team's young nucleus to come together before adding free agents seems like a good strategy, teams that adhere to this can get stuck in a perpetual cycle of rebuilding. Huntington's Pirates have been in that rut for the past 17 years. It costs a lot of money to retain decent players with six or more years of MLB service. However, it's difficult to construct even a .500 team with only young players ineligible for free agency. Hence a team with a rebuilding mantra may be constantly letting free agents go and avoiding major signings because they are not one or two players away from playoff contention. The Catch-22 is that it's not cost-effective to sign free agents to play for a non-contending team, but it's nearly impossible to build a contending team without having at least a few higher-priced free agents.

To avoid this cycle a sub-.500 team has to spend at least enough to put a decent product on the field, even though it may not transform them into a contender immediately. The Tigers used this approach to great effect in building their 2006 World Series club. While their young nucleus was far from ready in 2004, they began making some mid- to high-priced signings which helped them climb back to respectability. Though the team wasn't close to contention in 2004 or 2005, they assembled the pieces, such as Ivan Rodriguez and Magglio Ordonez, and with the help of their young pitching and a bit of luck, turned the franchise from laughingstock to success. Had GM Dave Dombrowski waited until the young nucleus came together, he would not have had the other pieces to contend in 2006 and may have missed his window.

In contrast, teams such as the Pirates and Reds seem to be perpetually rebuilding. It's not that they haven't produced good young players -- Jason Bay and Adam Dunn, among others, have come from their systems -- but before management deemed the young nucleus ready, those players became eligible for free agency without the support they needed from additional players. Tampa Bay is another team that could have benefited from a few more acquisitions in its down years. In 2008 the Rays' young nucleus arrived early and produced a great season, but the team could have been that much better had it signed a few supporting pieces ahead of time. As it stands now, the clock is ticking on the Rays' young nucleus, before it becomes too expensive to keep together.

Why not Miguel Cabrera?

yurizanow — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:26:18 -0000

I've seen some things that say the Tigers are trying to shop Miguel Cabrera. This raises the question of why don't the Orioles make a run for him? He's a great hitter, he fills a desperate need in the middle of their lineup and at first base that the Orioles aren't likely to be able to fill from within, he's only 26, and the Orioles probably have enough in their farm system to at least get the Tigers' attention. Hitters this good don't become available that often and this is one of the few times where the O's aren't going to be competing with the Yankees and the Red Sox at a disadvantage.

Way Nerdy Question

yurizanow — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:10:22 -0000

I like to play in whatifsports.com simulated baseball leagues. I've joined a theme league where you take a franchise and construct a team using any player who played for that franchise over the past 25 years using any individual season of that player regardless of whether that season took place on the francise you've selected. I've selected the Baltimore Orioles as my franchise which means (for example) I can take Sammy Sosa and use the season he hit 66 home runs even though he was on the Cubs at the time.

Can you guys think help me think of players who might prove useful for this endeavor? So far I have Roberto Alomar, Fred Lynn, Albert Belle, Tim Raines, Sammy Sosa, Kevin Brown, Jamie Moyer, Curt Schilling, Mike Timlin, Randy Myers, Arthur Rhodes, and Cla Meredith in addition to guys like Mike Mussina and Jim Palmer who played for the Orioles in their prime. Who are some other former Orioles who had the best years of their careers on another team?

Fun Facts About Earl Weaver

yurizanow — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:55:49 -0000

In the past week or so, it has come to my attention that some of the Camden Chat community are not familiar with why exactly Earl Weaver is probably one of the 5 greatest managers of all time and how far he was ahead of his time. Below is an excellent starting point, Earl Weaver's 10 Laws.

Weaver's First Law: No one's going to give a damn in July if you lost a game in March

Weaver's Second Law: If you don't make any promises to your players you won't have to break them

Weaver's Third Law: The easiest way around the bases is with one swing of the bat

Weaver's Fourth Law: Your most precious possessions on offense are your twenty-seven outs

Weaver's Fifth Law: If you play for one run, that's all you'll get

Weaver's Sixth Law: Don't play for one run unless you know that run will win a ballgame

Weaver's Seventh Law: It's easier to find four good starters than five

Weaver's Eighth Law: The best place for a rookie pitcher is in long relief

Weaver's Ninth Law: The key step for an infielder is the first one - left or right - but before the ball is hit

Weaver's Tenth Law: The job of arguing with the umpire belongs to the manager, because it won't hurt the team if he gets thrown out of the game

Semi-Off Topic Regarding A Team Many Of You Dislike

yurizanow — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:16:40 -0000

One of the things about that I find annoying about living in the land of Yankee fans is not just how stupid most of them are, but how stupid most of them are about their own team. I mean, you would not believe how many of these clowns genuinely believe that Alex Rodriguez is somehow a liability because he isn't a "true Yankee" or whatever horseshit those morons think. I usually react to that by saying something along the lines of "OK, how about you trade him to the Orioles for Melvin Mora and another player of your choice?"

What I find particularly asinine is the focus on his post-season problems since he's been on the Yankees. Nobody on else on that team has been hitting in the postseason since he got there, but somehow those losses are all his fault. I've even heard fans say stupid shit like "you know, A-Rod is making the rest of them not hit." Below is a link to an article from the Village Voice that I read about in Rob Neyer's column comparing A-Rod's postseason career (42 games) to Reggie Jackson's first 42 postseason games. Guess what? Mr. Un-Clutch has played slightly better than Mr. October did during his first 42 postseason games. While we're at it, A-Rod's postseason stats really aren't that bad anyway and Reggie Jackson was a bigger asshole. Hey, you know who also sucked in the postseason? Ted Williams and Willie Mays. Losers!

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/10/jockbeat_31.php

This gave me a chuckle

yurizanow — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 04:44:42 -0000

I found this on Deadspin.

http://deadspin.com/5377099/the-most-hopeless-franchise-in-football--jamboroo-week-5

It's about Dan Snyder and the Washington Redskins, but there was one paragraph that resonated with me as an Orioles fan.

"There are many bad franchises out there in the sports world, but there is a distinct difference between a franchise being shitty and a franchise being utterly hopeless. Even historically bad teams like Arizona are able to shine on occasion. No, I'm talking about the Raiders, Clippers, and Orioles of the world. I'm talking about franchises that have no hope of turning things around because the man who owns the team refuses to relinquish his cold death grip upon it. Those are the truly hopeless teams out there. The teams that refuse to pull themselves out of their own dysfunction. Teams for whom there is no future, just an endless cycle of building up shaky scaffolding and then tearing it back down again."

Despite my displeasure with Dave Trembley's return, I hold out hope that Andy MacPhail has managed to remove Peter Angelos' cold death grip. So far it seems like MacPhail is in complete control, so maybe the Orioles can get off of that list.

As for the Redskins, I grew up in Baltimore after the Colts were gone, but before the Ravens arrived. I was taught by the local grownups that the Redskins were not an appropriate football team to root for in place of a local favorite, so I'm kind of happy with the Snyder regime. That said, I still feel vaguely bad that what was once a great franchise has been brought so low.

Poll: Do you approve of Dave Trembley returning next year?

yurizanow — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 20:44:35 -0000

I was surprised by the number of people in the Camden Chat community who seem to be pleased that Dave Trembley will return next year. I really expected a different reaction to the news than what I saw on the thread, but I'm not sure if that thread was representative of the community at large or self-selected.

I thought that the best thing to do is to get to the bottom of it with a poll and see what Camden Chat really thinks.

Poll

Do you approve of Dave Trembley returning next year?

Yes

79 votes

No

53 votes

132 votes | Poll has closed

Let's get rid of Dave Trembley

yurizanow — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 03:50:30 -0000

I just saw that the Orioles are 6-16 since the All-Star break. That being the case, I thought now is as good a time as ever to once again advocate getting rid of Dave Trembley. I would suggest doing it right now, but there is no point in doing that considering the season is already lost. Also, if they got rid of Trembley they would promote some loser from within the organization to replace him and probably keep that chump into the next season, just like Dave got his job. Regardless, getting rid of him and finding a real manager should me high on off season MacPhail's to-do list.

I've said before that the O's would stink regardless of the manager, but Trembley isn't very good at his job and will have to be replaced at some point anyway and it strikes me that this off season is a perfect time do so. Although I'm less impressed by their talent than some O's fans, the Orioles are a young team that should be showing some sign of improvement or growth or promise. I don't see how anyone but the most optimistic of fans can see any signs of any of those things.

Once again, I also hope this post will resurrect the "Hire John Gibbons" movement.

Can the O's fire Dave Trembley now, please?

yurizanow — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 04:35:03 -0000

I just read that the Orioles lost for the 14th time in 18 games and 1-16 in road games within their division. That seems to put them at the nadir of a pretty disappointing season even by Orioles standards.

Does this mean someone will finally get rid of Dave Trembley? I don't think that the losses are his fault or that another guy would make a huge difference, but I also don't think he's very good at his job and he'll be removed before they'll ever get any good regardless. Why not do it now and see if they can stumble upon a real manager?

I also hope this thread will restart the whole "hire John Gibbons" debate.

Anybody interested in meeting up?

yurizanow — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:53:05 -0000

I'll be in Baltimore on Monday December 29th and Tuesday December 30th. I'll be in Brooklyn from New Year's Eve until January 9th and would be willing to get together anywhere in New York City within reason (sorry, no Bronx meet-up for me).

If anyone is interested in getting together at either location to talk Orioles or Ravens or whatever, let me know. For a week or so I should have the time and always have the inclination.