Orioles Hot Stove: Taking Stock
Yes, tomorrow is a giant playoff game for the Ravens in Indy. But we’ve been having some good baseball discussions in the comments, and I wanted to give them a proper home. We’ll be back to football either tonight tomorrow morning. Until then…
Amid the collective anxiety, hand wringing, and go-nowhere debates about second-tier players who “got away,” I think Orioles fandom might be losing sight of the one question that truly matters: is this team better suited to compete today than it was at the end of the season?
Speculation and wonder are part of the appeal of Hot Stove baseball, sure. There’s nothing wrong with a daydream now and then about what it would be like to trade for Adrian Gonzalez, but it’s not happening. Similarly, Matt Holliday was never coming here.
So let’s step back for a moment and look at what is before worrying about might, might not, and maybe.
The rotation is one solid arm deeper with the addition of Kevin Millwood, which helps with depth at the back-end/AAA. Brian Matusz and Brad Bergesen are no longer rookies — they’re ready to step in and become solid major leaguers. The same might be said for Chris Tillman, but he can get more seasoning if he needs it.
The outfield consists of four strong, young players — however we divvy up the starts. One of them just won a Gold Glove and is emerging as the kind of personality this team and town have desperately needed.
We have a new closer and his numbers are very good — even if we overpaid to get him.
We need one more bat and, ideally, that bat plays corner infield. It doesn’t look like such a player exists, at least not one who’s an obvious upgrade. Someone will probably land here for a year. We won’t be excited.
All that plus a few minor tweaks and, well, is it improvement? I think so. Is it meaningful improvement — the stated goal?
I don’t know. And neither I nor anyone else will or could know until sometime around midseason. That’s just kind of the way things work when evaluating results — they have to happen first.
Tentatively, though, I feel optimistic. If I had to grade the offseason so far I’d give it a B-minus. Slightly above average but not earth shattering.
I can get why maybe that’s not enough for some fans, but I can’t find any way to argue that the team hasn’t improved. Can you?
2009 Starting Rotation:
1. Jeremy Guthrie
2. Adam Eaton
3. Alfredo Simon
4. Koji Uehara
5. Mark Hendrickson
2010 Starting Rotation:
1. Kevin Millwood
2. Jeremy Guthrie
3. Brad Bergesen
4. Brian Matusz
5. Chris Tillman*
*Possibility of this being Erik Bedard.
If that isn’t improvement, I don’t know what is.
Not to mention you start the year off with Matt Wieters and Nolan Reimold and a possibly major-league-ready-this-time Felix Pie. You have Koji and, possibly, Hendrickson and Hernandez in the ‘pen where they probably were going to be more effective all along. You have essentially what you lost in a closer when you traded Sherrill. Johnson is going to pitch where he’s more comfortable. Chris Ray and his Yankee Yips are gone (no offense to him, he just couldn’t pitch against the Yankees).
You still have a solid bench with Wigginton, Pie, Andino, and Moeller, assuming that’s how it shakes out.
Yes, there’s a lot of “ifs” and “possiblys”, but the starting rotation alone is all you need to look at. It’s not dominating, but it’s legitimate. Adam Eaton and Alfredo Simon are not legitimate. Neither are Berken, Liz, or Waters.
Here’s my bottom line: Was there a hitter out there this offseason who was going to significantly improve the club on Opening Day? Yes – it was Matt Holliday. He took a ridiculous 7-year deal to play alongside the best player in baseball. Andy didn’t slip up on this one – it was never in the cards. So once he’s gone, what is there that he could honestly do to take this from a roughly .500 team to a “contender”? Short of selling the farm, nothing.
You upgraded your rotation, your bullpen, and you’re trying to plug holes around the infield until a legitimate option comes along at those positions either via the farm system, a better class of free agents, or trade.
I’d like to see Andy make a few more moves, and I think he will. He’s going to make a late trade because he always does. And he’s going to grab another pitcher or two. Maybe he signs a corner infielder, maybe he doesn’t. We have Wigginton, Rhyne Hughes, Michael Aubrey, Brandon Snyder, and Josh Bell. Somebody will step up and if they don’t, well, none of the free agent corner infielders were going to take us to the next level anyway.
And hey, it’s been awhile since Neal filed a post under “shame” or “an epic problem” or “deep frustration”, so that’s improvement, right? Haha.
You know I can, Neal. You know I can. But everything boils down to what you just said: “[the results] have to happen first”.
Here’s what I know for a fact: The Orioles’ pythag record last year (which is a better predictor than actual record, as it happens) was 69-93. Accounting for no longer having Adam Eaton, Rich Hill, Mark Hendrickson the Starter, George Sherill, Melvin Mora, Gregg Zaun, Aubrey Huff, Danys Baez, and Brian Bass (I figure the bit role players will sort of balance out, but that’s just me speculating) I figured the Orioles would look something like this in 2010:
Guthrie, Matusz, Bergesen, Tillman, Arrieta (Johnson closing)
Wieters, Aubrey/Hughes/Snyder, Roberts, Izturis, Wigginton, Reimold, Jones, Markakis, Scott (DH)
with a bench of: Turner, Moeller, Pie, Aubrey/Hughes/Snyder
So, guessing on how the guys developed (as well as on playing time), I put the Orioles down for about 75 wins with that team, pre-moves. I got there by saying they score 760 runs (a slight improvement) and allow 800 runs (a big improvement) but docked them 2 games because of their division (which is again speculating).
Anyway, I put some math and guessticulating to work is all I’m saying. 75 wins is an 11 game improvement over last year, so I’m not sure that anyone is going to seriously complain with that.
My problem with the moves they have made is that the mass improvement remains to have been (hypothetically) from the development of the youth. To wit (using WARP, which I know makes me a nerd with fallible math, but you need to have some system or you’re just guessing out of thin air):
Millwood replaced Arrieta, giving the Orioles 1.5 wins (I used Berken/Hernandez’s combined numbers as a baseline for Jake). You might suppose that Millwood “saves the bullpen”, but that’s already factored in.
Gonzalez replaced Dennis Sarfate, who I hope doesn’t have a roster spot anymore, because he is replacement-level or so, and there ought to be enough interesting arms that he’s in the past. This gives the O’s a win – Gonzo is a good pitcher, after all.
Atkins replaced Wigginton, who in turn replaces either Turner or Hughes/Snyder/Aubrey, for a net gain of 0.8 wins.
Anyway, maybe you disagree with those projections, so come up with your own, but I think you’ll find that the Orioles couldn’t have picked up more than 4 wins total from their winter. I have them now at 78 wins. And I don’t know that that makes the price we paid (in terms of money, a draft pick, and the utility cost of roster spots that could have gone to more young players like Arrieta and Snyder) makes it worthwhile.
I know that was long and nerdy, and you’re likely to disagree with a lot of it, but that’s where I’m coming from when I say “I didn’t like what the Orioles did this winter”. C-.
Oh yeah, forgot this: Additionally, the Orioles picked up exactly one player who will still be on the team on his current contract after this season (Gonzalez). So all of these moves were made in the hopes of winning more games in 2010, and obviously I take issue with the success/worthiness of that particular goal.
@Andrew – I can’t really argue with all that. At least when you voice your displeasure with something Orioles-related, you actually back it up with stats and a legitimate argument. You don’t just say, The Orioles Need To Spend Money.
I think if you are asking strictly, have the Orioles improved, the answer is yes, to some degree on paper they have. Have they done enough to warrant “significant improvement”, probably not, no.
You bring up an interesting point about players that aren’t here long term. On one hand, you are right, that’s a negative considering the O’s are still rebuilding. On the other hand, past GMs may very well have given Atkins a 3-year deal, or signed a bunch of players to long-term deals that do not warrant those deals. At least there’s no blurring of the line with MacPhail – you’re either a stop-gap, or we’re counting on you for the future. If you’re a stop-gap, you’re going to get a stop-gap contract.
But generally, I agree, I’d like to see some players acquired that are under our control for awhile. It has to be the right players, though, either somebody we identify as a crucial piece and go hard after (Bell), or some young guys that we take flyers on (Pie, Aubrey).
@dan the man – On the bright side (I’m not pessimistic for certain) the Orioles did the right thing and didn’t bog themselves down with bad long-term contracts that wouldn’t have helped them out at the right moment (I’m looking at you, Matt Holliday) or just plain bad long-term contracts (a three-year deal to Atkins would have been just awful, awful, awful)…and there is definitely something to be said for not Dayton Mooreing the team.
From the other thread, @dan the man – I was very tempted to put something in this post about LaRoche probably not wanting to sign here, but I decided to not make it about that particular argument. That said, I’m not surprised at all to read that he didn’t want to play here.
People need to move past this idea that signing free agents is all about money. It’s not all about that, and in fact I’d argue that it’s not even mostly about that.
I’ve got no firsthand knowledge of this, but common sense says that there has to be a good fit first and foremost. That means the team has to want the player and believe he fills a need, and the player has to have interest in coming here. If those pieces go together, then it’s time to go through the negotiations, which include money, yes, but also (again — common sense) how the team plans to use the player and how he wants to be used.
Going back to my favorite example, there was never any chance of John Lackey coming here. He didn’t want to play in Baltimore, period. Maybe in theory they could have offered him $20 million/year or something ridiculous like that, but in reality there was simply no chance.
We can talk about the fact that the Orioles are still in damage control mode from 12 years of losing and the poor management of previous regimes, but they have to play the hand they have. Right now that means some guys just won’t have interest.
@Andrew – 78 wins this year sounds about right. I don’t disagree with most of what you say.
Where I would take some issue is with the idea that the cost for that gain was too high. I don’t care about the money or the draft pick, and as you rightly point out the roster spots aren’t set up as long-term issues. So, to me, we’re fine on that count.
I’d like to see a couple more moves in order to feel like this team is a better-than-even bet to get to .500. I think we will see moves, and when we do we can evaluate whether or not they shift the needle.
Whether they do or not, here’s where I’m at: the team did enough that I have reasonable, if tempered, optimism. From there I’m just eager to see how it plays out in real time.
@neal s – That’s cool. I’m not sure what moves they can make that would drag the needle to 81 wins, though. I just don’t think that there are enough openings on the roster. The young guys (especially the pitchers) are going to keep losing games for the Orioles, and there’s really nothing that they ought to do to keep that from happening. The offense is good, but with the big gaping hole at the bottom of the order (Atkins-Aubrey-Izturis?) and the lack of a true clean-up hitter, I doubt the offense can hold the pitching staff up.
But that’s the name of rebuilding. Let the kids take their lumps, win 78 games, and next year we’ll all be projecting at least 85 wins before moves from the team.