The Baltimore Orioles Thread (merged)

[Why Not?]

No.

I'm against a salary cap because the sport has always been characterized by dynasties and rebuilding phases, Davids and Goliaths, favorites and underdogs, and that makes victories all the sweeter - and defeats all the more painful.

I'm against a salary cap because it seems like a lazy out for not planning your roster, developing your youngsters, outtrading your opponents, and generally acting like a smart franchise.

I'm against a salary cap because if the Florida Marlins can figure it out twice in seven years, why can't other teams?

If you are Goliath, it would make sense that you would want to maintain the current system. I appreciate your romanticism, but try selling that to a Royals season-ticket holder.

"Generally acting like a smart franchise" usually isn't enough for a small-market or mid-market team. The best most franchises can hope for is about a 5-year window if they can have a group of outstanding youngsters hit at the same time. The biggest spenders don't really have to act that smart. The Yanks have made as many awful signings as anyone, but they can absorb it. No other team could afford Pavano/Giambi/Igawa/etc.

Yes, the Marlins managed to win twice. But teams like the Marlins and the A's are noteworthy because they beat the odds. I don't think it's fair to point out the Marlins' titles without mentioning that the Yanks have made the playoffs for a decade-plus.

By no means am I saying Bobby Jr. is right or that the Orioles' crappiness is anyone else's fault. The Orioles have the means to compete, but they've been run in a terrible manner. But let's not pretend the major-market teams don't have a distinct advantage over the rest of the clubs. They do.

[bobby jr]

Since Tejada has now revealed that he is two years older than he previously admitted, coupled with the steroid and legal questions surrounding him, it looks to me like the Orioles picked the exact right time to trade the man. Good decision by MacPhail (and Angelos for letting the trade go through).

[YankeePride1967]

Since Tejada has now revealed that he is two years older than he previously admitted, coupled with the steroid and legal questions surrounding him, it looks to me like the Orioles picked the exact right time to trade the man. Good decision by MacPhail (and Angelos for letting the trade go through).

I think they made the right call even if he was 31. For whatever reason his productivity (though still very good) is not where it was and to get 5 good prospects for him is a good move. It was a great move by MacPhail and I will give Angelos credit for so far staying out of MacPhail's hair.

[yanke26]

I think they made the right call even if he was 31. For whatever reason his productivity (though still very good) is not where it was and to get 5 good prospects for him is a good move. It was a great move by MacPhail and I will give Angelos credit for so far staying out of MacPhail's hair.

Who's the say the hold up on the Roberts deal to the Cubs wasn't because of Angelos. I just can't see him staying out of the way. It's not his nature.

[YankeePride1967]

Who's the say the hold up on the Roberts deal to the Cubs wasn't because of Angelos. I just can't see him staying out of the way. It's not his nature.

It's possible, but unless there is indication to say that, I'm not going to go under the assumption that he did.

[Saxmania]

If you are Goliath, it would make sense that you would want to maintain the current system. I appreciate your romanticism, but try selling that to a Royals season-ticket holder.

Not my job to sell anything to anyone. I appreciate that my opinion doesn't determine anything here, but I'm not going to change it because of the team I support; nor will I change the team I support because of my opinion.

"Generally acting like a smart franchise" usually isn't enough for a small-market or mid-market team. The best most franchises can hope for is about a 5-year window if they can have a group of outstanding youngsters hit at the same time. The biggest spenders don't really have to act that smart. The Yanks have made as many awful signings as anyone, but they can absorb it. No other team could afford Pavano/Giambi/Igawa/etc.

All cheerfully acknowledged, and no-one's explained to me how this is bad for baseball.

Yes, the Marlins managed to win twice. But teams like the Marlins and the A's are noteworthy because they beat the odds. I don't think it's fair to point out the Marlins' titles without mentioning that the Yanks have made the playoffs for a decade-plus.

I think it's very fair, myself. I know how many times the Yankees have won the World Series; I'd be surprised if anyone has memorized how many times they've made the playoffs. Sure there's randomness in who wins the whole enchilada, but that doesn't mean that Florida's wins don't count and the Yankees get 1/8th of every World Series.

By no means am I saying Bobby Jr. is right or that the Orioles' crappiness is anyone else's fault. The Orioles have the means to compete, but they've been run in a terrible manner. But let's not pretend the major-market teams don't have a distinct advantage over the rest of the clubs. They do.

I don't see where we're disagreeing here. I'm just asking for someone to demonstrate to me how this is bad for baseball. I have less money than plenty of my co-workers, but my new big-screen TV won't be discounted because of it, and I won't be less likely to buy it. I might even enjoy it more!

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Why Not?]

I don't see where we're disagreeing here. I'm just asking for someone to demonstrate to me how this is bad for baseball. I have less money than plenty of my co-workers, but my new big-screen TV won't be discounted because of it, and I won't be less likely to buy it. I might even enjoy it more!

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

Baseball is nearly dead in several cities because there no hope of being competitive.

[Saxmania]

Baseball is nearly dead in several cities because there no hope of being competitive.

I disagree. Which cities?

Tampa Bay was a candidate for being closed down a few years ago, when the Expos moved. Now they've got Crawford, Kazmir, and Longoria locked up, and are going to be a force in the AL East. (Anyone want to bet against that?)

The Orioles are rebuilding, and Baltimore is a good baseball town. Milwaukee is coming back. The Marlins are getting a new park, and appear to be managing boom-bust-boom very well. Pittsburgh and Kansas City aren't doing great, but you can't say they don't deserve it.

Really, where is contraction going to hit? I don't see it. Some franchises are further ahead than others, but really, Matt Morris to the Pirates? Why? They're digging their own graves using other teams' money. My sympathy is finite.

Where are all these cities where the ballpark is a wasteland? There's a couple, but it's not an epidemic. What am I missing here?

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Saxmania]

To add a partial answer to that question, the Pirates were 15th out of 16 in attendance in the NL last year . . . with 1.749m attendees! That's well over 20k a game for one of the most pathetic franchises of the last decade. That's actually pretty good in context.

The Marlins were last with 1.371m, and we all know about that ballpark. Tampa was last in the AL, and had about the same attendance - and they're on the way up. For comparison, the Expos barely managed half that before they were relocated.

It's really pretty healthy out there. Have you seen how much money franchises are changing hands for? Owners are making money. Fans are turning up to games. Online revenue is soaring even as TV audiences falter. This isn't just the Yankees and the Red Sox - this is everyone.

Fun fact: in 1992, the Yankees were 11th out of 14 AL teams in attendance, with just 1.749m. Rather similar to the utterly pathetic Pirates last year, no? And in a much larger market, to boot. Things turned around, and they will do again for both teams. It just sometimes takes a while.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[bobby jr]

To see the damage the current system has done to Major League attendance, one does not have look any further than the AL East. Since fans in Toronto, Baltimore and Tampa Bay know their team does not have a fair chance, due to payroll considerations. And the Yankees will be in the playoffs each year (and recently the Red Sox about the same), the attendance has suffered.

With the increased population in the USA each year and increased wealth and interest in sports, one would expect attendance to go up each year for all the AL East teams. . Not the case.

Toronto: 1991 thru 1994, drew over 4 million per year, about 50 thousand per home game. This was before it became impossible to win the AL East without a huge team payroll.

Toronto in 2007: Averaged 29 thousand per game. 2.3 million. Still nowhere near the pace they had over a decade ago.

Orioles- for a long stretch 1992 through 2000, averaged more than 40 thousand per game. 2006, down to 26 thousand per game, last year 27 thousand per game.
And the figures would be lower without swarms of Yankee and Red Sox fans coming to see their teams play.

And Tampa Bay, last year averaged about 17 thousand per game. Again, this would be lower if not for the Yankees fans when they visit. This team has never had good attendance in large part because they are stuck in the richest division in MLB, and their team last year had a fraction of the Red Sox and Yankee payroll.

If there were a salary cap or more extensive revenue sharing, then Tampa Bay, Baltimore, and Toronto attendance would likely skyrocket once fans realized their teams had a fair shot again.

[bobby jr]

Last night was a good indication of why the Orioles have not given up on Daniel Cabrera. He shut down a powerful Yankee lineup with no problems. If Cabrera could be consistent in pitching like this he could be one of the best pitchers in the league.. He has the pitches to dominate.

The Orioles made a mistake once in trading away Dennis Martinez who underachieved with the Orioles but went on to be one of the best pitchers in the NL with the Montreal Expos. I'm hoping that Cabrera will have a similar career, but all of it with the Orioles.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Toronto: 1991 thru 1994, drew over 4 million per year, about 50 thousand per home game. This was before it became impossible to win the AL East without a huge team payroll. Toronto in 2007: Averaged 29 thousand per game. 2.3 million. Still nowhere near the pace they had over a decade ago.

Oh bobby jr, your ability to misrepresent the truth is unparalled. Surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that Toronto's attendance, like pretty much all of mlb's, cratered in response the work stoppage in 94. Are you really blaming the yankee payroll for the Toronto decline from 4 million tickets in 1993 to 2.8 million in 1994, 2.8 in 95 and 2.6 in 96? Declines that were met throughout baseball, even {gasp} by teams in divisions other than the AL East. And surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that as the yankees' payroll has become even further and further ahead of the rest of mlb, Toronto's attendance has been on the upswing, with 2007 making 5 straight years of attendance increases in Toronto.

Orioles- for a long stretch 1992 through 2000, averaged more than 40 thousand per game. 2006, down to 26 thousand per game, last year 27 thousand per game. And the figures would be lower without swarms of Yankee and Red Sox fans coming to see their teams play.

Attributing the declining attendance in Baltimore to reasons other than the team's recent incompetence? Man, that's impressive logic. And of course let's not forget that those heady 40 thousand days you so fondly remember were heavily influenced by having a brand new, beautiful ballpark, an effect that always wears off slowly over time. As recently as 2005, the O's were drawing more than they did in the closing years of Memorial Stadium. Perhaps they should simply make a better product if they want to increase sales.

And Tampa Bay, last year averaged about 17 thousand per game. Again, this would be lower if not for the Yankees fans when they visit. This team has never had good attendance in large part because they are stuck in the richest division in MLB, and their team last year had a fraction of the Red Sox and Yankee payroll.

Wow, an expansion team struggles, and somehow that's the fault of the big bad Yanks and Sox.

If there were a salary cap or more extensive revenue sharing, then Tampa Bay, Baltimore, and Toronto attendance would likely skyrocket once fans realized their teams had a fair shot again.

Not likely at all. MLB attendance has grown at a better pace than other sports which do have a salary cap. In fact, 2007 mlb attendance was 50% higher than the last time the yanks didn't make the playoffs. (Pretty impressive considering how much their playoff dominance has dampened enthusiasm nationwide). As I said in an earlier post, that's not proof that a salary cap would hurt attendance, but the evidence is pretty solidly against the notion that it would help.

Really bobby, you make this all too easy.

[Saxmania]

I was going to rebut - however, any post would be moot after Mr. Vowel-Deprived's effort above. Bravo, sir. While I'm here:

And surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that as the yankees' payroll has become even further and further ahead of the rest of mlb, Toronto's attendance has been on the upswing, with 2007 making 5 straight years of attendance increases in Toronto.

was my favorite part.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Why Not?]

I disagree. Which cities?

Tampa Bay was a candidate for being closed down a few years ago, when the Expos moved. Now they've got Crawford, Kazmir, and Longoria locked up, and are going to be a force in the AL East. (Anyone want to bet against that?)

The Orioles are rebuilding, and Baltimore is a good baseball town. Milwaukee is coming back. The Marlins are getting a new park, and appear to be managing boom-bust-boom very well. Pittsburgh and Kansas City aren't doing great, but you can't say they don't deserve it.

Really, where is contraction going to hit? I don't see it. Some franchises are further ahead than others, but really, Matt Morris to the Pirates? Why? They're digging their own graves using other teams' money. My sympathy is finite.

Where are all these cities where the ballpark is a wasteland? There's a couple, but it's not an epidemic. What am I missing here?

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

I don't think the amount of money being made and the health of the sport are necessarily the same thing.

I think it's a problem that a few teams are ALWAYS going to win and several have virtually no hope of more than a wild-card run. Honestly, only the supporters of the "haves" seem to think everything is fine with that scenario.

It's anecdotal, but I happen to work with a couple of guys who grew up in Pittsburgh and Kansas City. They both played baseball, grew up with the sport, followed their local teams passionately. It was the centerpiece of their summer, just like the Orioles were and are with me and increasingly with my kids. But these guys are now at the point where they don't really follow baseball any more because their teams have essentially been eliminated in April the last decade. That's not good for baseball.

I'm not sure like Bobby that a salary cap is the answer or if there even IS an answer. I know that small-market teams can sometimes compete. I realize that many franchises (cough, Orioles, cough) have made their own beds. Still, the woefully unlevel playing field definitely has a negative impact.

[Saxmania]

I think it's a problem that a few teams are ALWAYS going to win and several have virtually no hope of more than a wild-card run. Honestly, only the supporters of the "haves" seem to think everything is fine with that scenario.

But that's not the case.

I'm sorry your co-workers have been turned off baseball by the ineptitude of their teams (neither of which reside in a division with a team including a massive payroll, unless you include Detroit or Chicago in that category), but I don't see what the structure of MLB has to do with it.

There is hope for Tampa Bay, the Orioles seem to finally be making a few good decisions (and can afford to spend a lot more when they're competitive), and, as pointed out, Toronto's attendance is surging and they've got more money to invest too. The AL East will be interesting this year, and next year, and in 2012 for that matter. Pittsburgh and Kansas City can do that if they smarten up a bit.

Am I missing some golden age when there was a salary cap and everyone was happily mediocre? Weren't Pittsburgh and Kansas City both heavyweight players back in the day?

Although amount of money being made is one metric, you'll note that attendance is another that has been used in defence of baseball's current health. And attendance has never been better. I'm happy to use that as a metric if the cashflow doesn't meet your needs, bobby's ludicrous distortions notwithstanding.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Why Not?]

But that's not the case.

I'm sorry your co-workers have been turned off baseball by the ineptitude of their teams (neither of which reside in a division with a team including a massive payroll, unless you include Detroit or Chicago in that category), but I don't see what the structure of MLB has to do with it.

There is hope for Tampa Bay, the Orioles seem to finally be making a few good decisions (and can afford to spend a lot more when they're competitive), and, as pointed out, Toronto's attendance is surging and they've got more money to invest too. The AL East will be interesting this year, and next year, and in 2012 for that matter. Pittsburgh and Kansas City can do that if they smarten up a bit.

Am I missing some golden age when there was a salary cap and everyone was happily mediocre? Weren't Pittsburgh and Kansas City both heavyweight players back in the day?

Although amount of money being made is one metric, you'll note that attendance is another that has been used in defence of baseball's current health. And attendance has never been better. I'm happy to use that as a metric if the cashflow doesn't meet your needs, bobby's ludicrous distortions notwithstanding.

Yes, they were but that was before the salary differences became so outrageous. It was before local TV revenues became such a factor. I'm not really sure a salary cap is the answer and I understand and agree baseball is doing well in the current setup.

I also find it difficult to believe baseball wouldn't be healthier if more teams had a fighting chance.

[bobby jr]

Oh bobby jr, your ability to misrepresent the truth is unparalled. Surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that Toronto's attendance, like pretty much all of mlb's, cratered in response the work stoppage in 94. Are you really blaming the yankee payroll for the Toronto decline from 4 million tickets in 1993 to 2.8 million in 1994, 2.8 in 95 and 2.6 in 96? Declines that were met throughout baseball, even {gasp} by teams in divisions other than the AL East. And surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that as the yankees' payroll has become even further and further ahead of the rest of mlb, Toronto's attendance has been on the upswing, with 2007 making 5 straight years of attendance increases in Toronto.

Attributing the declining attendance in Baltimore to reasons other than the team's recent incompetence? Man, that's impressive logic. And of course let's not forget that those heady 40 thousand days you so fondly remember were heavily influenced by having a brand new, beautiful ballpark, an effect that always wears off slowly over time. As recently as 2005, the O's were drawing more than they did in the closing years of Memorial Stadium. Perhaps they should simply make a better product if they want to increase sales.

Wow, an expansion team struggles, and somehow that's the fault of the big bad Yanks and Sox.

Not likely at all. MLB attendance has grown at a better pace than other sports which do have a salary cap. In fact, 2007 mlb attendance was 50% higher than the last time the yanks didn't make the playoffs. (Pretty impressive considering how much their playoff dominance has dampened enthusiasm nationwide). As I said in an earlier post, that's not proof that a salary cap would hurt attendance, but the evidence is pretty solidly against the notion that it would help.

Really bobby, you make this all too easy.

Sounds to me like you don't like my citing attendance figures which served to contradict and question the facts and logic that you cited.
Sorry but crowning yourself the winner of a debate is amusing, but it won't work when the facts are not in your corner.

So let's look at one of your statments which you just posted.

"Surely you're not so ignorant as to be unaware that Toronto's attendance, like pretty much all of mlb's, cratered in response the work stoppage in 94. Are you really blaming the yankee payroll for the Toronto decline from 4 million tickets in 1993 to 2.8 million in 1994, 2.8 in 95 and 2.6 in 96? Declines that were met throughout baseball, even {gasp} by teams in divisions other than the AL East."

Now let's look at the real facts. Toronto's attendance in 1993 was 4,057,947. Toronto's attendance in 2007 was 2,360.648. That is a huge decline. Yet the rest of MLB set an all time attendance record in 2007.

To use your favorite phrase, surely you couldn't be so ignorant . Mr. Mxylsplk, to believe that Toronto fans alone are still angry about the 1994 work stoppage, and their attendance has not recovered from 1993 for this reason, while the rest of MLB has gotten over it, and is setting records in 2007?

Also you cite Toronto's relatively slight increases over the last five years as some kind of crown jewel in your argument. Who cares abotu these slight increases, when the Blue Jays attendance has shown such a huge overall decrease since 1993? One would expect slight increases in recent years attendance due to increased population over the years.

No, your logic is faulty. There is a much more reason to believe that Toronto's decreased attendance since the early 90's is due to their inability to come close to making the playoffs in recent years. At this point in 2008 has little or nothing to do with the 1994 work stoppage.

And as the correlation between winning percentage and team payroll is a fact, and the Blue Jays are in the AL East, it logically follows that the Blue Jays attendance decrease is related to the payroll situation in the AL East, where the richest teams dominate and it usually takes close to 100 wins to win the division.

A similar argument could be made for the Blue Jays attendance and the Orioles attendance. It is the have-nots in the AL East, those who must face the reality of facing huge payrolls in the top teams, these teams are suffering in attendance. Baltimore, Toronto, and Tampa Bay. The other teams in other divisions are not hurt as much because payroll is more important in the AL East than any other division.

The Cardinals could win the WS a couple of years ago with a record barely over .500. The Blue Jays, Orioles and Tampa Bay will never even make the playoffs in the AL East with that kind of record.

Sometimes, Mxylsplk, you make this too easy.

[cupcollector99]

What is not recognized in all of this is the fact that when Toronto and Baltimore played well and won games, the attendance increased. Conversely,
when they stunk, the attendance decreased. Why is this concept so difficult to understand?
People will go to the stadium to see winning teams. I have no doubt that if the Orioles tried to put out a good team or even had a decent plan for the last ten years, the good fans of Baltimore would spend their cash in the house that Albert Belle built. Instead they kept piling up the bad decisions in a multi-city market that they shared with no other team until recently. I understand the frustration, but it's misguided.
The fact that it took the team until 2005 to develop a regional sports network is testament to how far behind the revenue curve they've been.

[john316]

Who's the say the hold up on the Roberts deal to the Cubs wasn't because of Angelos. I just can't see him staying out of the way. It's not his nature.

As much as I hate to even sound like I am defending Angelos there is no evidence that he interfered with the Cubs deal. What killed it was the players the Cubs were offering stunk.

[In Mo I Trust]

That new hotel blocking the Bromo Seltzer Tower is a disgrace.

[cubhater]

What is not recognized in all of this is the fact that when Toronto and Baltimore played well and won games, the attendance increased. Conversely,
when they stunk, the attendance decreased. Why is this concept so difficult to understand?

Exactly. I remember when the White Sox had contending teams in the early 90s and drew large crowds. Then after the strike and mediocre teams, we couldn't draw squat. Even the Yanks and Red Sox had problems drawing fans before winning on a regular basis.

Then of course there's another local team where the stadium and frat boy party atmosphere is more of an attraction than the team itself but that's the exception.

[Why Not?]

What is not recognized in all of this is the fact that when Toronto and Baltimore played well and won games, the attendance increased. Conversely,
when they stunk, the attendance decreased. Why is this concept so difficult to understand?
People will go to the stadium to see winning teams. I have no doubt that if the Orioles tried to put out a good team or even had a decent plan for the last ten years, the good fans of Baltimore would spend their cash in the house that Albert Belle built. Instead they kept piling up the bad decisions in a multi-city market that they shared with no other team until recently. I understand the frustration, but it's misguided.
The fact that it took the team until 2005 to develop a regional sports network is testament to how far behind the revenue curve they've been.

But some franchises can only win by hitting the player development sweepstakes. Even then, a small-market team can only hope to remain competitive for a few seasons before their players reach free agency.

As for MASN, it realistically could only exist once the Nats came on board. There's no way Angelos could force cable networks in the DC area to pay for what became MASN without broadcast rights to the Nats. Without those DC-area systems, it would be a money-losing venture....just like a team-owned RSN is for other smaller MLB markets.

[cupcollector99]

But some franchises can only win by hitting the player development sweepstakes. Even then, a small-market team can only hope to remain competitive for a few seasons before their players reach free agency.

As for MASN, it realistically could only exist once the Nats came on board. There's no way Angelos could force cable networks in the DC area to pay for what became MASN without broadcast rights to the Nats. Without those DC-area systems, it would be a money-losing venture....just like a team-owned RSN is for other smaller MLB markets.

It's hitting the player development sweepstakes that can be traced back to bad upper management. We know that one-in-ten good minor leaguers tend to make good major leaguers but to have only a few in like twelve years has to be traced back the for boneheaded front office. They've had early draft picks for more than a few seasons and they very little to show for it.
One thing I see it that the two big moves they made this offseason are looking pretty good. If they keep this up, the fans will return and money will start to flow back, what the FO does with the money is another thing.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Now let's look at the real facts. Toronto's attendance in 1993 was 4,057,947. Toronto's attendance in 2007 was 2,360.648. That is a huge decline. Yet the rest of MLB set an all time attendance record in 2007.

To use your favorite phrase, surely you couldn't be so ignorant . Mr. Mxylsplk, to believe that Toronto fans alone are still angry about the 1994 work stoppage, and their attendance has not recovered from 1993 for this reason, while the rest of MLB has gotten over it, and is setting records in 2007?

Also you cite Toronto's relatively slight increases over the last five years as some kind of crown jewel in your argument. Who cares abotu these slight increases, when the Blue Jays attendance has shown such a huge overall decrease since 1993? One would expect slight increases in recent years attendance due to increased population over the years.

No, your logic is faulty. There is a much more reason to believe that Toronto's decreased attendance since the early 90's is due to their inability to come close to making the playoffs in recent years. At this point in 2008 has little or nothing to do with the 1994 work stoppage.

And as the correlation between winning percentage and team payroll is a fact, and the Blue Jays are in the AL East, it logically follows that the Blue Jays attendance decrease is related to the payroll situation in the AL East, where the richest teams dominate and it usually takes close to 100 wins to win the division.

There you go again bobby, doing what you so often do, blaming payroll disparity for things that it's not responsible for. It's true that Toronto's payroll took a huge tumble, more than could reasonably be attributed to the stoppage in 94. Sadly, despite your protestations to the contrary, it cannot reasonably be attributed to payroll disparity, and the twin Yankee and Red Sox behemoths either. The Jays' attendance bottomed out in 2000. I would agree that this is surely related to their inability to compete for the division title or wildcard spot in these years. However the evidence is quite clear that this is not at all due to any so-called "payroll situation" in the division either.

Throughout the 96-00 period, as the yanks were dominating and the Jays were coming up short, there was no payroll dominance on the part of the yanks. As I'm sure you know, the yankees didn't even lead the league in payroll each year during this time, as the O's proudly claimed the top spot in 1998. (Should they be blamed for Toronto's troubles?). Now the yankees did have the 2nd highest payroll that year, and the highest every other year, so certainly they were mlb's top spenders. But the disparity was quite modest - the yanks were never more than $7 mil in payroll more than the 2nd place team, and were typically closer than that. In 2000 they were only $2 mil above the 2nd place team. The Red Sox were never higher than 5th in the league in payroll during this period, and were even lower than the Jays in 1997. For all your clamoring about a salary cap, there's nothing a salary cap would have done during these years - the payroll disparity that existed is no different than what we see in sports that do have salary caps. Some teams are higher and some are lower. A cap prevents the gap from growing too wide, but the mlb payroll gap simply wasn't any wider during the period of the Jays' declining attendance than it typically is in sports with salary caps. So the Jays struggles cannot really be attributed to huge payroll disparity on the part of the Yanks and Sox, or to the lack of a salary cap. The Jays' fans may have been frustrated with the team's inability to compete on the field with the yanks and sox, but it simply wasn't because of some huge payroll gap that a salary cap would have eliminated.

It's post-2000 that the yanks really started to run away from everyone in payroll. By 2002 they were way ahead, and if the yanks' payroll wasn't obscene by 2003, it sure was by 2004. The Sox weren't at the top with them every year, but sure, they were most of the time, and never too far off. So this is when Toronto really should have seen fan interest fall apart. Not only could they not compete on the field, they were getting blown off the map in payroll too. Yet that's not what happened. Toronto's attendance went up. And not only did it go up, it went up more than most of the other teams in baseball. From 2000 - 2007, Toronto ranked 8th in mlb in attendance increase. From 2001 - 2007, they ranked 9th. From 2002 - 2007, they're 7th, from 2003 - 2007 they're 9th and from 2004 - 2007 their attendance increase was the 6th largest in mlb. What you, for some reason, call "relatively slight" was actually relatively large - attendance was climbing throughout baseball, and it climbed more in Toronto than most places. And all the while, the Jays were falling further behind their division competitors than any other team in baseball. Declining attendance during a period of modest payroll disparity, the kind of disparity one sees with a salary cap, increasing attendance, among the best increases in the league, during a period of a ballooning payroll gap between them and their division rivals. As I've said before, this doesn't prove their attendance wouldn't be helped by a salary cap, but it pretty clearly doesn't support that theory.

A similar argument could be made for the Blue Jays attendance and the Orioles attendance.

Not really. The Orioles had pretty solid attendance until their embarrassing performance became too much for fans to bear. 10 straight years of sub-.500 ball is hardly the yankees or red sox fault. It's the fault of the team being poorly managed and making bad decisions. Toronto may not have made the playoffs, but they were able to field competitive teams despite these two 800 lb gorillas in the division you whine about so much. If they were able to do it, it seems silly to insist the O's couldn't. You yourself have said the O's are in a rebuilding period - it's only natural for attendance to decline when a team performs so poorly and goes through rebuilding. The O's now have some talented young players and some well regarded prospects. You insist they're now entering an era of smart management, so there should be no reason they can't put a good product on the field and re-generate interest from their fans.

And suggesting Tampa's woes are due to the big payrolls of the yanks and sox seems remarkably silly. The Rays have finished last every year but one. If they can't compete with even the Orioles and the other worst teams in baseball, it's hardly the payrolls at the top of the division that are keeping them down, unable to compete for the post-season.

The Cardinals* could win the WS a couple of years ago with a record barely over .500. The Blue Jays, Orioles and Tampa Bay will never even make the playoffs in the AL East with that kind of record.

Ahh bobby, going with the exception that proves the rule. 2 teams in the last decade have made the playoffs with a record barely over .500. An extremely low number. If that's how low you think the bar should be set for the O's, then I'm afraid you've got unrealistic expectations, regardless what divison mates they're pitted against. And if you think the plight of the O's, Jays and Rays in generating attendance can be laid at the feet of the big bad Yanks and Sox and their overwhelming payrolls, and could be ameliorated by the introduction of a salary cap, you should look at the facts. Because the facts disagree.

*The same Cardinals who have had smaller attendance increases while going to the WS than the Jays have had while being unable to compete with the monsters of the AL East?

[Why Not?]

It's hitting the player development sweepstakes that can be traced back to bad upper management. We know that one-in-ten good minor leaguers tend to make good major leaguers but to have only a few in like twelve years has to be traced back the for boneheaded front office. They've had early draft picks for more than a few seasons and they very little to show for it.
One thing I see it that the two big moves they made this offseason are looking pretty good. If they keep this up, the fans will return and money will start to flow back, what the FO does with the money is another thing.

I'm not even talking about the Orioles. They've done just about everything wrong in the last 10 years. Baltimore has decent resources. If they stop being so stupid, they can compete. That said, it's unclear what effect the presence of the Nats will have.

The problem is the bottom third or so of the league that spends about 1/3 of what the Yanks do. The best they can hope for is to have a boatload of young talent hit the majors at the same time so maybe they can win a title before their young stars become too expensive. Those teams and the Yankees/Red Sox et al are just worlds apart in what they can hope to accomplish.

[Saxmania]

Those teams and the Yankees/Red Sox et al are just worlds apart in what they can hope to accomplish.

In terms of financial capabilities? Sure. It's been that way for for over a century. And the Yankees have won a lot more World Series than everyone else, without even having to flex all their financial muscles for much of the time.

However, even after the Yankees have won 1 in 4 of all World Series in the 20th century, MLB was fine. Now the Yankees are finally spending significantly more than most other teams, they're not winning World Series . . . and attendance is booming!

I don't see the doom-merchants being right on this one. Just because there's severe financial inequality in baseball doesn't mean that baseball's in trouble. Nothing anyone has said on this thread has really addressed that point.

It may feel like people ought to stop watching because of competitive imbalance . . . but they don't. It's just not supported by the facts. So while bobby bemoans the awful, uncompetitive, wildly popular present, I hope the rest of us on this thread can acknowledge that baseball's imbalance between franchise revenues and spending is way down on the list of things we should worry about.

Steroids, lack of African-American participation, competitiveness in new markets, and Peter Angelos' continuing presence are all far more scary.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Why Not?]

In terms of financial capabilities? Sure. It's been that way for for over a century. And the Yankees have won a lot more World Series than everyone else, without even having to flex all their financial muscles for much of the time.

However, even after the Yankees have won 1 in 4 of all World Series in the 20th century, MLB was fine. Now the Yankees are finally spending significantly more than most other teams, they're not winning World Series . . . and attendance is booming!

I don't see the doom-merchants being right on this one. Just because there's severe financial inequality in baseball doesn't mean that baseball's in trouble. Nothing anyone has said on this thread has really addressed that point.

It may feel like people ought to stop watching because of competitive imbalance . . . but they don't. It's just not supported by the facts. So while bobby bemoans the awful, uncompetitive, wildly popular present, I hope the rest of us on this thread can acknowledge that baseball's imbalance between franchise revenues and spending is way down on the list of things we should worry about.

Steroids, lack of African-American participation, competitiveness in new markets, and Peter Angelos' continuing presence are all far more scary.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

Baseball survives and thrives because it's, like, totally awesome.

But I think an MLB featuring a more competitve atmosphere among franchises would be even better. I think the only people who think otherwise are supporters of the few teams that are virtually assured of a winning campaign every year.

[Saxmania]

Baseball survives and thrives because it's, like, totally awesome.

Dude. Right on.

But I think an MLB featuring a more competitve atmosphere among franchises would be even better. I think the only people who think otherwise are supporters of the few teams that are virtually assured of a winning campaign every year.

Well, obviously your opinion is totally welcome on what is, after all, a discussion board. But to me we've ended up in the realm of unfounded assertion rather than debate, so perhaps this is a good place to end.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[lolo]

He may get somewhat ignored because he plays for the O's, but Markakis is putting up great numbers so far. He's 2nd in RC/27 with 9.25, 1st in OBP at .468, 3rd in OPS at .995, and 2nd in OPS+ at 168. He's 2nd to Manny Ramierez in a handful of other sabermetric-ish offensive categories, but his defense is much better. And the scary thing is that this is not a product of a hot streak, he just has consistently been very good.

And this is with Kevin Millar batting behind him.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

He may get somewhat ignored because he plays for the O's, but Markakis is putting up great numbers so far. He's 2nd in RC/27 with 9.25, 1st in OBP at .468, 3rd in OPS at .995, and 2nd in OPS+ at 168. He's 2nd to Manny Ramierez in a handful of other sabermetric-ish offensive categories, but his defense is much better. And the scary thing is that this is not a product of a hot streak, he just has consistently been very good.

And this is with Kevin Millar batting behind him.

Yeah, it's early, but it looks like he's made the jump from great young player to great player.

[crstoner97]

Injury to Loewen takes away some of the enjoyment of taking 2 of 3 in Seattle.

Another great comeback Thursday night...

O's were rained out in Chicago last night, scheduled to play a Doubleheader today.

Cabrera's next start is Monday.. he has now pitched 3 strong games in a row, after changing his approach.

Has lowered his walk count in each of his starts.

As noted above, Markakis is getting toward the end of April with an OPS around 1.000... will be interesting to watch, as he really has not been hot yet.

For now it appears to Matt Albers will remain in the bullpen, and it is possible that Garret Olson will be coming up to replace Loewen.

[crstoner97]

May Schedule - Notes / Goals / Thoughts

At 14-11, with two games left in April - the O's will enter May with a winning record no matter what.

Thursday May 1st vs Tampa

Friday May 2nd - Sunday May 4th @ LAA

Monday May 5th - Wed May 7th @ Oakland

Thursday May 8th - Sunday May 11th @ Kansas City

May 12th Off

Tuesday May 13th - Wed May 14th vs Boston

May 15th Off

Friday May 16th - Sunday May 18th vs Washington

May 19th Off

Tuesday May 20th - Thursday May 22nd @ New York Yankees

Friday May 23rd - Sunday May 25th @ Tampa

Monday May 26th - Wednesday May 28th vs New York

May 29th Off

Friday May 30th - Saturday May 31st vs Boston



28 games overall

4 off days

2nd trip in two weeks to the West Coast

14 Division games

11 home games


Goals & Thoughts

1) 14 wins overall
2) 7 wins in division play
3) 7 wins at home

4) Current team OBP is .322 should be a team goal to have a higher % in May.

5) Jones has 7 doubles, and is playing great defense… avg is respectable… but has 22 k's to 5 walks.. Would like to see that gap closed a bit in May.

6) Markakis' OPS has been near 1.000 all month, but has dipped under 900 (still exceptional) after the last few days… he only has 7 xbh's for the month, would love to see him get hot and carry the team for a few weeks.

7) Ramon Hernandez is not long for the O's world, but is a better player than he is showing… he is due to get hot..

8) Huff had a better start than last year… as the weather warms, maybe he takes it up another notch.

9) Mora has to get some rest… he had some clutch hits, and decent games…. But overall, was a rough month… forgoe the power, and worry about getting onbase.

10) Days off are going to screw with the rotation a bit.. But the flip side is the bullpen should be fairly rested with 4 off days.

11) Cabrera made big strides in April… show it is real, with further consistency in May.

12) Guthrie is going to end April at 0-3, but in his six starts only once (Opening Day) did he not give his team a chance to win. I do think it is important for him to get a couple of wins in May…. A few more k's.. And most importantly a drop in homeruns allowed.

13) Staff as a whole has to lower the homers allowed…

14) Olson gets his first 2008 start at the end of April… May will be a prolonged opportunity for him.

15) Albers and Johnson had a dominating opening month… figure to regress some… want to watch them after they face a bit of adversity.

16) Will the organization address SS?

17) Sarfate has 12IP, 8 walks, and 13 k's… exactly what you thought he was… a guy that give IP, with limited control, and dominating stuff…. Can Kranitz help with his control as the season progresses?

18) Sherrill was 9 for 10 in saves… first BS yesterday… how does he respond?

19) I think Burres' future is in the pen… but he gave you 3 quality starts in April… can he build on that in May?

20) Continued eye to the minors, and whats going on down there…

[crstoner97]

O's have climbed back to 500 with wins the last 2 days in KC...

Cabrera has provided 6 straight quality starts... Markakis is getting warm.. Garret Olson goes today vs Tomko... Olson has looked strong in his 1st two starts of 2008...

Will be Guthrie and Cabrera in the two game set vs Boston next week.

[Soriambi]

http://deadspin.com/5009129/orioles-...t-or-something

Good Lord.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

http://deadspin.com/5009129/orioles-...t-or-something

Good Lord.

That is awesome. Just awesome, thanks for posting.

[roblyo33]

http://deadspin.com/5009129/orioles-...t-or-something

Good Lord.

Fantastic....thanks for the post!!

[Carbon Fiber]

http://deadspin.com/5009129/orioles-...t-or-something

Good Lord.

Awesome!

Except now I have "Orioles Magic" stuck in my head. Argghh.

[Soriambi]

That is awesome. Just awesome, thanks for posting.

I think they might have topped "Let's Go Mets Go" as the best bad music video in MLB history. Maybe not, but at least Lets Go Mets Go has the excuse that it was made in the '80s. It also doesn't feature Kevin Millar singing.

For comparison purposes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhvf1KSOw7M

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

For comparison purposes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhvf1KSOw7M

Nice find. Is McDowell pretending to have sex at about the 35 second mark?

[Why Not?]

I think they might have topped "Let's Go Mets Go" as the best bad music video in MLB history. Maybe not, but at least Lets Go Mets Go has the excuse that it was made in the '80s. It also doesn't feature Kevin Millar singing.

For comparison purposes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhvf1KSOw7M

This song was actually born back in 1979, so it's legit vintage cheese as opposed to being a fake, new-fangled cheese. The video roughly parodies a video made in the mid-1980s that had several Orioles lip-synching to Old Time Rock and Roll a la Tom Cruise in Risky Business.

Rick Dempsey sang the lead in that video (Millar's role), Eddie Murray was on drums (like Adam Jones in the new video) and rotund trainer Ralph Salvon did the sax solo. I think Mike Boddicker and Rich Bordi were in the video as well.

For years, the O-R-I-O-L-E-S part of the song was played when the Orioles took the field. Ironically, that tradition was ditched this season. Apparently, Millar got hold of the song and the team has been playing it in the clubhouse after wins.

[crstoner97]

6 out of 7, and 4 in a row, with Sunday left vs DC.

Finish May with 3 in NY, 3 in Tampa, vs New York for 3, and 2 with Boston. (4 game series, last two in June)

Orioles are 14-6 at home, and 8-7 vs the AL East.

[bobby jr]

The Orioles are now 23-20 and in 3rd place in the AL East. Let's face it, they are doing better than expected, especially from some of the March and April comments I see on this forum.

Daniel Cabrera has been pitching very well lately, 4-1 record with a 3.58 ERA.
And George Sherrill has 17 saves in 19 save opportunities.

The O's had one of the worst records of all time in 2007 in 1 run games. As I predicted, this has not carried forward to 2008 and their ability to win the close games has helped turn this season around in a big way for the O's so far.

I went to the Nats Orioles game at Camden Yards on Saturday night, and it was great to see a relatively full stadium full of (mostly) Orioles fans who were happy, loud, and enjoying the recent success of their team. There were a few Nats fans there, to be expected considering how close the Nationals play but they were definitely in the minority.

[yankeebot]

Thanks Bobby. I'll be anxious to here how the fan demographics play out next weekend when the Sox come to town.

[RYMASTER or Ryan_Yankees]

The Orioles are now 23-20 and in 3rd place in the AL East. Let's face it, they are doing better than expected, especially from some of the March and April comments I see on this forum.

But...but...they don't have the third biggest payroll in the East! It can't be right.

[CallOfTheCrow]

So Bobby Jr makes his appearance be known only when Baltimore has a few wins or they lose & he cries about payroll? Just making sure I got it straight.

[bobby jr]

I am not contradicting myself to both be happy about the Orioles success, and also to realize that the system is unfair.

Even if by some miracle the Orioles (or Tampa Bay) did win the AL East this year, there is no way they would be able to be better than the Yankees over a 10 year period, due to the enormous payroll advantage the Yankees have.

The Yankees would have to make one heck of a lot of mistakes to miss the playoffs even one year, with a 200 million payroll. At a minimum, the Yankees will make the playoffs 9 years out of 10, with that kind of an advantage. Remember the Yankees have made the playoffs 13 years in a row. The Red Sox have been going down the enormous payroll road too, and these two teams will continue to dominate for years to come, with rare exceptions.

Anyway it looks like the trades of Bedard and Tejada have worked out quite well for the O's. Kudos to Andy MacPhail for pulling the trigger, and also Angelos deserves some credit too for stepping aside, not interfering, and letting MacPhail make the moves he thought would help the team.

[CallOfTheCrow]

Of course it's only payroll. It has nothing at all to do with proper scouting in the IFA, amateur draft or anything else.

Money is everything & the only explanation. What are your thoughts on the Rays & their future? Even lower payroll then the O's.

[Why Not?]

Of course it's only payroll. It has nothing at all to do with proper scouting in the IFA, amateur draft or anything else.

Money is everything & the only explanation. What are your thoughts on the Rays & their future? Even lower payroll then the O's.

Thinking payroll is the only factor in success is equally ridiculous as thinking it's not a factor at all.

[CallOfTheCrow]

Thinking payroll is the only factor in success is equally ridiculous as thinking it's not a factor at all.

Are you implying that's what I was suggesting or just randomly pointing that out?

[Why Not?]

Are you implying that's what I was suggesting or just randomly pointing that out?

Just trying to usurp the thread derailment that always occurs after Bobby Jr. posts.