• Dec
    07

    HHP BrunoCherrytown On Hamilton and Angelos


    by BrunoCherrytown

    I'm not particularly fond of Hamilton for any number of reasons. I think any team signing him is hoping for 3 seasons of great play and then the rest is paying the premium. Will he even give 3 seasons of great play? If he'd take 4 years, I think it's worth the risk at market rate. Just blindly giving him 6 or 7 at market rate is ridiculous though. And I don't think there are too many of us who think Angelos is cheap that would ridicule not jumping on that train.

    But there is this other point you are making which I think has a bit of a gray area to it. Where we should ridicule teams for actually paying market value. Market value is market value. We can ridicule it or understand we're going to have to pay it here and there. Nobody, not even the Yankees signs all market value players. They just do it more than everybody else.

    And while it may be really cool to have the best "Cost per win" ratio in baseball as a team - I'd rather have the most wins. As a fan, i'm not celebrating a fiscal and statistical hybrid measure of the team's performance. So there has to be more of a balance than what we are seeing now.

    And saying Angelos got burned by some contracts a long time ago is a world's smallest violin kind of moment. The fans have gotten burned by his nickel and diming not just on free agents, but drafting, player development, post first-round draft spending, non-existent international department for too many years. We got burned by him pocketing all of the profits from his network.

    So there is gray area between spend whatever it takes to get Hamilton or Greinke or whoever versus labeling us a small market team and restricting our GM in that way when the economics of our particular market/RSN ownership setup do not suggest the purse strings should be so tight.

    It's not a black and white issue. Never was, never will be.


    Comments/Questions?
    Visit the Orioles Hangout Message Board