I guess the threat of having Millwood in the starting rotation can cause a club to do funny things.

Pete, did you say that the Cards minor league system is thin? How could that be? How could they let that happen? What's with the GM down there?
They can't hack an injury or 2?

I mean, how great is it when you get to trade the best hitter in the game and throw away a season even when you play in a division with all of those perennial championship contenders- Pirates, Astros ,Cubs, and Brewers?

According to WSJ online:

.The Wall Street Journal examined every transaction made this winter and ranked each major-league team by the volume of moves it made and the net quality of the players it ended up with. The quality numbers are based on projected 2011 Wins Above Replacement, a statistic baseball wonks use to determine a player's value compared to an average 4-A scrub (Each team's net WAR as well as each player's projected value is listed in parentheses).

To be included in their team's ranking, players had to have pitched at least 40 innings or played 50 games last season. The numbers don't include players who signed extensions or prospects who are expected to play significant roles.

1. Baltimore Orioles (9.0)

Key acquisitions: 1B Derrek Lee (3.5), SS J.J. Hardy (2.9), 3B Mark Reynolds (2.4), RF Vladimir Guerrero (2.0) Key loss: SP Kevin Millwood (1.9) Outlook: While other teams made bigger splashes, the Orioles quietly reinvented their infield. The changes should help them do much better than 66-96.

2. Milwaukee Brewers (5.3)

Key acquisitions: SP Zack Greinke (5.2), SP Shaun Marcum (1.5), RP Takashi Saito (1.10) Key loss: C Gregg Zaun (1.0) Outlook: Greinke and Marcum make the Brewers a legitimate playoff contender—unless they decide to trade Prince Fielder.

3. St. Louis Cardinals (4.4)

Key acquisitions: OF Lance Berkman (4.3), SS Ryan Theriot (1.8) Key losses: OF Randy Winn (2.0), IF Brendan Ryan (1.3) Outlook: News that Adam Wainwright may miss the season derailed a nice winter. Let the Carpenter-to-Yankees rumors fly.

4. Washington Nationals (3.8)

Key acquisitions: OF Jayson Werth (5.0), 1B Adam LaRoche (2.1) Key losses: OF Josh Willingham (2.7), 1B Adam Dunn (2.1) Outlook: The Nationals made serious offseason noise for the first time since moving inside the Beltway.

.4. Oakland Athletics (3.8)

Key acquisitions: OF David DeJesus (2.8), LF Josh Willingham (2.7), LF/DH Hideki Matsui (1.8) Key losses: DH/OF Jack Cust (1.8), CF Rajai Davis (1.6) Outlook: The A's upgraded their outfield without damaging one of the game's top pitching staffs.

6. Cleveland Indians (2.6)

Key acquisition: SS Orlando Cabrera (1.9) Key losses: None Outlook: The Indians fared well because they didn't lose anyone—then again, they didn't have much to lose.

7. Pittsburgh Pirates (1.8)

Key acquisitions: 1B Lyle Overbay (2.0), SP Kevin Correia (0.8) Key losses: Zach Duke (1.3), Lastings Milledge (0.5) Outlook: The Pirates addition of Overbay helps them, but it's too little, too late.

8. Boston Red Sox (1.8)

Key acquisitions: 1B Adrian Gonzalez (5.2), LF Carl Crawford (5.0) Key losses: 3B Adrian Beltre (4.5), C Victor Martinez (3.0) Outlook: Boston spent lavishly to piece together one of the modern era's most dynamic top-to-bottom batting orders.

9. Chicago Cubs (1.8)

Key acquisitions: 1B Carlos Pena (2.6), SP Matt Garza (2.1), RP Kerry Wood (0.8) Key losses: 1B Derrek Lee (3.5) Outlook: The Cubs may have gotten the most bang for their buck with Garza and Pena.

10. Seattle Mariners (1.3)

Key acquisitions: C Miguel Olivo (2.1), IF Adam Kennedy (1.4) Key losses: 1B Russell Branyan (2.0), IF Jose Lopez (1.9) Outlook: Nothing against the newcomers, but the Mariners probably needed to do more.

11. Houston Astros (0.49)

Key acquisition: SS Clint Barmes (1.3) Key losses: None Outlook: The Astros more or less punted this offseason.

12. New York Mets (0.4)

Key acquisition: OF Scott Hairston (1.5) Key loss: 1B Fernando Tatis (1.2) Outlook: The Mets made a lot of teensy moves that kept them in the middle of the pack.

13. Arizona Diamondbacks (0.2)

Key acquisitions: 1B Russell Branyan (2.0), SP Zach Duke (1.3) Key losses: 3B Mark Reynolds (2.4), 1B Adam LaRoche (2.1) Outlook: Arizona will no doubt miss Reynolds and LaRoche's 57 combined homers.

14. L.A. Dodgers (0.1)

Key acquisitions: SP Jon Garland (1.4), 2B Juan Uribe (2.1) Key loss: C Russell Martin (2.9) Outlook: A case of quantity over quality. The Dodgers' nine additions probably won't help them improve on a sub-.500 season.

15. Detroit Tigers (-0.6)

Key acquisition: C Victor Martinez (3.0) Key loss: LF Johnny Damon (3.0) Outlook: The Tigers made few moves, but Martinez's offsets losing Damon.

16. Philadelphia Phillies (-0.8)

Key acquisition: SP Cliff Lee (5.6) Key loss: OF Jayson Werth (5.0) Outlook: The Phillies scored a coup by signing Lee, but gave up nearly as much by parting company with Werth.

16. San Francisco Giants (-0.8)

Key acquisition: SS Miguel Tejada (2.4) Key losses: 3B Juan Uribe (2.0), SS Edgar Renteria (1.0) Outlook: The Giants apparently spent the offseason recovering from the effects of all that World Series bubbly.

18. Florida Marlins (-1.1)

Key acquisitions: SP Javier Vazquez (3.0), 2B Omar Infante (1.6) Key loss: 2B Dan Uggla (4.2) Outlook: The Marlins are banking on Vazquez being better in the NL (4.02 career ERA) than in the AL (4.65 career ERA).

19. Los Angeles Angels (-2.4)

Key acquisition: CF Vernon Wells (1.8) Key losses: C Mike Napoli (2.7), LF/DH Hideki Matsui (1.8) Outlook: After whiffing on some free-agents, the Angels struck a deal with the Blue Jays for Wells, whose $23-million salary scared most clubs.

20. Atlanta Braves (-2.6)

Key acquisition: 2B Dan Uggla (4.2) Key loss: 1B Troy Glaus (1.9), Outlook: The Braves added some pop up the middle by trading for Uggla, who hit 33 home runs for the Marlins last season.

21. Texas Rangers (-2.7)

Key acquisitions: 3B Adrian Beltre (4.5), C Mike Napoli (2.7) Key losses: SP Cliff Lee (5.6), RF Vladimir Guerrero (2.0), C Bengie Molina (1.8), SP Rich Harden (1.5) Outlook: The American League champs added a nice piece in Napoli. Too bad he can't throw an 88-mph cut fastball.

22. Colorado Rockies (-3.0)

Key acquisition: IF Jose Lopez (1.9) Key loss: C Miguel Olivo (2.1) Outlook: Colorado didn't bring in many players this offseason (That's what happens when you spend $120 million on Troy Tulowitzki).

23. Chicago White Sox (-3.3)

Key acquisition: LF/1B Adam Dunn (2.1) Key loss: OF/DH Manny Ramirez (3.5) Outlook: Chicago also lost Freddy Garcia, Bobby Jenks and J.J. Putz. But some AL Central foes had bigger talent drains (see: Twins).

24. Cincinnati Reds (-3.9)

Key acquisitions: None. Key losses: SS Orlando Cabrera (1.9), SP Aaron Harang (1.7) Outlook: Don't panic: this surprise playoff team still has the reigning league MVP and a solid rotation.

25. Toronto Blue Jays (-4.9)

Key acquisitions: CF Rajai Davis (1.6) Key losses: 1B Lyle Overbay (2.0), CF Vernon Wells (1.88) Outlook: The Blue Jays have come to resemble a sort of desperate fantasy team, piling up speed and former closers.

26. New York Yankees (-6.4)

Key acquisitions: C Russell Martin (2.9), RP Rafael Soriano (1.0) Key losses: OF/1B Lance Berkman (4.3), SP Javier Vazquez (3.0), SP Andy Pettitte (2.8) Outlook: The Yankees didn't address their need for starting pitching, but they're still nicely stocked.

27. Kansas City Royals (-6.5)

Key acquisitions: None. Key losses: SP Zack Greinke (5.2), OF David DeJesus (2.8) Outlook: The loss of Greinke alone makes this a massive debacle.

27. San Diego Padres (-6.5)

Key acquisitions: 2B Orlando Hudson (2.5), SS Jason Bartlett (2.5) Key losses: 1B Adrian Gonzalez (5.2), 3B Miguel Tejada (2.4), IF Jerry Hairston (1.8) Outlook: There's no way to sugarcoat this one. Adrian Gonzalez was practically their entire offense last season.

29. Minnesota Twins (-8.4)

Key acquisition: None. Key losses: SS J.J. Hardy (2.9), 2B Orlando Hudson (2.5), IF Nick Punto (1.7) Outlook: This one looks like a train wreck. Joe Mauer's $184-million deal didn't leave much room to grow.

30. Tampa Bay Rays (-10.6)

Key acquisitions: OF/DH Manny Ramirez (3.5), LF Johnny Damon (3.0) Key losses: LF Carl Crawford (5.0), 1B Carlos Pena (2.6), SS Jason Bartlett (2.5), SP Matt Garza (2.1) Outlook: Forced to cut payroll, the Rays may have given up a huge amount of talent.

Pie, Reimold and Vandenhurk for Pujols!

@ dave in glen burnie,

None of those stats quantify the Orioles president of baseball operations.

Unfortunately, Andy has a WAR ratting of -897,675.6 which has to be calculated into the total wins and losses. Once Andy signs a player, that player will takes a -345.2 hit.

Add in the 13 loosing seasons, which adds another -783.6 to each players ratings, and you'll find that the players the O's have are actually little more than the Boy Scouts in different uniforms.

dave, since you're a relative of Andy, and an O's employee...

ah, never mind. I'm just playing. and I know you're already prepared for this type of assault. Just thought I bet them to it...

Paulie.

I know it. I just thought it was an interesting article with sharing.

Or course, for shedding positive light, I'm now a shill, plug, warehouser, AM's family, and employee.

Heaven forbid I commit saying something other than "O's suck" about the Orioles.

Maybe I should redeem myself by finding a less than flattering article about AM in the Cubs archives.......

The key phrase here Pete is "Ken Rosenthal speculated." I'll admit it makes good blog fodder and we'll chew this one up and spit it out all day. It is highly unlikely that the Cardinals will panic and try to move Albert. It is more likely that the Cardinals will find a solution to Wainright's spot in the rotation and continue to work to get Pujols signed. The season has yet to start.

Now , I'm not a baseball expert in Ken Rosenthal's league, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Again. Really.

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Gil, you're right, it is all speculation and it is because this is a blog. That's what I'm here to do, since we do the Orioles news on Insider.

@dave in glen burnie,

I would have appreciated your spin on what you read instead of you copying without proper credit or sources.

But my money is on you blowing the Andy MacPhail trumpet. A trumpet that has been blown for 3 consecutive offseasons, only to be followed by a rude awakening reality at the end of each season.

Here is my takeway from that article: "The quality numbers are based on projected 2011". Projected. That's right! That's why they don't play the games on paper. I'm sure on Playstation MacPhail is an Hall of fame GM, but reality says otherwise.

Pack it up Yankees and Redsox. The O's won the offseason!

Nothing brings about a deafening silence quicker on this blog then good basic facts...

The O's +9.0 big step up compared to big losses by TB -10.6, Yankees -6.4, and Jays -4.9 should make the race for #2 and the wildcard an interesting race. I the ends the O's will be playing some meaningful games in Aug/Sept for a change...

First, Dave did credit the Wall Street Journal, in case you have trouble with the reading.
And that's right, Mesotheliangelos, the O's won the offseason, but somehow people still call our GM MacFail and say he's worse than Beattie/Flannagan. It seems the whole rationale for people saying this season won't be a good one is:
1. We've had hope before, and our dreams have been dashed.
2. Therefore, it will happen again (like Paulie says, MacPhail will somehow magically make all these players worse), and everyone will either get injured or play worse than expected.

Mesotheliangelos, wayne, et al, do you actually have a rational explanation for your opinions, or is this all you've got?

Mesotheliangelos -

Yea, and my money is on you knocking down anything that anyone says that doesn't agree with your opinion.

I never said anything about the Orioles winning, nor have I mentioned a winning season. You think I have? Prove it. Either that or it's a hell of trumpet that I don't even know I'm blowing.

Are you offended that I posted this? You sound angry. They might not play games on paper, but how about you get your "analysis" right for a change before blowing a bunch of half-truths and hearsay out of your neck.

BTW, right now it's all PROJECTIONS. That's right. So what makes your PREDICTIONS anymore credible then anyone elses? I guess you know more because you predict a bad team to be bad every year and it comes true. I haven't predicted this team to win more than 80 games in years, so what kind of trumpet am I blowing?

You can see what you want to see, just don't try and knock me down because I don't buy into your routine. I've grilled AM for what he's done, and I praised him too.

Last, I said I found the article on WSJ Online. Go to google, type in Wall Street Journal Orioles, and the website will be listed. There's your source.

How freaking hard is that?

FYI, my prediction for the Orioles in '11 was 75 wins as early a January. After the Vlad signing, I bumped it to 78.

I guess I'll keep "blowing that trumpet" for a losing season....

You can't expect Meso to be burdened by facts, dave.

Heck, among other things, I'm still waiting to hear about how Brian Roberts wasn't 100% in 2008 and 2009.

Meso is the classic example of a poster seeing the current situation and then trying to turn everything about this organization, even history, into garbage.

Hey Pete,

Could you put on your attorney hat for a minute and pass along any insider intell you may have with regard to Simon's chances of wearing Orange and Black this season?

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Very slim. His attempt to get released on bail reportedly was rebuffed today, and he wasn't projected to make this year's major league bullpen to begin with.

not brooks -

What's funny is I copied and pasted the article, but it was called "spin" by Meso. LOL how is it spin if I copied it straight from the source that provided it, plus GAVE the source away in the 1st sentence? Yet, I didn't provide the source, supposedly. These people suffer from "selective reading".

As soon as you say something positive - watch out!

@dave in glen burnie,

First, learn how to read. I didn't say what you wrote was spin. I wanted to get your spin, as in your opinion about the article. Clearly you didn't put that article out there for us to just read. I'm sure you had some point of view in mind that you wanted to come across.

@not brooks,

I sense a bit of sarcasm on your little replies. Let's settle this. I made a claim that teams that spend big money consistently win consistently. You probably don't recall, but I have actually defended that claim before with supporting arguments.

If you like a challenge, we both can post here with our research findings and let everyone decide. I doubt you will take that challenge, as you know you will lose. Instead, you will probably come back with some broken-record canned answer, as usual.

@Brian,

I saw how Dave gave "credit", by copying and pasting that entire article after a line of "according to WSJ online". If he did that on a collegiate paper, he would be called for plagiarism. You tell me how to read, but fail to read or understand the point I was trying to make to him, which is:

If you're trying to make a point, make it and use that article to support your argument. Otherwise don't give us the whole article to read. A link would have been just fine.

When did I refute a claim that teams that spend big money win consistently? Why would I argue with you about something that we agree on?

I mean, sure there are exceptions. As Gil pointed out, the Mets have been spending big money for a while and haven't won squat lately. There are a few more examples like that out there.

And the A's and Twins are/were great examples of teams that don't need to spend a ton to win consistently.

But, generally, you're right that the big spenders usually win.

And then there are teams like the Orioles. Teams that have been so poorly run that, even when they do spend, they don't do it properly and it sets them back a few years.

Anyway, if we're talking about the things we disagree upon...

Let's see you back up your claim that Brian Roberts wasn't 100% in 2008 and 2009.

Or how about that horrific post about the players that Andy hasn't signed that included two that signed their current deals before Andy was named O's GM, as well as a bunch of chumps that no one would want here in a million years?

Or that bit about how NL pitching is 50% of the way between the minors and the AL?

Again, Meso, I usually don't disagree with the points you try to make. It's that you tend to bring up "evidence" that makes no sense (Andy should have signed JD Drew!) or you don't offer any evidence at all (AL pitching rocks! NL pitching doesn't!).

I will give you the Roberts argument. He had one off year in 2010.

About Andy's signings or failure to do so. Out of a list of dozens of players you find two that I was wrong about?! For real?! Why don't you stick to the other 90% of the argument which is very valid: that Andy signed a long list of losers and didn't sign any notable free agents out there (you saw my list).

And it is a fact that NL pitchers ERA increases significantly when they move to AL. Is the 50% you getting hung up on? Would words like worse or better do it for you? Again, my friend. Your argument is weak when you pick apart words, instead of the message those words collectively are conveying. You sound like a politician. Challenge the message not your way of interpreting bits and pieces of the message. It makes you look like a stickler and not a big picture kind of guy.

A couple of things about the cut-and-paste from the WSJ on wins above replacement.

First, add nine wins to a 66-win team equals 75 wins. I doubt even the most ardent, habitual nay-sayers would predict much less than 75 wins for the Orioles going into 2011. (I'm still shocked about the amount of activity given Roberts' sore neck. It's no secret the Orioles have been lacking depth for years. It's no secret the Orioles have gotten better. At least the 120-plus posts about it has given me insight to rubber-necking at a fender-bender.)

Second of all if I did my calculations in my head on the fly correctly, MLB will be down 28.7 wins this year in the same amount of games. This, of course, is impossible. (I'm not sure I understand why Houston gets an additional significant digit -- 0.49? -- but I rounded it to 0.5)

Of course, this makes an awful lot of assumptions. So, I will make one of my own. The -28.7 distributed evenly over 30 teams means each team should be awarded an additional win as statistical compensation. That gives the Orioles another win, but it makes them no closer to the other teams in the division.

Perhaps the area I most agree with the WSJ fun with stats and assumptions is Tampa Bay will return to their sucking ways. I expect a much more than an 11-win drop-off from them. People will have to search for their next low-budget role model du jour.

This is getting testy !! I can't wait for the season to start. When the O's endure their first three game losing streak there's gonna' be a RUMBLE !!!

Just to go on record, I like the moves that were made this off season. I can't get my brain around how many more games the Orioles will win though. Just because you better doesn't mean you'll win a boat load more games. If you lose to the Yankees last year 7-2, this year you may lose 5-4. I'm going with the glass half full approach, 83-79.

I can't believe that Meso was attacking dave in glen burnie, it's so out of character for him.

First, learn how to read. I didn't say what you wrote was spin. I wanted to get your spin, as in your opinion about the article. Clearly you didn't put that article out there for us to just read. I'm sure you had some point of view in mind that you wanted to come across. Posted by: Mesotheliangelos | February 24, 2011 3:36 PM

In all honesty, the reason why I cut and paste the article is because I found it interesting.

My altierior motive? Well, nothing really. My point of view of the article is that this team has obviously improved. It doesn't take in account the projective (there's that word again) progression of the younger, niether does it take into account the regression of the older players. All it's saying is, based on last years stats (WAR), this team is nine wins better than it was.

If you would like, I could take the time to dig a little deeper and post all of the player projections going into 2011.

Would you like in that in MLA format or APA format?

I saw how Dave gave "credit", by copying and pasting that entire article after a line of "according to WSJ online". If he did that on a collegiate paper, he would be called for plagiarism. Posted by: Mesotheliangelos | February 24, 2011 3:48 PM

This is a blog on the internet. Everyone plagiarises. You tend to fabricate. BTW, where were you when I pasted the ESPN article with Keith Law calling the Vlad and Lee signings "bad moves" because they slow the development of Pie and Riemold? For a 25 and 27 year old, they're about as good as we've seen them already.....

Meso -

The issue with your "list" was that the entire thing was incomplete. I just brought up the two guys that were already signed with other teams because that was the most glaring error. I'm not going to recount all of my criticisms - if you really care to see them, go back to that post and read them again.

But when it comes down to it, that list was nothing but a giant pile of negative spin. Putting it out there as anything else was just plain irresponsible.

For more on pitchers switching from the NL to AL, it's time for a little research.

First I have to find some good pitchers who have made the switch...

Can't really do Cliff Lee, as he's only pitched a half season in the NL...

How about Dan Haren? NL ERA is supposed to be lower, right?

AL: 3.54
NL: 3.78

But that's not really fair, because Haren's got a 4.85 ERA from his limited time in St. Louis before he developed into an ace. So...

Oakland: 3.54
Arizona: 3.56
And the switch back to...
Anaheim: 2.87

But that time with Anaheim is a small sample size, right?

How about some more...

Here are two good ones for your case, Meso:

Ted Lilly
AL: 4.52
NL: 3.80

Josh Beckett:
AL: 4.29
NL: 3.46

Of course, Beckett has run into several injury problems and a load of inconsistency. In Boston, he's got three years of a 3.71 ERA book ended by two 5.00+ spots.

Who else is there...

Tim Hudson's not good for your case:
183 starts in the AL: 3.30 ERA
161 starts in the NL: 3.57 ERA

But Javier Vazquez is: 4.02 NL ERA, 4.65 AL ERA. But, of course, in the AL, Javy pitched in two of the best hitters parks in the game (Chicago and New York) and in the NL, he pitched in a few more neutral parks (Montreal, Atlanta, Arizona). You've got to factor that in, too.

Hey, what about our old buddy A.J. Burnett? AL ERA: 4.23, NL ERA: 3.73. Looks good for you, but what about park factors again? A.J. has not enjoyed the worst time of his career in New York. Do you just ignore the hitter's park and the pressure of playing for the Yankees?

Well, that's all I feel like doing. What do you think? I would say the results are inconclusive. In reality, I would say it depends on the quality of the pitcher.

Burnett and Vazquez have both been disastrous in New York, but much better everywhere else.

Beckett's AL numbers in his good years have been good enough to suggest that he's just an inconsistent, injury prone pitcher.

Hudson and Haren, probably the two best pitchers listed here, both didn't do as well in the NL as they did in the AL. But, both of those guys played for the A's, so they pitched half of their games in a pitcher's park when they played in the AL. And that's just another wrinkle in this thing.

And what about hitters? Are you ready to compare offensive stats of each league to see which one hits better? And if the AL hits better, who's to say it's not because AL pitchers aren't as good?

Once again, Meso, it's irresponsible to just flat out say, "The AL is the more difficult league" or "AL pitchers are better than NL pitchers". It's more than that. It's about the parks, it's about the hitters, it's about the DH, it's about the difference in the style of how AL and NL teams play the game. It's nowhere near as black-and-white as you're trying to make it.

@ not brooks & Mes,

To be fair, not brooks, while there are examples that prove both sides of the argument, there is a decidedly large sample of evidence on one side of the argument vs. the other.

I'll give a person their due's when they earn it. From Andy MacPhail to Mes. I think Mes's point, while not air tight, qualifies as fact given the disproportionate amount of examples.

And agreeing with Mes twice in less than 24 hours has started a bit a of an existential void for me.... I'm lost...

Paulie -

I agree that AM has missed out on a lot of opportunities the past 3 offseasons. But if one is going to revise history, do so in a consistent, informative and factual manner.

There's a difference between just being right and stroking your own ego. While I get where Meso is coming from, he's just as right as he is wrong.

Peter, just one comment on this line of yours. Nobody in St. Louis wants to think about a future without Pujols, but he might bring enough talent in return to restock the relatively thin minor league system and give the club a head-start on its long-term future.

That would leave the Orioles out of the Pujols "Trade" race. We didn't even have enough in the "Cupboard" for Greinke. How in the world would we have enough for Pujols? Besides, I wouldn't want Pujols. And when he becomes a free agent, his demands would be outrageous 10 yr / 300 million. Blah to that!

If we were going to do anything with the Cardinals, maybe the O's could look at Chris Carpenter. Yeah, he's 35/36, but if we add a pitcher of his ilk, I really do think the O's could vie for the wild card if not the division.

One other thing if the O's got Pujols maybe we could convert him to a 2nd baseman hehehehehe! We really need to resolve the B Rob situation, no ifs, ands or Pujols.