Cup of jO's: 2011 Trade Deadline and J.J. Hardy (PM Post)

Well...a few hours changes the world sometimes.  The Orioles have agreed in principle for a three year extension worth in the neighborhood of 22 MM with a limited no trade clause.  I find it surprising that he signed for that value.  I think he is underpaid given the market and what would have been possible for him.  This is definitely not a Brian Roberts-like deal which was overmarket in per year salary and overmarket in length.  Hardy's deal appears to me to be undermarket in salary and on par with length.

As with Roberts' deal, Hardy's deal increases the need to take advantage of his presence on the team.  Useful complementary pieces will need to be acquired to make any sense of this signing.  Hardy making a 70 win team into a 73 win team means little and likely is counterproductive.  Him being part of a larger effort to improve the team would make sense.  However, I think the only way this team becomes competitive is with about 30-40 MM extra in signings as the team does not have overwhelming sources of young talent.

What I was going to write about was the Reds and Yonder Alonso as well as the Giants and a long odds dream about Brandon Belt.  That conversation is now worth less in having.  As such, I will go on record being for trading J.J. Hardy for someone like Alonso and being quite mildly against an extension for J.J. Hardy.

I just have doubts when it comes to devoting resources in an oft-injured older shortstop who does not display amazing amounts of athleticism and is having a career year at the plate while the team is struggling to be within 10 games of five hundred ball.  I do not believe it is an efficient use of funds.  I hope I am wrong.

Cup of jO's: 2011 Trade Deadline and J.J. Hardy (AM Post)

We will be running through all of the possible ticket items that the Orioles have to give away and receive something useful in return.  The first for us to highlight, before he is signed to an extension, is J.J. Hardy.

J.J. Hardy
.356 wOBA, 275/333/490, 1.8 fWAR

Case to Keep
Ever since Miguel Tejada began rapidly aging, shortstop has been a black hole of offense for the Orioles.  Internal options never emerged, no one ever really trades a useful shortstop prospect, and free agency rarely yields good talent at that position.  Shortstops are hoarded and locked up by their teams.  However, the Twins were in a cash crunch and had doubts about J.J. Hardy.  He provided excellent defense, but is the epitome of "injury-prone" and showed an anemic bat two years running.  The Orioles jumped on Hardy and merely had to pay his salary (5.85 MM) and give up two somewhat inconsequential players (Jim Hoey with his blazing straight fastball and Aubrey Huff acquisition Brett Jacobson).

This year the Orioles are benefiting from Hardy's best offensive season of his career by rate.  The only mark on him so far has been that he has missed roughly 25 games to injury.  That is better attendance than his previous two years.  His defense has also shined and is just as good as our all glove shortstop Cesar Izturis.  The simple truth is that shortstop has been a great year for this team.  Even with Andino filling in for Hardy on several occasions, the Orioles ranked as the 10th most productive team at shortstop.  Last year, the team was 27th.  Of all of the troubles the Orioles have faced this season, shortstop has not been one of them and at 28, Hardy certainly has several years left in him.

Case to Trade
There are three major reasons to trade Hardy: he is injury-prone, he is having a career year, and you probably can trade him for useful prospects.

Injury prone.  In 2009, he barely played 100 games.  The same thing was true in 2010.  He, again, this year missed a quarter of the first half with an injury.  While it is true that none of these injuries were career threatening, the possibility lies that a future injury certainly could be career threatening.  This is probably more of a concern for a shortstop because even little dings here and there can turn into decreased ability to play third base effectively.  Injuries during his 2009 and 2010 campaigns likely had a lot to do with his issues at the plate.  Hardy's power evaporated those two years and injuries probably have some bearing on that.  If the three year extension does go through, I think it will be safe to say that Hardy will likely play 3B in 2014 with Manny Machado at shortstop.  If Machado rushes up for 2013, Hardy might make the switch earlier.  At 28, Hardy is at the point where players tend to slow down.

Career Year.  I am surprised by the 21-25 MM numbers being thrown about because J.J. Hardy is having a career year.  That is most assuredly a discount, if Hardy hits the open market...he will receive three or four years at 10+ MM.  The only way 21-25 MM makes sense to me would be if there are sizable incentives in there and a concrete no trade clause that could later turn into more money for him.  The shortstop market is incredibly thin in the upcoming year and you have several big money teams (e.g. San Francisco Giants) who will be looking to resolve issues they have at this position.  Jose Reyes might be the best option for shortstop this off season, but after Hardy there is nothing left at the position.  My guess for his value if he hit the market would be 3/36 or 4/44.  Teams close to the playoffs and in need of help will and should be willing to put up with the premium that is a career season and be tolerant of his injury issues.  The Orioles with holes a plenty, have little use for a shortstop going into his thirties with a dicey injury history.

Trade return.  Several teams are also struggling in season for an answer at shortstop.  This translates into teams being willing to give up prospects who are blocked within the team's playoff window or players in the low minors.  Trading Hardy and then overpaying him by several million may actually be cheaper than signing Hardy and then signing a free agent at a position.  The easiest scenario here would be the Reds where the Orioles could deal him for Yonder Alonso (1B) and then resign Hardy at 13-15MM a year for three years.  That would be cheaper and likely more useful than resigning Hardy and then signing Prince Fielder to a 150-200MM contract.  The point is that this team, the Orioles, is not a playoff team in the near term.  It is difficult to see how this organization can field a competitive squad in the next three years.  As such, a Hardy extension makes as much sense as Brian Roberts extension did.  Just because you are left with a hole does not mean you should spend whatever it takes to fill it because your yard may be full of holes.

Possible Trade Partners and Targets

The following teams are those who are having troubles with production from their shortstop position.  Most of these teams are producing wOBAs around .305 or less and the team is within striking distance of the divisional pennant.

AL

Tampa Bay Rays
To be kind, shortstop is killing the Rays.  They are getting decent defense there, but Reid Brignac and Elliot Johnson are providing next to nothing at the plate.  The Rays could certainly use a short term fix and would make good use of any compensation picks Hardy would provide.  However, the Rays never just look at the current season and would be unlikely to drop a major piece to the Orioles, so nothing like Desmond Jennings.  What the team could expect would be a couple low B prospects or a low B and a soon to be expensive starting pitcher.  In the former scenario, I am thinking a tandem to target would be Nick Barnese (RHP) and Braulio Lara (LHP).  In the Rays' system those guys are probably in the 10-15 tange for their prospects.  In ours, they would be in the 3-7 range.  That said, only Barnese would be consequential for next season.  Something that might be more relevant for the near term would be pairing Barnese up with Jeff Niemann (RHP).  The Rays probably do not want him much long with the arms they have pushing up from AAA and with his arbitration figures coming in.  He is also their back end rotation arm.  He would be something similar for the Orioles.  Either trade scenario probably is not ideal for the Orioles.

NL

Atlanta Braves
Money will be tight for the Braves, but Alex Gonzalez is providing nothing at the plate for them.  Gonzalez has about 1.2 MM left on his deal this year.  I could see the Braves asking the Orioles to take Gonzalez back in the deal and maybe even through in a million or two with Hardy.  Similar to the Rays, I do not see anything of immediate need available in the Braves' system.  My target here would be Arodys Vizcaino (RHP).  He has a great arm, but his durability has been questioned.  As such, you will see him ranked anywhere from top 15 to top 50 when the off season prospect rankings emerge.  Getting an arm like that means you threw money in there and a second piece is likely to be a bit fringe because no one likes giving up that kind of arm.  A player who fits that bill would be someone like Todd Cunningham (CF).  He covers the plate well with good discipline and plays good defense.  His power though is a bit unimpressive.  He is likely to be a 4th outfielder.  That said, Vizcaino would be a huge piece to have in the Orioles system and I think the Braves would be more willing to give value than the Rays.

Milwaukee Brewers
The Brewers made a big splash acquiring KRod.  However, they still have an issue at shortstop.  Ex-Brewer Hardy may not be an option the team wants as there may be bad blood between the two.  The Brewers notoriously dropped Hardy into the minors to add a year service time onto his contract preventing him from reaching free agency in 2011, which is why Hardy is an Oriole right now.  The Brewers system is also void of much talent after the Grienke trade this past off season.  I would not bother entering talks with them.  If I had to deal with them, I'd settle for nothing less than three of their top four or five arms...something like Heckathorn, Scarpetta, and Thornburg...it might be better just to take the draft picks for Hardy.

Pittsburgh Pirates
The Pirates do not have much money to throw around and I could see the Orioles being able to leverage that by offering to pay for Hardy's deal.  The two draft picks for Hardy would also look good to the Pirates who would not have to worry about him taking arbitration.  With that in mind, I would ask for two potentially big pieces: Starling Marte (CF), Rudy Owens (LHP), and Colton Cain (LHP).  Marte could spell Adam Jones in centerfield in a couple years allowing Jones to shift to a more natural left field or for the Orioles to deal him.  Owens looks like a promising lefty who has struggled this past year in AAA.  At the very least, he is more valuable fodder than Troy Patton or Jim Johnson in the rotation.  Colton Cain would be the Chris Tillman circa Erik Bedard deal.  Cain is young with a ton of projection, but I think he could be a top 50 guy in a year.  Again, this is another forward thinking deal.  Not many opportunities available for the here and now.

In the second post today, I will focus on two more likely destinations: the Cincinatti Reds and the San Francisco Giants.  I count these as more likely because (1) their shortstops are awful and (2) they have pieces the Orioles could use right now.

Cup of jO's: Throwing in the towel for O's 2012 season?

I don't think we need to recount what happened the night before anymore unless something truly interesting happens, so for now on when I write these Cup of jO's...I am just going to jump in to whatever I want to write about.

In Brittany Ghiroli's article yesterday detailing what the Orioles are likely to do as the trade deadline comes up writes this little nugget:

Johnson has established himself as one of the best setup men in the American League, and the organization -- which has told several teams it's unwilling to discuss offers for the reliever -- continues to have internal discussions about moving Johnson into a starting role next season.

Um, what?  We have Mitch Atkins, Chris Jakubauskas, and Alfredo Simon in the starting rotation and we have to wait until next year to see if Jim Johnson can start?  This makes little sense to me.  This season, the team could stretch Johnson out 30-50 innings more than he is in line to get which would be a headstart on next season.  Plus, what is left for the team to play for this year?  If your goal is to see if Johnson can start then there is nothing preventing you from figuring that out in our current situation.

What I find more revelatory is that it seems to be an acknowledgement that the current front brass is planning on 2012 to be another lets wait and see type of season.  If the team planned on being competitive, they would be looking to next season as one where they fill in a spot or two with veteran pitchers and let the rest shake out.  Johnson should be quite far from the conversation in this regard.  He should not be held as an untouchable player due to his value as a setup man and potential (though unlikely) value as a starting pitcher.  How much value can a potential middle to backend rotation arm have?  It appears the modus operandi for the team, particularly with pitchers, is to run them into the ground and make them prove whether or not they can actually pitch.  It makes no sense to me.

It appears just as the team signed Brian Roberts to a long term deal and then squandered the front end of his deal which is where his value was actually . . . valuable (which was incredibly obvious and that extension has long been something we have railed against here in that we highly criticized it before the contract was even writtin).  It now looks like Nick Markakis' contract will also be exhuasted to no real use.  It also looks like Matt Wieters' cost-controlled years may also be squandered.  To be true, this is not an Oriole Little moment in time.  There are good things happening in the organization.  However, I have a hard time believing things are overall going in the right direction and every day it seems more and more evidence mounts illustrating how inadequate the organization might be in facing off against the superior payrolls of Boston and New York as well as against the superior innovation of Toronto, Tampa, and probably Boston, too.

Situations like these when doubt becomes feverish, I remind myself not to get too wrapped up in my own conclusions.  That I need to challenge my ideas instead of easing into a comfortable pre-formed answer.  One always needs to challenge their own beliefs and never grow complacent.  My belief is that this team although in better shape than it was three years ago is in worse shape when it comes to competing.  I'm trying to challenge that statement.  Maybe you all can help.

Cup of jO's: Keith Law's Interview About the Future of the Orioles

Perhaps more eloquently than I rambled on yesterday, Keith Law was interviewed on The Fan in Baltimore yesterday about how the Orioles situation is indeed somewhat dire.  Long time followers of this blog can probably recall my preaching of patience over the first two years of the MacPhail regime in Baltimore.  I still think what he did during that period was correct.  The team jettisoned their useful pieces and acquired prospects in return.  The team stepped up their resources in international talent acquisition.  The team stepped up money dedicated in the draft.  Then it all sort of stopped and got derailed.  The team somewhat inexplicably locked in a 30s second baseman to an overmarket deal and then failed to aggressively pursue complementary pieces in trade or free agency.  The team signed short-term fill ins for position for relatively big money (4MM or more) on individual players when that money would be far better utilized in amateur markets.  The team's aggressive move into the international market ceased before they could call their effort average.

Whatever you think of MacPhail, it is difficult to explain away the state of this team as they begin the second half of this year and come up against the trade deadline.  For position players in the Majors, the Orioles have a long term solution at catcher (Matt Wieters).  They may have long term solutions in right field (Markakis) and left field (Jones).  They may have long term solutions in the starting rotation (Matusz, Arrieta, and Britton).  That is where the team is on the pro level.  In the minors, they have Manny Machado and likely Dylan Bundy as the only two high potential difference makers.  In comparison to every other team in the AL East, the Orioles trail behind them in organizational talent.  It is certainly a team currently cursed with difficult footing in their attempt to be meaningful.

This past week's interview with Steve Melewski comes back again and again in my memory.  MacPhail's "I'm an old baseball man schtick" is an amazingly antiquated character to be the head of baseball side of a front office.  He may play a bumpkin, good ol' boy in the media or maybe he really is, I do not know.  That kind of mentality though works against teams these days.  The application of economic theory to baseball is not some passing fad.  Teams that employ these methods are wildly successful and every team not named the Orioles do so in the AL East.  Yes, teams like the Twins and Phillies as far as I know put very little stock in Wall Streeting baseball, but I think it is fair to say exceptions do not fit the rule.  The ability to utilize well founded analysis and understanding what data gaps mean is likely an easier and perhaps more cost efficient way to create success as opposed to taking a talent bankrupt organization and trying to make them flow in old school methodology that is highly reliant on anecdotal evidence as well as a overly robust distrust of any new way of evaluation and acquisition.

This past winter we saw how the Rays when unable to earn enough revenue were thinking ahead and found ways to stay relevant.  They were able to identify relief pitching types that had a better liklihood to rebound and return free agency compensation.  They decided not to spend big money on their own free agents who showed high level performance on a few skills.  These measures netted them with a dozen or so picks in the first two rounds of this year's deep draft.  That did not happen by accident.  The Blue Jays literally spent 500k to deal for a player after last season who they immediately declined an extension just to garner themselves a compensation round selection in the draft.  THESE are examples of dynamic front offices operating on the front end of the operation wave.

This is not to say that numbers and slide rulers ensure success.  They do not.  The Mariners faith (and it was faith) in defensive metrics resulted in them fielding a team that relied on statistical variables that were incredibly elastic.  Of course, Milton Bradley's complete meltdown and Chone Figgins remembering he was Chone Figgins did nothing to help.  This shows that not all heavily analytical approaches are successful, but I would reckon that the more a team is able to rely on quantitative measures the more likely they are to find areas where they can leverage their resources to improve their chances of success more so than if they simply relied on well-experienced guts.  Again...qualitative ("gut") scouting is needed and highly valued, but where it can be replaced by numbers (that are well understood in how they can be applied) it needs to be replaced.

This leaves me more firm in my notion I wrote last winter that this team needs to be rebuilt.  At the beginning of MacPhail's tenure I said this and it again is how I feel.  I do not think it needs to be completely dismantled, but I think as fans we need to recognize that signing a Prince Fielder and resigning the career-year J.J. Hardy is not going to change this team's fortune.  Over the next two weeks, we will be going through our trade items and where may be the best destination for them.  I will also pepper in a few Life Without Andy posts.

Cup of jOs: The Second Part of MacPhail's Words on IFAs

Last night, Matt Wieters grounded out to the second baseman in the eigth inning of the American League's 5-1 loss to the National League.  Peculiar rules really need to shift this back to being a pure exhibition and not something that determines post season play.  What to make the All Star Game more important?  Get rid of interleague play.

---

Of interest...

A couple days ago, Steve Melewski posted the second part of his interview with Andy MacPhail and then reported his interview with Baseball America's Ben Badler.  What Melewski does well is interview often the right people.  He typically does a good job of this outside of last Winter's Keith Law interview.  What is painful to me though is that what is good about sharp, incisive interviewing is that you can ask thoughtful questions and mild criticisms while immediately recieving an answer.  In this collection of interviews, Badler provides a rebuttal of several of MacPhail's key statements.  To me, this is poor form in that MacPhail is no longer capable of responding.  If Melewski feels inadequate in questioning MacPhail's approach then he should call Badler, get his viewpoint, hone up his own research, and then ask more insightful questions and allow MacPhail to be more thoughtful in his answers.

I recognize what I am asking from Melewski is to be more of an investigative reporter.  To be more aware of what is actually out there and asking pertinent questions.  That Melewski was unaware of MacPhail's own brass speaking of studies comparing IFAs and rule 4 draft cost efficiency shows poor research.  Information is out there and it should be utilized.  Although, this may not be Melewski's game.  His game may be to be a straight interviewer who provides as little insight as possible.  It is very much a sort of Prime Directive perspective...that you remove any element of yourself in an interview in order to prevent any bias.  It certainly is something found favorable to the interviewee as their words are reported verbatim and are not scrutinized immediately by the interviewer.  Melewski does this seperation of self quite well and it certainly is a defendable manner of writing.  From my own perspective though...I think it wastes opportunity.  I mean, are we interested in MacPhail's speech on international talent or are we interested in his thoughts.  The two appear different to me.

The second part of the interview falls apart for me.  MacPhail answers questions about Miguel Sano, which were reported quite a long while back.  The Orioles were a finalist on him, but thought 3 MM was not workable as a bonus for the now top 100 prospect.  It is fair to say the jury is out on him.  He will likely be a left fielder and he will have home run power as well as a propensity to swing and miss.  MacPhail also talks about American scouts cross checking what the local scouts think, which is something almost every organization I am aware of does.  So, nothing new or different.  MacPhail also mentions the Orioles are in the Dominican, Curacao, and reentering Venezuela...which is something we already know.  There is just no new information here.  It may be that MacPhail stonewalled Melewski here or the intent was just to rehash background information and produce direct quotes from MacPhail.  These really are answers that require a paraphrase and more structure provided when writing.

Melewski then reports Ben Badler's perspective on the MacPhail interview.  His use of Badler to provide commentary results in some interesting statements that largely reflect my own opinions that were shared in the previous post.  Badler's view boils down to this:

• There is a great deal of uncertainty in the Latin American market and it is understandable for a team to be conservative in that market.  Most teams are.
• The Orioles appear to be not only conservative in that market, but tend to avoid it.
• Talent is a rare thing, so avoiding any market is probably not advisable.
• No one in this year's crop was worth more than 3MM from Badler's perspective, but you have to trust your own scouts.
• It is not difficult to see these talents play in actual games.  Very few prospects are prevented by their trainers from appearing at academies and playing.
• The Orioles are not middle of the road spenders on IFAs.

I think those are all viable perspectives.  What I put in italics are what I am reading into his words.  I should also note that Melewski also viewed MacPhail's 17th overall as a statement on IFAs, which does not make sense to Badler as well.

What do I take away from these posts?

• Someone should be writing a blog where they take Melewski's zen interviewing style and write actual articles.
• Andy MacPhail is not open-minded about IFAs and this is based on information he pretends he does not have (which may be inaccurate information) or is based on a potentially antiquated management approach.
• The team is not maximizing its ability to cheaply accumulate talent, preferring to spend money on items like relievers and "proven veterans."
• The team is probably the least progressive team in the AL East.

I think MacPhail is a competent and well respected GM, but the problem I have here is that in the AL East you need to be a trail blazing, intelligent front office (i.e., Tampa Bay Rays), have oodles of money (i.e., Yankees), have some of each (i.e., Toronto Blue Jays), or lots of each (i.e. Boston Red Sox).  In this divisional environment, how can we look at the makeup of these different teams and think that the Orioles will be a competitive team sometime in the near or slightly near future?  I am at a loss.  The Rays and Jays have top 5 talent in their minor leagues.  The Orioles appear to have Machado and Dylan Bundy, which puts them likely in the 15-20 range.  After that, the team has a lot of C+ talent. 

We are certainly better off as an organization than we were before MacPhail came here, but we are further away from competing.

Cups of jO's: MacPhail on O's International Spending (Part I of II)

Enjoy it.  Today is the beginning of our three day respite from the tiresome burden this season has become.  There have been some interesting developments this season:

• Matt Wieters has become a full fledged, accredited All Star (and primarily for his defense)
• J.J. Hardy has said everything and done everything right in wanting to become a well paid Oriole
• Adam Jones has established himself as a worthy center fielder (who might be better off playing left field)
• Mark Reynolds has displayed an amazing amount of plus power over the past six weeks.
• The bullpen has a tight core of Uehara, Johnson, and Gregg
• The Orioles arguably drafted the best arm in the 2011 draft and the guy has Oriole roots.

Read those again.  They are six good things that have happened for this team.  You cannot ignore them.  Not only are they six good things.  They are six things that should benefit the team next year as well.  Hardy is the only one who might benefit the team in whatever free agent compensation becomes.  Remember . . . good things have happened.

---

Of Interest...

Steve Melewski asks some pertinent questions of Andy MacPhail in a part I  of a two part interview today.  The focus is on the Orioles' approach to international free agency.  Steve does a good job reporting what MacPhail says, but does zero commenting.  I'll provide the commenting.

• MacPhail states he is unwilling to dedicate 4 or 5MM to prospects who have never play competitive games.  He says that the efforts they have put forth have resulted in solid upswings of velocity for international players they have signed who are playing in the Dominican Summer League and in the Gulf Coast League.

MacPhail is putting forward the message that international talent is pretty much a crapshoot.  That a player who can sign a 4MM bonus is not worth that amount because we have no idea what he will become.  I do not agree with this.  Fellow talent evaluators are determining these amateurs are good enough to compete with each other and drive the price to those levels.  These fellow talent evaluators come from Ivy League front offices ranging to the very rich (e.g. Yankees, Red Sox) to the not so very rich (e.g. Athletics).  That these teams of varying backgrounds and high analytical effort are into a talent source has to tell you that these amateur talents are likely worth that much money.  To me, insisting on this perspective seems incredibly aloof.  It makes me wonder whether he believes this or that he is refraining from a secondary issue that makes them decide against spending money for high profile talent.

Second, you do have to recognize that there is a growing international presence in the Orioles lower minor league system.  However, we have to remember sample size.  Jonathan Schoop is a name most Oriole fans have become familiar with and hopefully many watched him last night in the MLB Futures game.  Another name in GCL that everyone should write a mental note on is Eduardo Rodriguez.  I have received several positive reviews on him.  Solid 18yo lefty with a good breaking ball and a 90mph fastball with movement.  Beyond that it is difficult to know what is there long term.  When money is spent on the Garrett Atkins and Vladimir Guerreros, but not on the Miguel Sanos, you know there is misevaluation in the organization.  Think about it like this.  What is worth more?  A 3 MM investment on a commodity that might return MLB value for six years at a low cost or spending 5-8 MM for a declining player in hopes the team can reach .500 ball?

• MacPhail says it makes no sense to spend big money on amateurs who only work out and not play games.

What I found interesting here and the way I read it is that the team is recognizing that the best players are not playing in the Dominican Prospect League.  I agree with that.  Furthermore, this shows that MacPhail acknowledges that the best prospects are indeed getting the big money.  It reads somewhat contradictory.  Although he may not have felt like mentioning it, it seems that the DPL is still a low priority for the team.  It is interesting for a team to say they want to see guys play in games and then goes and largely ignores the only organized league in the country.

• MacPhail mentions the team was about 17th in spending for amateur talent last year.

This was a slightly confusing statement.  This has to mean 17th in spending when adding together the rule 4 draft and international free agency.  They are around 25th in spending for international free agency.

• MacPhail thinks Melewski should do an analysis on how many big money IFAs wind up becoming solid prospects.  MacPhail must be unaware that Melewski does not do analysis.

A couple things that are kind of amusing here. (1) The Orioles have done a study on this!  Why is MacPhail saying they have not done one?  Matt Klentak specifically stated they did this.  They hired an outside consultant and did the study.  They found the IFA market was not as cost efficient as the rule 4 draft. (2) The rate for high cost prospects is about 30-40%, which is higher than multi-year declining veterans outperforming their preceding three year average.

There is not to like in MacPhail's answer there.  He cannot be truly unaware of the study because that front office is knit tight from every indication.  Why would he explicitly say he did not do a study, but others should do it?  No idea.  That said, teams who like to do studies (e.g. Blue Jays, Rays, Red Sox, Athletics) are spending freely on talent south of the Great 48.