Roberts to Cubs update

[bigbird]

from a Cubs board....

Just a couple comments from Bruce Levine this morning:

The Cubs are still very interested in Roberts and he expects talks to continue next week.

The players he's hearing in a potential deal are Cedeno, Gallagher, and either Veal or Marshall.

Levine thinks if the Cubs acquire Roberts, they'd put him at leadoff and ask Soriano to bat down in the order.


Peace21....Looks like the Marshall piece I was told has some teeth.;)

[AgentOrange]

That would be a sweet package, IMO. I think that is even better than the Gallagher, Murton and Patterson.

[JTrea81]

So this would mean a 2B man would be coming back in a Bedard deal, most likely Kendrick from the Angels or Chen from the Mariners. I don't think Cedeno would make an adequate second baseman.

[SacreBleu]

Thanks for the update! I think I like Gallagher/Marshall coming this way in a BRob trade...not sure who would play 2nd, but heck, we got until the end of March to figure that out!!

Thanks again. Go O's!!

[rammyfanny]

Cubs open up a spot on the 40 man by trading Pagan for 2 minor leaguer today.

[mikezpen]

Cedeno, Gallagher, Marshall/Veal w/b a hundred times better. Patterson's a project at best and Murton they don't really need that badly. That's why MacPhail didn't go for that deal-presuming it was offered.

They need a SS and Marshall/Gallagher have a shot at the rotation.If this is the deal-take it.

[Greg Pappas]

from a Cubs board....

Just a couple comments from Bruce Levine this morning:

The Cubs are still very interested in Roberts and he expects talks to continue next week.

The players he's hearing in a potential deal are Cedeno, Gallagher, and either Veal or Marshall.

Levine thinks if the Cubs acquire Roberts, they'd put him at leadoff and ask Soriano to bat down in the order.


Peace21....Looks like the Marshall piece I was told has some teeth.;)

Interesting that Murton appears out. Thanks for the update BB.

[66-70-83-??]

Interesting that Murton appears out. Thanks for the update BB.

Marshall doesn't excite me much.

I think I would rather have Murton than Marshall.

Gallagher, Cedeno, Murton for BRob.

[amateurfan]

Sorry everyone, but I can't find anything on marshall. Can someone post a link?
Personally, though I know nothing of Marshall, I'm not that impressed with Cedeno, and I'm getting a little sick of pitchers. Not that Gallagher looks bad at all, but we need some positional depth too.

[Sandwich Pick]

from a Cubs board....

Just a couple comments from Bruce Levine this morning:

The Cubs are still very interested in Roberts and he expects talks to continue next week.

The players he's hearing in a potential deal are Cedeno, Gallagher, and either Veal or Marshall.

Levine thinks if the Cubs acquire Roberts, they'd put him at leadoff and ask Soriano to bat down in the order.


Peace21....Looks like the Marshall piece I was told has some teeth.;)

I like the deal, especially if it means we could get Kendrick back in a Bedard deal.

[Greg Pappas]

Marshall doesn't excite me much.

I think I would rather have Murton than Marshall.

Gallagher, Cedeno, Murton for BRob.

We agree, although I'd still do Veal or Marshall.

Although it's not happening, I'd sure like to get Vitters as a PTBNL... :D

[B-more]

Hopefully the waiting out of the deals is paying off. Might also be pressure from other teams bidding. Sounds like a good deal.

[66-70-83-??]

Sorry everyone, but I can't find anything on marshall. Can someone post a link?
Personally, though I know nothing of Marshall, I'm not that impressed with Cedeno, and I'm getting a little sick of pitchers. Not that Gallagher looks bad at all, but we need some positional depth too.

Here you go..... (http://thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Sean-Marshall.shtml)

[coe76]

You can go to Baseballamerica.com and look for the player finder section. Type in the players name and it will direct you to last years stats for all the teams the kid played for in 2007. Here is the link.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/

[33rdst]

Marshall doesn't excite me much.

I think I would rather have Murton than Marshall.

Gallagher, Cedeno, Murton for BRob.

Yeah I prefer Veal or Murton over Marshall. I think Macphail may go for more pirching in this deal and take more position players in the Bedard deal.

[66-70-83-??]

Yeah I prefer Veal or Murton over Marshall. I think Macphail may go for more pirching in this deal and take more position players in the Bedard deal.

Same here, though like Greg said, including Marshall instead of Murton/Veal wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me.

[coe76]

Could Davearm or soneone who knows the Cubs system give us a breadkown on if Gallagher or Marshall is rated higher in their eyes? It seems Veal is a bit below them but I do not know for sure. Any guidance would be appreciated. Heck, any real movement on the trade front would be appreciated!!:D

[Greg Pappas]

Davearm should have an interesting take on this and I think he'll approve of it, from a Cubs' fan POV.

[orangedive]

Cedeno, Gallagher, and Veal would be a good deal for Roberts.

I'd be happy with Murton in place a Veal as well. I'm wondering if that package is too much for Roberts. How do some of the Cubs guys feel about it?

[ChaosLex]

Considering they have no room for him as is, I'm surprised Murton isn't included in the deal.

How about Cedeno, Gallagher, Veal/Marshall, and Murton for BRob and Payton?

[Sports Guy]

Marshall isn't good.

[amateurfan]

I don't see how this is a very good deal. Cedeno has no power, walks once about every 20 ABs, and is otherwise unimpressive offensively. He must be amazing with the glove. Furthermore, the O's already have plenty of Marshalls. Gallagher is nice, but it's not exactly what we need, unless he were to be flipped. I'd pass.

[tywright]

We need Murton...not Marshall

[Sports Guy]

We need Murton...not Marshall

Right...Murton is much better than Marshall.

Marshall is a borderline 5th starter in the AL IMO.

[rammyfanny]

Could Davearm or soneone who knows the Cubs system give us a breadkown on if Gallagher or Marshall is rated higher in their eyes? It seems Veal is a bit below them but I do not know for sure. Any guidance would be appreciated. Heck, any real movement on the trade front would be appreciated!!:D

Gallagher is much higher. Marshall will sit at 88, with a 11-6 curve. He did pitch well for us last year, though, but he just doesn't offer alot of potential.

[Rob H]

Could Davearm or soneone who knows the Cubs system give us a breadkown on if Gallagher or Marshall is rated higher in their eyes? It seems Veal is a bit below them but I do not know for sure. Any guidance would be appreciated. Heck, any real movement on the trade front would be appreciated!!:D

Marshall is a perfectly adequate back-end starter (3.92 ERA last season, IIRC). He's already about as good as he'll ever get, though.

Gallagher would be a perfectly adequate back-end starter right now. In a few seasons, he'll be a very good #3, or perhaps even a #2.

Veal is the wild card of the bunch, and all the Dontrelle Willis comps are starting to look very accurate. I could see Veal being a legit Cy Young contender one year, losing a tick of command, and being back-end filler the next. No doubt about it, he's got the highest ceiling of the bunch... he can be a legit ace, no question. But he's also got a very high maintenance delivery which is not easily repeated.

In your shoes, I'd take Gallagher and Veal. No offense intended, but a good back-end guy isn't worth much to your team right now.

[Greg Pappas]

Ok folks, which offer among these four do you like the best?

1> Gallagher, Marshall, Cedeno
2> Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno
3> Gallagher, Murton, Cedeno
4> Gallagher, Murton, Patterson

Personally I prefer 3, 4, 2 and 1, in that order.

[bird watcher]

Ok folks, which offer among theese four do you like the best?

1> Gallagher, Marshall, Cedeno
2> Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno
3> Gallagher, Murton, Cedeno
4> Gallagher, Murton, Patterson

Personally I prefer 3, 4, 2 and 1, in that order.

Number 2

(words)

[B-more]

I think the O's should try for Veal with Gallegher. Those two have better upside and maybe getting Veal helps lessen the demand for Morrow in a possible Seattle trade.

Interesting how this deal could affect a positive trade for the O's. At the very least it could stir the Mariners to cave in to the O's demands because the Angels are making some bigger moves to compete.

[TheBee]

That would be a sweet package, IMO. I think that is even better than the Gallagher, Murton and Patterson.

I like it better than the that deal as well

[TheBee]

I like it better than the that deal as well

Gallagher Veal Cedeno

Veal has a great arm - was their number 2 prospect last year - had a down year. Great career k ratio
Gallagher appears very solid mid rotation pitcher

[coe76]

I will say this. Our insiders, with the exception of Bigbird, have been pretty quiet the last week. Not sure if that has any significance beyond, no real news they can pass on. Next week could be interesting.

[JTrea81]

I will say this. Our insiders, with the exception of Bigbird, have been pretty quiet the last week. Not sure if that has any significance beyond, no real news they can pass on. Next week could be interesting.

I wouldn't get your hopes up. We've been saying this for three weeks now, and I haven't heard anything is even close to being done from what I've read from the insiders so far. MacPhail hasn't done anything major since the Tejada trade on Dec. 12th. I wouldn't expect anything significant because he is being too unreasonable still.

I fully expect Santana and Blanton to be traded before MacPhail moves on Bedard. And since that is holding up just about every trade that the FO wants to make, don't expect Roberts to go anywhere before Bedard is dealt either...

I'm hoping this is a case of the Tortoise and the Hare in the rebuilding race, because Beane sure looks like the Hare as the Oakland FO is running laps around the Orioles, getting stuff done and are well on their way to rebuilding, unlike the Orioles FO which is plodding along at a Tortoise like pace...

[owl]

I've posted on Gallagher before. I think he's easily the best of the three and ends up a #2-3.

Marshall is a good pitcher. He's not flashy and he's not very far from his ceiling right now but he's a solid back-end starter. He doesn't have any stand out pitch, though he gets nice whiff rates on his curve, but he mixes in a few pitches well. Tall young lefty groundball pitchers are always nice to have. However, there's been some concern of tired arm late in the season but I think by this season that should be worked out.

But I disagree on Veal. While he looked improved the last month of the season, he really dropped off some in 2007 and was extremely inconsistent. He was expected to improve his walk rates and instead had even worse control at times. His BABIP have always been fluky and his pitches are pretty average. A deceptive delivery only goes so far - especially when you can't quite control it yourself, often throwing your release off. He has a high ceiling but I really personally think his future is in the bullpen. Also might be interesting to note that with the recent death of Veal's father, there was a short period of off-limits which held off any talk of trading him.

And if you ask me, I'd take Cedeno over Patterson too.

[FavreFan]

I wouldn't get your hopes up. We've been saying this for three weeks now, and I haven't heard anything is even close to being done from what I've read from the insiders so far. MacPhail hasn't done anything major since the Tejada trade on Dec. 12th. I wouldn't expect anything significant because he is being too unreasonable still.

I fully expect Santana and Blanton to be traded before MacPhail moves on Bedard. And since that is holding up just about every trade that the FO wants to make, don't expect Roberts to go anywhere before Bedard is dealt either...

exactly and well put.

I am not in favor of trading BRob. I hope it doesn't happen.

[caljr]

I wouldn't get your hopes up. We've been saying this for three weeks now, and I haven't heard anything is even close to being done from what I've read from the insiders so far. MacPhail hasn't done anything major since the Tejada trade on Dec. 12th. I wouldn't expect anything significant because he is being too unreasonable still.



While it is true that the insiders have not picked up on anything as of late, I don't think we can say that nothing is close to being done. Fact of the matter is that the insiders don't pick up on everything. Most of the time, it is a last minute scoop, such as when Peace broke the Tejada trade a few hours before it was announced. Lets remember that the big rumor leading up to the Tejada trade was Bedard and Tejada to the Dodgers. In fact, it was thought the night before the Tejada trade went down, that both of these guys would be going to the Dodgers. The only talk of Tejada to the Astros was in a deal that did not involve any of the 5 players that we even got for him. I am not bashing the insiders at all. In fact, without them, I would probably not even visit this board. Its just that when a deal is being negotiated between us and another team, the GMs are often the only ones that truly know what is going on.

[JTrea81]

Its just that when a deal is being negotiated between us and another team, the GMs are often the only ones that truly know what is going on.

Well we've been negotiating for a month and a half, if Bavasi hasn't cracked on Morrow yet, he isn't going to. I tell you if this is how MacPhail does all his business, I pity the poor soul that has to sell a car to him.

[Boy Howdy]

Well we've been negotiating for a month and a half, if Bavasi hasn't cracked on Morrow yet, he isn't going to. I tell you if this is how MacPhail does all his business, I pity the poor soul that has to sell a car to him.

This made me laugh imagining, a certain OH poster trying to sell MacPhail a ring, going nuts when he won't choose one in the first 5 minutes. :D

[theobird]

I would like to see Cedeno, Colvin and Gallagher. I would pass on Marshall/Veal. If the Cubs absolutely would not include Colvin, I would consider taking Murton in his place. I don't think we need to be taking fringe pitchers in either a BRob or Bedard deal. Gallagher is a big, strong kid who is very likely to be good, but not great. Murton is a solid guy who is good, but not great. Cedeno is a risk. Could be very, very good. Has struggled to get untracked at the ML level thus far, though.

[Araqnid]

Yay. More pitchers that can fill a #3-5 hole. Awesome, because I wasn't sure how the other 17 would pan out.

We need Cedeno, and we should push for Murton, not Veal / Marshall. Gallagher does look very good though, so I'd like to get him.

[owl]

Yay. More pitchers that can fill a #3-5 hole. Awesome, because I wasn't sure how the other 17 would pan out.

Yes, that indeed is the primary function of the depth.

[Hank Scorpio]

I wouldn't get your hopes up. We've been saying this for three weeks now, and I haven't heard anything is even close to being done from what I've read from the insiders so far. MacPhail hasn't done anything major since the Tejada trade on Dec. 12th. I wouldn't expect anything significant because he is being too unreasonable still.

I fully expect Santana and Blanton to be traded before MacPhail moves on Bedard. And since that is holding up just about every trade that the FO wants to make, don't expect Roberts to go anywhere before Bedard is dealt either...

I'm hoping this is a case of the Tortoise and the Hare in the rebuilding race, because Beane sure looks like the Hare as the Oakland FO is running laps around the Orioles, getting stuff done and are well on their way to rebuilding, unlike the Orioles FO which is plodding along at a Tortoise like pace...

I thought you hated that deal for Oakland? Beane took a substandard package, etc???

[Araqnid]

You want depth all around. We have enirely too many back of the rotation types, and while Gallagher is better than that, I'm not convinced that Veal or Marshall is. We can IMPROVE two positions that will be awful this year. We shouldn't sacrifice LF and SS and create even more UNNECESSARY depth when we can upgrade both of those positions.

Patton, Olson, Penn, Albers, etc. will never be more than #3 pitchers, and will never bring a lot in a trade. It makes sense to have a few of them but its a little ridiculous to have all of them. It's even more ridiculous to trade for even more.

[Hank Scorpio]

I've posted on Gallagher before. I think he's easily the best of the three and ends up a #2-3.

Marshall is a good pitcher. He's not flashy and he's not very far from his ceiling right now but he's a solid back-end starter. He doesn't have any stand out pitch, though he gets nice whiff rates on his curve, but he mixes in a few pitches well. Tall young lefty groundball pitchers are always nice to have. However, there's been some concern of tired arm late in the season but I think by this season that should be worked out.

But I disagree on Veal. While he looked improved the last month of the season, he really dropped off some in 2007 and was extremely inconsistent. He was expected to improve his walk rates and instead had even worse control at times. His BABIP have always been fluky and his pitches are pretty average. A deceptive delivery only goes so far - especially when you can't quite control it yourself, often throwing your release off. He has a high ceiling but I really personally think his future is in the bullpen. Also might be interesting to note that with the recent death of Veal's father, there was a short period of off-limits which held off any talk of trading him.

And if you ask me, I'd take Cedeno over Patterson too.

This is the key for Marshall. He appears to have a plus sinker that gets him groundballs. Here (http://blog.stats.com/2007/06/whiff_profile_sean_marshall.html) is a nice article on him.

[JohnnyK27]

You want depth all around. We have enirely too many back of the rotation types, and while Gallagher is better than that, I'm not convinced that Veal or Marshall is. We can IMPROVE two positions that will be awful this year. We shouldn't sacrifice LF and SS and create even more UNNECESSARY depth when we can upgrade both of those positions.

Patton, Olson, Penn, Albers, etc. will never be more than #3 pitchers, and will never bring a lot in a trade. It makes sense to have a few of them but its a little ridiculous to have all of them. It's even more ridiculous to trade for even more.

Agreed ... I still say Gallagher, Patterson SS, & Murton. I would like to deal Murton if I was not going to play him over Scott. Or make him our 4th OF/DH & Trade Clement off for another piece maybe Votto from the Reds. He could be their back up catcher.

[JTrea81]

I thought you hated that deal for Oakland? Beane took a substandard package, etc???

He did what he wanted to do, which was get back quantity. Beane set the market instead of waiting for the market to be set and then trying to use the price before the market was set, which is what MacPhail is doing. Beane has identified players he wants and he's making deals to improve his club, unlike MacPhail who just likes to talk about improving his...

Had MacPhail actually traded Bedard before Haren was traded he would be recieving the players he wanted, but since he waited, Haren was traded and Bedard's value dropped. Now he's going to have to settle instead of continuing to have an unrealistic price tag for Bedard, otherwise Bedard will be an Oriole on Opening Day.

If MacPhail is actually serious about rebuilding Bedard has to go this offseason, otherwise you waste the best opportunity to maximize the return for him. He's waited until Haren got traded and will most likely wait for a Santana trade which will net a package of only one stud prospect such as Hughes/Buchholz/Ellsbury. The longer MacPhail waits, the lower Bedard's value is going to go...

[slaphitter]

All this talk of Cubs' prospects while our old prospect has done a decent job in the bigs.

Fontenot seems to be in Chicago's plans for the future.

Damn this deal better go down.
Cedeno is ABSOLUTELY ready to play everyday in the show.

[vatech1994]

Had MacPhail actually traded Bedard before Haren was traded he would be recieving the players he wanted, but since he waited, Haren was traded and Bedard's value dropped.

You keep typing stuff like this like it is a fact. Do you actually believe it to be fact? If so, can you please cite your source.

If it is your opinion, can you please explain to me why you believe this to be true and support it?

[Lucky Jim]

You keep typing stuff like this like it is a fact. Do you actually believe it to be fact? If so, can you please cite your source.

If it is your opinion, can you please explain to me why you believe this to be true and support it?

It's epidemic around here.

[JTrea81]

You keep typing stuff like this like it is a fact. Do you actually believe it to be fact? If so, can you please cite your source.

If it is your opinion, can you please explain to me why you believe this to be true and support it?

Well Beane was asking for 3-4 blue chippers for Haren to start with according to this article:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/03/SPRMTNE39.DTL

That's pretty much the equivalent to what MacPhail is asking from teams for Bedard. I have no doubt Beane could have got 3 blue chip prospects for Haren, yet he decided he wanted more than three players so he took less talent to get more players from Arizona.

Now had Beane held out say until after Bedard was traded, the price tag for Haren would still be 3-4 blue chip prospects. Therefore MacPhail would be justified in asking for three top prospects, but Haren was dealt before Bedard. Beane took less and now MacPhail looks unreasonable for not realizing the market price for Bedard has changed. Had MacPhail set the market before Beane traded Haren, I think he could actually get the players he wanted with the exception of Bruce.

[Goop]

I've been hoping that Marshall would blossom more. I followed him when he pitched for VCU, and he pitched well for them while he was in college.

He also dated my girlfriends' best friends' sorority sister, which practically makes us family, and family should hook each other up with tickets! :D

[Jimmy Mad]

Marshall played collegiately at VCU and continues to haunt me to this day. Personally, I hoped to never have to see him again.

[Goop]

Marshall played collegiately at VCU and continues to haunt me to this day. Personally, I hoped to never have to see him again.

Did you play against him?

[Pruke]

Right...Murton is much better than Marshall.

Marshall is a borderline 5th starter in the AL IMO.

I guess if Cedeno is the toss in, then Marshall becomes the 2nd piece and I think a ML Starter (5th or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I cannot help but think they're lining up to trade off some of this glut of pitching at some point next year in the hopes of picking up a key bat or 2.

[markpolis]

Well Beane was asking for 3-4 blue chippers for Haren to start with according to this article:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/03/SPRMTNE39.DTL

That's pretty much the equivalent to what MacPhail is asking from teams for Bedard. I have no doubt Beane could have got 3 blue chip prospects for Haren, yet he decided he wanted more than three players so he took less talent to get more players from Arizona.

Now had Beane held out say until after Bedard was traded, the price tag for Haren would still be 3-4 blue chip prospects. Therefore MacPhail would be justified in asking for three top prospects, but Haren was dealt before Bedard. Beane took less and now MacPhail looks unreasonable for not realizing the market price for Bedard has changed. Had MacPhail set the market before Beane traded Haren, I think he could actually get the players he wanted with the exception of Bruce.

:confused: If the Twins trade Santana and get 4 blue chips prospects does that once again change the market for Bedard? What if the Twins trade Santana to the Blue Jays or Red Sox? Hank Steinbrenner will probably flip out and offer his entire farm system for Bedard.

There are way too many other unknown factors involved for your "black and white" conclusion on Bedard's decreased trade value.

[blueberryale77]

I guess if Cedeno is the toss in, then Marshall becomes the 2nd piece and I think a ML Starter (5th or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I cannot help but think they're lining up to trade off some of this glut of pitching at some point next year in the hopes of picking up a key bat or 2.

Except that we have even more marginal 5th starters right now than we do DHs. Marshall doesn't have a whole lot of upside, especially if you throw him into the best hitting division in baseball. Trading away your best players needs to fill major needs and/or pick up guys with high upside who may be a risk but have the potential to be well above average players for us. "Not necessarily a bad thing" is what you trade Huff, Payton, Mora, etc. for just to be rid of their contracts and/or attitudes. It shouldn't be a significant part of a Roberts deal. Veal >>> Marshall IMO because while he's not a sure thing his potential is much higher.

[JohnnyK27]

Except that we have even more marginal 5th starters right now than we do DHs. Marshall doesn't have a whole lot of upside, especially if you throw him into the best hitting division in baseball. Trading away your best players needs to fill major needs and/or pick up guys with high upside who may be a risk but have the potential to be well above average players for us. "Not necessarily a bad thing" is what you trade Huff, Payton, Mora, etc. for just to be rid of their contracts and/or attitudes. It shouldn't be a significant part of a Roberts deal. Veal >>> Marshall IMO because while he's not a sure thing his potential is much higher.


I dont get why they'd want Cedeno over Patterson? Does anyone else?

Forget Marshall they should try to get a high ceiling kid who's in the low minors as we have more pitchers than we have slots for this year!

[blueberryale77]

I dont get why they'd want Cedeno over Patterson? Does anyone else?

Forget Marshall they should try to get a high ceiling kid who's in the low minors as we have more pitchers than we have slots for this year!

Maybe because Trembley's motto starts with "be on time..." :cool:

[Fairfax Bird]

So this would mean a 2B man would be coming back in a Bedard deal, most likely Kendrick from the Angels or Chen from the Mariners. I don't think Cedeno would make an adequate second baseman.

Why? If we get Cedeno it is to play SS, but why couldn't he shift to 2B?

[JohnnyK27]

I'm certain they could straighten Patterson out... Patterson looks like he could replace Roberts at the lead off role. Cedeno well ???? I 'm not sure but 10 HR Power ...Not a lot of speed... We could get lucky & LH might hit 10:D

[davearm]

Could Davearm or soneone who knows the Cubs system give us a breadkown on if Gallagher or Marshall is rated higher in their eyes? It seems Veal is a bit below them but I do not know for sure. Any guidance would be appreciated. Heck, any real movement on the trade front would be appreciated!!:D
Marshall has the lowest ceiling (solid back-of-the-rotation starter), but the greatest probability of reaching that ceiling (he's pretty much there now).

Veal, the opposite -- high ceiling with very questionable attainability. He profiles very similarly to Adam Loewen, especially his high K, high BB tendencies.

Gallagher's got a nice balance of both upside (#3 starter, maybe a #2) and solid prospect for attaining it, which makes him the top pick of the three.

[Fairfax Bird]

Well Beane was asking for 3-4 blue chippers for Haren to start with according to this article:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/03/SPRMTNE39.DTL

That's pretty much the equivalent to what MacPhail is asking from teams for Bedard. I have no doubt Beane could have got 3 blue chip prospects for Haren, yet he decided he wanted more than three players so he took less talent to get more players from Arizona.

Now had Beane held out say until after Bedard was traded, the price tag for Haren would still be 3-4 blue chip prospects. Therefore MacPhail would be justified in asking for three top prospects, but Haren was dealt before Bedard. Beane took less and now MacPhail looks unreasonable for not realizing the market price for Bedard has changed. Had MacPhail set the market before Beane traded Haren, I think he could actually get the players he wanted with the exception of Bruce.

Apples, Oranges, and speculation.

[davearm]

Davearm should have an interesting take on this and I think he'll approve of it, from a Cubs' fan POV.
We could sit here and debate who's going to have the better bigleague career... Cedeno or Patterson? Cedeno or Murton? Marshall or Veal?

And the winner of that debate will be whoever is more persuasive and articulate, regardless of which guy(s) he's arguing for, because there's really no clear right answer.

That's the nature of the Cubs available young guys these days. They're all decent. They all have questionmarks. They're all basically ready to step into a bigleague roster, or are a year or less away. And in terms of trade value, you can more or less throw a blanket over about 8 or 10 of them.

Guys like Hill and Pie and Marmol and Soto are on another level, but after that group I'll be fine with just about any combination of 3 of the remaining many (Cedeno, Murton, Patterson, Fontenot (OK he's a grade below the rest), Fuld, Colvin, Veal, Gallagher, Marshall, and maybe a half-dozen young bullpen guys).

[Scribo]

exactly and well put.

I am not in favor of trading BRob. I hope it doesn't happen.

Right.

So who do you think we should select with the draft picks when he leaves in two years?

[blamo0]

We could sit here and debate who's going to have the better bigleague career... Cedeno or Patterson? Cedeno or Murton? Marshall or Veal?

And the winner of that debate will be whoever is more persuasive and articulate, regardless of which guy(s) he's arguing for, because there's really no clear right answer.

That's the nature of the Cubs available young guys these days. They're all decent. They all have questionmarks. They're all basically ready to step into a bigleague roster, or are a year or less away. And in terms of trade value, you can more or less throw a blanket over about 8 or 10 of them.

Guys like Hill and Pie and Marmol and Soto are on another level, but after that group I'll be fine with just about any combination of 3 of the remaining many (Cedeno, Murton, Patterson, Fontenot (OK he's a grade below the rest), Fuld, Colvin, Veal, Gallagher, Marshall, and maybe a half-dozen young bullpen guys).

I know he hasn't been mentioned in any trade rumors, but how do they think Pawelek will do? I know he hasn't been that great as of yet. Do they have faith in him?

[davearm]

I know he hasn't been mentioned in any trade rumors, but how do they think Pawelek will do? I know he hasn't been that great as of yet. Do they have faith in him?
They're still trying to get Pawelek's mechanics straightened out, and get his delivery to be more repeatable.

I have no idea what the organization says about the guy privately, but of course they put on an optimistic face for interviews and whatnot.

Who knows. The guy's still young. But he certainly seems like (another) bust to me.

[blamo0]

I think he's a possible bust as well. Nothing against him or the state, but playing HS ball in UT and setting state records is a little different than setting state records in CA, FL,...etc. We'll see how he turns out. Hopefully he'll be alright.

[El Gordo]

I dont get why they'd want Cedeno over Patterson? Does anyone else?

Forget Marshall they should try to get a high ceiling kid who's in the low minors as we have more pitchers than we have slots for this year!

It might have something to do with the fact that the last 2 seasons at AAA Iowa, Cedeno hit for .900 + OPS and is a much better fielder, and a SS.

[blueberryale77]

It might have something to do with the fact that the last 2 seasons at AAA Iowa, Cedeno hit for .900 + OPS and is a much better fielder, and a SS.

Is he really? He's made quite a few errors at both SS and 2B (although in limited playing time at 2B). Fielding percentages in the .950 range throughout the majors and minors. Obviously that's not the be-all and end-all, but it's not a good sign. Given the mixed reviews on Patterson, I think there's at least a chance that with some good coaching on his footwork Patterson could end up being the better fielder of the two.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Ronny-Cedeno.shtml

[JohnnyK27]

I know he hasn't been mentioned in any trade rumors, but how do they think Pawelek will do? I know he hasn't been that great as of yet. Do they have faith in him?

He only pitched 17 innings this year did he have a injury?

[El Gordo]

Is he really? He's made quite a few errors at both SS and 2B (although in limited playing time at 2B). Fielding percentages in the .950 range throughout the majors and minors. Obviously that's not the be-all and end-all, but it's not a good sign. Given the mixed reviews on Patterson, I think there's at least a chance that with some good coaching on his footwork Patterson could end up being the better fielder of the two.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Ronny-Cedeno.shtmlFrom what I've read, Cedeno's errors are the kind that flashy young fielders make when they haven't learned to play within themselves. I don't think there is much evidence that he can't be at least a competent fielder, if not a LH.:002_sbiggrin: EPatt has some serious basic problems defensively and the jury seems to be out on weither he should be an IF or an OF.

[rammyfanny]

He only pitched 17 innings this year did he have a injury?

He tripped over his playstation waking up and broke his non pitching arm. His mechanics were out of whack , so he was thrown to extended ST for awhile if IIRC. Supposedly, in fall instructs a few months ago, he had the kinks worked out. We'll see.

[JohnnyK27]

He tripped over his playstation waking up and broke his non pitching arm. His mechanics were out of whack , so he was thrown to extended ST for awhile if IIRC. Supposedly, in fall instructs a few months ago, he had the kinks worked out. We'll see.

:D LOL

Is he anymore than a real longshot?

[hoosiers]

Not a big fan of this proposed deal. We're not getting any of the Cubs top four prospects and the deal gives weight that assumes, IMO, that Cedeno will become an average ML 2B - something we have seen little evidence of since he's had his ML opportunities.

If I were a GM dealing the owner's favorite player, I would want more of a sure thing in such a deal.

[rammyfanny]

:D LOL

Is he anymore than a real longshot?

IMO, definately. He pitched well in his first two seasons, then last year was the anomaly, with reasons for it. Our farm guy (Fleita) said that he thinks he's going to have a great 08 because they've found a repeatable delivery with him. Here was some of the recent quotes:

But after pitching in just two games at Class A Peoria in April, Pawelek headed to extended Spring Training in Mesa to work on mechanics. While preparing to rejoin Boise when the Northwest League season began, he suffered a fractured right (non-throwing) elbow when he tripped over his PlayStation.

After six weeks of rehabbing the injury, Pawelek headed up to Boise in late July, and he pitched in eight games in relief.

He's been making up for the lost time back in Mesa this fall and farm director Oneri Fleita was extremely enthusiastic about what he's seen, particularly when it comes to the mechanics which had been hampered by inconsistency.

"We finally have a delivery that I think he can repeat and that's really what it's been all about," Fleita said. "He's having fun and he's finally got a smile on his face, and usually with that comes success. So we're hoping this is the start of a huge gain for 2008."

Fleita attributes much of Pawelek's progress this fall to pitching coaches Dennis Lewallyn and Tom Pratt.

Pratt has been with the Cubs for a long time with a lengthy record of success stories, while Lewallyn joined the organization this season after working with such pitchers as Brandon Webb and Jose Valverde in his 12 years with the Arizona Diamondbacks.

"Sometimes it takes awhile for someone to 'connect,'" Fleita explained. "It can be a lot of things and sometimes you don't know how the dots get connected."

Fleita's own enthusiasm about Pawelek's progress is off the charts.

"He's young and left-handed and healthy," he said. "That equation can pay big dividends."

[furryburres]

He seems to have big groundball tendencies. Hey, whatever works...

[Rob H]

Is he really? He's made quite a few errors at both SS and 2B (although in limited playing time at 2B). Fielding percentages in the .950 range throughout the majors and minors. Obviously that's not the be-all and end-all, but it's not a good sign. Given the mixed reviews on Patterson, I think there's at least a chance that with some good coaching on his footwork Patterson could end up being the better fielder of the two.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Ronny-Cedeno.shtml

It's not bloody likely that Patterson ends up the better fielder.

Cedeno has ridiculous range and an absolute cannon for an arm. He gets errors on balls that most shortstops in the league wouldn't be able to get to even on a dive. Cedeno's mistakes are entirely of the mental variety, typically hurrying up to try to make a throw to first on a ball that should have been a base hit anyways.

As far as EPatt is concerned, Todd Walker is a very good comparison with the glove. Everybody thinks of Walker as some god-awful 2B, but he was merely below average with the glove, and not by so much that his bat didn't more than make up for it. EPatt has the raw athleticism necessary to carry his horrid fundamentals for the moment, but unless he learns second base in a hurry, he isn't likely to be more than average there... and not even for very long at that.

Of the two, I'd prefer to hold onto Cedeno. He's got a potential impact bat for a SS, and a glove that can go a long way with proper instructs and experience. Not to mention, the Cubs have offensive and defensive zero Ryan Theriot at SS at the moment, so Cedeno is extra-valuable since the Cubs would actually get better if their starting SS is injured in some horrific accident. That's not to denigrate EPatt, as his bat profiles as good enough to even warrant consideration full-time as a corner outfielder on a second-tier team, should he not be able to stick at 2B or CF. But simply because of Cedeno's potential dominance offensively and defensively over most SS in either league, he's got far more value. He wont hit like Jeter, Rollins, Tulo, or Hanley, and he wont defend like Tulo or Everett... but he can do everything below those levels.

((Take everything I've said with a grain of salt... for I am drunk.))

[ilovetheos]

It's not bloody likely that Patterson ends up the better fielder.

Cedeno has ridiculous range and an absolute cannon for an arm. He gets errors on balls that most shortstops in the league wouldn't be able to get to even on a dive. Cedeno's mistakes are entirely of the mental variety, typically hurrying up to try to make a throw to first on a ball that should have been a base hit anyways.

As far as EPatt is concerned, Todd Walker is a very good comparison with the glove. Everybody thinks of Walker as some god-awful 2B, but he was merely below average with the glove, and not by so much that his bat didn't more than make up for it. EPatt has the raw athleticism necessary to carry his horrid fundamentals for the moment, but unless he learns second base in a hurry, he isn't likely to be more than average there... and not even for very long at that.

Of the two, I'd prefer to hold onto Cedeno. He's got a potential impact bat for a SS, and a glove that can go a long way with proper instructs and experience. Not to mention, the Cubs have offensive and defensive zero Ryan Theriot at SS at the moment, so Cedeno is extra-valuable since the Cubs would actually get better if their starting SS is injured in some horrific accident. That's not to denigrate EPatt, as his bat profiles as good enough to even warrant consideration full-time as a corner outfielder on a second-tier team, should he not be able to stick at 2B or CF. But simply because of Cedeno's potential dominance offensively and defensively over most SS in either league, he's got far more value. He wont hit like Jeter, Rollins, Tulo, or Hanley, and he wont defend like Tulo or Everett... but he can do everything below those levels.

((Take everything I've said with a grain of salt... for I am drunk.))

written so well for a drunk man.

[mikezpen]

supports my gut feeling about Patterson.I think getting him is a mistake.

I also like Cedeno better as a hitter.You want a project w/talent who can maybe develop into something. At least go w/a true SS, not somebody who plays the infield part time.

[Dr. FLK]

Is he really? He's made quite a few errors at both SS and 2B (although in limited playing time at 2B). Fielding percentages in the .950 range throughout the majors and minors. Obviously that's not the be-all and end-all, but it's not a good sign. Given the mixed reviews on Patterson, I think there's at least a chance that with some good coaching on his footwork Patterson could end up being the better fielder of the two.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Ronny-Cedeno.shtml

LH made a lot of errors in the minors, yet many think he's a gold glover. Who knows, maybe there is some stat that shows an inverse relationship between minor league fielding and MLB fielding.

[33rdst]

If you buy Bill James' contention that minor league offensive performance is a good predictor of ML performance then both of these guys look to be solid ML players.

Oddly, they are only a few months apart in age yet Cedeno has much more ML experience. This suggest to me that he was rushed a little. Cedeno has nothing left to prove at the minor league level. He's approaching 1,000 abs in the majors so he needs to start performing. However, he's still under 25 so he has time to improve.

Patterson also has had outstanding minor league numbers. For me he's a center fielder. The Cubs played him at second base in the MIL for four seasons then changed him to outfield. He's has a lot of offensive upside, plus speed.

I don't think it would be a bad thing for us to get them both. Forget Marshall and take Gallagher, Patterson, Cedeno. You get a number 3 possibly an eventual number 2, your centerfielder and lead off man and an outstanding shortstop with good offensive upside.

Of course, if we get Jones in the Seattle deal then all bets are off on Patterson for CF. You have to go with murton or another arm in the Cubs deal.

[Ruzious]

I don't think it would be a bad thing for us to get them both. Forget Marshall and take Gallagher, Patterson, Cedeno. You get a number 3 possibly an eventual number 2, your centerfielder and lead off man and an outstanding shortstop with good offensive upside.

Of course, if we get Jones in the Seattle deal then all bets are off on Patterson for CF. You have to go with murton or another arm in the Cubs deal.
That would be the Cubs trade that I'd go after - though if I'm the Cubs, I keep Cedeno and push us to take Marshall or Veal.

[33rdst]

That would be the Cubs trade that I'd go after - though if I'm the Cubs, I keep Cedeno and push us to take Marshall or Veal.

Yep, I don't think they want to give up Cedeno. This will be interesting to watch. With regard to both Seattle and Chicago, I think the deal that is made first will determine the composition of the other.

[Moose Milligan]

Wow, three players for Roberts?

That seems to buy into MacPhails philosophy of quantity is quality...I hope this deal gets done...and in turn, sets off the chain reaction for shipping Bedard.

[vatech1994]

Why? If we get Cedeno it is to play SS, but why couldn't he shift to 2B?

I bet the voice of authority on trade matters was confusing Cedeno and Patterson

lol

[vatech1994]

Well Beane was asking for 3-4 blue chippers for Haren to start with according to this article:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/03/SPRMTNE39.DTL

That's pretty much the equivalent to what MacPhail is asking from teams for Bedard. I have no doubt Beane could have got 3 blue chip prospects for Haren, yet he decided he wanted more than three players so he took less talent to get more players from Arizona.

Now had Beane held out say until after Bedard was traded, the price tag for Haren would still be 3-4 blue chip prospects. Therefore MacPhail would be justified in asking for three top prospects, but Haren was dealt before Bedard. Beane took less and now MacPhail looks unreasonable for not realizing the market price for Bedard has changed. Had MacPhail set the market before Beane traded Haren, I think he could actually get the players he wanted with the exception of Bruce.

You didn't answer my question. I'll try again.

Do you believe what you wrote in post #46 is fact or opinion?

Regarding what you did write above, you realize that everything you wrote here is opinion and/or speculation, right? None of it is fact.

I also don't think your take on Macphail isn't accurate. MacPhail hasn't been reported to be holding out for 3-4 blue chip prospects for Bedard from what I've read and heard unless you define blue chip differently than I do.

You also clearly wrote in this post that you think Beane made a mistake and got less than he could have gotten by trading Haren too quickly. So Beane capitulated too quickly, but MacPhail is holding out for too much for too long. Interesting

Your take on negotiations amuses me to say your least. By your estimation, MacPhail should have been able to "set the market" better before Haren was traded and now the market is lower because Haren was traded. Let's see, 1/3rd less supply (Haren gone out of Haren, Bedard, & Santana), virtually the same demand (1 team eliminated out of 30 ML team or 6-8 interested teams, take your pick), yet the remaining suppliers have less leverage in negotiating by your way of thinking. LOL. All those economists must be hanging on your every word learning about all those mistakes they made throughout the last two hundred years.

Can you explain to me how you "set the market" in a negotiation? To be clear, I want you to explain how MacPhail was supposed to get the price he wanted for Bedard from the team he wanted on a deadline (prior to the Haren trade). You seem to be really good at this stuff, so I'd like to see what you would have done to make this happen. I'd like to learn. Thanks

[FutureOwner]

You didn't answer my question. I'll try again.

Do you believe what you wrote in post #46 is fact or opinion?

Regarding what you did write above, you realize that everything you wrote here is opinion and/or speculation, right? None of it is fact.

I also don't think your take on Macphail isn't accurate. MacPhail hasn't been reported to be holding out for 3-4 blue chip prospects for Bedard from what I've read and heard unless you define blue chip differently than I do.

You also clearly wrote in this post that you think Beane made a mistake and got less than he could have gotten by trading Haren too quickly. So Beane capitulated too quickly, but MacPhail is holding out for too much for too long. Interesting

Your take on negotiations amuses me to say your least. By your estimation, MacPhail should have been able to "set the market" better before Haren was traded and now the market is lower because Haren was traded. Let's see, 1/3rd less supply (Haren gone out of Haren, Bedard, & Santana), virtually the same demand (1 team eliminated out of 30 ML team or 6-8 interested teams, take your pick), yet the remaining suppliers have less leverage in negotiating by your way of thinking. LOL. All those economists must be hanging on your every word learning about all those mistakes they made throughout the last two hundred years.

Can you explain to me how you "set the market" in a negotiation? To be clear, I want you to explain how MacPhail was supposed to get the price he wanted for Bedard from the team he wanted on a deadline (prior to the Haren trade). You seem to be really good at this stuff, so I'd like to see what you would have done to make this happen. I'd like to learn. Thanks

The market for Bedard is whatever MacPhail says it is. When you have something in your hand that is rare, and there are multiple suitors for that commodity, you set the price.

Just because Beane did what he did, doesnt mean AM has to follow in his footsteps.

The difference between AM's position before Haren was traded and after is that there is one less team interested in Bedard, and by most accounts, was never a team AM was in serious discussions with in the first place, and there is one LESS commodity that the teams looking for a #1 starter to enter the year with can turn to.

A team that wants Bedard has a decision to make, they can either pay the asking price and win, or they can take their chances with their prospects and watch the competition get stronger.

Tell me this, when is the last time the Angels, Reds, Cubs, Dodgers or Mariners won the World Series? When is the last time any of those teams played in a World Series? When is the next time they will be in the position where the aquisition of a 29 year old ACE starter under their control for the next two seasons losting less than $6-10M is going to be available, when they are so close to putting themselves in the drivers seat for their division, and possibly their LEAGUE?

You wait for the deal you want and make the OTHER team cave. The Orioles are NOT the Athletics, they dont have to opperate with a $40M payroll, they wouldnt trade Markakis for what Beane just traded Swisher for, and they arent going to rebuild the team every 3 years. The Orioles are not AM's playtoy the way the A's are Beane's.

[wildcard]

If the Yankees up their offer to Hughes, Kennedy and Cabrera to get the Santana deal done then a new market value will be set for Bedard. It has not happen yet but it could. If it does then McPhail will look smart for holding out for a higher value of players in trade.

Also it will prove that a top pitcher can command high quality in trade even if he only has one year left on his contract.

Let's see where Santana goes a what he brings in trade.

However, I am not big on the Seattle deal because I don't think they have the pitching to give. I am not high on Morrow and Tillman is to many years away from the majors. There is too much risk with Tillman. He had trouble in the California league last year.

[wildcard]

The market for Bedard is whatever MacPhail says it is. When you have something in your hand that is rare, and there are multiple suitors for that commodity, you set the price.

Just because Beane did what he did, doesnt mean AM has to follow in his footsteps.

The difference between AM's position before Haren was traded and after is that there is one less team interested in Bedard, and by most accounts, was never a team AM was in serious discussions with in the first place, and there is one LESS commodity that the teams looking for a #1 starter to enter the year with can turn to.

A team that wants Bedard has a decision to make, they can either pay the asking price and win, or they can take their chances with their prospects and watch the competition get stronger.

Tell me this, when is the last time the Angels, Reds, Cubs, Dodgers or Mariners won the World Series? When is the last time any of those teams played in a World Series? When is the next time they will be in the position where the aquisition of a 29 year old ACE starter under their control for the next two seasons losting less than $6-10M is going to be available, when they are so close to putting themselves in the drivers seat for their division, and possibly their LEAGUE?

You wait for the deal you want and make the OTHER team cave. The Orioles are NOT the Athletics, they dont have to opperate with a $40M payroll, they wouldnt trade Markakis for what Beane just traded Swisher for, and they arent going to rebuild the team every 3 years. The Orioles are not AM's playtoy the way the A's are Beane's.

Angels won the World Series in 2002.

[FutureOwner]

Angels won the World Series in 2002.

well, that was 5 years ago and they are the only team out of that group who has even sniffed a WS appearance in how many years?

[vatech1994]

The market for Bedard is whatever MacPhail says it is. When you have something in your hand that is rare, and there are multiple suitors for that commodity, you set the price.

Just because Beane did what he did, doesnt mean AM has to follow in his footsteps.

The difference between AM's position before Haren was traded and after is that there is one less team interested in Bedard, and by most accounts, was never a team AM was in serious discussions with in the first place, and there is one LESS commodity that the teams looking for a #1 starter to enter the year with can turn to.

A team that wants Bedard has a decision to make, they can either pay the asking price and win, or they can take their chances with their prospects and watch the competition get stronger.

Tell me this, when is the last time the Angels, Reds, Cubs, Dodgers or Mariners won the World Series? When is the last time any of those teams played in a World Series? When is the next time they will be in the position where the aquisition of a 29 year old ACE starter under their control for the next two seasons losting less than $6-10M is going to be available, when they are so close to putting themselves in the drivers seat for their division, and possibly their LEAGUE?

You wait for the deal you want and make the OTHER team cave. The Orioles are NOT the Athletics, they dont have to opperate with a $40M payroll, they wouldnt trade Markakis for what Beane just traded Swisher for, and they arent going to rebuild the team every 3 years. The Orioles are not AM's playtoy the way the A's are Beane's.

I'm not sure why you wrote this against my post. I'm not the one advocating the drivel about us being in a worse position due to the Haren trade. I agree with you.

[Duke2010]

Let's see where Santana goes a what he brings in trade.

However, I am not big on the Seattle deal because I don't think they have the pitching to give. I am not high on Morrow and Tillman is to many years away from the majors. There is too much risk with Tillman. He had trouble in the California league last year.

The reason I like Tillman is because we don't necessarily need him to be in Baltimore anytime soon. We already have a surplus of young arms in Albers, Patton, Penn, Liz, Olson, Spoone, and possibly some of Marshall, Veal, and Gallagher if the cubs deal goes down. So, with all these guys competing for the 3-5 spots over the next 2 years, that will gives Tillman all the times he needs. I like his upside but he's just as much of a risk as say Erbe or Beato at this point, he could be great or he could just flame out.

[FutureOwner]

I'm not sure why you wrote this against my post. I'm not the one advocating the drivel about us being in a worse position due to the Haren trade. I agree with you.

I was supporting you, you fooooooooooooooooooool!;)

[Scribo]

The market for Bedard is whatever MacPhail says it is. When you have something in your hand that is rare, and there are multiple suitors for that commodity, you set the price.

Just because Beane did what he did, doesnt mean AM has to follow in his footsteps.



No. The asking price for Bedard is what MacPhail says it is.

The market price is what the market says it is. The market always sets the value of what is being offered.

A couple of months ago I put a somewhat rare and valuable camera lens up for sale on eBay. Because this is a lens that probably doesn't come up for sale more than once a year, there really was no baseline value. (I know this seems like I'm making it up to parallel the Bedard situation, but it really is a true situation).

Because I liked the lens a lot and didn't want to see it sell cheaply, I put up a rather high starting bid. It was a 10-day auction, and it got about 400 page views, but it didn't get any bids.

My starting price was NOT the market price. It was my asking price. If somebody had bid and won at that price, then I could say that I judged the market right. If it had gotten bid up, then the final price would be the market price.

Point is, the seller doesn't set the market price. Prospective buyers set the market price. If AM makes a player available, and gets into trade discussions with other teams, and that player doesn't get traded, then we can say by definition that AM set his asking price too high for the market.

That may be a good thing or not. In the case of Bedard and Roberts and this team as it stands, I happen to think that it would be a very bad thing. I could be wrong. In my case, I still own a really cool and rare camera lens, so I don't really care that I was out of sync with the market.

OTOH my lens doesn't become a free agent in two years, either.

[FutureOwner]

No. The asking price for Bedard is what MacPhail says it is.

The market price is what the market says it is. The market always sets the value of what is being offered.

A couple of months ago I put a somewhat rare and valuable camera lens up for sale on eBay. Because this is a lens that probably doesn't come up for sale more than once a year, there really was no baseline value. (I know this seems like I'm making it up to parallel the Bedard situation, but it really is a true situation).

Because I liked the lens a lot and didn't want to see it sell cheaply, I put up a rather high starting bid. It was a 10-day auction, and it got about 400 page views, but it didn't get any bids.

My starting price was NOT the market price. It was my asking price. If somebody had bid and won at that price, then I could say that I judged the market right. If it had gotten bid up, then the final price would be the market price.

Point is, the seller doesn't set the market price. Prospective buyers set the market price. If AM makes a player available, and gets into trade discussions with other teams, and that player doesn't get traded, then we can say by definition that AM set his asking price too high for the market.

That may be a good thing or not. In the case of Bedard and Roberts and this team as it stands, I happen to think that it would be a very bad thing. I could be wrong. In my case, I still own a really cool and rare camera lens, so I don't really care that I was out of sync with the market.

OTOH my lens doesn't become a free agent in two years, either.

You were willing to keep your lens, just as AM is willing to keep Bedard.

Ive said this before, trading Bedard and Roberts is not the only way to build a winning team in Baltimore. The Orioles are NOT a small market team and dont need to opperate as one.

Trading Bedard and Roberts for less than AM thinks they are worth is an admission that he does not believe he can tak another avenue in improving the team over the next TWO SEASONS. He has this entire season, next offseason, and all of 2009 to show some direction with the club and convince Bedard and Roberts that Baltimore is a place that they cam win.

If AM cant do that without trading Bedard and Roberts I dont think he is a very good GM. I do, however, think he is a very good GM and I expect him to figure out a way to turn this team around oone way or another.

Having an ace starter and an allstar 2B under your control, and 10's of millions in contracts expiring can help the direction of the club. If he cant get the players he wants, he can figure something else out, but he'd be crazy to cave to another team and take a lesser deal just because Billy Beane is willing to.

[PoorMike]

No. The asking price for Bedard is what MacPhail says it is.

The market price is what the market says it is. The market always sets the value of what is being offered.

A couple of months ago I put a somewhat rare and valuable camera lens up for sale on eBay. Because this is a lens that probably doesn't come up for sale more than once a year, there really was no baseline value. (I know this seems like I'm making it up to parallel the Bedard situation, but it really is a true situation).

Because I liked the lens a lot and didn't want to see it sell cheaply, I put up a rather high starting bid. It was a 10-day auction, and it got about 400 page views, but it didn't get any bids.

My starting price was NOT the market price. It was my asking price. If somebody had bid and won at that price, then I could say that I judged the market right. If it had gotten bid up, then the final price would be the market price.

Point is, the seller doesn't set the market price. Prospective buyers set the market price. If AM makes a player available, and gets into trade discussions with other teams, and that player doesn't get traded, then we can say by definition that AM set his asking price too high for the market.

That may be a good thing or not. In the case of Bedard and Roberts and this team as it stands, I happen to think that it would be a very bad thing. I could be wrong. In my case, I still own a really cool and rare camera lens, so I don't really care that I was out of sync with the market.

OTOH my lens doesn't become a free agent in two years, either.

Or, to look at it from another perspective, he didn't feel that it helped the club more than keeping Bedard.

BTW, maybe you should have tried a reserve auction.:002_sbiggrin:

[wildcard]

The reason I like Tillman is because we don't necessarily need him to be in Baltimore anytime soon. We already have a surplus of young arms in Albers, Patton, Penn, Liz, Olson, Spoone, and possibly some of Marshall, Veal, and Gallagher if the cubs deal goes down. So, with all these guys competing for the 3-5 spots over the next 2 years, that will gives Tillman all the times he needs. I like his upside but he's just as much of a risk as say Erbe or Beato at this point, he could be great or he could just flame out.

The O's are talking about trading Bedard here. I would not take a fly on a guy that is so far down in the organization. I would want a young ML pitcher or a near ML ready pitcher.

As far as having time, the O's need to get better sooner not later. If many pitchers are major league ready at once then trades can be may.

[Fan4Life]

No. The asking price for Bedard is what MacPhail says it is.

The market price is what the market says it is. The market always sets the value of what is being offered.

A couple of months ago I put a somewhat rare and valuable camera lens up for sale on eBay. Because this is a lens that probably doesn't come up for sale more than once a year, there really was no baseline value. (I know this seems like I'm making it up to parallel the Bedard situation, but it really is a true situation).

Because I liked the lens a lot and didn't want to see it sell cheaply, I put up a rather high starting bid. It was a 10-day auction, and it got about 400 page views, but it didn't get any bids.



My starting price was NOT the market price. It was my asking price. If somebody had bid and won at that price, then I could say that I judged the market right. If it had gotten bid up, then the final price would be the market price.

Point is, the seller doesn't set the market price. Prospective buyers set the market price. If AM makes a player available, and gets into trade discussions with other teams, and that player doesn't get traded, then we can say by definition that AM set his asking price too high for the market.

That may be a good thing or not. In the case of Bedard and Roberts and this team as it stands, I happen to think that it would be a very bad thing. I could be wrong. In my case, I still own a really cool and rare camera lens, so I don't really care that I was out of sync with the market.

OTOH my lens doesn't become a free agent in two years, either.

Market conditions change. Bedard's market value today is different than it was a month ago, and likely will be different a month from now. MacPhail is doing what he should be doing IMO.

[JTrea81]

You didn't answer my question. I'll try again.

Do you believe what you wrote in post #46 is fact or opinion?

What does it matter?



Regarding what you did write above, you realize that everything you wrote here is opinion and/or speculation, right? None of it is fact.

Again this is a message board. Last time I checked we were allowed to speculate, but there is a lot of evidence out there to support the speculation. Even though you seem to think speculation and those who do speculate are beneath you it isn't against the rules...



I also don't think your take on Macphail isn't accurate. MacPhail hasn't been reported to be holding out for 3-4 blue chip prospects for Bedard from what I've read and heard unless you define blue chip differently than I do.

He wants Jones, Morrow and Clement for Bedard while the Mariners are offering Jones and Clement. Morrow is seen as a blue chip prospect by some clubs, even though I disagree with that, he is still a blue chipper in MacPhail's eyes. He wanted Bailey, Cueto and Votto from the Reds and wanted Kemp and Kershaw and LaRoche from the Dodgers. This has all been reported in the media and by our insiders.



You also clearly wrote in this post that you think Beane made a mistake and got less than he could have gotten by trading Haren too quickly. So Beane capitulated too quickly, but MacPhail is holding out for too much for too long. Interesting

I think he traded Haren for too little, but Beane did what he wanted to do. He could have got 3-4 blue chippers if he wanted, but he decided he needed more players for depth so he got 1 blue chipper and 5 good-okay players. Now when he did this he undercut MacPhail who was selling Bedard at the same price. So now in order to make a trade, MacPhail has to realize he won't be able to get that 3-4 blue chippers because the market has been established at 1. The fact that Seattle is offering two, well he should take that and run.



Your take on negotiations amuses me to say your least. By your estimation, MacPhail should have been able to "set the market" better before Haren was traded and now the market is lower because Haren was traded. Let's see, 1/3rd less supply (Haren gone out of Haren, Bedard, & Santana), virtually the same demand (1 team eliminated out of 30 ML team or 6-8 interested teams, take your pick), yet the remaining suppliers have less leverage in negotiating by your way of thinking. LOL. All those economists must be hanging on your every word learning about all those mistakes they made throughout the last two hundred years.

Haren had the most value on the market IMO. He was a better pitcher than Santana last season, signed to a reasonable contract for the next three years, not just two or one and he was more durable than Bedard. So you didn't have to worry about him leaving in two years, getting hurt or having to sign him to a lucrative extension.



Can you explain to me how you "set the market" in a negotiation? To be clear, I want you to explain how MacPhail was supposed to get the price he wanted for Bedard from the team he wanted on a deadline (prior to the Haren trade). You seem to be really good at this stuff, so I'd like to see what you would have done to make this happen. I'd like to learn. Thanks

All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

[Rob H]

written so well for a drunk man.

Typically speaking, I manage to retain most of my ability to use correct grammar and spelling despite however drunk I may be. The only real way to notice is that I ramble on quite a bit and never really get to the point I'm trying to make, or I make the same points four or five times apiece.

All things considered, it's a gift.

[FutureOwner]

What does it matter?



Again this is a message board. Last time I checked we were allowed to speculate, but there is a lot of evidence out there to support the speculation. Even though you seem to think speculation and those who do speculate are beneath you it isn't against the rules...



He wants Jones, Morrow and Clement for Bedard while the Mariners are offering Jones and Clement. Morrow is seen as a blue chip prospect by some clubs, even though I disagree with that, he is still a blue chipper in MacPhail's eyes. He wanted Bailey, Cueto and Votto from the Reds and wanted Kemp and Kershaw and LaRoche from the Dodgers. This has all been reported in the media and by our insiders.



I think he traded Haren for too little, but Beane did what he wanted to do. He could have got 3-4 blue chippers if he wanted, but he decided he needed more players for depth so he got 1 blue chipper and 5 good-okay players. Now when he did this he undercut MacPhail who was selling Bedard at the same price. So now in order to make a trade, MacPhail has to realize he won't be able to get that 3-4 blue chippers because the market has been established at 1. The fact that Seattle is offering two, well he should take that and run.



Haren had the most value on the market IMO. He was a better pitcher than Santana last season, signed to a reasonable contract for the next three years, not just two or one and he was more durable than Bedard. So you didn't have to worry about him leaving in two years, getting hurt or having to sign him to a lucrative extension.



All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

I would love to make a living negotiating with someone like you. You are a reactive person, and when you are reactive, you lose. If AM's reaction the the Haren trade is, "OMG! Beane took less so I better hurry up and take whatever Im being offered" then he is not very good at what he does.

You wait for what think what you have is worth. You have to have the balls to keep what you have and move on.

The Orioles, IMO, are still in a better situation with Bedard than any of the other teams are without him. If they want to be serious about winning they will do what they need to. The Orioles have salary relief on the way. They have pitching depth they can potentially trade. Through FA and their own young players moving up, they can be as good as any of those other teams are in two years and resign Bedard. This is the stance you must take when negotiating.

If you show you are willing to bend, you will be the one getting bent over.

[Lucky Jim]

What does it matter?



Again this is a message board. Last time I checked we were allowed to speculate, but there is a lot of evidence out there to support the speculation. Even though you seem to think speculation and those who do speculate are beneath you it isn't against the rules...



He wants Jones, Morrow and Clement for Bedard while the Mariners are offering Jones and Clement. Morrow is seen as a blue chip prospect by some clubs, even though I disagree with that, he is still a blue chipper in MacPhail's eyes. He wanted Bailey, Cueto and Votto from the Reds and wanted Kemp and Kershaw and LaRoche from the Dodgers. This has all been reported in the media and by our insiders.



I think he traded Haren for too little, but Beane did what he wanted to do. He could have got 3-4 blue chippers if he wanted, but he decided he needed more players for depth so he got 1 blue chipper and 5 good-okay players. Now when he did this he undercut MacPhail who was selling Bedard at the same price. So now in order to make a trade, MacPhail has to realize he won't be able to get that 3-4 blue chippers because the market has been established at 1. The fact that Seattle is offering two, well he should take that and run.



Haren had the most value on the market IMO. He was a better pitcher than Santana last season, signed to a reasonable contract for the next three years, not just two or one and he was more durable than Bedard. So you didn't have to worry about him leaving in two years, getting hurt or having to sign him to a lucrative extension.



All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

Haren was better than Santana last year? Really? By what metric? It's true that Santana as moderately lucky last season (FIP of 3.78). But so was Haren (3.38 FIP). Bedard was the best of the three (3.15 FIP). Still, by simple counting stats, Santana posted a better ERA, more wins, more Ks than Haren. Further, even if the FIP of Santana was higher, he projects better for next year than Haren.

Of course, it's also true that Haren provides an extra year of security (and hence lower risk). But he poses a far higher risk of regression, which you fail to take into account. Haren also had the luxury of pitching in a pitcher-friendly environment.

Further, is there evidence he wants Morrow AND Clement, or Morrow INSTEAD OF Clement? I thought it was the latter.

As far as speculation goes - no one's arguing that you can't speculate. But, again, you're treating speculation like fact, which veils your posts with an air of authority they haven't actually earned. It's true, of course, that every trade has some effect on the market. But Haren and Bedard aren't fungible - they're different products with different valuations (both by the teams acquiring and teams trading) and need to be treated as such.

But the idea that the "market" is some static thing defined by one event, and that all else that follows is dictated by that one event is - frankly - one of the silliest bits of economic analysis I've ever seen. By your logic, if the "market was set" by Beane, then we shouldn't even be able to consider the offer by Seattle - it should never have been made/should be off the table.

I mean, there's a seriously flawed logic that condemns AM for failing to set the market - because that's determinative - then condemns him for not taking a deal that's above market value. If AM is still entertaining deals that are "above market" shouldn't you be praising his amazing ability to duck the market trends you so eloquently explicated for us?

Class dismissed? I'm not sure you belong IN the class, let alone in front of it. Perhaps there's an introductory class available to get you up to speed?

[Hank Scorpio]

What does it matter?



Again this is a message board. Last time I checked we were allowed to speculate, but there is a lot of evidence out there to support the speculation. Even though you seem to think speculation and those who do speculate are beneath you it isn't against the rules...



He wants Jones, Morrow and Clement for Bedard while the Mariners are offering Jones and Clement. Morrow is seen as a blue chip prospect by some clubs, even though I disagree with that, he is still a blue chipper in MacPhail's eyes. He wanted Bailey, Cueto and Votto from the Reds and wanted Kemp and Kershaw and LaRoche from the Dodgers. This has all been reported in the media and by our insiders.



I think he traded Haren for too little, but Beane did what he wanted to do. He could have got 3-4 blue chippers if he wanted, but he decided he needed more players for depth so he got 1 blue chipper and 5 good-okay players. Now when he did this he undercut MacPhail who was selling Bedard at the same price. So now in order to make a trade, MacPhail has to realize he won't be able to get that 3-4 blue chippers because the market has been established at 1. The fact that Seattle is offering two, well he should take that and run.



Haren had the most value on the market IMO. He was a better pitcher than Santana last season, signed to a reasonable contract for the next three years, not just two or one and he was more durable than Bedard. So you didn't have to worry about him leaving in two years, getting hurt or having to sign him to a lucrative extension.



All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

:D :D :D :D :D

[Scribo]

Or, to look at it from another perspective, he didn't feel that it helped the club more than keeping Bedard.

BTW, maybe you should have tried a reserve auction.:002_sbiggrin:

Regarding the bolded, if that's the way he feels, he is as wrong as can be. In this case it is really hard to make the argument that the Orioles benefit from keeping him -- almost regardless of who comes back for him.

Bedard is gone in two years. Given that reality, and the fact that even if he wins the Cy Young both of those years the Orioles are going to be somewhere between mediocre and abysmal, his ultimate value is basically the draft choices two years down the road. (Maybe some intangible PR benefit as well).

So in terms of long range value, or value in making this team a contender, just about any decent offer that includes a couple of players who are expected to contribute beyond 09 is a better option than keeping him.

And other teams realize that. That's why they're being so intransigent. Same with Santana.

This isn't about Bedard's value to the Orioles -- it's about his value on the market. And those are two different things. MacPhail is trying to get maximum value out of him, which is fine, but he does run a risk if he misjudges.

[markpolis]

I think he traded Haren for too little, but Beane did what he wanted to do. He could have got 3-4 blue chippers if he wanted, but he decided he needed more players for depth so he got 1 blue chipper and 5 good-okay players. Now when he did this he undercut MacPhail who was selling Bedard at the same price. So now in order to make a trade, MacPhail has to realize he won't be able to get that 3-4 blue chippers because the market has been established at 1. The fact that Seattle is offering two, well he should take that and run.


. Class dismissed...

:confused: :confused: :confused: Ok, I'm just glad I never had to take a course that somehow professes this "stuff" as fact or gospel. I have taken some logic classes that made me scratch my head before, but this pretzel logic continues to confound me.

Let me see if I follow... you say Beane could have gotten 3-4 blue chip prospects if he wanted, BUT he decided(not the market) he needed more average players for depth AND because Beane made this decision (not the market) this has somehow changed "the market" for Bedard from 3-4 blue chip prospects to 1 blue chip prospect?

Astounding!!!! And what school is that you teach?

[JTrea81]

I would love to make a living negotiating with someone like you. You are a reactive person, and when you are reactive, you lose. If AM's reaction the the Haren trade is, "OMG! Beane took less so I better hurry up and take whatever Im being offered" then he is not very good at what he does.

You wait for what think what you have is worth. You have to have the balls to keep what you have and move on.

The Orioles, IMO, are still in a better situation with Bedard than any of the other teams are without him. If they want to be serious about winning they will do what they need to. The Orioles have salary relief on the way. They have pitching depth they can potentially trade. Through FA and their own young players moving up, they can be as good as any of those other teams are in two years and resign Bedard. This is the stance you must take when negotiating.

If you show you are willing to bend, you will be the one getting bent over.


Bedard will not re-sign here for less than market value and we will not pay him more than 15 million a year to stay here. We will not re-sign him. I think a lot of you think Bedard is really worth more than he is.

He's never pitched 200 innings, has only pitched stellar for 1.5 seasons under one particular PC that is no longer here nor on any other team, is injury prone, and is going to be 29 with only 2 years left under team control.

If you are being offered 2 blue chip prospects for that, when a better pitcher only cost 1, then you are stupid for holding out for three. Especially as Frobby and Baltimoron have posted there is a significant risk that if you hold on to Bedard, his value will decline even further. The Red Sox and Yankees aren't even offering three for Santana who will extend with both, and if Santana and Haren both can't net three, why would Bedard who has the least value of the three?

[ChaosLex]

All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

Absolutely agreed.

There's going to be a lot of disappointed people around here in a couple of years when we get nothing but draft picks for Bedard.

[JTrea81]

:confused: :confused: :confused: Ok, I'm just glad I never had to take a course that somehow professes this "stuff" as fact or gospel. I have taken some logic classes that made me scratch my head before, but this pretzel logic continues to confound me.

Let me see if I follow... you say Beane could have gotten 3-4 blue chip prospects if he wanted, BUT he decided(not the market) he needed more average players for depth AND because Beane made this decision (not the market) this has somehow changed "the market" for Bedard from 3-4 blue chip prospects to 1 blue chip prospect?

Astounding!!!! And what school is that you teach?

You cannot tell me that clubs won't look at the Haren deal when determining the price for Bedard. They'd be stupid not to use that as leverage.

[ChaosLex]

Bedard will not re-sign here for less than market value and we will not pay him more than 15 million a year to stay here. We will not re-sign him. I think a lot of you think Bedard is really worth more than he is.

He's never pitched 200 innings, has only pitched stellar for 1.5 seasons under one particular PC that is no longer here nor on any other team, is injury prone, and is going to be 29 with only 2 years left under team control.

If you are being offered 2 blue chip prospects for that, when a better pitcher only cost 1, then you are stupid for holding out for three. Especially as Frobby and Baltimoron have posted there is a significant risk that if you hold on to Bedard, his value will decline even further. The Red Sox and Yankees aren't even offering three for Santana who will extend with both, and if Santana and Haren both can't net three, why would Bedard who has the least value of the three?

Expect to hear a lot of crickets chirping around here the day Bedard bolts for Toronto. :D

[JTrea81]

Expect to hear a lot of crickets chirping around here the day Bedard bolts for Toronto. :D

I know, I think there are too many people on here who are just willing to go along with what MacPhail is doing because of his past history with Tejada and Trachsel. But Bedard is a different case. Bedard is not the best pitcher left on the market in terms of value while Tejada and Trachsel pretty much were the best left at the time. There are others out there such as Blanton who may be less talented, but are talented enough so that the cost isn't prohibitive, unlike Bedard.

[JohnnyK27]

Wow pretty heated stuff. I think the offer will come and only time will tell who's correct. I would think Bedard should bring 2-3 Blue Chippers. One of them a pitcher who might eventually replace EB. I like Seattle's offer as it fills a lot of needs. I would like to get Cueto from the Reds or Kershaw from the Dodgers but I think the Dodgers are pretty well out. The Reds would give us Votto but I'm not sure if we could get a nearly ready SS or CF from them.

I imagine I would take Votto, Cueto , & Maybe Buck Coats (CF) or Maloney (LHSP)

Then get Gallagher, Cedeno, & Patterson or Chen for Roberts.

[FutureOwner]

Bedard will not re-sign here for less than market value and we will not pay him more than 15 million a year to stay here. We will not re-sign him. I think a lot of you think Bedard is really worth more than he is.

He's never pitched 200 innings, has only pitched stellar for 1.5 seasons under one particular PC that is no longer here nor on any other team, is injury prone, and is going to be 29 with only 2 years left under team control.

If you are being offered 2 blue chip prospects for that, when a better pitcher only cost 1, then you are stupid for holding out for three. Especially as Frobby and Baltimoron have posted there is a significant risk that if you hold on to Bedard, his value will decline even further. The Red Sox and Yankees aren't even offering three for Santana who will extend with both, and if Santana and Haren both can't net three, why would Bedard who has the least value of the three?


How do you know what the Orioles or Bedard will or wont do 2 years from now? How do you know what position the Orioles will be in 2 years from now? Anything could happen during that time.

Last year they picked up Guthrie for nothing from Cleveland. No one predicted Guthrie to perform as he did. If Guthrie continues his success, Bedard continues pitching as he has and just ONE of the other talented pitchers we have realizes their potential, that hives the Orioles 3 very good starters. That alone is enough to imporove the team.

They have TWO YEARS to make changes. If the Orioles have Bedard, Loewen and Guthrie pitching to their potential, Cabrera as a sometimes dominant #4, and Liz hitting his stride in 09, they sign Teixeira and Blalock, and Reimold becomes a solid LF this team will be pretty good, and they will have PLENTY of money to resign Bedard.

1B Teixeira
2B Roberts
3B Blalock
SS
C Weiters
DH Scott
CF
LF Reimold
RF Markakis

1. Bedard
2. Loewen
3. Guthrie
4. Cabrera
5. Liz

Thats a pretty damned good team potentially, and Roberts is the only guy who would be over 30 mentioned. I would imagine AM could procure a SS and CF between now and then.

There are a lot of if's in that situation, but trading Bedard for whatever is being offered brings a lot of if's in itself. Id say my speculation has as much chance of playing out as any deal we make for him producing as much for this team as Bedard will from 09 on. The only guy who Id label from the Seattle deal as being a near cant miss is Jones, and he could flop just as easilly as Corey Patterson did with the Cubs.

Everything is a risk. Theres no telling what these guys we get for Bedard will do. If they all flop as badly as the guys we got from Thrifts little fire sale we end up with nothing. Based on our recent drafts (Markakis, Loewen, Weiters) draft picks wouldnt be the worst thing in the world, and the money Bedard would have cost can be allocated to other areas to improve the team.

[Pruke]

They have TWO YEARS to make changes. If the Orioles have Bedard, Loewen and Guthrie pitching to their potential, Cabrera as a sometimes dominant #4, and Liz hitting his stride in 09, they sign Teixeira and Blalock, and Reimold becomes a solid LF this team will be pretty good, and they will have PLENTY of money to resign Bedard.


i think this is a complete pipe dream at this stage. i like your optimism but i think we'll need to be a .500+ team before we can sign any impact FA.

[Fairfax Bird]

I know, I think there are too many people on here who are just willing to go along with what MacPhail is doing because of his past history with Tejada and Trachsel. But Bedard is a different case. Bedard is not the best pitcher left on the market in terms of value while Tejada and Trachsel pretty much were the best left at the time. There are others out there such as Blanton who may be less talented, but are talented enough so that the cost isn't prohibitive, unlike Bedard.

Wow ... just, wow ... I'm not even sure how to reconcile these statements.

[JTrea81]

Wow ... just, wow ... I'm not even sure how to reconcile these statements.

Bedard isn't the best pitcher on the market in terms of value. I'm not talking pitching ability here, I'm talking value. When it is going to take 3-4 blue chippers to get him and he might leave in two years, he's too expensive for what he provides. A guy like Blanton who may cost only 1 blue chipper, may be less talented than Bedard, but he doesn't hurt the team as much as far as giving up their future and is under team control until 2011, and he's talented enough so that the dropoff will be negated by the players that they get to keep for the future.

As far as Traschel goes, name a better alternative that was on the market that passed through waivers for the Cubs in August. If you wanted a SP, Trachsel was the best available at the time IIRC.

[Lucky Jim]

Bedard isn't the best pitcher on the market in terms of value. I'm not talking pitching ability here, I'm talking value. When it is going to take 3-4 blue chippers to get him, he's too expensive for what he provides. A guy like Blanton who may cost only 1-2 blue chippers, may be less talented than Bedard, but he doesn't hurt the team as much as far as giving up their future, and he's talented enough so that the dropoff will be negated by the players that they get to keep for the future.

As far as Traschel goes, name a better alternative that was on the market that passed through waivers for the Cubs in August. If you wanted a SP, Trachsel was the best available at the time IIRC.

You'll need to quantify the value of Bedard to the teams who are in the market for a starter, specifically, relative to Blanton before I accept this generalization.

What is Bedard's predicted performance? Blanton's? How close to competing are the teams in question? Is leverage an issue? I.e., will Bedard be worth more than the difference in WARP value between he and Blanton due to individual circumstances/needs for these teams?

How hard is it to develop a Blanton-like pitcher? A Bedard-like pitcher? What is the relative (not just market) scarcity of the two types of pitchers?

It's possible. But until I see that, your cocktail napkin valuation of Bedard v. Blanton is pretty much just that...worth more for something to set a drink on than as a valuation.

[Tx Oriole]

Good golly Trea. Did someone eat your clam chowder this morning? Why not give AM more time to see what the best trades he can get for the O's? We all want trades to happen so the O's can get better. I understnd your impatience. I am as well. I jsut believe it is better that AM is holding out. I beleive he will accomplish more for the O'sby doing that. Once some ofthe other pitchers are traded some team is going to be desperate. They will trade with the O's to get Bedard. Trea i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. If i came off to strong i apologize.

[Sports Guy]

Beane wants close to the same thing we are asking for Bedard...A team can probably get Blanton for 3 good players where as Bedard requires 4...Bedard is the better pitcher.

[Moose Milligan]

How do you know what the Orioles or Bedard will or wont do 2 years from now? How do you know what position the Orioles will be in 2 years from now? Anything could happen during that time.

Last year they picked up Guthrie for nothing from Cleveland. No one predicted Guthrie to perform as he did. If Guthrie continues his success, Bedard continues pitching as he has and just ONE of the other talented pitchers we have realizes their potential, that hives the Orioles 3 very good starters. That alone is enough to imporove the team.

They have TWO YEARS to make changes. If the Orioles have Bedard, Loewen and Guthrie pitching to their potential, Cabrera as a sometimes dominant #4, and Liz hitting his stride in 09, ]they sign Teixeira and Blalock, and Reimold becomes a solid LF[/COLOR] this team will be pretty good, and they will have PLENTY of money to resign Bedard.

1B Teixeira
2B Roberts
3B Blalock
SS
C Weiters
DH Scott
CF
LF Reimold
RF Markakis

1. Bedard
2. Loewen
3. Guthrie
4. Cabrera
5. Liz



Sorry, just wanted to point those out.

I hope Texeira knows that he's coming here. After all, it's pretty apparent that everyone here seems to know that he will be.

[Lucky Jim]

Sorry, just wanted to point those out.

I hope Texeira knows that he's coming here. After all, it's pretty apparent that everyone here seems to know that he will be.

Apparently, many OH posters can predict the future.

That, or their psychics have uncannily accurate tea leaves.

[FutureOwner]

Apparently, many OH posters can predict the future.

That, or their psychics have uncannily accurate tea leaves.

Yes, they can tell that theres nothing that the Orioles can do to improve the team enough in the next two years to make Bedard or Roberts stay, so they should give him away asap.

Never mind the huge salary reduction to the payroll over the next 3 offseasons, or the players who will be available during that time. Lets ignore that and focus on trading Bedard and Roberts for whatever offer suits the Mariner, Reds or Angels.

[Lucky Jim]

Yes, they can tell that theres nothing that the Orioles can do to improve the team enough in the next two years to make Bedard or Roberts stay, so they should give him away asap.

Never mind the huge salary reduction to the payroll over the next 3 offseasons, or the players who will be available during that time. Lets ignore that and focus on trading Bedard and Roberts for whatever offer suits the Mariner, Reds or Angels.

Why is it one or the other? What is the probability that Bedard changes his mind? What is his value if he doesn't? What is the risk? For the right package, it's worth trading him. It's not, otherwise.

I don't think Roberts is a worry - he might stay if we compete. It's just that he'll be well into his 30s and likely in decline. And so his value is better in trade than for a team likely (not certain) to struggle for the next two years.

[Moose Milligan]

Yes, they can tell that theres nothing that the Orioles can do to improve the team enough in the next two years to make Bedard or Roberts stay, so they should give him away asap.

Never mind the huge salary reduction to the payroll over the next 3 offseasons, or the players who will be available during that time. Lets ignore that and focus on trading Bedard and Roberts for whatever offer suits the Mariner, Reds or Angels.

This is just baffling.

First of all, we're not just "giving" them away. I don't like to use the word "ignorance" because it's pretty strong, but this post smells like a cropdusting of it. We'd be getting some good pieces back in return. Kind of, like, you know, how Billy Beane has constructed the A's out west. But nah, I wouldn't want a team like that. Would you?

Nevermind the fact that none of us truly knows what players will be available over the next few years. I know that everyone likes to think that Tex will somehow fall in our lap and takes that for granted. What happens when ATL throws a serious offer at him to stay and he takes it?

The hypocrisy in your prior post is stunning, specifically where you talk about not knowing what'll happen, but then acting so sure that Reimold will pan out, and we'll end up with Blalock and Tex.

[JTrea81]

Good golly Trea. Did someone eat your clam chowder this morning? Why not give AM more time to see what the best trades he can get for the O's? We all want trades to happen so the O's can get better. I understnd your impatience. I am as well. I jsut believe it is better that AM is holding out. I beleive he will accomplish more for the O'sby doing that. Once some ofthe other pitchers are traded some team is going to be desperate. They will trade with the O's to get Bedard. Trea i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. If i came off to strong i apologize.

No feelings were hurt, in fact this is the only post contradicting me that hasn't referred to me as a lunatic or in other condescending ways. I just see a lot of negatives here if MacPhail waits and I'm just pointing things out the way I see them. In my opinion there is more evidence that MacPhail has nothing to gain by holding out, and everything to lose...

[Moose Milligan]

No feelings were hurt, in fact this is the only post contradicting me that hasn't referred to me as a lunatic or in other condescending ways. I just see a lot of negatives here if MacPhail waits and I'm just pointing things out the way I see them. In my opinion there is more evidence that MacPhail has nothing to gain by holding out, and everything to lose...

Well, you are a lunatic. And I mean that in a good way :D

[Tx Oriole]

Well you may be right. Time will tell how it works out. As for the trade to the Cubs if it happens i am fine with it.

[ChaosLex]

This is just baffling.

First of all, we're not just "giving" them away. I don't like to use the word "ignorance" because it's pretty strong, but this post smells like a cropdusting of it. We'd be getting some good pieces back in return. Kind of, like, you know, how Billy Beane has constructed the A's out west. But nah, I wouldn't want a team like that. Would you?

Nevermind the fact that none of us truly knows what players will be available over the next few years. I know that everyone likes to think that Tex will somehow fall in our lap and takes that for granted. What happens when ATL throws a serious offer at him to stay and he takes it?

The hypocrisy in your prior post is stunning, specifically where you talk about not knowing what'll happen, but then acting so sure that Reimold will pan out, and we'll end up with Blalock and Tex.

Good post. I think some people fail to realize that a deal of Jones, Clement, Sherrill, and Tillman is a fantastic return for Bedard.

If that's what the Mariners are offering, MacPhail would be absolutely foolish to hold out for more.

[Moose Milligan]

Good post. I think some people fail to realize that a deal of Jones, Clement, Sherrill, and Tillman is a fantastic return for Bedard.

If that's what the Mariners are offering, MacPhail would be absolutely foolish to hold out for more.

I agree. Only thing I'm not too sure about is Jones' power potential. But by all accounts he should turn out to be a good player.

I think people are just apprehensive because they've never heard of or seen these players we're talking about acquiring. Therefore the easiest thing to do is just dismiss them and talk bad about them instead of exploring the possibilities they could bring to the future of this team.

[glenn__davis]

Good post. I think some people fail to realize that a deal of Jones, Clement, Sherrill, and Tillman is a fantastic return for Bedard.

If that's what the Mariners are offering, MacPhail would be absolutely foolish to hold out for more.

Actually, I think most people on the board (obviously there will always be exceptions) would be quite happy with that return.

I think most "skeptics" of this trade are just questioning whether or not it's on the table and how strongly MacPhail believes something better will come up.

[markakis4pres]

I agree. Only thing I'm not too sure about is Jones' power potential. But by all accounts he should turn out to be a good player.

I think people are just apprehensive because they've never heard of or seen these players we're talking about acquiring. Therefore the easiest thing to do is just dismiss them and talk bad about them instead of exploring the possibilities they could bring to the future of this team.

Very well said

They see that there best player is being traded and dont see the ML type players coming back.

These players are going to be the ML players you want back, it will just take more time.

Trading for multiple players who fill the needs of the team in the future is more important than having someone for 2 years.

[NoVaO]

I agree. Only thing I'm not too sure about is Jones' power potential. But by all accounts he should turn out to be a good player.

I think people are just apprehensive because they've never heard of or seen these players we're talking about acquiring. Therefore the easiest thing to do is just dismiss them and talk bad about them instead of exploring the possibilities they could bring to the future of this team.

Not concerned at all with his power potential. If anything, his strike zone judgement is the only questionable thing about him in my mind, but that it isn't too big a deal for me.

Jones had a .272 ISO power in a heavy pitcher's park as a 22 year old. Plus power to all fields. And even if he never reaches his full offensive potential, he still saves you 10 - 20 runs per year at a premium defensive position.

[vatech1994]

You didn't answer my question. I'll try again.

Do you believe what you wrote in post #46 is fact or opinion?

What does it matter?

Are you trying to be funny? If so, it isn't working. It matters a lot. I'm sure you know the difference between fact and opinion and that one shouldn't be confused with the other.




Regarding what you did write above, you realize that everything you wrote here is opinion and/or speculation, right? None of it is fact.

Again this is a message board. Last time I checked we were allowed to speculate, but there is a lot of evidence out there to support the speculation. Even though you seem to think speculation and those who do speculate are beneath you it isn't against the rules...

I've got no problem with you speculating so long as you call it speculation, opinion, whatever... I made this clear multiple times. That isn't what you've been doing.

Regarding "lot of evidence", there is no evidence at all that Bedard's value has gone down because of the Haren trade that I'm aware of and you certainly haven't offered any.





I also don't think your take on Macphail isn't accurate. MacPhail hasn't been reported to be holding out for 3-4 blue chip prospects for Bedard from what I've read and heard unless you define blue chip differently than I do.

He wants Jones, Morrow and Clement for Bedard while the Mariners are offering Jones and Clement. Morrow is seen as a blue chip prospect by some clubs, even though I disagree with that, he is still a blue chipper in MacPhail's eyes. He wanted Bailey, Cueto and Votto from the Reds and wanted Kemp and Kershaw and LaRoche from the Dodgers. This has all been reported in the media and by our insiders.

Again, this isn't true. I searched for insider posts indicating that we wanted all of Kemp, Kershaw, and LaRoche from the Dodgers or Bailey, Cueto, and Votto from the Reds or Jones, Clement, and Morrow from the Mariners and found nothing that indicated we wanted all three of these guys for just Bedard.

Here is what I found by team:
Dodgers
I found this post from Belkast for a combo of these guys but not Bedard by himself. There is nothing else out there mentioning these four names:
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/search.php?searchid=131731

This post from Peace blatantly contradicts what you're saying here. There is nothing else out there:
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1111310&highlight=bedard+kemp+laroche+kershaw#post1111310

Nothing from BB in any of these posts supporting what you're saying:
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/search.php?searchid=131736

I also have searched for media reports. I found nothing that wasn't contained in fan blogs.

Reds
I found nada from BB or Peace on us demanding this from the Reds. I found one post from Belkast contradicting it:
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1138180&highlight=bedard+Bailey+Cueto+Votto#post1138180
I found one article with this info, but it says "3 top prospects - probably Bailey, Votto, & Cueto" so it isn't very dependable
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1138180&highlight=bedard+Bailey+Cueto+Votto#post1138180


Haren had the most value on the market IMO. He was a better pitcher than Santana last season, signed to a reasonable contract for the next three years, not just two or one and he was more durable than Bedard. So you didn't have to worry about him leaving in two years, getting hurt or having to sign him to a lucrative extension.

At least you couched this as an opinion. I disagree with you and I believe most analysts would disagree with everything you wrote here.

I think there are about 5 factors that you aren't even considering in this "analysis", but Lucky Jim hit on them pretty well and you responded with something that had nothing to do with his post so I'm going to save my fingers the wear and tear and move on.





Can you explain to me how you "set the market" in a negotiation? To be clear, I want you to explain how MacPhail was supposed to get the price he wanted for Bedard from the team he wanted on a deadline (prior to the Haren trade). You seem to be really good at this stuff, so I'd like to see what you would have done to make this happen. I'd like to learn. Thanks

All he had to do was pull the trigger. Make the trade before anybody else and you set the market. Class dismissed...

I don't think there is anything I could write in response to your answer to this complex question that could discredit you any further than what you did to yourself, so I'm just going to ROTFLMAO and move on.


No feelings were hurt, in fact this is the only post contradicting me that hasn't referred to me as a lunatic or in other condescending ways.

You know I really don't enjoy being condescending and I try to avoid it at all costs, but I'm not sure what else to do when you type outrageous stuff like "MacPhail is a real brain surgeon" and "Bedard's value is definitely lower because we waited" and "MacPhail should have set the market by, ummm, pulling the trigger" and then you refuse to support or re-couch your statements when called on them.


I just see a lot of negatives here if MacPhail waits and I'm just pointing things out the way I see them. In my opinion there is more evidence that MacPhail has nothing to gain by holding out, and everything to lose...

There is nothing wrong with this statement at all, because it is clear you're just offering your opinion which is exactly why we're here. If your previous statements had been offered in such a way, I wouldn't have even bothered responding.

[ChaosLex]

Actually, I think most people on the board (obviously there will always be exceptions) would be quite happy with that return.

I think most "skeptics" of this trade are just questioning whether or not it's on the table and how strongly MacPhail believes something better will come up.

I know, I just didn't want to call anyone in particular out. I'm not really feeling argumentative today. ;)

[vatech1994]

Actually, I think most people on the board (obviously there will always be exceptions) would be quite happy with that return.

I think most "skeptics" of this trade are just questioning whether or not it's on the table and how strongly MacPhail believes something better will come up.

I'm happy with that trade. I just don't want MacPhail to make that trade now if he thinks it will get better. I want him to milk every ounce out of that cow that he can get. If he is waiting, he must think he can and will do better. If he ends up settling for worse, I won't be happy. However, I think I'll wait for this process to play out first. Call me crazy.....

[Boy Howdy]

I'm happy with that trade. I just don't want MacPhail to make that trade now if he thinks it will get better. I want him to milk every ounce out of that cow that he can get. If he is waiting, he must think he can and will do better. If he ends up settling for worse, I won't be happy. However, I think I'll wait for this process to play out first. Call me crazy.....

OK crazy. :D I couldn't agree with you more.

[RShack]

Yes, they can tell that theres nothing that the Orioles can do to improve the team enough in the next two years to make Bedard or Roberts stay, so they should give him away asap.

Never mind the huge salary reduction to the payroll over the next 3 offseasons, or the players who will be available during that time. Lets ignore that and focus on trading Bedard and Roberts for whatever offer suits the Mariner, Reds or Angels.
Personally, I think you have a point. But you're swimming against the tide here, so you're gonna get roasted. Count on it, it's guaranteed.

A big part of what's going on here is that people just want to see something big and dramatic happen. People want something to talk about and, as you can tell, trades are the #1 topic, no matter what. I agree with you that there's more than one way to skin a cat, and personally I believe AM thinks so too. I think he's got some idea about what constitutes adequate value for Bedard and BRob, and if he doesn't get it, he'll just keep them. That's what he says, and I have no reason to not believe him.

For whatever reasons, when AM acknowledged that he's facing a big problem, and not a little problem, people here somehow decided that he's hell bent on trading everybody. And "everybody" includes both those players who are good (except maybe Nick) and those players who aren't. AM never said that, but most folks here decided that's what he really meant (or at least it's what he *should* have meant). Without a bunch of trades, some guys here are melting down on a daily basis. If you think this is bad, just wait and see what's gonna happen if he doesn't trade them this winter and then the deadline gets near next summer. Boy, that's gonna be ugly. If you think some people are saying stuff that doesn't make any sense now, you ain't seen nothing yet ;-)

[Sports Guy]

Personally, I think you have a point. But you're swimming against the tide here, so you're gonna get roasted. Count on it, it's guaranteed.

A big part of what's going on here is that people just want to see something big and dramatic happen. People want something to talk about and, as you can tell, trades are the #1 topic, no matter what. I agree with you that there's more than one way to skin a cat, and personally I believe AM thinks so too. I think he's got some idea about what constitutes adequate value for Bedard and BRob, and if he doesn't get it, he'll just keep them. That's what he says, and I have no reason to not believe him.

For whatever reasons, when AM acknowledged that he's facing a big problem, and not a little problem, people here somehow decided that he's hell bent on trading everybody. And "everybody" includes both those players who are good (except maybe Nick) and those players who aren't. AM never said that, but most folks here decided that's what he really meant (or at least it's what he *should* have meant). Without a bunch of trades, some guys here are melting down on a daily basis. If you think this is bad, just wait and see what's gonna happen if he doesn't trade them this winter and then the deadline gets near next summer. Boy, that's gonna be ugly. If you think some people are saying stuff that doesn't make any sense now, you ain't seen nothing yet ;-)
I love it when you put a bunch of people you don't know in some fantasy category that only exists in your mind.

[Moose Milligan]

Very well said

They see that there best player is being traded and dont see the ML type players coming back.

These players are going to be the ML players you want back, it will just take more time.

Trading for multiple players who fill the needs of the team in the future is more important than having someone for 2 years.

Thanks man.

I'll admit, I've been guilty of it myself. But everyone on here owes it to take a look at their stats and imagine how these guys could help us in the future rather than dismiss them without knowing anything about them.

[RShack]

I love it when you put a bunch of people you don't know in some fantasy category that only exists in your mind.
Well, I do believe that people want to see something big and dramatic happen. Evidently, stating my opinion gives you another chance to go trolling around behind me, trying to start another one of your pissing contests. But, since I don't wanna play, wouldn't your time be better spent creating another 4-way trade that won't happen?

[Sports Guy]

Well, I do believe that people want to see something big and dramatic happen. Evidently, stating my opinion gives you another chance to go trolling around behind me, trying to start another one of your pissing contests. But, since I don't wanna play, wouldn't your time be better spent creating another 4-way trade that won't happen?

I'm not trolling...Just tired of you taking shots at everyone on this site. It is pathetic and a joke and I am surprised Paul, Tony or John haven't called you on it.

People want Bedard, Roberts and others dealt because they understand that the team, as currently constructed, will never compete consistently.

People are smart enough to see what most of the league is doing, whether it is fielding a very good to great team or building up the youth and looking towards the future.

The Orioles, as of today, are doing neither. People want depth..They want youth..They want talent.

For you to constantly berate them and put them into your fantasy categories is a complete and utter joke.

[Moose Milligan]

SG, I don't see how rshack saying that a lot of people wanting to see something big and dramatic is taking a shot at anyone, really.

It's true. I mean, it's all everyone talks about.

[Sports Guy]

SG, I don't see how rshack saying that a lot of people wanting to see something big and dramatic is taking a shot at anyone, really.

It's true. I mean, it's all everyone talks about.

The way rshack does it and has been doing it for months, is taking shots at people.

He makes it sound like people just want it so we can talk about it...Totally ignoring the long term effects of the team and why it is smart to do so.

[Boy Howdy]

I'm not trolling...Just tired of you taking shots at everyone on this site. It is pathetic and a joke and I am surprised Paul, Tony or John haven't called you on it.



Yesterday you're telling us we're too sensitive and calling us crybabies (in addition to saying you didn't care about the opinion of anybody who disagreed with you), and now you want somebody else to step in like the SWAT team because you're offended. Can't have it both ways...

What is the origin of the term "pissing contest" anyway? That one always leaves me scratching my head. Who on earth would organize such a thing?

But, to stay on topic, who on here doesn't want to see something big and dramatic happen? Based on your posts, you certainly do.

[MChance]

I'm not trolling...Just tired of you taking shots at everyone on this site. It is pathetic and a joke and I am surprised Paul, Tony or John haven't called you on it.

Pot, meet kettle. :rolleyes:

[Sports Guy]

Yesterday you're telling us we're too sensitive and calling us crybabies (in addition to saying you didn't care about the opinion of anybody who disagreed with you), and now you want somebody else to step in like the SWAT team because you're offended. Can't have it both ways...

What is the origin of the term "pissing contest" anyway? That one always leaves me scratching my head. Who on earth would organize such a thing?

But, to stay on topic, who on here doesn't want to see something big and dramatic happen? Based on your posts, you certainly do.
And I was wrong too...Not denying that. But that comment was based off of a trend on this board just as my comment about shack is based on his own trends.

BTW, even VaTech told me he didn't care about that comment and didn't take it that way...The other people who did were being sensitive and were crying about it...Just a fact.

[Moose Milligan]

Yesterday you're telling us we're too sensitive and calling us crybabies (in addition to saying you didn't care about the opinion of anybody who disagreed with you), and now you want somebody else to step in like the SWAT team because you're offended. Can't have it both ways...

What is the origin of the term "pissing contest" anyway? That one always leaves me scratching my head. Who on earth would organize such a thing?

But, to stay on topic, who on here doesn't want to see something big and dramatic happen? Based on your posts, you certainly do.

Ummm.... :o

;)

[Moose Milligan]

And I was wrong too...Not denying that. But that comment was based off of a trend on this board just as my comment about shack is based on his own trends.

Sunday, January 6th, 5:58 PM.

A moment in OH history.

Mark it down.

[RShack]

What is the origin of the term "pissing contest" anyway? That one always leaves me scratching my head. Who on earth would organize such a thing?
From urbandictionary.com... FWIW...

pissing contest:

1. A competition in urinating, most likely to see who is able to urinate the farthest or for longest time. Mostly done between males, although I'm not ruling out the female possibility.

2. An argument where each participant is merely attempting to out-do the other one, not for the sake of the truth coming out, but simply to win. (see pure heavy metal fans of any type of metal, the most uppity in the world.)

3. Two or more parties simply attempting to out-do one another, not for the sake of truly believing in their cause, but just to win in order to gain some kind of power, honour, or reward of some kind. (see politics, particularly Australian politics; see also university philosophy students if there is such a definition)

[Greg Pappas]

Personally I wish these arguments would go to PM's rather than hijack the thread topic. It is uncalled for and lowers the quality of the OH.

Ok, I'm off duty now, no longer the forum police. :D

[osfan83]

I think it's less "wanting something dramatic to happen", and more "getting on with the long over due and much needed rebuilding process".

Keeping Bedard in 2008 will most likely lead to another 72 win or so season, and other year waiting to rebuild. Best case senerio, Bedard pitches like he did in 2007 and he only loses a little value because he has less time under contract.

What is the likleyhood than Bedard will resign with us after another lackluster 72 win season?

I want AM to get the best deal he can, but Bedards value starts slipping as soon as the first pitch gets thrown in April.

[Sports Guy]

Personally I wish these arguments would go to PM's rather than hijack the thread topic. It is uncalled for and lowers the quality of the OH.

Ok, I'm off duty now, no longer the forum police. :D

As usual, you are right.

[Moose Milligan]

I think it's less "wanting something dramatic to happen", and more "getting on with the long over due and much needed rebuilding process".

Keeping Bedard in 2008 will most likely lead to another 72 win or so season, and other year waiting to rebuild. Best case senerio, Bedard pitches like he did in 2007 and he only loses a little value because he has less time under contract.

What is the likleyhood than Bedard will resign with us after another lackluster 72 win season?

I want AM to get the best deal he can, but the Bedards value starts slipping as soon as the first pitch gets thrown in April.


Yeah, but the two go hand in hand...or one could argue that they're one in the same. IMO, in order to rebuild this thing properly, things that are major and dramatic need to happen. You can't half ass a rebuilding effort, we should all know that by now. :(

[osfan83]

Yeah, but the two go hand in hand...or one could argue that they're one in the same. IMO, in order to rebuild this thing properly, things that are major and dramatic need to happen. You can't half ass a rebuilding effort, we should all know that by now. :(

Agreed...but my point was most here don't want something dramatic jsut because we are bored...we want it because it signals a change in course for the team that is long overdue!

[Moose Milligan]

Agreed...but my point was most here don't want something dramatic jsut because we are bored...we want it because it signals a change in course for the team that is long overdue!

But we are bored...we're bored and tired of the losing and the same lateral moves every offseason. ;) You said yourself that the change of course is long overdue.

[Sports Guy]

Agreed...but my point was most here don't want something dramatic jsut because we are bored...we want it because it signals a change in course for the team that is long overdue!

Right...Some on here don't get this concept.

[vatech1994]

I think it's less "wanting something dramatic to happen", and more "getting on with the long over due and much needed rebuilding process".

I tend to agree with this. However, I do think there are a few prominent posters who like the excitement of making a deal as much if not more than the deal itself (and no, I'm not remotely talking about SG). Some of us have very, very little patience.

Regarding Bedard, it isn't a no brainer that he has to be traded. He has to be traded IF we get back enough return for him. That remains to be seen.

Like many of us, I think (please note that word) we have been offered Jones, Clement, Sherrill, and Tillman for Bedard alone or Bedard plus a minor piece. If we were offered that deal and we ended up not trading Bedard, I agree that it would be a mistake. Note that I didn't write we should trade Bedard for that package. I wrote that Bedard should be traded at some point if we have been offered that package. I would assume (please note that word) that MacPhail hasn't pulled the trigger on that deal because he feels he can do better. I'm perfectly willing to wait and see if that is true or not.

I rarely pester the insiders, but I will ask for clarification if that deal was/is on the table the next time they show up. That will get us beyond whether this is fact or opinion.

[El Gordo]

Yesterday you're telling us we're too sensitive and calling us crybabies (in addition to saying you didn't care about the opinion of anybody who disagreed with you), and now you want somebody else to step in like the SWAT team because you're offended. Can't have it both ways...

What is the origin of the term "pissing contest" anyway? That one always leaves me scratching my head. Who on earth would organize such a thing?

But, to stay on topic, who on here doesn't want to see something big and dramatic happen? Based on your posts, you certainly do.

It's origin is male animals marking their territory with their scent(urine)
A contest in which logical rational argument in the search for truth gives way to emotional and/or personal attacks for the sake of power or reputation. Usually such contests leave a feeling of ill-will amongst all involved, and prove nothing more than who belongs where in a primal heirarchy.
Derived from the term "pissing grounds", which are usually urinated on to mark ownership.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pissing+contest

[JTrea81]

I tend to agree with this. However, I do think there are a few prominent posters who like the excitement of making a deal as much if not more than the deal itself (and no, I'm not remotely talking about SG). Some of us have very, very little patience.

I want to see a deal for excitement yes, but it's the excitement that we are finally on our way to rebuilding instead of retooling. As for patience, we've been waiting 10 years for this to take place. So I think I have a little bit of an excuse for being impatient...



I rarely pester the insiders, but I will ask for clarification if that deal was/is on the table the next time they show up. That will get us beyond whether this is fact or opinion.

I doubt you will get a response. I'm guessing the reason they haven't clarified it or have been cryptic is because they probably can't without giving away "classified info" from their source.

[JohnnyK27]

I'm still rather new here ... I am impatient waiting for a deal as the rebuilding have been long overdue! The Orioles have been talking out of both sides of their mouth for so long that I need to be reassured by action.

While I'm hoping for Jones, Clement, Chen, & Sherril or Tillman. I believe we are getting good value.

Anything short of trading Roberts & Bedard leaves me to think that the latest supposed rebuilding is just another scam! JUST MY OPINION:eek:

[El Gordo]

To get the best deal you have to be willing to say no and walk away IMO. The prevailing opinon here seems to be there are no alternatives for improving the team to trading Bedard and BRob before ST. If that is true then we are not barganing from a strong position and other teams will be aware of this. I think MacP has alternative moves he thinks he can make, if he doesn't get what he percieves is good value and doesn't trade these two this winter, that will still make the team competitive by 2010.

[JohnnyK27]

To get the best deal you have to be willing to say no and walk away IMO. The prevailing opinon here seems to be there are no alternatives for improving the team to trading Bedard and BRob before ST. If that is true then we are not barganing from a strong position and other teams will be aware of this. I think MacP has alternative moves he thinks he can make, if he doesn't get what he percieves is good value and doesn't trade these two this winter, that will still make the team competitive by 2010.


I'm not sure I agree.. In fact I dont think I do!:D

[mweb]

Ok folks, which offer among these four do you like the best?

1> Gallagher, Marshall, Cedeno
2> Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno
3> Gallagher, Murton, Cedeno
4> Gallagher, Murton, Patterson

Personally I prefer 3, 4, 2 and 1, in that order.

I'd go 4, 3, 2, 1, and I wouldn't do 1.

[JohnnyK27]

I like 4 the Best ...But like 3 also could live with 3 !!!

[FutureOwner]

Why is it one or the other? What is the probability that Bedard changes his mind? What is his value if he doesn't? What is the risk? For the right package, it's worth trading him. It's not, otherwise.

I don't think Roberts is a worry - he might stay if we compete. It's just that he'll be well into his 30s and likely in decline. And so his value is better in trade than for a team likely (not certain) to struggle for the next two years.

This is what Im saying, iether AM will get what he wants and trade Bedard or he wont, and he'll figure out another plan. If you have yourself in the position where everyone believes you have only one option, to trade the player, youll never get the value you are looking for.

[33rdst]

I like Gallagher, Patterson, Cedeno

[ChaosLex]

Did somebody say pissing contest?

"Don't cross the streams."

;)

[Jimbo81]

Did somebody say pissing contest?

"Don't cross the streams."

;)

You said crossing the streams was bad.

[jerios55]

I like Gallagher, Patterson, Cedeno

this was my thought as well. Potential double play combo, that already played together and another 2-3 SP.

While getting a #1 always seems to be an issue, wouldn't five 2-3's be pretty solid and cheap? And one could always turn into something stronger.

[RZNJ]

I'd go 4, 3, 2, 1, and I wouldn't do 1.

Just curious why you like Patterson over Cedeno? I would have gone #3, 4, 2, and 1.

[FutureOwner]

This is just baffling.

First of all, we're not just "giving" them away. I don't like to use the word "ignorance" because it's pretty strong, but this post smells like a cropdusting of it. We'd be getting some good pieces back in return. Kind of, like, you know, how Billy Beane has constructed the A's out west. But nah, I wouldn't want a team like that. Would you?

Nevermind the fact that none of us truly knows what players will be available over the next few years. I know that everyone likes to think that Tex will somehow fall in our lap and takes that for granted. What happens when ATL throws a serious offer at him to stay and he takes it?

The hypocrisy in your prior post is stunning, specifically where you talk about not knowing what'll happen, but then acting so sure that Reimold will pan out, and we'll end up with Blalock and Tex.

Im not saying we shouldnt trade Bedard, Im saying we shouldnt trade him for less than we think he's worth.

You dont know what the actual trade offers are. You know what some bloggers, newspaper columnists and "insiders" believe the offers to be, but you have absolutely no idea what the actual offers have been.

Everything we all are talking about is pure speculation. You seem to think you know more about building a baseball team than the guy who has done it more than once for real, not in fantasy world, or orioles hangout land.

AM does not have to trade Bedard and Roberts to turn this team around. If he can aquire the right players to do so, it would be the easiest way. If the players offered, and again, we have no idea what the actual offers are, are not who he feels are capable of building a new team around then he isnt going to do it, and he shouldnt.

As far as speculating about Teixeira being signed, there is no difference in that than you speculating about who may or may not be involved in a deal for Bedard. Neither of us know what will or will not happen. What I do know is that this team is going to lose $30-40 million in payroll before Teixeira hits the open market, so unless he simply does not want to be an Oriole, or is the Braves extend him before he becomes a FA, the Orioles have a pretty good chance of landing him considering the payroll flexibility theyll have.

Ignore that if you wish when talking about the Orioles ability to improve the team. They could easilly absorb a high salary player through trade, or sign FA's for players they cant develope once those salaries clear.

Keeping Bedard could potentially set the rotation, with a near clean slate as far as payroll goes to fill the remaining positions.

At no point did I say I was so sure any of that would happen, but its an example of another way to plan on building if our needs arent met through a trade with Bedard. You are the one who is so positive the Bedard will not resign, even though he wont even be a FA for another TWO SEASONS. Im saying none of us know what will happen, we dont know who will or wont pan out, who's included in trades, and who is going to sign.

The point of my post was that there are other ways to build the team, AM is not going to put himself in the position of having to take whatever deal he's being offered, and we have 2 full years to show Bedard that we are heading in the right direction and make him believe in this franchise.

[Sports Guy]

Im not saying we shouldnt trade Bedard, Im saying we shouldnt trade him for less than we think he's worth. Well, that depends on what you think he is worth...If you think he should net 4 top 100 prospects, that is absurd. You have to get very good value but also be realistic.



AM does not have to trade Bedard and Roberts to turn this team around. If he can aquire the right players to do so, it would be the easiest way. If the players offered, and again, we have no idea what the actual offers are, are not who he feels are capable of building a new team around then he isnt going to do it, and he shouldnt.This really isn't true in all likelihood...Yes, some things could happen but realistically, if those 2 aren't dealt, we are at least 3 years away from beginning to show signs that we could potentially contend.

[davearm]

Quit the bickering and get back to talking about the Cubs. :)

[coe76]

I would go 2, 3, 1, 4 I am intrigued by Veal and would like Cedeno. None of the 4 seem that bad but AM probably has his preference out of it as well. Since no deal has been made, he may be looking for choice # 5

[Sports Guy]

Gallagher, Veal, EPat, Dempster and Murton for Payton, BRob and Hoey.

[RZNJ]

Gallagher, Veal, EPat, Dempster and Murton for Payton, BRob and Hoey.

I think you're making it more complicated AND worse.

[Sports Guy]

I think you're making it more complicated AND worse.

You think it is worse for us or the Cubs?

[Moose Milligan]

Im not saying we shouldnt trade Bedard, Im saying we shouldnt trade him for less than we think he's worth.

I've drawn this analogy on here before, I'll draw this analogy again. Trading Bedard is like selling a house. It doesn't matter what you're asking, it matters what people are offering. If you're asking a million dollars for your home, but people are only offering around 850k, well guess what your house is worth? That's right, only as much as people are willing to pay for it.


You dont know what the actual trade offers are. You know what some bloggers, newspaper columnists and "insiders" believe the offers to be, but you have absolutely no idea what the actual offers have been.

So what's your point?


Everything we all are talking about is pure speculation. You seem to think you know more about building a baseball team than the guy who has done it more than once for real, not in fantasy world, or orioles hangout land.

No, I don't think I know more about building a baseball team, but it's not hard to take a look around and see what successful GM's have used as strategies and guidelines to be more successful than we have with FAR less more money than we have over the past decade. Doesn't it irk you that the Florida Marlins have won a World Series, been essentially bulldozed and won a World Series AGAIN while we've constantly been stumbling around in the dark? Have you ever taken the time to look at how the did it? Doesn't it bother you that the Athletics are competitive year in, year out despite having a payroll that's about half of ours?

So no, I don't have any real life GM experience, but the basic tenants of deal making are pretty easy to pick up on when you take a minute to look around at who's been successful.


AM does not have to trade Bedard and Roberts to turn this team around. If he can aquire the right players to do so, it would be the easiest way. If the players offered, and again, we have no idea what the actual offers are, are not who he feels are capable of building a new team around then he isnt going to do it, and he shouldnt.

No, we don't have any idea what the actual offers are. But this is a board for speculating, and if you don't like it you don't have to participate.

Man, I feel like SG.

Moving on...


As far as speculating about Teixeira being signed, there is no difference in that than you speculating about who may or may not be involved in a deal for Bedard. Neither of us know what will or will not happen. What I do know is that this team is going to lose $30-40 million in payroll before Teixeira hits the open market, so unless he simply does not want to be an Oriole, or is the Braves extend him before he becomes a FA, the Orioles have a pretty good chance of landing him considering the payroll flexibility theyll have.

I wouldn't even discuss Tex being a possibility until he actually hits the open market and we've expressed interest. People (not just you) have been banking on the fact that he'll be an Oriole and I just don't think it's smart to put all our eggs in one basket like that.


Ignore that if you wish when talking about the Orioles ability to improve the team. They could easilly absorb a high salary player through trade, or sign FA's for players they cant develope once those salaries clear.

You're right, they could.


Keeping Bedard could potentially set the rotation, with a near clean slate as far as payroll goes to fill the remaining positions.

At no point did I say I was so sure any of that would happen, but its an example of another way to plan on building if our needs arent met through a trade with Bedard. You are the one who is so positive the Bedard will not resign, even though he wont even be a FA for another TWO SEASONS. Im saying none of us know what will happen, we dont know who will or wont pan out, who's included in trades, and who is going to sign.

I never said Bedard wouldn't resign. Resign or not, the best and easiest way to rebuild, IMO, is to trade him and get some good pieces back.

My point to you earlier was that none of us knows what'll happen, but you acted pretty positive that Tex coming here is a done deal. I find it funny that you play the "no one knows" hand and then turn around and act like Tex is in the Orioles plans, especially since you've harped on the fact that Bedard won't be an FA for another two seasons. Same with Tex....so no one knows, right?


The point of my post was that there are other ways to build the team, AM is not going to put himself in the position of having to take whatever deal he's being offered, and we have 2 full years to show Bedard that we are heading in the right direction and make him believe in this franchise.

You're right, there are other ways to build the team....however, I don't think the most effective is holding onto Bedard, especially with his injury history.

What if he tears his shoulder this year? Then you're really SOL.

Bedard's best value to this franchise is to bring back 3-4 young ML ready players with a ton of upside.

Hey, Billy Beane just traded Haren to Arizona for a good package...But I wouldn't want to pretend like I know more than a ML GM by talking about other teams winning ways and trends, right? ;)

[RZNJ]

You think it is worse for us or the Cubs?

For us. Throwing Hoey in there to get Veal (probably a setup LHP at best) or Dempster (why do we need him) is a mistake IMO. Keep Hoey. Too many people giving up on him too fast. If they'll take Payton great. I like any deal which includes Gallagher, Murton, and either Cedeno or EPat, if not both. I prefer Cedeno. I should clarify. I'm not even that hung up on getting Murton back. I could take something else in place of him. I just see no reason to be including someone like Hoey in any Cubs deal as a sweetener.

[FutureOwner]

Well, that depends on what you think he is worth...If you think he should net 4 top 100 prospects, that is absurd. You have to get very good value but also be realistic.


This really isn't true in all likelihood...Yes, some things could happen but realistically, if those 2 aren't dealt, we are at least 3 years away from beginning to show signs that we could potentially contend.

I dont think he is worth 4, but he's worth more than 1 and 3 much lesser players, or 2 good but not great guys and 2 lesser players.

Again, we dont know what is or isnt being offered. I love Jones, but getting Jones and a couple of other decent guys isnt a great return. Getting Jones and no top pitcher is not a good return. Getting Jones and a catcher who probably isnt as good as Weiters, unless we have another trade lined up for him is not a great return.

Ive written a million posts about how great of an idea I think it is to trade Bedard and Roberts, I just dont think its the only way to build a good team, and until the efforts to do so have been exhausted, I believe AM has 2 years to convince Bedard to stay.

If youve got $30-40M to spend it can go a long way toward aquiring players. If they take on two higher salaried players and sign two players with that money, to add to Roberts, Weiters and Markakis, they can have a good lineup.

[Sports Guy]

For us. Throwing Hoey in there to get Veal (probably a setup LHP at best) or Dempster (why do we need him) is a mistake IMO. Keep Hoey. Too many people giving up on him too fast. If they'll take Payton great. I like any deal which includes Gallagher, Murton, and either Cedeno or EPat, if not both. I prefer Cedeno. I should clarify. I'm not even that hung up on getting Murton back. I could take something else in place of him. I just see no reason to be including someone like Hoey in any Cubs deal as a sweetener.
I would rather have Veal than Hoey personally and the newest update isn't talking about Murton coming back.

So, i would rather do this.

[bigbird]

I would rather have Veal than Hoey personally and the newest update isn't talking about Murton coming back.

So, i would rather do this.

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

[Fairfax Bird]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

Yeah, that part of the deal really isn't good for them. I don't like Marshall coming back per say, but I really like Cedeno coming back over EPat given our need for a SS.

[amateurfan]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

Thank you. Do you know if Cedeno was offered or requested?

[Moose Milligan]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

I hope it gets done, but I hope it doesn't get blown up by trying to force Payton on them.

[Sports Guy]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

Does this mean you think we are going to trade Bedard soon then?

And why are we after Marshall???? Much rather have Murton than Marshall.

[rochester]

I hope it gets done, but I hope it doesn't get blown up by trying to force Payton on them.

Anyone else yea...the Cubs...am not sure anything could blow a trade up between these two...unless the earth turned on its axis..

[Lucky Jim]

Does this mean you think we are going to trade Bedard soon then?

And why are we after Marshall???? Much rather have Murton than Marshall.

How do you know we're after Marshall over Murton? Maybe they value Murton more and aren't willing to give him up for what we're willing to unload.

Murton has major league value. It's entirely possible that the Cubs don't want to give that up.

[amateurfan]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

BB, do you have any thoughts on this trade yourself? I don't really like it in return for Roberts. It opens a new hole in the IF, provides less offense than Roberts, but does get the team younger. Are you hearing anything about a new 2b in return for Bedard?

[Sports Guy]

How do you know we're after Marshall over Murton? Maybe they value Murton more and aren't willing to give him up for what we're willing to unload.

Murton has major league value. It's entirely possible that the Cubs don't want to give that up.

Well, all the outlets had Murton in the deal before and now he isn't.

And Murton doesn't have ML value to the Cubs because he has no place to play for them unless they have an injury.

[Lucky Jim]

Well, all the outlets had Murton in the deal before and now he isn't.

And Murton doesn't have ML value to the Cubs because he has no place to play for them unless they have an injury.

Doesn't mean that he's not a valuable chip in another trade. When I say he has major league value, I mean that he's not a prospect. Because the Cubs can't use him doesn't make him a throwaway.

[Sports Guy]

Doesn't mean that he's not a valuable chip in another trade. When I say he has major league value, I mean that he's not a prospect. Because the Cubs can't use him doesn't make him a throwaway.

I never said he was a throwaway.

However, i highly doubt they say no to trading Murton if we want him over Marshall.

[ChaosLex]

It will most likely be a Cedeno, Gallegher, and Marshall with a good chance of it getting done in the next few days. We are trying to get them to take Payton in the deal and include Murton but that's probably not going to happen.

Marshall? Ew...

I want Murton. :(

[RShack]

No, I don't think I know more about building a baseball team, but it's not hard to take a look around and see what successful GM's have used as strategies and guidelines to be more successful than we have with FAR less more money than we have over the past decade. Doesn't it irk you that the Florida Marlins have won a World Series, been essentially bulldozed and won a World Series AGAIN while we've constantly been stumbling around in the dark? Have you ever taken the time to look at how the did it? Doesn't it bother you that the Athletics are competitive year in, year out despite having a payroll that's about half of ours?
Well, I agree with you completely. But most of that has very little to do with trades. Most of it is the same thing that helped the O's be good all the time: having the best player-development system. Big trades are mainly just a short-term way of coping with the fact that we don't have one, which is the real problem. Big trades don't fix the real problem, they're mainly a band-aid.

I won't go on my by-now-usual harangue about how the farm system needs to be a player-development system, and not just a Darwinian-promotion system with coaches available to offer advice. I just wish that some enterprising sports-reporter/journalist-type person would do a study of exactly how the old O's farm system actually worked. We're right on the edge of all the guys who worked in it being dead. We're reaching the end of the window when 1st-hand reports and insights are available. Everybody seems to agree that it was the core reason that the then-small-market-O's were baseball's best franchise for 35 years. I just wish we could learn more about it before it's too late. I wanna know exactly what they did, and exactly how they did it.

[bigbird]

BB, do you have any thoughts on this trade yourself? I don't really like it in return for Roberts. It opens a new hole in the IF, provides less offense than Roberts, but does get the team younger. Are you hearing anything about a new 2b in return for Bedard?

MacPhail knows the Cubs talent better than anyone on this board so the deal he settles for should be the best talent for the team.

[RZNJ]

I'd do it if it's the best we can do. If it's made, I like the fact that AM has the authority to move BRob and also the fact that this further defines the direction in which the team is headed. I would have hoped for a little more coming back (maybe EPat as well).

[Fairfax Bird]

MacPhail knows the Cubs talent better than anyone on this board so the deal he settles for should be the best talent for the team.

This is completely wrong, there are many people here who will tell you they know the talent way better, just ask them.

[Fairfax Bird]

I never said he was a throwaway.

However, i highly doubt they say no to trading Murton if we want him over Marshall.

Well, it just seems to me that we really want Cedeno and they don't want to give him away, they would rather give us Patterson. So we said we want Cedeno, they say that we aren't giving you Murton and Cedeno, so we say we will take Cedeno, Gallagher, and Marshall.

I do doubt they don't make the trade if it is Murton over Marshall, that is how deals break down.

[JTrea81]

MacPhail knows the Cubs talent better than anyone on this board so the deal he settles for should be the best talent for the team.

Two questions here, where does Cedeno play? I'm assuming SS so that leaves a hole at 2nd if true.

Also with Murton, would he be a regular in LF and Scott DHing or the other way around? I think the best spot to put him would be DH because Scott is the better fielder, and Murton has shown he is much better playing everyday vs. platooning. It's a moot point however if we can't get him.

[coe76]

If that is the deal we end up with, I wonder if AM is looking at Marshall in relief, rather than as a starter. It would give us another option and limit his exposure. He obviously is not a SO pitcher, given his results with the Cubs, and some of the reports we have gotten on him in the last couple of weeks say his upside is not much higher than where he is now. Just a possibility that AM may be working on to make the deal work. I still would prefer Veal but doesn't look like either him or Murton are part of it. We still gotta figure out what to do with our deadwood like Payton and even Gibbons, assuming we can't void the contract or something.

[Sports Guy]

Well, BB is saying he thinks BRob may go soon...He also said the other day that BRob wouldn't be dealt if Bedard wasn't.

Maybe this all finally goes down this week.

[Rob H]

If that's the new deal, I'm already missing the old one. Gallagher and Marshall is our entire stock replacement starters, and Cedeno is the man who should be our starting SS.

[MChance]

Count me as one who likes this deal!

[tywright]

If we aren't going to get Murton, AM/FO must think Reimold can platoon with Scott in 2009. Murton would basically block Reimold. As much as we all would like to get Murton, he doesn't fit into our plans that well.

However we need someone other than Marshall. We already have at least 5 Marshall's coming up through our system.

[Fan4Life]

Personally, I think you have a point. But you're swimming against the tide here, so you're gonna get roasted. Count on it, it's guaranteed.

A big part of what's going on here is that people just want to see something big and dramatic happen. People want something to talk about and, as you can tell, trades are the #1 topic, no matter what. I agree with you that there's more than one way to skin a cat, and personally I believe AM thinks so too. I think he's got some idea about what constitutes adequate value for Bedard and BRob, and if he doesn't get it, he'll just keep them. That's what he says, and I have no reason to not believe him.

For whatever reasons, when AM acknowledged that he's facing a big problem, and not a little problem, people here somehow decided that he's hell bent on trading everybody. And "everybody" includes both those players who are good (except maybe Nick) and those players who aren't. AM never said that, but most folks here decided that's what he really meant (or at least it's what he *should* have meant). Without a bunch of trades, some guys here are melting down on a daily basis. If you think this is bad, just wait and see what's gonna happen if he doesn't trade them this winter and then the deadline gets near next summer. Boy, that's gonna be ugly. If you think some people are saying stuff that doesn't make any sense now, you ain't seen nothing yet ;-)
I'm not trolling...Just tired of you taking shots at everyone on this site. It is pathetic and a joke and I am surprised Paul, Tony or John haven't called you on it.

People want Bedard, Roberts and others dealt because they understand that the team, as currently constructed, will never compete consistently.

People are smart enough to see what most of the league is doing, whether it is fielding a very good to great team or building up the youth and looking towards the future.

The Orioles, as of today, are doing neither. People want depth..They want youth..They want talent.

For you to constantly berate them and put them into your fantasy categories is a complete and utter joke.

Well, IMO, I don't think they're pot shots, and not only am I not tired of hearing his point of view, I don't hear it enough. He does have a life though so I won't hold it against him. I don't think any poster expressing their opinion about what they would like to see happen, or perhaps disgust that nothing has happened is a problem... Posters expressing those opinions as facts and drawing conclusions from those opinions expressed as facts about people running our organization deserve a stiff arm now and again. And while it may or may not be trolling, you can expect with a fairly high degree of accuracy that an RShack post will be followed up by an opposing SG post. From my side of the fence, you are as knowledgeable or moreso than just about anyone here on matters of baseball, but on this subject matter, you are closer to being part of the problem, than the solution.

[Scribo]

Well, it just seems to me that we really want Cedeno and they don't want to give him away, they would rather give us Patterson. So we said we want Cedeno, they say that we aren't giving you Murton and Cedeno, so we say we will take Cedeno, Gallagher, and Marshall.



Sorry, I just don't like this. How many MLB plate appearances does a guy need before people stop mentioning his AAA numbers? (I guess 700 PAs isn't enough). He's a free-swinger with too many Ks. He would have to be absolutely brilliant in the field to even begin to justify a spot in a big league lineup. And it's not like he's a kid anymore. If he were going to start translating his MiL numbers into MLB success, it really should have started to happen last season. And it didn't.

Marshall, best case, pitches 170 innings near league average... and there's nothing wrong with that, if it happens. EDIT: If he goes into long relief as some have suggested, his value goes way down and this deal looks even more shaky.

And I do like Gallagher a lot. He probably becomes the best young pitcher in the system.

So to my mind, this is trading Roberts for a really good young SP prospect, a probable #4 or #5 SP, and a guy who will very likely have to be replaced before this team starts to go anywhere.

I wish Patterson or Murton were in it -- Patterson to me has the potential to be a huge steal for somebody -- but I would still do the deal, and really hope that Gallagher develops.

[Moose Milligan]

Well, BB is saying he thinks BRob may go soon...He also said the other day that BRob wouldn't be dealt if Bedard wasn't.

Maybe this all finally goes down this week.

Wouldn't bank on it, big fella ;)

Not discrediting our insiders as I love bigbirds posts as much as anyone else, but things change and these deals are pretty complicated.

I remember Belkast wanting to bet me a bushel of crabs that Bedard would be traded at the winter meetings. Too bad I'm not a huge seafood fan ;)

My gut tells me that Roberts and Bedard are here on opening day.

Hope I'm wrong.

[Scribo]

Two questions here, where does Cedeno play? I'm assuming SS so that leaves a hole at 2nd if true.



There is a good chance that this leaves TWO holes in the middle infield. I realize that Cedeno would be more or less given the SS job, but I don't think he will turn out to be the answer.

Age 25 in a month, and a .626 OPS in 700-plus MLB plate appearances, 1:5.5 BB:K... he looks like a stopgap at best.

[Hank Scorpio]

MacPhail knows the Cubs talent better than anyone on this board so the deal he settles for should be the best talent for the team.

Correct. I think some are overlooking Marshall's tendencies as a groundball guy. He's not going to strikeout a ton of guys, but he could stabilize a very uncertain back of our rotation.

[Pruke]

Well, BB is saying he thinks BRob may go soon...He also said the other day that BRob wouldn't be dealt if Bedard wasn't.

Maybe this all finally goes down this week.

Put me down in this camp.

I mean, how many major league pitchers can we have at any one time on the roster for cryin' out loud?

Gallagher
Marshall (does he come into the mix because we don't get Morrow???)
Albers
Patton
Loewen
Guthrie
Cabrera
Burres
...

Bedard?????

These dominoes will have to fall close to each other or the entire roster flex will get funky.

We'll have a roster with 30 pitchers and 10 position players!!!! ;)

[Hank Scorpio]

Two pitchers in the Roberts deal so we can leave Morrow out of the Seattle deal??????

[RZNJ]

Sorry, I just don't like this. How many MLB plate appearances does a guy need before people stop mentioning his AAA numbers? (I guess 700 PAs isn't enough). He's a free-swinger with too many Ks. He would have to be absolutely brilliant in the field to even begin to justify a spot in a big league lineup. And it's not like he's a kid anymore. If he were going to start translating his MiL numbers into MLB success, it really should have started to happen last season. And it didn't.

Marshall, best case, pitches 170 innings near league average... and there's nothing wrong with that, if it happens. EDIT: If he goes into long relief as some have suggested, his value goes way down and this deal looks even more shaky.

And I do like Gallagher a lot. He probably becomes the best young pitcher in the system.

So to my mind, this is trading Roberts for a really good young SP prospect, a probable #4 or #5 SP, and a guy who will very likely have to be replaced before this team starts to go anywhere.

I wish Patterson or Murton were in it -- Patterson to me has the potential to be a huge steal for somebody -- but I would still do the deal, and really hope that Gallagher develops.

You were expecting Brandon Wood back for BRob or some stud SS prospect? You take chances. If Cedeno put up a .750 OPS last year, we wouldn't be able to get him. Patterson has an advantage over Cedeno. He hasn't been exposed at the ML level yet. He also doesn't have a clear position.

[clapdiddy]

Two pitchers in the Roberts deal so we can leave Morrow out of the Seattle deal??????
Yeah...maybe we'll see Tillman instead...and he won't have to be on the 40-man!

I sure hope this is what its leading to....I'm wondering if the deal would be Jones, Clement, Chen, and Tillman since we would be getting back Cedeno?

[El Gordo]

Yeah...maybe we'll see Tillman instead...and he won't have to be on the 40-man!

I sure hope this is what its leading to....I'm wondering if the deal would be Jones, Clement, Chen, and Tillman since we would be getting back Cedeno?They could be thinking of Cedeno as a 2B because they believe they already have their SS. Hoo Hooo Haaa Haaa BWWWAAAAAHHHAA!!:002_sbiggrin:

[clapdiddy]

They could be thinking of Cedeno as a 2B because they believe they already have their SS. Hoo Hooo Haaa Haaa BWWWAAAAAHHHAA!!:002_sbiggrin:
I'm not so sure that Cedeno is much of an upgrade from Hernandez. I'm not really thrilled with the deal, if it is on the table. I would prefer Patterson to Cedeno. I think he provides more offense.

[RZNJ]

I'm not so sure that Cedeno is much of an upgrade from Hernandez. I'm not really thrilled with the deal, if it is on the table. I would prefer Patterson to Cedeno. I think he provides more offense.


Based on? They are essentially the same age. Cedeno clearly outhit Patterson in AAA last year. Both have plate discipline problems. Cedeno has a position. Patterson? Maybe. Maybe not.

[Sports Guy]

This is completely wrong, there are many people here who will tell you they know the talent way better, just ask them.

Yea because I am sure AM will never ever make the wrong call. :rolleyes:

[clapdiddy]

Based on? They are essentially the same age. Cedeno clearly outhit Patterson in AAA last year. Both have plate discipline problems. Cedeno has a position. Patterson? Maybe. Maybe not.
You are looking at just last season. Look at their career OBP. Cedeno is a .329 in the minors and Patterson is a .365.

Look at the power numbers as well. Patterson hits quite a few more doubles and homers and also draws walks more frequently.

[Sports Guy]

Correct. I think some are overlooking Marshall's tendencies as a groundball guy. He's not going to strikeout a ton of guys, but he could stabilize a very uncertain back of our rotation.

His K rate AND HR rate are terrible...For a GB pitcher, his HR rate is very high.

And its not like his BB rate is low enough to justify his low BB rate.

On top of that, his numbers were in the NL, not AL.

You may be onto something though....May want this deal because of no Morrow....If no(ml ready) pitching comes back for Bedard, they may want depth from a BRob deal.

[markakis4pres]

Not sure if I like the deal or not, I think we could get more.

Gallagher is the only piece that I like.

If it was possible I would ask for Epat and Cedano, but I think the Cubs would only give up one, but maybe not.

I guess if it would come down to the deal of Gallagher, Cedano, and Marshall, I would do it.

Then I would go after Truinfel from the M's, I would rather take him then Clement (not sure if the M's value Truinfel or Clement better).

[markakis4pres]

His K rate AND HR rate are terrible...For a GB pitcher, his HR rate is very high.

And its not like his BB rate is low enough to justify his low BB rate.

On top of that, his numbers were in the NL, not AL.

You may be onto something though....May want this deal because of no Morrow....If no(ml ready) pitching comes back for Bedard, they may want depth from a BRob deal.

We should not be taking Marshall back because we want more depth.

We have plenty of depth as it is, especially since Gallagher is coming back.

Marshall is a long reliever at best.

[JohnnyK27]

[QUOTE=Pruke;1155717]Put me down in this camp.

I mean, how many major league pitchers can we have at any one time on the roster for cryin' out loud?

Gallagher
Marshall (does he come into the mix because we don't get Morrow???)
Albers
Patton
Loewen
Guthrie
Cabrera
Burres
...

Bedard?????

These dominoes will have to fall close to each other or the entire roster flex will get funky.

We'll have a roster with 30 pitchers and 10 position players!!!! ;)[/QU

I dont think they need to pitchers for Roberts Gallagher will do... If they did they should get a High Ceiling guy in the low minors who wouldn't have to be on the 40 man at this point!

The reason the Roberts deal hasn't been completely is said by rumor to be that AM wants to move Bedard first.

[tywright]

Tillman > Marshall

We should get a high ceiling prospect added in the deal...someone like Jose Ceda.

http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Jose%20Ceda&pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=469167

[RZNJ]

You are looking at just last season. Look at their career OBP. Cedeno is a .329 in the minors and Patterson is a .365.

Look at the power numbers as well. Patterson hits quite a few more doubles and homers and also draws walks more frequently.

Fine. I'll give you that Cedeno stunk until he got to AAA. However, he's performed well there in at least two different stints. That's not a fluke IMO. Also, there walk rates were pretty similar at AAA last year. If you want to look at career minor league numbers, you win. If you want to look at the last two years, then Cedeno has outhit Patterson at the highest level. How do you acount for the fact that Cedeno outhit Patterson by about 140 OPS points? SG would say it was luck. How about you?

BTW, how is this for progression in the minors.

Ronny Cedeno

2003 in A ball - 552 OPS
2004 in AA ball - 729 OPS
2005 in AAA balll -921 OPS
2007 in AAA ball - 957 OPS

He didn't do well in a full season in 2006 in the majors and lost his job after 74 AB's last year. Again, at leat we know he has a position he can play. I think he's worth taking a chance on. Patterson is the "sexier" prospect because he can run and because he hasn't been exposed yet, like 90% of the guys who come up.

[JohnnyK27]

Put me down in this camp.

I mean, how many major league pitchers can we have at any one time on the roster for cryin' out loud?

Gallagher
Marshall (does he come into the mix because we don't get Morrow???)
Albers
Patton
Loewen
Guthrie
Cabrera
Burres
...

Bedard?????

These dominoes will have to fall close to each other or the entire roster flex will get funky.

We'll have a roster with 30 pitchers and 10 position players!!!! ;)

I dont think they need 2 to pitchers for Roberts, Gallagher will do... If they did they should get a High Ceiling guy (potential #1) in the low minors who wouldn't have to be on the 40 man at this point!

The reason the Roberts deal hasn't been completely is said by rumor to be that AM wants to move Bedard first.

[Sports Guy]

I would also prefer EPat.

Cedeno has almost 700 ML ab's and his OPS isn't that much above 600. While that is still a small sample size and most of that was done at a young age, that is still a healthy amount of ab's to get an indication about him.

I think he would be a better player than LH but not enough to where I would want him to be a player in a BRob deal.

Cedeno only started hitting in the minors when he got to the PCL and his BABIP numbers are very very high in AAA so those numbers are inflated on many different levels.

He is supposed to be good defensively and maybe he is better now as he is older.

I just think he will be very disappointing for us...If we could get him in a seperate, smaller deal, that would be fine. But as part of a deal for BRob? No thanks.....Although I must say, i may prefer him to Marshall.

[Sports Guy]

Fine. I'll give you that Cedeno stunk until he got to AAA. However, he's performed well there in at least two different stints. That's not a fluke IMO. Also, there walk rates were pretty similar at AAA last year. If you want to look at career minor league numbers, you win. If you want to look at the last two years, then Cedeno has outhit Patterson at the highest level. How do you acount for the fact that Cedeno outhit Patterson by about 140 OPS points? SG would say it was luck. How about you?

A 30-50 point different in BABIP helps to explain that difference....His OBP is BA driven and obviously a high BABIP is going to help that.

Now, one thing I will say that I hadn't noticed before is that he showed better plate discipline this year..In fact, it was the best it ever has been. So, either he made an adjustment this year or he hit well enough that he got pitched around or it was just a fluke in a small sample size.

EDIT: Cedeno's BABIP this year, in AAA, was 404...EPat's was 322.

There is your difference RZ...That is a huge difference.

[clapdiddy]

Fine. I'll give you that Cedeno stunk until he got to AAA. However, he's performed well there in at least two different stints. That's not a fluke IMO. Also, there walk rates were pretty similar at AAA last year. If you want to look at career minor league numbers, you win. If you want to look at the last two years, then Cedeno has outhit Patterson at the highest level. How do you acount for the fact that Cedeno outhit Patterson by about 140 OPS points? SG would say it was luck. How about you?

Hey...hey...I'm a lover not a fighter! ;)

I dunno...seems odd that a guy goes from around a .600 OPS in his career to over a .900 at a higher level. Hey...maybe there's hope for LH yet! :D

Or...it could be that he devoted himself to the game a little more...maybe he "gets it" now. Maybe he's more mature and understands what he needs to do now.

I think I'd trust his first 1300 at bats a little more than his last 530.

[RZNJ]

Hey...hey...I'm a lover not a fighter! ;)

I dunno...seems odd that a guy goes from around a .600 OPS in his career to over a .900 at a higher level. Hey...maybe there's hope for LH yet! :D

Or...it could be that he devoted himself to the game a little more...maybe he "gets it" now. Maybe he's more mature and understands what he needs to do now.

I think I'd trust his first 1300 at bats a little more than his last 530.

It's a lot more than 530 if you count is AA season (.729 OPS) and his time in the majors. Even with his ML numbers being poor (low 600 OPS), seems odd that he could do even that if you think of him as a sub 600 guy in the minors. Of course BRob himself, wasn't much better his first 1,000 or so AB's in the majors.

[RZNJ]

A 30-50 point different in BABIP helps to explain that difference....His OBP is BA driven and obviously a high BABIP is going to help that.

Now, one thing I will say that I hadn't noticed before is that he showed better plate discipline this year..In fact, it was the best it ever has been. So, either he made an adjustment this year or he hit well enough that he got pitched around or it was just a fluke in a small sample size.

EDIT: Cedeno's BABIP this year, in AAA, was 404...EPat's was 322.

There is your difference RZ...That is a huge difference.


Wouldn't a guy who hits .350 always have a significantly higher BABIP than a guy who hits .280? Do you always just chalk that up to luck? Can you show me someone who hit 50 points higher than someone else and had the same BABIP? BTW, that's the second time Cedeno has put up a 900+ OPS in AAA. Pretty lucky, I guess.

[clapdiddy]

It's a lot more than 530 if you count is AA season (.729 OPS) and his time in the majors. Even with his ML numbers being poor (low 600 OPS), seems odd that he could do even that if you think of him as a sub 600 guy in the minors. Of course BRob himself, wasn't much better his first 1,000 or so AB's in the majors.
I just went and looked at BRob's minor league numbers, and he truly didn't have great stats (although his OBP of .377 lifetime isn't bad) anywhere over a full season. And...true...he really didn't become what I'd call a productive middle infield stick until he was 25 or so.

Good comparison on your part.

I guess I would still do this deal...I'd just prefer Patterson. I like his longer period of production moreso than Cedeno.

[bandy75]

Not sure if I like the deal or not, I think we could get more.

Gallagher is the only piece that I like.

If it was possible I would ask for Epat and Cedano, but I think the Cubs would only give up one, but maybe not.

I guess if it would come down to the deal of Gallagher, Cedano, and Marshall, I would do it.

Then I would go after Truinfel from the M's, I would rather take him then Clement (not sure if the M's value Truinfel or Clement better).

Does anyone have any idea how the Mariners value Triunfel? Would they add him to the deal? That could potentially be an awesome deal in a few years. I would add something to the deal to get back Jones, Clement, Truinfel

[Scribo]

Fine. I'll give you that Cedeno stunk until he got to AAA. However, he's performed well there in at least two different stints. That's not a fluke IMO. Also, there walk rates were pretty similar at AAA last year. If you want to look at career minor league numbers, you win. If you want to look at the last two years, then Cedeno has outhit Patterson at the highest level. How do you acount for the fact that Cedeno outhit Patterson by about 140 OPS points? SG would say it was luck. How about you?

BTW, how is this for progression in the minors.

Ronny Cedeno

2003 in A ball - 552 OPS
2004 in AA ball - 729 OPS
2005 in AAA balll -921 OPS
2007 in AAA ball - 957 OPS

He didn't do well in a full season in 2006 in the majors and lost his job after 74 AB's last year. Again, at leat we know he has a position he can play. I think he's worth taking a chance on. Patterson is the "sexier" prospect because he can run and because he hasn't been exposed yet, like 90% of the guys who come up.

Sorry, for predictive value, 700 MLB PAs trumps 600 at AAA every time. I mean, come on... MLB performance is what we try to predict with MiL numbers. At some point, if the MLB numbers don't work out, you have to start to conclude that the MiL stats just don't project in this case. If he were 21 years old, that's one thing. But he was 24 all of last year. It was his seventh pro season.

Last year was his third try at MLB, and he still couldn't cut it.

It's pretty funny, your previous post to me is very similar to one I made last week defending Patterson. I agree, if there weren't any questions, we wouldn't be getting either of these guys.

But 700 PAs goes a long way toward filling in the blanks, and the answers don't look good.

[Sports Guy]

Wouldn't a guy who hits .350 always have a significantly higher BABIP than a guy who hits .280? Do you always just chalk that up to luck? Can you show me someone who hit 50 points higher than someone else and had the same BABIP? BTW, that's the second time Cedeno has put up a 900+ OPS in AAA. Pretty lucky, I guess.

Cedeno isn't a 350 hitter. His career ML BA is 247...In the minors, it is 276.

His BABIP in his first AAA go around was 380 BTW.

Cedeno looks to be a 250/310/370 ML hitter at best IMO.

Way too much of a coincidence that his best seasons came in a great hitters league with very high BABIP numbers.

Now, i will acknowledge his ages, prior to this season, at the levels he was at and that is important and he did fair decent in a good pitchers league in AA.

So, that does need to be acknowleged.

If his defense is an elite level(this I am not really sure to be honest...have heard mixed reviews) and he can have a 650+ OPS, he will be a league average SS or even slightly better.

I just don't think both of those things will happen.

[RZNJ]

I would also prefer EPat.

Cedeno has almost 700 ML ab's and his OPS isn't that much above 600. While that is still a small sample size and most of that was done at a young age, that is still a healthy amount of ab's to get an indication about him.

I think he would be a better player than LH but not enough to where I would want him to be a player in a BRob deal.

Cedeno only started hitting in the minors when he got to the PCL and his BABIP numbers are very very high in AAA so those numbers are inflated on many different levels.

He is supposed to be good defensively and maybe he is better now as he is older.

I just think he will be very disappointing for us...If we could get him in a seperate, smaller deal, that would be fine. But as part of a deal for BRob? No thanks.....Although I must say, i may prefer him to Marshall.


Every argument you use to downgrade Cedeno can be used right back at you against Patterson. Patterson put up a mediocre .738 OPS in AA in 2006 and an .815 OPS in what you rightfully infer as the "hitter friendly" PCL. And for the umpteenth time, Cedeno at least has a position to play. Even if EPat is a slightly better hitter, what good does he do you if he can't play 2B or CF, and we don't know the answer to either. The fact is, that you're not going to get a younger, less expensive, but just as good IF, back as part of a package for BRob. You'd be lucky to get that straight up. The odds are against Cedeno but he has shown two things as he's progressed to the majors. Improvement and upside.

[Scribo]

Every argument you use to downgrade Cedeno can be used right back at you against Patterson. Patterson put up a mediocre .738 OPS in AA in 2006 and an .815 OPS in what you rightfully infer as the "hitter friendly" PCL. And for the umpteenth time, Cedeno at least has a position to play.

Patterson has not bombed at the MLB level over the equivalent of a season and a half.

Big difference.

And having a position to play doesn't really matter if you are putting up a .630 OPS.

[ChaosLex]

Not sure if I like the deal or not, I think we could get more.

I completely agree. Whatever happened to the Murton, E. Patterson, and Gallagher deal? I liked that deal a heck of a lot more.

[RZNJ]

Patterson has not bombed at the MLB level over the equivalent of a season and a half.

Big difference.

And having a position to play doesn't really matter if you are putting up a .630 OPS.


Two players of identical age. One puts up a .950 OPS at AAA. The other puts up an .817 OPS. Your argument is that Patterson is the better bet to succeed in the majors because Cedeno hasn't yet. Right?

[Sports Guy]

Every argument you use to downgrade Cedeno can be used right back at you against Patterson. Patterson put up a mediocre .738 OPS in AA in 2006 and an .815 OPS in what you rightfully infer as the "hitter friendly" PCL. And for the umpteenth time, Cedeno at least has a position to play. Even if EPat is a slightly better hitter, what good does he do you if he can't play 2B or CF, and we don't know the answer to either. The fact is, that you're not going to get a younger, less expensive, but just as good IF, back as part of a package for BRob. You'd be lucky to get that straight up. The odds are against Cedeno but he has shown two things as he's progressed to the majors. Improvement and upside.

We have seen enough reports to make me think he can be average defensively but he needs to work on it.

I have already shown you why your AAA argument is bad, so I will just move on from that.

Patterson has better plate discipline and more power. Patterson is also a much better base stealer.

Patterson did have a better OPS in AA than Cedeno did however he was 2 years older.

[RZNJ]

We have seen enough reports to make me think he can be average defensively but he needs to work on it.

I have already shown you why your AAA argument is bad, so I will just move on from that.

Patterson has better plate discipline and 1) more power. 2)Patterson is also a much better base stealer.

3)Patterson did have a better OPS in AA than Cedeno did however he was 2 years older.




3) Why even mention a .009 advantage? LOL
2) 24 SB and 9 caught in AAA. I hope it was a leg injury and not just better defensive catchers and pitchers.
1) Very similar power numbers at AAA in the same number of AB's


BTW, if all Paterson needs is work at 2B, what the hell has he been doing the last 3-4 years in the minors?

[NoVaO]

A 30-50 point different in BABIP helps to explain that difference....His OBP is BA driven and obviously a high BABIP is going to help that.

Now, one thing I will say that I hadn't noticed before is that he showed better plate discipline this year..In fact, it was the best it ever has been. So, either he made an adjustment this year or he hit well enough that he got pitched around or it was just a fluke in a small sample size.

EDIT: Cedeno's BABIP this year, in AAA, was 404...EPat's was 322.

There is your difference RZ...That is a huge difference.

Cedeno's BABIP may be artificially high, but BABIP for hitters is very different from BABIP for pitcher's.

While pitchers don't have that much control over BABIP and very high and very low BABIPs can be attributed to mostly luck, hitters do have control over BABIP.

So when you see an unusually high BABIP, they aren't automatically going to regress to the mean because BABIP is a skill for hitters.

Now, Cedeno's BABIP was unusually high, but it still looks like he has the ability to make hard, consistent contact. It hasn't translated yet, and perhaps never will, but I much prefer him to Patterson.

You didn't say this (Scribo did), but he has not had 3 chances to show himself as ready. He had 1 chance over an entire season when it was clear he was overmatched and not ready. The other two seasons were 80 and 74 ABs, hardly enough to qualify as a real opportunity.

In any case, he has certainly shown the ability to be a better hitter than Patterson. Both are basically the same age and Patterson had a .738 OPS in AA, and then an .817 OPS in AAA. However, Cedeno has the versatility to play both SS and 2b, something Patterson does not have.

And I have to add, I don't like the offer the Cubs could be sending. Marshall is at best a 4/5 starter in the AL and we have many of those. Murton is already an average/above average corner OF bat, which is something we definitely need. I would not do that Cubs deal. Taking Murton out is a deal breaker for me.

[El Gordo]

Fine. I'll give you that Cedeno stunk until he got to AAA. However, he's performed well there in at least two different stints. That's not a fluke IMO. Also, there walk rates were pretty similar at AAA last year. If you want to look at career minor league numbers, you win. If you want to look at the last two years, then Cedeno has outhit Patterson at the highest level. How do you acount for the fact that Cedeno outhit Patterson by about 140 OPS points? SG would say it was luck. How about you?

BTW, how is this for progression in the minors.

Ronny Cedeno

2003 in A ball - 552 OPS
2004 in AA ball - 729 OPS
2005 in AAA balll -921 OPS
2007 in AAA ball - 957 OPS

He didn't do well in a full season in 2006 in the majors and lost his job after 74 AB's last year. Again, at leat we know he has a position he can play. I think he's worth taking a chance on. Patterson is the "sexier" prospect because he can run and because he hasn't been exposed yet, like 90% of the guys who come up.I agree. We don't need Tejada II at SS, we need a guy who can give us at least LA defense and hit .700 OPS. There's a very good chance Cedeno can do that and maybe more.

[JTrea81]

I completely agree. Whatever happened to the Murton, E. Patterson, and Gallagher deal? I liked that deal a heck of a lot more.

I believe one of the Cubs players (Murton) was going to be flipped to another team, so maybe that team was the Reds and they are out. MacPhail must have found a 2B man that he liked better than Patterson and as our insiders have said Gallagher is part of any deal. I think this means Bedard will be traded to a team with a 2nd base prospect coming back, or has another trade lined up to get a 2nd baseman. Cedeno will likely compete with Hernandez for SS. I would assume as well that if we are acquiring Cedeno, that the Angels trade would be out unless we are flipping them Cedeno in the Bedard deal. So many scenarios here...

Hopefully Peace can enlighten us tomorrow...

[Sports Guy]

3) Why even mention a .009 advantage? LOL
2) 24 SB and 9 caught in AAA. I hope it was a leg injury and not just better defensive catchers and pitchers.
1) Very similar power numbers at AAA in the same number of AB's


BTW, if all Paterson needs is work at 2B, what the hell has he been doing the last 3-4 years in the minors?

Do you only look at a small number of ab's or an entire career?

[Scribo]

Two players of identical age. One puts up a .950 OPS at AAA. The other puts up an .817 OPS. Your argument is that Patterson is the better bet to succeed in the majors because Cedeno hasn't yet. Right?

My argument is that you have to start discounting a player's MiL numbers when they no longer line up with actual MLB results. And the longer they don't line up, the more you have to discount them.

I don't care if Cedeno had a 1.300 OPS at AAA if he can't hit at the next level up.

But if by "succeed in the majors" you mean "put up a better than .630 OPS in his first 700 appearances," then the answer is yes. Until he proves otherwise, Patterson's .817 does tell us that he should do better than .630 OPS. But if Patterson does put up a .630 OPS in 700 PAs then we will know that his MiL numbers didn't predict much.

For Cedeno, that question is already answered.

[JTrea81]

Who is better: Aybar or Cedeno? That last sentence I posted just got me thinking...

[Pruke]

I dont think they need 2 to pitchers for Roberts, Gallagher will do... If they did they should get a High Ceiling guy (potential #1) in the low minors who wouldn't have to be on the 40 man at this point!

The reason the Roberts deal hasn't been completely is said by rumor to be that AM wants to move Bedard first.

I understand the Bedard first, then Roberts concept. However, if we're done to the finer pieces of these deals and AM is working the return to fill in the holes, perhaps he can back off Morrow if he knows Marshall is coming back from the Cubs.

This sounds like they're getting close to dotting I's and crossing T's in terms of who will go where for what - ..... I hope

[Sports Guy]

Who is better: Aybar or Cedeno? That last sentence I posted just got me thinking...

I would prefer Aybar.

[Sports Guy]

My argument is that you have to start discounting a player's MiL numbers when they no longer line up with actual MLB results. And the longer they don't line up, the more you have to discount them.

I don't care if Cedeno had a 1.300 OPS at AAA if he can't hit at the next level up.

But if by "succeed in the majors" you mean "put up a better than .630 OPS in his first 700 appearances," then the answer is yes. Until he proves otherwise, Patterson's .817 does tell us that he should do better than .630 OPS. But if Patterson does put up a .630 OPS in 700 PAs then we will know that his MiL numbers didn't predict much.

For Cedeno, that question is already answered.

In Cedeno's defense, most of his ML ab's were in one year and he was very young that year and not ready to be in the majors.

There are some trends that you have to like but there are also too many coincidences as well.

Would love to see some scouting reports from the last few years...Also, be nice to hear about his defense at SS from the Cubs fans on here.

[Scribo]

In Cedeno's defense, most of his ML ab's were in one year and he was very young that year and not ready to be in the majors.

There are some trends that you have to like but there are also too many coincidences as well.

Would love to see some scouting reports from the last few years...Also, be nice to hear about his defense at SS from the Cubs fans on here.

Well, SG, he was 23, not exactly a kid.

And it was his 2nd try at the majors.

The "not ready" part is self-evident.

There was an excellent post this morning by a Cubs fans that did make his defense sound intriguing. If I recall: Great range leading to errors on balls most don't reach, very flashy, cannon for an arm.

[thundercleetz]

In Cedeno's defense, most of his ML ab's were in one year and he was very young that year and not ready to be in the majors.

There are some trends that you have to like but there are also too many coincidences as well.

Would love to see some scouting reports from the last few years...Also, be nice to hear about his defense at SS from the Cubs fans on here.

http://www.cubshub.com/?cat=12&paged=4

Bottom of the page is a very good scouting report on Cedeno. There is also a scouting report on Gallagher.