Don't trade RLo.

[DrungoHazewood]

It's not whether their arm are worn down now. It's how they will be in mid August. A six man rotation may save arms.

Or it might throw them off their regular throwing routine and screw them all up.

It's kind of weird to think that Loewen and Cabrera can't handle 150 innings, and Penn whatever small amount he's going to throw this year. If they break down after that workload you have to wonder if it wasn't inevitable no matter how they were treated.

If you can find anything of value for Rodrigo you have to trade him. He's not going to be a type A free agent (or I'd be amazed if he was) and net the O's a couple good picks.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Let's just think about where this team is, we're not winning anything this year. So what the second half is really about is developing our young talent, and hopefully hording more of it. Rodrigo's not going to help us win games this year, and even if he did, what is 1 or 2 more wins on this team? So if the sole concern is wearing down young arms there's a very simple solution. Call up Burres, call up Johnson, let Birkins get a spot start. If they fail, so what? What is failing anyway? I would say a 6+ ERA is. So who would you rather fail? Rlo, or a guy who needs experience at this level, who is not under a lot of pressure to win now, but could help this team win in the near future?

[NewMarketSean]

Who cares if the young arms wear down... call up Burress. Trade Lopez to the Mets and get John Maine back in some kind of deal... he could help out the team later in the season as well, if your scenario does come true.

Trade Lopez now, because we'll be stuck with him again next year and then we'll REALLY have a problem when Loewen and Penn totally deserve a spot in the rotation over Lopez. Will we have to listen to him complain about being in the bullpen again?

[RShack]

I think we will see solid no. 4-5 type pitching from Rodrigo for as long as we keep him. I'm not sure why he started the year so badly, but he's been OK the last 7 weeks or so (2 stinkers and 7 pretty solid starts), and I think he will stay that way. Nothing great, but serviceable.

Exactly right. I like Loewen and Penn getting a chance, but we don't know that both of them will be servicable. There would be nothing surprising about needing another starter at some point, and I'd much rather have Rodrigo around than Ortiz.

If, as many suggest, Rodrigo won't net us much, then the only big reason for trading him before the off-season is to satisfy the "oooh, let's trade somebody" urge. If they can get somebody who actually adds value to the team this year and next, that's one thing. But this mad rush to make trades just for the sake of making trades is just silly. Doing that has become a fad around here, but it won't fix anything, and it could quite easily make things worse. You don't make trades to let some posters vent their spleen. You make trades to make the team better.

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

[PaulFolk]

Exactly right. I like Loewen and Penn getting a chance, but we don't know that both of them will be servicable.

But we do know that Rodrigo isn't serviceable. Not this year, at least. Penn/Loewen would likely be better than Lopez right now-- it's hard not to improve on a 6.77 ERA-- and they certainly are a much bigger part of this team's future than Rodrigo is.

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

I see that "punching bag" has become your latest meaningless buzzword. You seem to be overlooking the fact that Lopez, like Matos, has actually not been good. What part of our criticism of Lopez is unwarranted? (I asked you this on another thread and you didn't respond.) He has allowed three ER or less in only 5 of his 19 starts, whereas he has allowed six or more ER in seven of them. He has a 6.77 ERA. He leads all the majors in earned runs, and is tied for third in hits allowed.

So I ask, how exactly is Rodrigo helping the team? If you want him to eat up another start or two while Penn recovers from his appendicitis, fine. But there's no way Lopez should be on this team once August rolls around. He doesn't fit into the team's plans for the present or the future.

[Avsfan]

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

Punching Bags = crappy players, who don't deserve a roster spot?


Then I say..."Bruce Chen, you're the next player on the 'Price is Right'".

[Cokeman]

If the only reason for keeping Lopez is to spot start to take some innings off of the younger guys...we still have Chen to do that. I'm not saying anything about results, I'm just saying that he can take a few starts if that is why anyone wants to keep Lopez. Birkins was also a starter in the minors, so he could do the same thing. There is just no reason to keep Lopez soley for that purpose.

[NewMarketSean]

Exactly right. I like Loewen and Penn getting a chance, but we don't know that both of them will be servicable. There would be nothing surprising about needing another starter at some point, and I'd much rather have Rodrigo around than Ortiz.

Either one of them could do what Lopez does now. Lopez AND Ortiz both shouldn't be on this team much longer.

If, as many suggest, Rodrigo won't net us much, then the only big reason for trading him before the off-season is to satisfy the "oooh, let's trade somebody" urge. If they can get somebody who actually adds value to the team this year and next, that's one thing. But this mad rush to make trades just for the sake of making trades is just silly. Doing that has become a fad around here, but it won't fix anything, and it could quite easily make things worse. You don't make trades to let some posters vent their spleen. You make trades to make the team better.

Maybe you're OK with 9 straight losing seasons but I'm not. And until we start making trades and upgrading the talent on this team, we'll get more of the same. No one is saying to trade valuable players -- UNLESS THEY GIVE US A GOOD CHANCE TO MAKE THE TEAM BETTER.

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

Yes, I do feel better because Matos was a bum, and has been a bum since his flukey 2003 second half. And I don't want bums on my team.

[DrungoHazewood]

Exactly right. I like Loewen and Penn getting a chance, but we don't know that both of them will be servicable. There would be nothing surprising about needing another starter at some point, and I'd much rather have Rodrigo around than Ortiz.

If, as many suggest, Rodrigo won't net us much, then the only big reason for trading him before the off-season is to satisfy the "oooh, let's trade somebody" urge. If they can get somebody who actually adds value to the team this year and next, that's one thing. But this mad rush to make trades just for the sake of making trades is just silly. Doing that has become a fad around here, but it won't fix anything, and it could quite easily make things worse. You don't make trades to let some posters vent their spleen. You make trades to make the team better.

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

I think you're forgetting that baseball is a meritocracy. You earn your right to play by playing well, or by having a reasonable expectation of playing well in the future.

Since April 1st, 2005 Rodrigo Lopez has a 5.55 ERA. He's a replacement-level pitcher. He's performing about as well as a minimum-salaried journeyman.

Since April 1st, 2004 Luis Matos has a .248/.306/.351 line, good for a .657 OPS. Over 900 plate appearances, not some flukey small sample. He's a replacement-level player with an attitude problem, and has been replaced by a younger player of similar talent, better makeup, and lower salary.

Teams cut poor players all the time. At some point you have to conclude that a good performance two or three years ago has little chance of repeating. The only surprise here is that the Orioles took/are taking so long to cut these players.

[Cokeman]

People wanted Matos gone. He's gone. Feel better? No. It's just time to move on to the next punching bag, that's all.

As a matter of fact, I really do feel better. I have mentioned it before that I am beginning to see the O's cut bait a little quicker this year with some players than they have in the past. Brower and Halama are gone, and replaced with younger guys in the bullpen who are working out pretty well...of course, if they had listened to me during the off-season, they wouldn't have spent a dime bringing anyone in for our bullpen and would have went with the younger arms already in our system to begin with. Anyway, now Matos is gone...as many have said it isn't a big move, but I think its still a big step in the right direction.

[RShack]

So I ask, how exactly is Rodrigo helping the team? If you want him to eat up another start or two while Penn recovers from his appendicitis, fine. But there's no way Lopez should be on this team once August rolls around. He doesn't fit into the team's plans for the present or the future.

I agree that he doesn't fit with the future. I disagree that he has no role in the present. It is entirely plausible that we will need a starter in the 2nd half in addition to the usual names. Neither Loewen nor Penn are even here right now. If we need an extra guy, I would much rather it be Rodrigo than Ortiz. Rodrigo at least pitches great sometimes (like he did yesterday). I'm also fine with trading him *if* we get good value for him. But this "give him away" and "addition by subtraction" stuff is just silly.

[RShack]

I see that "punching bag" has become your latest meaningless buzzword.

It is not a meaningless buzzword. It is an entirely apt description of how some players are consistently mis-evaluated around here. It is often accompanied by cherry-picking data to make them look as bad as possible.

If you want meaningless buzzwords, howsabout "addition by subtraction", "trade him for a bag of balls", and other silly things like that?

[mikezpen]

If you can get anything worthwhile for Rodrigo, trade him. You have Birkins who was a starter at Ottawa, plus some folks there and Dubose at Bowie if you're desperate enough.

Matt Riley was overstressed but not because the Orioles desperately needed starters.He was the team's best prospect, and he was called up here to generate interest in a boring, mediocre ballclub.I always heard that Ray Miller was overruled "from above" when he opposed that call-up. (Riley had pitched a lot at Bowie and his numbers were declining at that point.)

I can imagine just who "above" ordered that ridiculous-and ultimately disasterous-move.

[DrungoHazewood]

It is not a meaningless buzzword. It is an entirely apt description of how some players are consistently mis-evaluated around here. It is often accompanied by cherry-picking data to make them look as bad as possible.

If you want meaningless buzzwords, howsabout "addition by subtraction", "trade him for a bag of balls", and other silly things like that?

Mis-evaluate (verb): To evaluate someone or something in a manner inconsistent with the opinions of rshackelford.

[PaulFolk]

It is not a meaningless buzzword. It is an entirely apt description of how some players are consistently mis-evaluated around here. It is often accompanied by cherry-picking data to make them look as bad as possible.

The only mis-evaluation in this case is on your end. As Jon pointed out, Rodrigo has a 5.55 ERA since the start of the '05 season, and he's been dreadful this year. Yet you want to keep him around because the O's will "need another starter"? If you trade Lopez and you discover that Loewen and/or Penn isn't ready yet, then you can rather easily replace him with any number of journeymen bouncing around the majors or minors, and at minimal cost. Why would you want to keep a guy with a 6.77 ERA in the rotation any longer than necessary? How does that help anyone?

People are criticizing Rodrigo (like Matos before him) because he deserves criticism. Does that make him a "punching bag"?