Keith Law hating on the Orioles big time.

[DrungoHazewood]

The only difference between Keith Law and the posters on the OH is that he has a national forum to discuss his opinions, and ours are hidden on a message board.

Well, that and the fact that he worked in the front office for the Blue Jays, is a member of the BBWAA (don't know if that's a plus or a minus) and has been paid to write about baseball for years.

I respect a lot of the opinions and knowledge of posters on the Hangout, but it's kind of crazy to say a guy who was on staff of a major league team doesn't really have a leg up on a random guy on a messageboard.

[El Gordo]

I guess we will see which of the FA get traded for "high quality" prospects. I'd love to be wrong -- would be great to get younger at the mid-seasons mark.

Hopefully we won't want to trade them at mid season.

[Stotle]

Despite your evidence here, I agree with Hoosiers. Generally you'll have a higher hit rate when trading for established MiL players as opposed to what you get in the draft, with the exception of perhaps the top 5-ish picks in the first round.

Well, is that really true? $8.5 million doesn't buy one amateur talent. It's an entire draft class for some. I disagree that you are more likely to hit with a top 40-60 overall prospect.

The tradeoff isn't Vlad + prospect vs amateur talent. it is:

Vlad + 40-60 prospect (potentially, who knows what will be out there on the trade market)

AND

Combination of 4 over slot signings of $700 K or more, two international signings of $2 million.

I will gladly roll the dice on 6 high quality amateur talents vs one MiL player that may or may not be high quality, depending on if Vlad has any trade value and what that trade value is. Heck, if you want to be a little more conservative on the int'l front, you could sign 6 - 8 $500K talents rather than spending on any of the seven-figure kids. You just aren't going to convince me that BAL isn't better off with that than they are with Vlad pushing them to MAYBE mid-80s in the win column (which also requires a number of other things going right).

[Fan4Life]

I guess we will see which of the FA get traded for "high quality" prospects. I'd love to be wrong -- would be great to get younger at the mid-seasons mark.

Isn't a prospect a A/AA with at least a couple seasons experience and having numbers that a good-very good for that level considering age etc, a better risk than a drafted prospect that has never seen pro ball? (Assuming we're not talking about a #1-5 pick).

[DrungoHazewood]

Isn't a prospect a A/AA with at least a couple seasons experience and having numbers that a good-very good for that level considering age etc, a better risk than a drafted prospect that has never seen pro ball? (Assuming we're not talking about a #1-5 pick).

Yes. But I think it's an open question as to whether anyone is going to give up a A/AA level player with good/very good numbers for that level for two or three months of a 36-year-old DH.

[Fan4Life]

Well, is that really true? $8.5 million doesn't buy one amateur talent. It's an entire draft class for some. I disagree that you are more likely to hit with a top 40-60 overall prospect.

The tradeoff isn't Vlad + prospect vs amateur talent. it is:

Vlad + 40-60 prospect (potentially, who knows what will be out there on the trade market)

AND

Combination of 4 over slot signings of $700 K or more, two international signings of $2 million.

I will gladly roll the dice on 6 high quality amateur talents vs one MiL player that may or may not be high quality, depending on if Vlad has any trade value and what that trade value is. Heck, if you want to be a little more conservative on the int'l front, you could sign 6 - 8 $500K talents rather than spending on any of the seven-figure kids. You just aren't going to convince me that BAL isn't better off with that than they are with Vlad pushing them to MAYBE mid-80s in the win column (which also requires a number of other things going right).

Okay I see your point here. I was looking at prospects versus prospects comparison.

[Dipper9]

Well, that and the fact that he worked in the front office for the Blue Jays, is a member of the BBWAA (don't know if that's a plus or a minus) and has been paid to write about baseball for years.

I respect a lot of the opinions and knowledge of posters on the Hangout, but it's kind of crazy to say a guy who was on staff of a major league team doesn't really have a leg up on a random guy on a messageboard.

My point is his entire piece is an opinion story.

There are tons of guys who have been in baseball whose opinion I could wipe my hind parts with, but that said, I hear what you're saying!

[hoosiers]

Well, is that really true? $8.5 million doesn't buy one amateur talent. It's an entire draft class for some. I disagree that you are more likely to hit with a top 40-60 overall prospect.

The tradeoff isn't Vlad + prospect vs amateur talent. it is:

Vlad + 40-60 prospect (potentially, who knows what will be out there on the trade market)

AND

Combination of 4 over slot signings of $700 K or more, two international signings of $2 million.

I will gladly roll the dice on 6 high quality amateur talents vs one MiL player that may or may not be high quality, depending on if Vlad has any trade value and what that trade value is. Heck, if you want to be a little more conservative on the int'l front, you could sign 6 - 8 $500K talents rather than spending on any of the seven-figure kids. You just aren't going to convince me that BAL isn't better off with that than they are with Vlad pushing them to MAYBE mid-80s in the win column (which also requires a number of other things going right).

Thanks, Captain Obvious. Who is disputing that the $ put into Vlad might better be served to be put entirely into incremental amateur talent spend?

[Arthur_Bryant]

The Rangers offered Vlad 8.5 million early in the offseason, and he turned them down trying to get a two year deal. Texas DID want to keep him.

I think you are wrong about this. The Rangers declined a $9MM option on Guerrero on Nov. 3.

They may have wanted him, but not at that price.

[ce4v20]

I don't post on this board a lot, but I read it everyday. The biggest thing that I have noticed about this board is people are so consumed by all the bad things the national media has to say about the O's. My question is, who cares what they say? They get paid to write their opinions on websites or in newspapers, so let them. As the people who pay to get in the game all that matter is that we are happy with our team is doing to get better and the direction they are headed. Honestly, after 13 years of losing do we deserve to get a favorable opinion from these guys with our proving we are a quality team first? Lastly, for every writer out there who does not like what the O's did this off season there is one who does like it. So if you don't like to read the bad stuff then don't find the good stuff. GO ORIOLES

[JTrea81]

I guess we will see which of the FA get traded for "high quality" prospects. I'd love to be wrong -- would be great to get younger at the mid-seasons mark.

Only if we aren't competing.

I'd rather see us keep everybody because that means we are likely winning and in the playoff race.

It's about time this team finally looks to add at the deadline, rather than subtract...

The last time we had an opportunity to do that was in 2005.

And if Lee and Vlad are hitting well, I'd rather just hang on to them for 2012 considering we aren't going after Pujols, Fielder or trading for Morneau.

[carolinaoriole]

The Rangers offered Vlad 8.5 million early in the offseason, and he turned them down trying to get a two year deal. Texas DID want to keep him.

The cool thing about this is that Vlad took less money to come to Baltimore:rofl:

[Stotle]

Thanks, Captain Obvious. Who is disputing that the $ put into Vlad might better be served to be put entirely into incremental amateur talent spend?

Why so angry?

[Stotle]

Okay I see your point here. I was looking at prospects versus prospects comparison.

That was the comparison hoosiers was making -- I just don't think it was a particularly meaningful one.

[SrMeowMeow]

3. Any dollar spent on free agents is a dollar that cannot be spent on amateurs.

Most of you disagree with two or all three of these. Personally, I am agnostic on 1 and 2. I think it can go either way and it really depends on the team, the manager, and a lot of other things.

But number 3 is absolutely, unequivocally correct.

I do disagree with this...absolutely and unequivocally. History just doesn't bear it out.