Roch: Pitching looking like a priority this offseason

[Sanfran327]

The only problem is that we're "behind the curve" with virtually every notable young player in our organization. They've all been exposed and devalued already. It sounds to me like he's talking about Tillman, but I say that quote is most relevant to Pie. And in another category, not trading Guthrie and Scott last offseason or earlier this year was a missed opportunity as well. But at this point, trading off someone like Tillman is pointless because his potential and age make him a better gamble to keep vs what you'll get for him. I wonder if there's a trade that we walked away from that would have been beneficial had we not been more honest with ourselves.

I'm not too thrilled that it continues to look like Reimold is not well liked by Buck. He had the 4th highest OPS on the team despite having inconsistent playing time. Yes, we were behind the curve when it mattered. But let's not compound the mistake by trading off young players with some potential to become regulars without giving them a full season to re-establish value. Nobody is thinking of 2012 as a contending year. So let's be honest with ourselves and give Reimold and Davis 500 at bats next year between LF, DH and 1B. They aren't likely the long term answer for us, but you have to commit to some players if you want to build value from what you already have. For an organization that is thin on talent, we pissed away Luke Scott, Felix Pie, Pedro Beato and Justin Turner for absolutely no return. Not earth shattering, but also not a move in the right direction.

Until we've got enough talent to contend, we should stay in the mode of accumulation and development of talent. We acquired Strop and Davis during the season, and developed Andino and Patton. A team that is in our state should be doing far more to acquire and establish value. I guess my point is that we already missed the bus on being ahead of the curve. I think being honest with yourself means admitting that we have to forget about the Guerrero's and Lee's of the world and start looking for some blocked prospects in other organizations that we can get cheap and throw regular playing time their way. I'm all for going after Darvish or Wilson....or Fielder. But we have to commit ourselves to youth as well and not split a position like LF between Reimold, Pie, Scott, Fox, Angle and Hudson again...with nobody getting more that 267 ABs. Either find an established player who can produce better than league average at the position or commit to youth there.

Holy smokes... what do people think we are/were gonna get for these guys?? I don't think many teams were gonna beat down the door for Luke Scott. He's not an attractive trade target, because he doesn't do one thing really well, nor does he do several things kinda well. He's a C+ type of player at best.

As for Guthrie, I still can't figure out why people want to trade him. We have no SPs to begin with, so why trade from an area where you're so thin? Is some other team going to give up two Guthries to get one Guthrie? Because that's what we need. I don't see the logic. We need quality AND quantity. We're just fine on warm bodies, which is pretty much the price tag on Guts and Scott.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Holy smokes... what do people think we are/were gonna get for these guys?? I don't think many teams were gonna beat down the door for Luke Scott. He's not an attractive trade target, because he doesn't do one thing really well, nor does he do several things kinda well. He's a C+ type of player at best.

As for Guthrie, I still can't figure out why people want to trade him. We have no SPs to begin with, so why trade from an area where you're so thin? Is some other team going to give up two Guthries to get one Guthrie? Because that's what we need. I don't see the logic. We need quality AND quantity. We're just fine on warm bodies, which is pretty much the price tag on Guts and Scott.

I gathered he was talking about trading those two players previously (not now) when their value was higher.... for more depth. I tend to agree with you about keeping both of them at this point as their values are low. Scott had a fine year last year (902 OPS), has a career OPS+ of 117 and has shown he can play a decent LF, so I'm not sure I agree about him having had such little value.

[GoldGlove21]

I gathered he was talking about trading those two players previously (not now) when their value was higher.... for more depth. I tend to agree with you about keeping both of them at this point as their values are low. Scott had a fine year last year (902 OPS), has a career OPS+ of 117 and has shown he can play a decent LF, so I'm not sure I agree about him having had such little value.

Scott is not a prospect and he is not cheap. He made $6.4M last season and was injured for most of the season. How much is a left fielder who plays average defense, is aging, is expensive and just came off of a an injury plagued season worth? If I am the Orioles I do not spend the $6M+ needed to bring Scott back in 2012. I would rather see that money used on a premium player that can help this team 3 or 4 years down the road. If we are not going that route than put the money into the draft or international markets.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Scott is not a prospect and he is not cheap. He made $6.4M last season and was injured for most of the season. How much is a left fielder who plays average defense, is aging, is expensive and just came off of a an injury plagued season worth? If I am the Orioles I do not spend the $6M+ needed to bring Scott back in 2012. I would rather see that money used on a premium player that can help this team 3 or 4 years down the road. If we are not going that route than put the money into the draft or international markets.

Where did I say Scott was a prospect? He's not been injury prone in the past and his production except for last year has been solid. I'm not sure we have to pay him 6 mil (I think hed be cheaper) or that we should even offer him arbitration to bring him back as the DH. Even if we did, look what we got at DH this year for 8 mil? If we sign Scott we don't have to lose a comp pick. Who is this premium FA player you're talking about that's going to help us 3-4 years down the line and at what projected cost? I like Willingham, but at this point I'd settle for 1 year of Scott than a 2/3 year deal on Willingham. Be much cheaper. I'm all for plowing money in player development etc. but we do have to field a team.

[scOtt]

Scott is not a prospect and he is not cheap. He made $6.4M last season and was injured for most of the season. How much is a left fielder who plays average defense, is aging, is expensive and just came off of a an injury plagued season worth? If I am the Orioles I do not spend the $6M+ needed to bring Scott back in 2012. I would rather see that money used on a premium player that can help this team 3 or 4 years down the road. If we are not going that route than put the money into the draft or international markets.

I'd like to see us not offer arbitration to Scott, then re-sign him @ about $4 million plus big incentives. I'd like to see this offense with Luke, Hardy and Reynolds hitting just their career averages. Add a first or third baseman and I'd be fine on the offensive side.

[GoldGlove21]

I'd like to see us not offer arbitration to Scott, then re-sign him @ about $4 million plus big incentives. I'd like to see this offense with Luke, Hardy and Reynolds hitting just their career averages. Add a first or third baseman and I'd be fine on the offensive side.

I am not saying that I wouldn't bring Scott back for $4M plus incentives, but big incentives? How big? Comparing what we got from the DH spot last year from what Scott COULD bring is an example of getting what you pay for. I am not sure that Scott scares anyone unless he is on one of his red-hot streaks.

[GoldGlove21]

Where did I say Scott was a prospect? He's not been injury prone in the past and his production except for last year has been solid. I'm not sure we have to pay him 6 mil (I think hed be cheaper) or that we should even offer him arbitration to bring him back as the DH. Even if we did, look what we got at DH this year for 8 mil? If we sign Scott we don't have to lose a comp pick. Who is this premium FA player you're talking about that's going to help us 3-4 years down the line and at what projected cost? I like Willingham, but at this point I'd settle for 1 year of Scott than a 2/3 year deal on Willingham. Be much cheaper. I'm all for plowing money in player development etc. but we do have to field a team.

I think there are a lot of players like Scott in the game. The best scenario for would be for Scott to have a great year and us deal him for a quality prospect or two. I am concerned with cost to some extent, but if we do not use saved money for other areas than I could care less what the Orioles spend. We have to field a team? Fielding a team is simple, but fielding a quality is another story. The Orioles can spend money, but they have failed at putting quality teams on the field.

[scOtt]

I am not saying that I wouldn't bring Scott back for $4M plus incentives, but big incentives? How big? Comparing what we got from the DH spot last year from what Scott COULD bring is an example of getting what you pay for. I am not sure that Scott scares anyone unless he is on one of his red-hot streaks.

I don't know exactly, but I mean big. Enough to get him to sign for less guaranteed. I like that because if he produces you don't mind paying the man. Put up or shut up.

[weams]

Teams don't give up number 2 pitchers cheaply. BOS/NY pay 15-18 mil for old ones on long term deals.

You are so right. Only they are at best number threes.

[wildcard]

One thing that is in this article and has not been talked about is this:

"The first place you're always going to look is from within"

The O's have Guthrie, Britton, Arrieta, Matusz and Hunter. This quote makes it sound like Jim Johnson goes into ST competing for a starter's role. That makes 6 starters.

This quote sounds like Tillman:

But through that process, you also have to be willing to identify that maybe this one is not going to happen.

Tillman is a fly ball pitcher trying to make the majors in a smallish hitters park. Trade him to a big park like to the Dodgers, Padres, Twins, Mariners or any other larger pitchers park, and he might do very well. If the O's can get an established starter in a salary dump for Tillman then they would have 7 starters.

Buck said he wants 10 starters. Maybe Simon is 8th. That leaves two more. I don't think Bergy or Reyes fit as starters next year. Reyes may be a long reliever. Bergy is out of options and probably needs to be traded. Bascom is probably added to the 40 man roster but he probably projects as a reliever. I doubt VandenHurk makes the 40 man roster. He is very inconsistent.

That leaves the O's looking for two guys that can start and maybe relieve or be in the minors. Plus a closer to complete the pitching staff.

I doubt we see a Wilson or some FA of that caliber signing with a 90+ loss team. The O's need another way to build. MacPhail's trade of young, cheap players for salary dump players similar to the Hardy and Reynolds trades may be a path.

I still believe Britton, Matusz and Arrieta will develop into high ceiling starters. They should go into ST fighting for rotation spots with them needing to earn their slot. The O's need enough guys competing that two or three of them can fail to win a rotation spot and the team will still have enough depth to have a good rotation. That is the goal for the offseason IMO.

I have no problem with any of these starters ending up in the pen or in AAA.

[jabba72]

Pitching has to be a priority. It should be every year. Our rotation is non existent. No nuggets, so to speak, and only one average innings eater, who never gets runs support anyway.

[Sanfran327]

I did not realize the Scott's OPS got over .900 last year. I would say that that qualifies as a big bat, but we know what Scott is at this point. I would definitely consider bringing him back as our DH assuming that Reimold can be at least average in LF. Still means we need a corner infielder, but Luke can be a high value signing, especially if we non tender him and workout a different 2 year deal.

[wildcard]

I did not realize the Scott's OPS got over .900 last year. I would say that that qualifies as a big bat, but we know what Scott is at this point. I would definitely consider bringing him back as our DH assuming that Reimold can be at least average in LF. Still means we need a corner infielder, but Luke can be a high value signing, especially if we non tender him and workout a different 2 year deal.

Shoulder injuries are tough. Until he can show he is strong, recovered and can hit with power I hope the O's don't spend much money on him. A low salary with incentives would make some sense. However, the O's need another alternative at DH in case Scott can't come back strong.

[Sanfran327]

Shoulder injuries are tough. Until he can show he is strong, recovered and can hit with power I hope the O's don't spend much money on him. A low salary with incentives would make some sense. However, the O's need another alternative at DH in case Scott can't come back strong.

Reimold?

[wildcard]

Reimold?

Reimold had a terrible 2010 and did not do very well at AAA in 2011. He got hot for about a week to 10 days and they promoted him. He got 267 at bats in about a four months. I'd say he got a pretty good look and showed some power and speed but low averages. That is a very good look for a guy that had a 739 OPS at AAA this year.

I doubt if he gets promoted if Buck didn't want to see him. And I doubt if he gets that much playing time if Buck does not want to give him a chance.

Reimold's problems have been of his own making. As has been any success that he has had.