Orioles Reach Out To Prince Fielder's Representatives

[CA-ORIOLE]

Well, it is just an AM radio station in Milwaukee. Could be a little Milwaukee-centric... focused on their own issues (losing Fielder.)

True, and I don't see any other sources.

[Roll Tide]

I agree with this. I get so tired of people saying the Orioles should spend big money on a FA to "bring the fans back" or to show that they want to win. That's just BS. The fans will come back when the team is winning, and not before. If the Orioles add an expensive FA and the team still can't clear .500, I don't think that's going to cause people to pack Camden Yards.

So buying a big name free agent or two wouldn't help with the progress? I haven't been to a Orioles game since Angelos stopped trying back in the late 90s. If the Orioles added Fielder and Wilson they would be a better team. And it would increase the interest of the casual fan. That would put asses in the seats and cure the sagging attendance problem. Per Angelos's latest mouthpiece DD... He wants the crowd first before investing more money. Kinda backwards based on the crappy product he has given the fans for a long time.

[DrungoHazewood]

In your opinion what is the difference between Smoak and Davis worth? What player would you be willing to give up for that difference?

Of course this is all speculative at this point, but I think Smoak is likely to have a decent run of 4-5 years as a 3-ish win player, with some upside beyond that. I believe it's much less likely Davis does that because of his plate discipline issues. So... what's that... maybe four years of 2 wins difference, or 8 wins, times $5M, or $40M. Discount that by half for uncertainty and risk. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume Smoak has $20M in surplus value over Davis.

What's that? Maybe Guthrie and fair to middling prospect/player worth $5-10M?

If they're not liquidating the core, one would have to think we're looking to contend in that time frame and not looking at a major rebuild. Also, Wieters (assuming continued progress) should be a no brainer extension candidate.

I'm not so sure any catcher is a no-brainer to extend through his early-to-mid 30s. The 10 best HOF catchers in history were worth about a 5/125 deal starting on their 28th birthdays:

                                                                                                                                                             Rk             Player WAR/pos From   To   Age   G   PA   AB   R   H  2B 3B  HR RBI  BB IBB  SO HBP SH SF GDP  SB CS   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS       Pos          Tm1         Gary Carter    31.6 1982 1986 28-32 739 3137 2739 393 765 132  8 129 487 324  52 287  31  6 37  77   7  9 .279 .358 .475 .832   *2/3975     MON-NYM2     Mickey Cochrane    26.9 1931 1935 28-32 635 2734 2254 476 721 161 18  62 384 436   0 106  18 26  0   0  23 19 .320 .434 .490 .924      *2/7     PHA-DET3          Yogi Berra    25.4 1953 1957 28-32 709 2966 2631 419 751 114 18 130 528 288  23 134  20  6 21  48   5  8 .285 .358 .491 .848    *2/795         NYY4         Bill Dickey    25.1 1935 1939 28-32 632 2668 2335 422 741 137 23 116 541 306   0 108  19  8  0   9  12  5 .317 .401 .545 .946        *2         NYY5      Roy Campanella    22.5 1950 1954 28-32 652 2625 2326 379 657 110 11 146 487 274   0 268  15  9  1  84  15 12 .282 .362 .528 .889        *2         BRO6        Johnny Bench    21.1 1976 1980 28-32 641 2508 2176 306 565 106  4 116 404 297  34 410   6  4 25  48  27 12 .260 .347 .472 .819   *2/3795         CIN7        Carlton Fisk    20.6 1976 1980 28-32 665 2717 2392 398 680 130 18  91 352 248  18 339  41  9 27  51  40 18 .284 .358 .468 .826   *2/D735         BOS8          Buck Ewing    19.2 1888 1892 28-32 404 1763 1616 338 518  72 59  26 311 143   0 103   4  0  0   0 170  0 .321 .377 .486 .864 *2/354167     NYG-NYI9      Ernie Lombardi    17.6 1936 1940 28-32 609 2234 2070 236 668 123  6  74 381 139   0  80  19  6  0  99   2  0 .323 .371 .495 .866        *2         CIN10    Roger Bresnahan    16.6 1907 1911 28-32 491 1831 1472 211 395  70 22   8 183 290   0 114  18 51  0   0  57  0 .268 .395 .362 .757 *2/438517     NYG-STL11     Gabby Hartnett    13.1 1929 1933 28-32 544 2041 1806 246 530 111 12  74 341 200   0 225   3 32  0  17   5  0 .293 .365 .491 .856      *2/3         CHC12       Rick Ferrell     9.6 1934 1938 28-32 625 2430 2060 257 600 122 18  15 258 336   0  91   1 33  0   0   7 10 .291 .391 .390 .781        *2 BOS-TOT-WSH13   Wilbert Robinson     6.7 1891 1895 28-32 464 1859 1719 217 500  83 17   8 306 115   0 131   8 17  0   0  63  0 .291 .338 .373 .711     *2/39     BAL-BLN14         Ray Schalk     3.9 1921 1925 28-32 575 2047 1736 190 440  80 12   6 214 224   0 137  19 68  0   0  34 22 .253 .345 .324 .669        *2         CHW15           Al Lopez     3.4 1937 1941 28-32 516 1768 1592 150 399  57  7  20 185 136   0 170   3 37  0  55  15  0 .251 .311 .333 .644        *2 BSN-TOT-PIT16        Connie Mack     2.7 1891 1895 28-32 293 1158 1039 149 254  31  6   2 100  78   0  57  25 16  0   0  28  0 .244 .313 .292 .604    *2/397         PIT

And remember, that 5/125 deal is in retrospect. Going forward you have no way of knowing if the guy you're trying to extend is going to be Gary Carter or Gabby Hartnett. You have to discount for risk.

Joe Mauer's extension is more-or-less paying him to be the best catcher in history from age 28-on. I think like anything else you need to see how Wieters develops and how the market for him develops and then see if you can get him to sign something reasonable.

[DrungoHazewood]

So buying a big name free agent or two wouldn't help with the progress? I haven't been to a Orioles game since Angelos stopped trying back in the late 90s. If the Orioles added Fielder and Wilson they would be a better team. And it would increase the interest of the casual fan. That would put asses in the seats and cure the sagging attendance problem. Per Angelos's latest mouthpiece DD... He wants the crowd first before investing more money. Kinda backwards based on the crappy product he has given the fans for a long time.

Short term there's no way that comes anywhere close to breaking even. Maybe if you couple it with a lot of other changes and reforms and infusions of talent it works out in years 3 or 4 of Wilson and Fielder's deals. If they're still any good by then.

But to pay for about $45M in annual contract obligations to those two (and that's about what it would take to get them to come to Baltimore), you'd need to add roughly one million additional fans (assuming ~$50 in revenue per ticket, which may actually be high). Unless the O's are in contention late in the year I don't think the signing of those two adds half that. The year the O's signed Tejada and Lopez their attendance went up 300k, and that was only six years into the losing run.

[Orioles0615]

BTW if Seattle got Prince, I think it would be dumb for them to move Smoak when they can easily alternate them between DH and 1b

[MrOrange82]

BTW if Seattle got Prince, I think it would be dumb for them to move Smoak when they can easily alternate them between DH and 1b

Maybe they're looking at Prince like airlines look at "big and tall" customers. One guy, two positions (just not in the emergency exit row).

[DrungoHazewood]

BTW if Seattle got Prince, I think it would be dumb for them to move Smoak when they can easily alternate them between DH and 1b

Wily Mo Pena says hi!!!!

No, he doesn't have the DH job in Seattle. He's just friendly.

[Sports Guy]

BTW if Seattle got Prince, I think it would be dumb for them to move Smoak when they can easily alternate them between DH and 1b

Sure, they could do that.

But if you sign Fielder, you have to think there is at least something that says, we believe we can contend soon, whether it be in 2012 or 2013.

So, because of that, you can use Smoak to fill in other holes.

They would likely need to acquire someone who has a lot of service time or someone who is willing to sign an extension.

[MrOrange82]

Sure, they could do that.

But if you sign Fielder, you have to think there is at least something that says, we believe we can contend soon, whether it be in 2012 or 2013.

So, because of that, you can use Smoak to fill in other holes.

They would likely need to acquire someone who has a lot of service time or someone who is willing to sign an extension.

The Mariners had the worst offense in baseball last year, and their pitching was serviceable. It'd make next-to-no sense for them to trade Smoak, if they believe he's a legit MLer, simply because they sign Fielder.

[Sports Guy]

The Mariners had the worst offense in baseball last year, and their pitching was serviceable. It'd make next-to-no sense for them to trade Smoak, if they believe he's a legit MLer, simply because they sign Fielder.

Sure it makes sense...as long as they get more offense back.

[MrOrange82]

Sure it makes sense...as long as they get more offense back.

You have to think his upside is worth more to the M's than it would be in players they'd get back via trade. Smoak's approaching the end of "prospect" status, and he hasn't exactly lit it up through his first 886 ABs in the majors.

[Sports Guy]

You have to think his upside is worth more to the M's than it would be in players they'd get back via trade. Smoak's approaching the end of "prospect" status, and he hasn't exactly lit it up through his first 886 ABs in the majors.

Well, doesn't common sense say that if you don't get the right player(s) back in a deal where Smoak is involved, that you don't pull the trigger on the deal? Does that really need to be said?

[MrOrange82]

Well, doesn't common sense say that if you don't get the right player(s) back in a deal where Smoak is involved, that you don't pull the trigger on the deal? Does that really need to be said?

It needs to be said because so much OH discussion seems to revolve around him. So, to tally: (1) the M's need offense, and Smoak is an offensive player with upside; (2) IMO, it seems like the M's would be unlikely to get multiple, good, offensive players (which would be needed to truly address their biggest holes) in exchange for Smoak, given that he hasn't produced much at the ML level yet (i.e., the prospect shine might be wearing off a bit); (3) not mentioned above, but who do the Orioles have that the M's would actually want that'd make it "make sense" for the M's to trade Smoak, who you view as a potentially-impact, offensive player? Given that the M's would seemingly need more than one good, ML- or close-to-ML-ready, offensive player in return, the O's don't seem to match up at all.

All that needs to be said, so hopefully "Smoak" can be said less often.

[Sports Guy]

It needs to be said because so much OH discussion seems to revolve around him. So, to tally: (1) the M's need offense, and Smoak is an offensive player with upside; (2) IMO, it seems like the M's would be unlikely to get multiple, good, offensive players (which would be needed to truly address their biggest holes) in exchange for Smoak, given that he hasn't produced much at the ML level yet (i.e., the prospect shine might be wearing off a bit); (3) not mentioned above, but who do the Orioles have that the M's would actually want that'd make it "make sense" for the M's to trade Smoak, who you view as a potentially-impact, offensive player? Given that the M's would seemingly need more than one good, ML- or close-to-ML-ready, offensive player in return, the O's don't seem to match up at all.

All that needs to be said, so hopefully "Smoak" can be said less often.

Well, I think your opinion is wrong.

Whether Seattle chooses to go after pitching or offense for Smoak is to be determined.

However, if they did want hitting and say, wanted Adam Jones, you mean to tell me that Smoak can't be the primary player you have coming back for Jones?

[MrOrange82]

Well, I think your opinion is wrong.

Whether Seattle chooses to go after pitching or offense for Smoak is to be determined.

However, if they did want hitting and say, wanted Adam Jones, you mean to tell me that Smoak can't be the primary player you have coming back for Jones?

In that scenario, you're implying that the M's would be sending Smoak+ to the Orioles for Jones alone. Which, again, doesn't make much sense for a team looking to improve its offense. As for my personal "Jones trade" preference...it'd depend on whether Smoak was far-and-away the best player coming back. If he simply headlined a package of strong talent, that'd be fine, but if the ceilings on the rest were relatively low...no, I wouldn't like that. I'm not a huge Smoak fan.