Some stuff

[Birds08]

This is a pointless semantic argument, but even if what you're saying is 100% accurate, it's still the O's waiting on the M's/Dodgers.

Obviously I don't mean 100% instantaneous. I mean something could come together within a few hours. And obviously for the O's to execute a trade the Ms or Dodgers would have to agree - I think you were missing my point. Regardless, this is not really a point worth discussing further. Hopefully Kuroda just signs within 24 hrs.

[weemnj]

That's not a very compelling argument when the subject is 29 years old.

Odds are good that 2007 was his career year.

What possible graph are you looking at?---Man you are normally a slightly negative voice of reason----but not here. Look at his trends----Bedard finally "got it" and, short of injury, will probably have "it" for 4 or 5 years.

[davearm]

That could be true, but the point is are other teams willing to take the risk that he can maintain that dominance? Chances are if he moves to the NL, especially in a pitchers park such as Chavez Ravine, he would have a pretty good shot. I would say the three teams involved for him all have favorable environments for him to pitch in so I think he's got a good shot at repeating his success moreso than if he stayed with the Orioles.

I can certainly get onboard with that.

Bedard could pitch a little worse, but still see his numbers improve for the reasons you state.

Not sure if that qualifies as him "getting better," but frankly it's not worth wasting any more bandwidth on IMO.

[Sports Guy]

Why do you do this? Obviously, there's no way to know if, over the course of the next several years, Bedard will be "one of the best" or "the best" left-handed pitcher in the game. He was utterly dominant when healthy this year. He was very good last year. He's obviously on the short-list of guys who could be considered upper-echelon pitchers, right- or left-handed.

Further, there's nothing in his numbers that scream fluke - his numbers are dominant. High K-Rates, low hit rates, good command. Combine that with the fact that he was a bit unlucky on HRs this year, and you've got the markings of success.

He might not be THIS good next year, but that still leaves plenty of margin for error. Further, playing in LA, in cavernous Chavez Ravine, in the weaker NL, there's a strong chance that Bedard would stake a claim to exactly what you'd like to deny him.

But you know all this. You're just trying to stir up trouble because that's what you do. You troll under the guise of objectivity. And you've been doing it for years, here. Don't get me wrong, you bring a lot of good stuff to the table. But this is the least attractive part of your presence. It's just plain tacky.

Nah, Dave just thinks he is a solid #2...A lot of #2 pitchers dominate like Bedard does...Dime a dozen.

[JTrea81]

Exactly. Of course anybody could use a guy like Bedard, but not at more expense of your primary weakness.

Well if they trade Kershaw, LaRoche, Hu and Abreu or DeWitt, they have only traded depth and haven't effected the major league club any. Kershaw is going be blocked, LaRoche is Nomar's backup, Hu is the heir to Furcal, but they still have another good SS prospect. Abreu is blocked by Kent and is redundant with Young and DeWitt. The Dodgers have ridiculous depth to pull this off if they really wanted to go for it. They signed Andruw Jones, so why not go all the way and get Bedard instead of a 4th starter that may be your worst pitcher on the squad. The Dodgers have to decide if they are going to make a run or not...

[davearm]

If the guy (Bedard) actually had a decent bullpen behind him and some good run support he would be a 20 game winner. The Dodgers have that dont they?

Peace you're smarter than to construct an argument around Wins and Losses.

[Peace21]

Peace you're smarter than to construct an argument around Wins and Losses.

Im only saying that he will get better, and will thrive in a different system.

[davearm]

Why do you do this? Obviously, there's no way to know if, over the course of the next several years, Bedard will be "one of the best" or "the best" left-handed pitcher in the game. He was utterly dominant when healthy this year. He was very good last year. He's obviously on the short-list of guys who could be considered upper-echelon pitchers, right- or left-handed.

Further, there's nothing in his numbers that scream fluke - his numbers are dominant. High K-Rates, low hit rates, good command. Combine that with the fact that he was a bit unlucky on HRs this year, and you've got the markings of success.

He might not be THIS good next year, but that still leaves plenty of margin for error. Further, playing in LA, in cavernous Chavez Ravine, in the weaker NL, there's a strong chance that Bedard would stake a claim to exactly what you'd like to deny him.

But you know all this. You're just trying to stir up trouble because that's what you do. You troll under the guise of objectivity. And you've been doing it for years, here. Don't get me wrong, you bring a lot of good stuff to the table. But this is the least attractive part of your presence. It's just plain tacky.

I was on a Cub board about an hour ago.

Someone there pointed out the fact that in mid-2006, Bedard had an ERA of over 5.

That's not too long ago. And it wasn't based on 1 or 2 bad starts early in the year.

Suffice it to say that I don't think my skepticism when it comes to Bedard is completely unwarranted and irrational.

[Sports Guy]

I was on a Cub board about an hour ago.

Someone there pointed out the fact that in mid-2006, Bedard had an ERA of over 5.

That's not too long ago. And it wasn't based on 1 or 2 bad starts early in the year.

Suffice it to say that I don't think my skepticism when it comes to Bedard is completely unwarranted and irrational.

Not that I would expect you to actual do something like look at stats or anything but that ERA was 4.18 in mid May and it jumped after he had 2 bad starts in which he gave up 14 runs in about 9 IP....It was a bad stretch of 3 straight games that jumped it up.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/gamelog?statsId=6910&year=2006

Oh and not to throw anything like facts into this by midseason, that ERA was just over 4, not 5.

Looks like whoever said that should do a better job of reading.

[JTrea81]

I get what Dave is trying to say. You have to admit there are concerns with Bedard, at least for me anyway. And those same concerns we have, you can bet teams that are trading away top prospects are going to have too. However the World Series is the ultimate step, and if a Bedard despite his risks and his talent are available, and they'll put you over the top in your division, especially a weak one such as the NL West, Central or AL West, you are going to make that move because you have the shot at living that dream and you are willing to sacrifice a little bit of your future to get there in the present.

This is what the Dodgers, Mariners and Reds have to decide. From what I can tell, the Dodgers, Mariners and Reds aren't ready to say that they are ready yet because they are not serious enough with their offers.

[Lucky Jim]

I was on a Cub board about an hour ago.

Someone there pointed out the fact that in mid-2006, Bedard had an ERA of over 5.

That's not too long ago. And it wasn't based on 1 or 2 bad starts early in the year.

Suffice it to say that I don't think my skepticism when it comes to Bedard is completely unwarranted and irrational.

Pre-All Star 2006 he had a 4.28 ERA. Post-AS, he was at 3.10.

Over the last year and a half, he's had an ERA under 3.25 in the AL East.

Bedard's 2006:

April	3.70	4	1	0	0	5	5	0	31.2	36	14	13	3	9	19	.286May	   7.85	1	3	0	0	6	6	0	28.2	39	26	25	5	17	17	.325June	  3.09	3	2	0	0	6	6	0	35.0	28	13	12	2	10	39	.217July	   1.54	4	0	0	0	5	5	0	35.0	24	7	6	2	9	35	.189August	4.15	0	3	0	0	5	5	0	30.1	34	16	14	3	8	25	.276September 3.03	3	2	0	0	6	6	0	35.2	35	16	12	1	16	36	.259

You're right. Mediocre. Though I'm not sure how "mid-season" he had an ERA over 5. Is the end of May mid-season?

[weemnj]

I was on a Cub board about an hour ago.

Someone there pointed out the fact that in mid-2006, Bedard had an ERA of over 5.

That's not too long ago. And it wasn't based on 1 or 2 bad starts early in the year.

Suffice it to say that I don't think my skepticism when it comes to Bedard is completely unwarranted and irrational.

Think real hard after a deep breath---not only would Bedard go to a great pitchers park.....he would be going from the major league to the AAAA league-----and he was dominant in the majors.

[El Gordo]

Bedard may be worth 16 wins above replacement over the next two years.

It's entirely possible that some combination of Kemp, Kershaw, Hu, Laroche et al., would be worth at least double that over the next five years (before they hit FA.)

So, it's not that they value Kuroda more. It's that they're more willing to spend ducats on Kuroda than they are to throw so much value out the window for two years of Bedard. For them, $40 million < the many wins that these prospects represent.

If they traded Kemp Kershaw and Hu they are not likely to be giving up 8 WARP in the next year. Only Kemp would even be on their 25 man roster next year.

[Sports Guy]

I get what Dave is trying to say. You have to admit there are concerns with Bedard, at least for me anyway. And those same concerns we have, you can bet teams that are trading away top prospects are going to have too. However the World Series is the ultimate step, and if a Bedard despite his risks and his talent are available, and they'll put you over the top in your division, especially a weak one such as the NL West, Central or AL West, you are going to make that move because you have the shot at living that dream and you are willing to sacrifice a little bit of your future to get there in the present.

Bedard has durability concerns, that's it....Nothing major since the TJ surgery though.

Anyone questioning his ability and his place amongst the best pitchers in baseball is clearly not paying attention.

[Lucky Jim]

2007:

April	6.09	3	2	0	0	6	6	0	34.0	39	23	23	6	13	42	.291May	1.71	1	1	0	0	6	6	0	42.0	25	9	8	2	15	46	.169June	2.61	2	1	0	0	5	5	0	31.0	30	10	9	3	4	41	.246July	2.21	5	0	0	0	6	6	1	40.2	19	10	10	6	16	52	.140August	3.67	2	1	0	0	5	5	0	34.1	28	14	14	2	9	40	.224

Really, Dave...tell me more about his last two seasons. Take away April 2007 and May 2006 and he's been phenomenal, for the most part (with an odd average month here and there.)