Should the Orioles trade some of their pitching this off season?

[Roll Tide]

If a player is suspended for violating the substance abuse policy, isnt it suspension without pay? IF, Hamilton violated it, he wouldn't get paid anyhow, right? Or do the teams still have to pay, but the salaries goes into a fund? We would just get stuck losing a 40 man roster spot?

I dont believe he would count on the roster. My suggestion is that they include a drug clause in his contract. I'd be willing to give him the 5/$25 million and maybe a option that vest based on his final year performance. But that is voidable if he has drug related issues. The Orioles could insure the contract as well.

Not sure if they would have to pay out the money if he were suspended.

[Frobby]

Some have complained about Nick Markakis' contract but I think he is playing very close to what his contract is paying him, and will be in 2 years when it expires.

That's fair though. He would be correct on most players who are 30-32 when they sign these monster contracts.

Markakis had a couple of years where many on here complained that he was over paid and not producing for what he was being paid. They even called his contract unmovable unless the Orioles ate a large portion. Check the archives as you obviously werent posting here then.

I read it all. Disagreed with it.

Markakis signed his deal after 2008 ... his near .897 OPS was his highest. The next two seasons it dropped to .801 & .805 respectively. One could argue thats quite a drop.

A lot of people, compared him to Alex Rios, and was ready to place Nick on waivers, in hopes some team would claim him.

Remember, the first few years of Nick's contract weren't too expensive. I think you'd have a hard time saying Nick wasn't worth what he got paid in 2009 ($3.35 mm) and 2010 ($7.1 mm). Last year he got paid $10.6 mm and was probably a bit overpaid, but not horribly. This year he was paid $12 mm and probably would have been worth it but for his injuries limiting his playing time.

Now comes the hard part, as Nick makes $15 mm each of the next two seasons and then has a $17 mm option with a $2 mm buyout. He's probably going to end up having been overpaid by a bit by the time his contract is up. But it's hardly been a disaster. I'd say the goodwill with the fanbase was probably worth it.

[Dark Helmet]

Remember, the first few years of Nick's contract weren't too expensive. I think you'd have a hard time saying Nick wasn't worth what he got paid in 2009 ($3.35 mm) and 2010 ($7.1 mm). Last year he got paid $10.6 mm and was probably a bit overpaid, but not horribly. This year he was paid $12 mm and probably would have been worth it but for his injuries limiting his playing time.

Now comes the hard part, as Nick makes $15 mm each of the next two seasons and then has a $17 mm option with a $2 mm buyout. He's probably going to end up having been overpaid by a bit by the time his contract is up. But it's hardly been a disaster. I'd say the goodwill with the fanbase was probably worth it.

I agree. Getting a deal done, with the young fan favorite at the time, was a neccesity.

[Roll Tide]

Remember, the first few years of Nick's contract weren't too expensive. I think you'd have a hard time saying Nick wasn't worth what he got paid in 2009 ($3.35 mm) and 2010 ($7.1 mm). Last year he got paid $10.6 mm and was probably a bit overpaid, but not horribly. This year he was paid $12 mm and probably would have been worth it but for his injuries limiting his playing time.

Now comes the hard part, as Nick makes $15 mm each of the next two seasons and then has a $17 mm option with a $2 mm buyout. He's probably going to end up having been overpaid by a bit by the time his contract is up. But it's hardly been a disaster. I'd say the goodwill with the fanbase was probably worth it.

I just remember it argued here that he had negative trade value because of his salary/production.

[Roll Tide]

Suspended players arent paid...But the bigger reason for the clause would be to void his contract if he had those kinds of problems again. That imo would even the risk factor to aging (not drug related) just like any other mlb deal.

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

I dont believe he would count on the roster. My suggestion is that they include a drug clause in his contract. I'd be willing to give him the 5/$25 million and maybe a option that vest based on his final year performance. But that is voidable if he has drug related issues. The Orioles could insure the contract as well.

Not sure if they would have to pay out the money if he were suspended.

I assume you meant $125m...

Nonetheless, this isn't Melky Cabrera we're talking about. Josh Hamilton is getting more than 5 yrs, just like Prince got more than 7 yrs, and Pujols got more than 8, and ARod, etc, etc... He's also not likely going to to sign a contract with a drug clause, he's getting guaranteed money, even if that seems unfair to the club signing him.

[Roll Tide]

I assume you meant $125m...

Nonetheless, this isn't Melky Cabrera we're talking about. Josh Hamilton is getting more than 5 yrs, just like Prince got more than 7 yrs, and Pujols got more than 8, and ARod, etc, etc... He's also not likely going to to sign a contract with a drug clause, he's getting guaranteed money, even if that seems unfair to the club signing him.

It will depend on who is really interested. I expect to see the interest in Hamilton diminished by his issues. Obviously somebody will be interested in him...But at what length

[DrungoHazewood]

If signed early enough, your right. But, if a 27 year old becomes a FA, most likely he will want and get 8-10 years, at 20+ mil a year. With the way contracts are backloaded, most likely he wont be worth the 25 mil he will be getting, in years 7-10. Your not going to get many quality ML players under 30, for short, team friendly deals.

If a source of talent is predictably high risk, then find a different strategy. Grow your own talent, sign your own stars to deals that buy out some arb years and free agent years in exchange for security. Trade. Let someone else make the stupid deals. Let the Yanks waste 3/4ths of their revenue advantages on 38 year old, league-average players making $28M.

You can use free agency, but you have to pick your spots.

[DrungoHazewood]

A lot of people, compared him to Alex Rios, and was ready to place Nick on waivers, in hopes some team would claim him.

If by "a lot of people" you mean JTrea81. He was really the only one who judged players as falling into one of two bins: either superstars or rabble.

[wildcard]

No. It's about production. And I don't care how many homers you hit, if you have a .290 OBP, limited or negative defensive value, a 5:1 K:BB ratio... it's going to be very difficult to be a productive player. Your outs will be more (negative) value than your power makes up.You can close your eyes and ignore the data, that's the facts.

But Davis OBP was 326 this year so none of this applies.

[Roll Tide]

If a source of talent is predictably high risk, then find a different strategy. Grow your own talent, sign your own stars to deals that buy out some arb years and free agent years in exchange for security. Trade. Let someone else make the stupid deals. Let the Yanks waste 3/4ths of their revenue advantages on 38 year old, league-average players making $28M.

You can use free agency, but you have to pick your spots.

I agree ...But the point is the Orioles dont have the Star high OBP middle of the Orioles bats. Your not going to find them on the scrap heap. I agree they should trade for one and pick their spots strategy. They should do that this year for Hamilton or Swisher and take max advantage of the spike in attendance and momentum from last year.

[EagleOriole]

He would probably cost too much for us. That dude is a stud though.

Yeah, that dude is a stud...Trumbo that is, wish we had a guy like that in our lineup:

wait - lets check these numbers:

Option A - 26 years old - .268/.317/.491/.808 with 32 HR, 95 RBI

Option B - 26 years old - .270/.326/.501/.827 with 33 HR, 85 RBI

I could have sworn someone on this board compared Chris Davis to Mark Trumbo early in the year? Who was that?:scratchchinhmm:

[Roll Tide]

Yeah, that dude is a stud...Trumbo that is, wish we had a guy like that in our lineup:

wait - lets check these numbers:

Option A - 26 years old - .268/.317/.491/.808 with 32 HR, 95 RBI

Option B - 26 years old - .270/.326/.501/.827 with 33 HR, 85 RBI

I could have sworn someone on this board compared Chris Davis to Mark Trumbo early in the year? Who was that?:scratchchinhmm:

Its okay to have 1 player that will always be at or near 200Ks ...But not 2-3. Reynolds/Davis is bad for this team.

[DrungoHazewood]

But Davis OBP was 326 this year so none of this applies.

Yes, what someone did last year is exacty what they'll do going forward. His career OBP is .310, and he never got over .305 from 2009-2011.Can't you even acknowledge the possibility that Davis' 120 point OPS jump was his peak, and not just a waypoint on his inevitable journey to greatness? The reason he set a career high in PAs in 2012 wasn't that nobody gave him a real chance before. It was because he hadn't played well in four years!Don't get me wrong, I love the guy and I hope he puts up a 900 OPS and hits the warehouse a couple times in '13. But I'm not holding my breath.

[DrungoHazewood]

Its okay to have 1 player that will always be at or near 200Ks ...But not 2-3. Reynolds/Davis is bad for this team.

Why? I don't think there's any objective evidence that indicates you'd be more than microscopically better off with a .800 OPS player who Ks 100 times vice a .800 OPS player who Ks 200 times.A preference for contact is really a fan thing. It's making fans who grew up being taught that strikeouts are evil (because they really were counter-productive 100 years ago when there were no homers and fielding percentages were in the low .900s) feel better.