Article that explains the off season (problems)

[weams]

So we will ask you th MSK question. What reclamation projects would you have signed and what would you have done with a packed bullpen and several out of option pitchers?

I would have probably signed Reynolds. But that is beacuse I was always a Sheriff defender. Like I am for Tillman. I would have signed Joe Saunders. I would have tried to trade for Smoak if I could not sign Reynolds. I might have signed Koji and spun a bullpen piece. I would have found another partner for the "Betemit Platoon."

[Dark Helmet]

A blockbuster trade is imminent within the next year. There is too much pitching talent ready for the major leagues that needs to be sorted through, especially with the next round of prospects matriculating to Bowie or higher this year.

Britton, Matusz, and Arrieta are going to really have to raise their stocks in 2013 then. Because I am not all that interested in trading Bundy, Gausman, or Tillman. I really like the idea of a Bundy, Gausman, Tillman, Chen, Hammel rotation for 2014. If Hammel is extended.

[Crazysilver03]

I would have probably signed Reynolds. But that is beacuse I was always a Sheriff defender. Like I am for Tillman. I would have signed Joe Saunders. I would have tried to trade for Smoak if I could not sign Reynolds. I might have signed Koji and spun a bullpen piece. I would have found another partner for the "Betemit Platoon."

DD has said he wants to work on the issue of the bullpen being full of guys with no options. Koji doesn't solve that issue.

[tilgaham]

I disagree. But I will defend your right to your opinion.

And that is all that anyone can ask of you. Thank you.

[weams]

I really like the idea of a Bundy, Gausman, Tillman, Chen, Hammel rotation for 2014. If Hammel is extended.

Me too. Or one that has Matusz in it. Or Britton.

[El Gordo]

I would have probably signed Reynolds. But that is beacuse I was always a Sheriff defender. Like I am for Tillman. I would have signed Joe Saunders. I would have tried to trade for Smoak if I could not sign Reynolds. I might have signed Koji and spun a bullpen piece. I would have found another partner for the "Betemit Platoon."

These could still happen, and I think they will.

[SrMeowMeow]

So we will ask you th MSK question. What reclamation projects would you have signed and what would you have done with a packed bullpen and several out of option pitchers?

On reflection, maybe I pass on Swisher. I don't know if I want to give up a pick. Probably still do it though.

So for the sake of the argument, say we have to beat any agreed contract by 10% to actually sign the player. I don't know our option situation or payroll offhand, but Scott Baker was a crazy steal at 5.5M. I'd love him at 6M. Wait until February and try to find a live arm or two for the middle relief innings. Then if we're really going to spend money, do it right, and buy both Swisher and either Edwin Jackson or Anibal Sanchez. If not, get Marcum for 6-8M and make the McLouth deal we actually did. Play him vs RHP in LF, and let Reimold play LF vs LHP and DH vs RHP and spend a million or two to get a decent DH vs RHP like Scott Hairston. Chris Davis at first, resign yourself to Alexi Casilla at 2B, Machado, Hardy, Markakis, Jones, Wieters rounds out the lineup. Then you have Hammel, Jackson/Anibal/Marcum, Chen and Miguel Gonzalez in more realistic mid-rotation roles, give Tillman the #5 spot, and let Arrieta, Britton and Matusz find their place in the bullpen or in the minors for now. I love having real depth. Trade one of Jim Johnson, Strop and Patton if you can for a good prospect (hi, Nick Castellanos!), pack your bullpen with the ex-cavalry and the rest of last year's gang, and go to war.

EDIT: Oh my lord, yes. Sign Koji to whatever one year deal he wants, install him as closer, and watch him continue to ruin the AL for like 5M.

[tilgaham]

Britton, Matusz, and Arrieta are going to really have to raise their stocks in 2013 then. Because I am not all that interested in trading Bundy, Gausman, or Tillman. I really like the idea of a Bundy, Gausman, Tillman, Chen, Hammel rotation for 2014. If Hammel is extended.

If Gonzalez and Tillman both progress/maintain, and we see Stotle's predictions for Gausman come to light, I think you deal one of your young pitchers and position prospects a la Schoop, potentially whomever breaks out next year for a bat like Stanton. This is obviously the best case scenario.

[Dark Helmet]

Me too. Or one that has Matusz in it. Or Britton.

I would prefer a 2nd LH in the rotation. Hopefully Matusz/Britton can get back on track.

[SrMeowMeow]

If Gonzalez and Tillman both progress/maintain, and we see Stotle's predictions for Gausman come to light, I think you deal one of your young pitchers and position prospects a la Schoop, potentially whomever breaks out next year for a bat like Stanton. This is obviously the best case scenario.

You'd have to double that or more for Stanton. Even Bundy and Schoop would get you hung up on real fast.

[Stotle]

You'd have to double that or more for Stanton. Even Bundy and Schoop would get you hung up on real fast.

Not necessarily 1 to 1.5 years from now.

[SrMeowMeow]

Not necessarily 1 to 1.5 years from now.

If Stanton starts being worse, sure.

[Dark Helmet]

If Gonzalez and Tillman both progress/maintain, and we see Stotle's predictions for Gausman come to light, I think you deal one of your young pitchers and position prospects a la Schoop, potentially whomever breaks out next year for a bat like Stanton. This is obviously the best case scenario.

If Stotle's assesment of Bundy and Gausman are on, I would rather deal Tillman. Hopefully Tillman carries over 2012 into 2013. I like Tillman a lot, but i'd be hesitant to trade Bundy or Gausman. However, if Tillman is succesful in the majors, i'd be hesitant to trade a proven guy over a prospect. Can we have our cake and eat it too?

[Dark Helmet]

If Stanton starts being worse, sure.

Or he's more expensive with less years under control.

[CA-ORIOLE]

It doesn't do any good. However, this is the offseason. Not a lot has been done to discuss. There's only so much to be said for the "T.J. McFarlands" of the world. It doesn't bother me that MSK makes the same statements. Just like it doesn't bother me when some preach the Betemit/Platoon stuff over and over. Everyone has their point of views, and most of the time stick to it, and will relay it over and over. It's just not worth getting all bent out of shape over. Idon't consider the OH a place for crybabies. I see it as a place for fans to express their opinions. They don't always have to be the same point of view. Thats what makes this a great forum. However, lately it has become impossible to disagree with anything the FO does. The only one I stick to, is letting Reynolds go. No one can or will convince me, that letting him go was worth saving 6.5M. Unless a better option is found, and I see nothing that suggests the FO will take the kind of risk associated with such an upgrade.

Yeah, I don't see the anology. The Reynolds thing has been debated over and over. We've looked at all aspects: money/budget restrictions, platooning, Cost/value, defense, replacements (Davis at 1b), future trade possibilites etc. etc. If the choice was having Reynolds over a Betemit/RHP platoon, I'd probably prefer Reynolds as well. The scope of the argument was well beyond that and certainly beyond the "if you don't agree with me about spending more money then you're a PA apolgist" angle that MSK plays so well.