Roberts Trade News Thread

[blueberryale77]

The one where Cano, Pedroia and Aaron Hill are all younger and better.

And if you count Upton as a 2B (he played 48 games there in '07), Roberts would be the 5th best 2B in the AL EAST.

Roberts is a great player, and I know that being the 4th or 5th best 2B in the AL EAST doesn't take anything away from his performance, but I do think we vastly overrate him on these boards. I think we're trading him at the right time and for the right package.

VORP

Roberts - 48.6

Cano - 40.5

Pedroia - 35.9

Hill - 27.1

Wigginton - 11.2

Iwamura (if he shifts over to make room for ELong) - 15.3

Which three rate ahead of Roberts?

I don't believe you answered Stotle's question. Cano and Pedroia (especially Cano) are young enough and good enough that it's quite likely they'll be more effective players than Roberts by the time the Orioles are next competitive if not next year, but they have not established themselves as such yet. Hill might still improve enough to be better than Roberts in the future but he'll be 26 this year and is certainly not as good as Roberts yet. BJ Upton was removed from 2B because of astonishingly horrible defense. Plus, who outside the AL East not named Chase Utley is definitively better? There are a couple you could debate but none that are clear cut. I think you're letting your black colored glasses, stained by the disappointment of years of Oriole losing, color your assessment of Oriole players.

[Lucky Jim]

I don't believe you answered Stotle's question. Cano and Pedroia (especially Cano) are young enough and good enough that it's quite likely they'll be more effective players than Roberts by the time the Orioles are next competitive if not next year, but they have not established themselves as such yet. Hill might still improve enough to be better than Roberts in the future but he'll be 26 this year and is certainly not as good as Roberts yet. BJ Upton was removed from 2B because of astonishingly horrible defense. Plus, who outside the AL East not named Chase Utley is definitively better? There are a couple you could debate but none that are clear cut. I think you're letting your black colored glasses, stained by the disappointment of years of Oriole losing, color your assessment of Oriole players.

Cano has a WARP of 20.5 over the last two years. I think he's definitively better, at this point (even with mediocre defense).

Pedroia and Hill both have WARPs of 7.5 for this past year. Both are much younger than Roberts. The odds are actually good that the gap will close this year...or, perhaps, next.

As of right now, though? Yes, NMS was exaggerating. But I'd take Cano, Pedroia and maybe Hill over Roberts, in a one-for-one trade right now.

[Birds08]

What are we going to call the thread when Roberts actually is traded?

[orioles119]

What are we going to call the thread when Roberts actually is traded?

"Told you so..."

[Frobby]

What are we going to call the thread when Roberts actually is traded?

"MacPhail is a liar"

[JTrea81]

Good lord another day with smoke but no fire. This is getting old, fast...

Maybe the trade won't be announced tomorrow because it is the 89th anniversary of the Treaty of Versailles being ratified by the League of Nations. Wouldn't want to upstage that now...

[RShack]

I'm not sure I see the difference. Isn't player development about growing good players?

Of course, sure. I was responding to the (oft-repeated) claim that the strategy of growing good players, keeping them, and acquiring a few extras from elsewhere, is somehow what caused the 10 years of losing. The 10 years of losing wasn't caused by that strategy, it was caused by the failure to actually *do* that strategy properly. It's exactly the strategy that AM's gonna get back to, just as soon as he can. Trading everybody is just an extreme emergency procedure that AM feels is necessary. It's like CPR. It's certainly not the SOP of success.

[ChaosLex]

What are we going to call the thread when Roberts actually is traded?

One of two things.

#1 Roberts traded to Cubs for Hill AND Colvin AND Pie

or

#2 Roberts traded to Cubs... Seriously, this time!

[SacreBleu]

Could a 2nd team (Cleveland? Colorado?) have stepped in with a strong offer making AM to go back to the Cubs for more...? Am I way out in left field here (if so, I'll say 'hey' to Luke Scott).....

[hoosiers]

Well said.

The reality here is that nobody can say how this kid is going to turn out. Portions of his resume suggest a terrific bigleague future, and portions suggest a AAAA hanger-on.

And if you come across someone who thinks they know one way or another, then you've found someone whose opinion needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

I'm speaking more to the quote that Dave uses since I can't find it.

How can Cedeno's value possibly be "high" after the last two years and his current role as backup middle-infielder. Cedeno will have little opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the Cubs for at least this year and he's failed in two attempts under two managers to seize and retain the SS position. I'm more than willing to take a flier on Cedeno in a one in two or three shot that he will be an average ML SS, but I don't see how anyone can support the opinion that Cedeno's value may be "high" right now.

[RShack]

I'm speaking more to the quote that Dave uses since I can't find it.

How can Cedeno's value possibly be "high" after the last two years and his current role as backup middle-infielder. Cedeno will have little opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the Cubs for at least this year and he's failed in two attempts under two managers to seize and retain the SS position. I'm more than willing to take a flier on Cedeno in a one in two or three shot that he will be an average ML SS, but I don't see how anyone can support the opinion that Cedeno's value may be "high" right now.

He didn't say that his value was high, he just said that there are 2 ways to look at the guy. The low-value view is exactly what you said.

The high-value view looks at both his O and his D and sees more than his ML record shows. Such a view looks at his Iowa O-numbers (which were both great and sustained over 2 big spans there), and figures it's not unusual for guys to falter when they first get to the bigs, and that maybe he can overcome it. If he does, then he's got way more than a league-average SS-bat. He's already got that. The high-view also looks at his D-performance as a temp-victory of poor-judgment about throws over many indications of very good D-tools. So, he can be seen as 2 different guys, based on how you look at him, and it all really comes down to, "Will the real Ronny Cedeno please stand up."

[davearm]

I'm speaking more to the quote that Dave uses since I can't find it.

How can Cedeno's value possibly be "high" after the last two years and his current role as backup middle-infielder. Cedeno will have little opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the Cubs for at least this year and he's failed in two attempts under two managers to seize and retain the SS position. I'm more than willing to take a flier on Cedeno in a one in two or three shot that he will be an average ML SS, but I don't see how anyone can support the opinion that Cedeno's value may be "high" right now.

Where did I say Cedeno's value was high?

And what in this scenario, where Cedeno is the third player in a trade for a non-superstar, suggests that his value is high?

Folks talk all the time about buying low and selling high.

Well I'll tell you what. Next to "buy low" in this year's baseball almanac is a picture of Ronny Cedeno.

And understand that in order to be a "buy low" player, there has to be some reason why the player's trade value is disproportionately lower than his upside. If Cedeno didn't have some warts, if he hadn't flopped in '06, if he was 21 instead of 24, he wouldn't be Ronny Cedeno. He'd be Jay Bruce, and this board would be discussing whether or not Ronny Cedeno and Sean Marshall (without Sean Gallagher) was enough for Erik Bedard.

As it is, the board is discussing whether or not Cedeno is an adequate #3 in a deal for a player much less valuable than Bedard.

So if you don't want to take back a guy like Cedeno under the current set of circumstances, then please, don't ever let me hear you beotch that the O's are never able/willing to buy low on other team's guys. By being opposed to acquiring Ronny Cedeno in this deal, you officially relinquish that right.

[clarence]

I want Cedeno in the deal. I think he is a better for the O's situation than EPatterson. I also like the idea of having Marshall in the 5 spot in the rotation so we can keep Gallagher, Patton, Penn and Liz in AAA. Burress and Olson can fight for the 4 spot. Too many people are worried about next season and not the big picture and the big picture is better without BRob in the mix.

[zff4]

Mariotti doesn't want it to happen.

"...with Clemens in steroids hell and Barry Bonds headed for a landmark court case, this is no time to acquire Page 158 of the Mitchell Report."

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/734607,011008mariottic.article

But then Mariotti has never been much more than self-serving.

[bird watcher]

Mariotti doesn't want it to happen.

"...with Clemens in steroids hell and Barry Bonds headed for a landmark court case, this is no time to acquire Page 158 of the Mitchell Report."

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/734607,011008mariottic.article

But then Mariotti has never been much more than self-serving.

Blowhard. These writers intentionally look for contrarian viewpoints so that they get noticed. It is all about publicity for these guys. It is the same thing with the HOF voting. Take a controversial stance and everybody will talk about you. Look at me! Look at me!