MLB.com article on the Wright deal

[Mackus]

I would think a good year would insure the fact that he'd be a Type B FA at least.

No compensation for Type B anymore under the new CBA.

[Baltimoron]

NCRaven,

Perhaps you misread my post.

B-Moron, I'm not spewing anyone's line.

This:

If you can get a starter - one that went 7-2 down the stretch in a penant race - for a questionable middle reliever, you just do it.

is Duquette's argument, you repeated it. This is a misleading statement, as the trade is really a 30 year old starter under contract for one year for a 23 year old reliever not eligible for free agency for 5-6 years.

------------------

Your premise seems to be that because the O's have made bad moves in the past, then every move they make must be bad.

Why are strawman arguments so common here? I wrote:

Take a step back. The Orioles are not on the cusp of the playoffs. Why is this team not building for the future? Aren't the Orioles the one who should be trading older, more expensive players with little time left on their contracts to teams who can win now for younger players who will be of value for some time.

1998 to now equals losing and a FO that refuses to rebuild but continually tries to reload. Thye have demonstarted a lack of awareness of where they are in the competition cycle. They are getting better and developing young talent, but they are not there yet and should still be working in that direction.

Maybe Britton is not what he is cracked up be, and this will be a great trade, but at least be honest in your assessment of the deal.

I suppose my reference to the refusal to rebuild and continual attempt to reload could be interpreted as "the O's have made bad moves in the past, then every move they make must be bad." My point was that looking to older stopgaps instead of youth is a bad approach for teams not on the verge of success. The Orioles have not manifested an understanding of this principle.

Not every move the Orioles have made, nor every trade the Orioles do make is bad. But those moves that de-emphasize cheap, pre-free agency young talent and favor older, on the verge of free agency type players are suspect and demand scrutiny given how far the franchise is from legitimately competing for the playoffs.

--------------------------

I can actually look at each deal individually.

What is this:

Because Britton will be cheaply under control for the next 5-6 years, he is more valuable than one year of Wright if he can simply be a below average relief guy, i.e. 4.75 ish ERA guy. This is especially so since what Wright does in his one year here will be of little consequence (if he is good maybe he is a 2-3 win improvment over whomever he is replacing, but those 2-3 wins aren't going to vault the Orioles into the playoffs, but more lilkey from a .500ish team, to a 80ish win team).

The relevant time frame for expecting success from the Os is the next few years, not next year. But absent an extension, Wright does nothing to help us then, while Britton certainly could have, even if he would have ended up as the last guy out of the bullpen in those years.

The Yankees get all the upside here. If Mazzone works his magic, Wright gets a big deal next offseason as a free agent. If Britton can hold down a major league bullpen spot, the Yankess have him cheaply for some time.

Is the O's upside limited solely to improving Wright under Mazzone and then hoping to flip him at the deadline to a contender? If so, what's the Orioles track record for trading aging stars/players eligible for free agency for young prospects at the deadline?

[hoosiers]

The signing team doesn't have to give compensation but the old team will still receive a supplemental pick. Otherwise, what's the sense of even having Type B's?

RZ is correct. The new agreement eliminates Type C free agents as well as the draft pick loss to a team signing a Type B free agent. Teams losing a Type B free agent pick up a supplemental first rounder - what the Os would receive if Hawkins was offered and accepted arbitration.

I have little issue paying Wright for an option year or two. I'd hate for him to pitch as a two this year and then only collect one prospect or draft for him. I would offer a $7M extension for 2008 with a $2M buyout if he doesn't perform this year.

[Baltimoron]

No compensation for Type B anymore under the new CBA.

Its now a sandwich pick.

Draft Choice Compensation

1. Type C free agents eliminated in 2006

2. Also in 2006, compensation for type B players becomes indirect (sandwich pick) as opposed to direct compensation from signing Club.

3. Effective 2007, Type A players limited to top 20 percent of each position (down from 30 percent) and Type B players become 21 percent - 40 percent at each position (rather than 31 percent - 50 percent).

4. Salary arbitration offer and acceptance dates move to December 1 and December 7.

Union/MLB press release

[Mackus]

I have little issue paying Wright for an option year or two. I'd hate for him to pitch as a two this year and then only collect one prospect or draft for him. I would offer a $7M extension for 2008 with a $2M buyout if he doesn't perform this year.

But if we bought out the option, we wouldn't get the compensation pick, although if we're buying out the option its possible he wouldn't have pitched well enough to be a Type B.

[hoosiers]

The Yankees get all the upside here. If Mazzone works his magic, Wright gets a big deal next offseason as a free agent. If Britton can hold down a major league bullpen spot, the Yankess have him cheaply for some time.

Is the O's upside limited solely to improving Wright under Mazzone and then hoping to flip him at the deadline to a contender? If so, what's the Orioles track record for trading aging stars/players eligible for free agency for young prospects at the deadline?

I just totally disagree with this. It's just too simplistic.

If Wright is a type A free agent, we get a first rounder and a supplemental first for him if he leaves. I would deal Chris Britton for that in a second. If Wright pitches well, we could deal him at the deadline. If he repeats last year's 4.5 ERA, he could still be a type B free agent.

While Britton has value even as a minimum wage, below average bullpen guy, the author fails to see what kind of production Britton's replacement could achieve. Who is to say that Britton will outpitch Hoey or Salas or Penn or Hale or Parrish or LeBron during the period Britton will be pre-free agent?

[Sapper]

I worry that getting Wright means that the Orioles "braintrust" thinks they've now shored up the rotation for 2007.

[Hank Scorpio]

I worry that getting Wright means that the Orioles "braintrust" thinks they've now shored up the rotation for 2007.

They couldn't possibly.............. could they?

Nah, not even they're that simple.

[hoosiers]

I worry that getting Wright means that the Orioles "braintrust" thinks they've now shored up the rotation for 2007.

That's a lot to worry about, Sapper.

A lot of us are more worried that Loewen will be put on the block or banished to the bullpen.

I hope the Wright deal is a signal that we will be active "traders". Moving bodies around to make incremental improvements and not developing too much of an attachment to an individual player. I know it's cold, but players are assets.

The Bosox and NYY sign and then trade guys after a year or two all the time.

[ledzepp8]

1. You don't know that there weren't other teams willing to trade something to get him.

2. You don't know what he would have cost if he had been a free agent.

3. They went into the season with a bullpen full of question marks because half the bullpen got hurt before the season started.

4. I doubt Mazzone had any say about whether he could help out what was currently with the Orioles pitching staff.

5. I am tired of people using Russ Ortiz and Brower as an example of Mazzone's failures. Talk about a small sample size in comparison to his overall body of work. This is the kind of thinking that has Yankee fans saying Arod stinks.

6. Rant over.

Good post. As for number 5, I couldn't agree more. People keep wanting to point to Ortiz, Brower or Halama and say that Mazzone isn't a good judge of talent or is overrated. Have we forgotten guys like John Smoltz, Tom Glavine, Steve Avery, Greg Maddux, Mark Wohlers or the types of seasons he's gotten out of pitchers like Denny Neagle, Jaret Wright, John Burkett, Damian Moss, and Jorge Sosa.

[ledzepp8]

Mazzone likely had nothing to do with aquiring any of those guys. He gets a lot of credit for developing those pitchers.

Sorry, I didn't really mean to insinuate that he had a hand in acquiring them. Just that his track record speaks a lot more highly of him than about three busts from last season who had previous success under him.

[Baltimoron]

Hoosiers,

I just totally disagree with your post. Its much too simplistic, makes many unrealistic assumptions, includes irrelevant red herrings and attempts to unfairly slant the issues by making an apples to oranges comparison.:002_shappy:

I just totally disagree with this. It's just too simplistic.

If Wright is a type A free agent, we get a first rounder and a supplemental first for him if he leaves. I would deal Chris Britton for that in a second. If Wright pitches well, we could deal him at the deadline. If he repeats last year's 4.5 ERA, he could still be a type B free agent.

In 2007, the pool of Type A players shrinks from top 30 percent of each position to top 20 percent. Its highly unlikely Wright can achieve this. Wright was 53rd out of 89 starters this season, which means he was barely amongst the top 60 percent.

Type B is also reduced to the top 40 percent. I think that is a possible goal, but one needs to consider this formula puts great weight on innings pitched as well as ERA, and we know Wright does not have a history as a workhorse post 1999.

Sandwich picks are not guaranteed successes. They have value, but more so than a pitcher with 50+ above average innings in the major leagues who at the time of the pick may have already have another season of major league success?

Regarding trading Wright at the deadline, its possible, but far from probable, and unlikely to yield much in return. The author overestimates the Orioles' trading acumen and the market's willingness to trade prospects for 2-3 month rentals. Has the author considered the recent Orioles history of deadline deals, or that of recent deadline deals in major league baseball as a whole? Moreover, such a deadline deal presupposes Wright is successful next season. I certainly hope so, but....

While Britton has value even as a minimum wage, below average bullpen guy, the author fails to see what kind of production Britton's replacement could achieve. Who is to say that Britton will outpitch Hoey or Salas or Penn or Hale or Parrish or LeBron during the period Britton will be pre-free agent?

The author fails to realize that that those points are largely irrelevant, as the issue is whether the return is worth the price. The mere possibility that others *might* be better doesn't change the fact that Britton has 5-6 years of pre-free agency at a below market rate and has, at least for a season, pitched at an above average level in the major leagues. Britton has value, and the fact that the Orioles may have additonal pitchers who *potentially* could equal or surpass Brittons' value doesn't diminish Britton's value. I understand that the possibility may render Britton expendable from the Orioles perspective, but that possibility doesn't change the fact that Britton has pitch at a cetain level, and the market will pay a price for pitchers who can pitch at that level. Of course his 2006 pitching may be an abberation that may not be repeated, but he's done it, which is more than you can say about a number of those who you posit may possibly outpitch him one day.

Is it even likely that in his pre-free agency period that Britton will be outpitched by enough others such that he is never an option for the Orioles' bullpen?

Moreover, your comparison of the downside of keeping Britton to the upside of trading him is illogical. Isn't it more accurate to compare the downside to each side and then to also compare the potential upside to each side?

Is it inconceivable that Britton could achieve success (note the bottom of the bullpen guy like perfromance is a very conservative assesment of Britton's upside) and Wright could end up as a below league average pitcher or suffer another injury?

[hoosiers]

I respect that post, baltimoron, but we'll just have to disagree.

We can talk in a year, but my expectation is that Wright will yield a compensation pick in a year. And an ERA of 4.5 at the break should yield a decent prospect in return.

You mention that Britton could end up having more value than other guys in the bullpen and there is no doubt that's possible. That's why there are two sides to a trade, no?

Regarding a comparison for Wright, we could talk about Chen or Lopez, but I believe Wright is easily within our top five starters right now. I thought that an obvious point - so I did not discuss.

I have no idea how Britton will turn out. I am not thrilled with attempts to speak to a Britton's conditioning or other negatives now that he has left the organization. But I see the bullpen arms in this organization and I do not feel that Britton was a major loss.

[bigbird]

I worry that getting Wright means that the Orioles "braintrust" thinks they've now shored up the rotation for 2007.

I wouldn't mind entering 2007 with the rotation of Bedard, Cabrera, Benson, Loewen, and Wright as long as we pick up 4 quality bullpen arms and 2 run producing bats.