Trade rumors heat up...

[Hank Scorpio]

My take...............

I'm not sure I disagree with that take.

[wesamos]

I will not be surprised to see both Roberts AND Bedard in our opening day lineup.

I would be surprised if they were not. I can totally buy Angelos nixing a B-ROB deal. He did it last year. It makes no sense to trade Tejada and not trade Bedard and Roberts though. When has Angelos done anything that made sense? Another half witted rebuild would seriously piss me off.

I might half to set up a tent in front of the warehouse.

I liked the Roberts trade. I don't buy us being able to get more from anyone else. Yeah we can think we can, however we can also be left with nothing.

I don't like the idea of holding out until we are "blown away". This idea will probablt blow up in our face. You rarely ever get blown away.

I want to see a bunch of new younger guys out on the field. I think Dave would do a good job with a young team. Dave comes off as a teacher and motivator. A perfect guy for a young team.

Marshal, Gallagher, Cedeno plus Jones, Clement, Tillman..... I like it.

Add this with what was had in the Tejada and we have added a lot of new blood with potential. Next step would be to get rid of garbage like Payton, Millar, and Gibbons. Gibbons can be waived as far as I'm concerned.

I don't trust Big Pete...... I think holding out looking to get "Blown Away"

will only delay the process and eventually lessen our return not Increase it.

[Jimmy Mad]

It's too early to conclude that PA interfered with this trade going through and it's also too early to conclude that a great deal still won't go through. That said, this team has been in need of a blow-up for 10 years. It has been a flawed organization for years and I have completely bought into the blow-it-up and rebuild philosophy. This team cannot afford to have Angelos prevent a complete rebuild yet again. I still have faith it could happen this year, but if it doesn't, then I will be more disappointed than I have ever been with anything related to the Orioles. That includes steroids and 30-3 losses and 0-21 starts and players spitting on umpires and running the manager of the year out of town and kids who catch balls in play for home runs and the list goes on...

[bgfield]

My guy has held fast that the Roberts deal was with PGA. Others said the deal was done. Not it's off the table. Just putting 2 and 2 together.

Okay, so it's opinion. In that case I'm going to have to disagree, it's probably too early to tell. I don't know who Tony's sources were but it is always possible they weren't accurate, unless his two sources were PA and AM themselves. Maybe AM agreed with many posters on this site that we weren't getting enough back from the Cubs.

[SilentJames]

My guy has held fast that the Roberts deal was with PGA. Others said the deal was done. Not it's off the table. Just putting 2 and 2 together.

Okay, serioiusly BB. You need to clarify that from the start. Your posts carry a lot of weight around here and for good reason. You really need to let us know when you are making assumptions or you have real info.

This isn't an attack on your integrity, Brooks knows that we would slowly wither and die without your updates.

But I feel that the first post was a bit irresponsible.

If its still on the table, then nothing was nixed.

[AgentOrange]

I'm not sure I disagree with that take.

I do, both will be traded before opening day.

[TGO]

Okay, serioiusly BB. You need to clarify that from the start. Your posts carry a lot of weight around here and for good reason. You really need to let us know when you are making assumptions or you have real info.

This isn't an attack on your integrity, Brooks knows that we would slowly wither and die without your updates.

But I feel that the first post was a bit irresponsible.

If its still on the table, then nothing was nixed.

I think he meant "noW it's off the table." JMO.

[centralpaosfan]

I dislike what Angelos has done to this once proud franchise as much as the other guy, but I have to stand up for him here.

Let's say, for example, you're a millionaire and you want to build a brand new hotel in the downtown Baltimore area. The construction company who is building your hotel comes to you with their plans. You disagree with some of the plans they propose. Do you go along with the builder because someone walking in off the street tells you they plan on staying in this hotel and they want what the builder proposed? Also, does the builder walk off the job because the owner of the hotel tells him no to his plan?

[BillySmith]

Maybe "on the table" just means "here boss, this is where we are right now" Just keeping you up to date.

Is the joey poster for real? Has anyone had any reason to doubt him or question who he is? Seems a little odd that he swooped in with all this info all of a sudden. Maybe I'm just paranoid. No offense, joey. Mackus says you're a nice guy.

[StunninSteve]

My guy has held fast that the Roberts deal was with PGA. Others said the deal was done. Not it's off the table. Just putting 2 and 2 together.

He said it's NOT off the table... I'm sure we have some sort of agreement in place we are probably just working on some minor additions to the deal. Either that or just waiting for approval just as speculated...

[Mackus]

He said it's NOT off the table... I'm sure we have some sort of agreement in place we are probably just working on some minor additions to the deal. Either that or just waiting for approval just as speculated...

That's either a type or horrible grammar. I'm leaning towards typo. I think BB's guy has told him the whole trade is currently off the table.

[Guest rochester]

Okay, serioiusly BB. You need to clarify that from the start. Your posts carry a lot of weight around here and for good reason. You really need to let us know when you are making assumptions or you have real info.

This isn't an attack on your integrity, Brooks knows that we would slowly wither and die without your updates.

But I feel that the first post was a bit irresponsible.

If its still on the table, then nothing was nixed.

BB - I am also appreciative of your efforts and believe you are extremely helpful on this board. However (isn't it always) I also believe that your dislike of the FO has increased greatly since AM was hired and your source did not know if or how long they had a job.

Not knowing if or how long one may have a job is not exactly a position that breeds loyalty, specifically with PA - one would think exactly the opposite. I am not discounting you or your source but....right or wrong you have a much higher level of responsibility in what you put out there - case in point, there is many follow-up posts that do not discuss this as one possibility but as the truth (not saying it is not).

Note: other insiders have written the exact opposite, so I believe we all need to see what happens...patience is no longer a virtue in many circles in this internet age.

[bgfield]

He said it's NOT off the table... I'm sure we have some sort of agreement in place we are probably just working on some minor additions to the deal. Either that or just waiting for approval just as speculated...

I think that was a typo. Either he hit T instead of W, or he accidently typed Not before It's. I'd say the former is more likely. Apparently it's "off the table" but we don't know what that means (or specifically, why it's off the table, if indeed it is).

[tywright]

My guy has held fast that the Roberts deal was with PGA. Others said the deal was done. Not it's off the table. Just putting 2 and 2 together.

Have you ever thought that maybe AM pulled the deal off the table because the Reds are ponying up for Bedard, which is a GOOD thing. Now he has to adjust his trade with the Cubs because we don't need more pitchers (Marshall and Gallagher).

[Mackus]

Listen to what your saying. Your saying you want Angelos to decide what's enough in a BRob trade instead of McPhail. Come back to us Mackus. If PA vetoed a deal McPhail deal (that doesnt' include a big contract) any O's fan with a pulse should either be outraged, seriously depressed, or both.

Yeah, I've come back around a bit and realized what I'm doing. Sort of an ends justify the means kind of rationale on my part, which isn't ideal.

I'd be pretty pissed off if Angelos nixed a deal that I thought we should make. I think the fact that I'm not wild about the Gallagher/Marshall/Cedeno package is pacifying my outrage at Angelos' meddling.

I agree Angelos getting involved is generally not a good thing, and always not a good thing from a communication/process/direction standpoint.