If we give up a draft pick for Kendrys Morales I will hammer a railroad spike through my head

[Stotle]

If there were a redraft today of last June, I think Hunter Harvey would go top ten.

Tough call. I think the pro guys certainly think so. I think the amateur guys with longer history with the players probably haven't changed their minds yet. Just not a long enough pro track record.

[Frobby]

1. Yes. Hobgood is a real stumbling block, but Hunter and ERod really pick up a lot of that slack.

2. Yes. But they don't. And Hader was not it.

There were other misses that draft, but Hobgood really hurts.

For me, our inability to get much out of our second round picks also has hurt a lot over the years. In the last 25 drafts, we've picked one guy who had higher than 0.1 rWAR for his career: Nolan Reimold. The only nine to reach the majors: Xavier Avery, Ryan Adams, Nolan Reimold, Sean Douglass, Brian Falkenborg, Tommy Davis (not the one who played DH for us, David Lamb, Brian Sackinsky, Erik Schullstrom.

[atomic]

But they will all be from previous regimes' scouting, drafting, and developing, so they all will be irrelevant.

I can give you a list of first round busts from when DD was GM of red Sox.

[primetime]

It appears that there will be no head spiking on this issue. The fans health is Dan Duquette most important objective.

Given the current state of the fans' health, we'd definitely fail an Orioles physical.

[atomic]

All this hand-wringing over the possibility that the Orioles might sign a Kendrys Morales or Nelson Cruz is laughable. PA probably wakes up in a cold sweat mulling over such a deal and believe me' date=' the draft pick isn't what's giving him nightmares.[/quote']

Exactly.

[weams]

Tough call. I think the pro guys certainly think so. I think the amateur guys with longer history with the players probably haven't changed their minds yet. Just not a long enough pro track record.

So you think Josh Hart might still pan out?

[mdbdotcom]

I can give you a list of first round busts from when DD was GM of red Sox.

Was he the scouting director? That's usually who makes the draft calls.

[El Gordo]

I think this is where you break down. There are other ways to build the team without losing the pick. They haven't necessarily taken advantage of them so I'm inclined to agree with you on some level, but the 'screw the pick' mentality is short sighted to say the least. And that comes from someone who wants to see them increase payroll. I do, however, live in reality.

Screw the pick is short sighted. If you are going for it that's what you have to be. Just because you are risking one pick in order to contend doesn't mean it's a policy.

[weams]

Perfect; thanks. So, as I would expect is the case with most folks, you seem uncomfortable with trading the young cost-controlled talent that has a potential to help out the big team (with upside) in the next year or two because it depletes BAL's reserve of those player types. And you correctly value those player types because BAL's desired payroll level seems to necessitate the org create opportunities for excess value at the MLB level in order to build a collection of talent that in the aggregate will compete with TAM/NYA/BOS/TOR, mostly by spending less (the latter three) or starting from a position where you are disadvantaged as to cost-controlled talent (the former).

With the 17th overall pick this year, it's easily conceivable BAL will have the opportunity to select a college arm that is more advanced than Harey, with a higher floor, and capable of helping the MLB team out a year or two more quickly. If you draft that player, you can move Harvey in a mid-season deal and actually be ahead of the game from both a strength-of-the-system standpoint and strength-of-the-big-club standpoint, because you will have replaced the MiLB talent with the pick and you will be trading for a player as good, or better, than someone like Morales or Cruz or Drew, etc.

In fact, you could argue the same for trading Bundy. You are probably sacrificing upside, but your also exchanging risk and winding up with a college arm that maybe helps you out in the rotation at the beginning of 2016 instead of mid-2015.

The pick is valuable for what it produces (the player) but it's equally valuable for the flexibility it gives you in adding to the overall talent in your MiLB, which is your cache for trading for impact talent.

Great Summary. We are fortunate to have your thoughts here.

[El Gordo]

We can try this from another angle, though your words seem to indicate you're pretty well entrenched in some sort of binary analysis of the situation and I'm doubtful you have the desire to actually engage in earnest.

Tell me where you draw the line as far as prospects you'd trade in the system:

Guasman

Bundy

Harvey (midseason when eligible)

Rodriguez

Schoop

Wright

Berry

Davies

Sisco

Hart

Is everyone on the table? Common sense deals. Price will cost Gausman/Bundy + ERod/Schoop + Wright/Berry + low level guy. Headley will cost Schoop + Wright + low level guy.

You open to trading whatever it takes, provided equal value, to fill holes Baltimore has?

I have to know what my budget is. Depending on that I would first try to bolster the team through FA in order to contend the next two years. If I don't have the money to do that, then I don't want to trade any of them. I trade Davis and Wieters now. What the O's seem to be doing id holding on to their prospects as well as Wieters and Davis, and augmenting the ML roster with marginal affordable upgrades? and hoping for some improvement from Manny, Wieters, Markakis, and Gausman. If you need to have a choice then I would draw the line between ERod and Schoop. Of course you can't make these choices in a vacuum, you have to know the return. I might trade Bundy, Schoop, Berry and the low level guy for Price. Not all that excited by Headley. Be more inclined to extend Hardy and keep Manny at 3B.

[Stotle]

I have to know what my budget is. Depending on that I would first try to bolster the team through FA in order to contend the next two years. If I don't have the money to do that, then I don't want to trade any of them. I trade Davis and Wieters now. What the O's seem to be doing id holding on to their prospects as well as Wieters and Davis, and augmenting the ML roster with marginal affordable upgrades? and hoping for some improvement from Manny, Wieters, Markakis, and Gausman. If you need to have a choice then I would draw the line between ERod and Schoop. Of course you can't make these choices in a vacuum, you have to know the return.

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I believe you generally formulate your opinions on here under the understanding Baltimore has around $100 MM to spend on payroll. You are also of the opinion BAL will not spend big in FA on a top tier signing and will generally not sign a pitcher for longer than a there year deal.

The draft pick is important for the short term not because of the future MLB value of the player drafted, but because it gives you the flexibility to trade one of your top guys for comparable "now" MLB talent without forfeiting the potential for near-term cost controlled contributions.

Deep college arm crop in the draft, so BAL should reasonably expect to have multiple options available from the following (shorthand -- obviously players more than these cursory grades):

Kyle Freeland (plus to plus-plus FB, plus slider, lefty)

Eric Fedde (plus to plus-plus fastball, potential plus breaker, projectable)

Michael Cederoth (plus-plus fastball, future plus breaking ball, reaches triple-digits)

Nick Burdi (plus-plus to 80 fastball (regular triple-digits), plus to plus-plus breaker, reliever)

Luke Weaver (plus to plus-plus fastball, average to above-average breaking ball)

Tyler Beede (plus fastball, two potential plus breaking balls)

Brandon Finnegan (plus-plus fastball, plus breaker, undersized w/effort)

Aaron Nola (average to plus fastball, average to plus breaker, average to plus change, war tested at LSU)

With those arms where they are right now, it's easy to assume there will be a good, advanced college arm available for Baltimore at 17th overall pick -- someone who could step into High A this year, Double-A next year, and Baltimore to start 2016 (maybe sooner than that). You could trade Bundy or Harvey and end up with MLB help more quickly (and with less risk), sacrificing some upside. Or, you could package Gausman for a front-end arm ready now, and add to the potential #2/#3/#4 type arms you have in the system come June.

Just one example, but hopefully that clarifies what I'm getting at. It isn't solely about the value of that player you're drafting, it's about 1) building depth from which to trade, and 2) with the type of players BAL targets in FA, you are likely to get a better talent trading a prospect than signing the second tier QO FAs. Holding on to the pick affords you those advantages.

[El Gordo]

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I believe you generally formulate your opinions on here under the understanding Baltimore has around $100 MM to spend on payroll. You are also of the opinion BAL will not spend big in FA on a top tier signing and will generally not sign a pitcher for longer than a there year deal.

The draft pick is important for the short term not because of the future MLB value of the player drafted, but because it gives you the flexibility to trade one of your top guys for comparable "now" MLB talent without forfeiting the potential for near-term cost controlled contributions.

Deep college arm crop in the draft, so BAL should reasonably expect to have multiple options available from the following (shorthand -- obviously players more than these cursory grades):

Kyle Freeland (plus to plus-plus FB, plus slider, lefty)

Eric Fedde (plus to plus-plus fastball, potential plus breaker, projectable)

Michael Cederoth (plus-plus fastball, future plus breaking ball, reaches triple-digits)

Nick Burdi (plus-plus to 80 fastball (regular triple-digits), plus to plus-plus breaker, reliever)

Luke Weaver (plus to plus-plus fastball, average to above-average breaking ball)

Tyler Beede (plus fastball, two potential plus breaking balls)

Brandon Finnegan (plus-plus fastball, plus breaker, undersized w/effort)

Aaron Nola (average to plus fastball, average to plus breaker, average to plus change, war tested at LSU)

With those arms where they are right now, it's easy to assume there will be a good, advanced college arm available for Baltimore at 17th overall pick -- someone who could step into High A this year, Double-A next year, and Baltimore to start 2016 (maybe sooner than that). You could trade Bundy or Harvey and end up with MLB help more quickly (and with less risk), sacrificing some upside. Or, you could package Gausman for a front-end arm ready now, and add to the potential #2/#3/#4 type arms you have in the system come June.

Just one example, but hopefully that clarifies what I'm getting at. It isn't solely about the value of that player you're drafting, it's about 1) building depth from which to trade, and 2) with the type of players BAL targets in FA, you are likely to get a better talent trading a prospect than signing the second tier QO FAs. Holding on to the pick affords you those advantages.

I am looking at the 100 M ceiling and the 3 year limit on FA SP. If these things weren't a factor I don't think there would be a problem. If the #17 pick could free us to trade ERod it would depend on the return. I doubt he'd bring back the ML ready arm we need to contend. We'd have to trade Bundy/Gausman, IMO.

[Stotle]

I am looking at the 100 M ceiling and the 3 year limit on FA SP. If these things weren't a factor I don't think there would be a problem. If the #17 pick could free us to trade ERod it would depend on the return. I doubt he'd bring back the ML ready arm we need to contend. We'd have to trade Bundy/Gausman, IMO.

It sounds like you don't really buy into BAL competing based on the restrictions you believe to be in place (payroll limit/limitations on acquiring an additional arm). If that's the case, throwing the pick away for something like Morales makes even less sense.

[Ripken]

I have to know what my budget is. Depending on that I would first try to bolster the team through FA in order to contend the next two years. If I don't have the money to do that, then I don't want to trade any of them. I trade Davis and Wieters now. What the O's seem to be doing id holding on to their prospects as well as Wieters and Davis, and augmenting the ML roster with marginal affordable upgrades? and hoping for some improvement from Manny, Wieters, Markakis, and Gausman. If you need to have a choice then I would draw the line between ERod and Schoop. Of course you can't make these choices in a vacuum, you have to know the return. I might trade Bundy, Schoop, Berry and the low level guy for Price. Not all that excited by Headley. Be more inclined to extend Hardy and keep Manny at 3B.

This is entirely accurate and I think most fans are here.

[Singleton]

Perfect; thanks. So, as I would expect is the case with most folks, you seem uncomfortable with trading the young cost-controlled talent that has a potential to help out the big team (with upside) in the next year or two because it depletes BAL's reserve of those player types. And you correctly value those player types because BAL's desired payroll level seems to necessitate the org create opportunities for excess value at the MLB level in order to build a collection of talent that in the aggregate will compete with TAM/NYA/BOS/TOR, mostly by spending less (the latter three) or starting from a position where you are disadvantaged as to cost-controlled talent (the former).

With the 17th overall pick this year, it's easily conceivable BAL will have the opportunity to select a college arm that is more advanced than Harey, with a higher floor, and capable of helping the MLB team out a year or two more quickly. If you draft that player, you can move Harvey in a mid-season deal and actually be ahead of the game from both a strength-of-the-system standpoint and strength-of-the-big-club standpoint, because you will have replaced the MiLB talent with the pick and you will be trading for a player as good, or better, than someone like Morales or Cruz or Drew, etc.

In fact, you could argue the same for trading Bundy. You are probably sacrificing upside, but your also exchanging risk and winding up with a college arm that maybe helps you out in the rotation at the beginning of 2016 instead of mid-2015.

The pick is valuable for what it produces (the player) but it's equally valuable for the flexibility it gives you in adding to the overall talent in your MiLB, which is your cache for trading for impact talent.

This is a great summary. It also explains why the Norris trade was such a risky one. Yes, it improved us last year but without the sup. pick, Hader and Hoes, we have much less depth to improve ourselves this year.

Given the current state of our team, I wouldn't give up the pick to sign any of the available free agents. I think there were moves available to us that were low cost, low risk with some upside that we didn't make (Hudson, Hart, Kazmir, Murphy, Colon, trading for Fister and other moves). Just over a month left in the offseason and I still don't understand the team's plan beyond adding some very mildly interesting minor league free agents.

Very disappointing.