Roch's Take

[Fairfax Bird]

Yes...if we can somehow get Payton out of here, I would be all for it.

I think he'd be a nice guy to have on a contending team. He still hits lefties pretty well, and is good in the outfield. We certainly don't need him here.

If they signed Wilkerson to a one year deal as MLB trade rumors reported, then Payton would make a lot of sense. Balentien is the guy in 2009, but Wilkerson getting 450 ABs and Payton 150 + backing up the other two OF positions makes sense for them. Payton makes no sense on this team.

[Migrant Redbird]

Pretty sloppy "article" if you ask me.

Pieper confirmed in the article that the two sides talked “conceptually” about a three-year contract. That's not an actual offer, but one was in the works. However, since Bedard is signed through 2009, my math tells me that we’re only talking about a one-year extension. No chance.

Bedard is under control for 2 more years, not signed! He has accepted arbitration for 2008 so he's effectively "under contract" for whichever figure the arbitrator picks, unless he agrees to different terms with the O's first, but he's definitely not under contract through 2009. The O's could decide not to offer him arbitration or he could decide not to accept (although that would also mean not playing baseball -- because of the "control" thing) but however you put it, to state that he's "signed through 2009" is just flat wrong! Doesn't Roch know this? Is he really that careless with his facts?

Bedard doesn’t want to go through a rebuilding process. The Orioles are going through a rebuilding process. He’s as good as gone.

That's no more informed than all the fan speculation that's been going on in this forum the past month or two. A worthless BLOG article, just column filler.

The other thing is that the O's might prefer a 3 year deal to a 4 year deal. Bedard's track record isn't that long and I'd be just a little nervous signing him to a longer multi-year contract. Sign him to 2 or 3 years (as opposed to the 3 or 4 years I've suggested elsewhere), with the customary club option and then, in 2 or 3 years, use the team's club option leverage to sign him to a new multi-year contract. As long as the team is comfortable with the dollars involved vis-a-vis the performance they can reasonably expect to get over the term of the contract, they can parlay 2 or 3 year deals with club options to keep Bedard under control forever if they want to.

There will always be an advantage to a player to agree to an extension rather than to play out his option year and go free agency -- if the team is offering an extension that's reasonably close to what he's likely to get in free agency, he'd be foolish to take the risk of injury while playing his walk season.

Baseball teams understand this well, which is why you see so few "quality" free agents on the market anymore. If the team really wants the player, they make him a "decent" contract extension offer and he never reaches free agency. Only if the team doesn't really want the player, or the player is really stubborn about how much he thinks he's worth, do you see good players reaching free agency. Teams which can't afford to play their stars "decent" contracts trade them off to teams which can, since getting decent prospects who are close to the majors is more likely to pay off than letting players walk for the draft picks -- especially since the team has to risk offering arbitration to get those draft picks and might end up having to pay that player for a season when he wasn't in their plans -- a la the Phillies with Polanco a couple years ago or the Astros this year with Loretta.

[theobird]

Yeah, I missed the LOL. I am not sure the five is a hair too much, but if it is, I wouldn't mind giving them a Jay Payton + cash back if it meant adding Chen to the deal.

Now I like that idea. And you are right about Paytons value. In the right situation I could see Payton being pretty attractive. He can play any three OF positions reasonably well and he does hit Lefties. I have kinda thought all along that Payton is a perfect fit for the Cubs as part of a BRob trade. He could platoon with Pie, because Pie cannot be expected to hit against LHers. To me, Payton will not be that hard to trade. And I think he certainly should be. Gibbons and Mora are practically untradeable in my estimation. Ramon's value is at an all time low, but he may be tradeable if you don't expect too much back, or are willing to take back another veteran who is overpaid in return.

Anyway, if we were to get back Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, Tui and Chen for Bedard and Payton...Then the Cubs deal that makes sense to me would be BRob for Murton, Gallagher and EPat. Murton could DH and spell the corner OFers, and EPat could play 2b and be available as a back up CFer. Let Chen compete with LH, the loser becoming the uti infielder/defensive replacement for EPat while he tries to acclimate himself to 2b. It eliminates the need to carry guys like Roberson on your 25 man. The other possibility would be to trade Bedard straight up and leave Chen out, then include Payton with Brob and get back Murton, Gallagher, Cedeno and EPat.

[Time2Win]

Pretty sloppy "article" if you ask me.

Bedard is under control for 2 more years, not signed! He has accepted arbitration for 2008 so he's effectively "under contract" for whichever figure the arbitrator picks, unless he agrees to different terms with the O's first, but he's definitely not under contract through 2009. The O's could decide not to offer him arbitration or he could decide not to accept (although that would also mean not playing baseball -- because of the "control" thing) but however you put it, to state that he's "signed through 2009" is just flat wrong! Doesn't Roch know this? Is he really that careless with his facts?

That's no more informed than all the fan speculation that's been going on in this forum the past month or two. A worthless BLOG article, just column filler.

The other thing is that the O's might prefer a 3 year deal to a 4 year deal. Bedard's track record isn't that long and I'd be just a little nervous signing him to a longer multi-year contract. Sign him to 2 or 3 years (as opposed to the 3 or 4 years I've suggested elsewhere), with the customary club option and then, in 2 or 3 years, use the team's club option leverage to sign him to a new multi-year contract. As long as the team is comfortable with the dollars involved vis-a-vis the performance they can reasonably expect to get over the term of the contract, they can parlay 2 or 3 year deals with club options to keep Bedard under control forever if they want to.

There will always be an advantage to a player to agree to an extension rather than to play out his option year and go free agency -- if the team is offering an extension that's reasonably close to what he's likely to get in free agency, he'd be foolish to take the risk of injury while playing his walk season.

Baseball teams understand this well, which is why you see so few "quality" free agents on the market anymore. If the team really wants the player, they make him a "decent" contract extension offer and he never reaches free agency. Only if the team doesn't really want the player, or the player is really stubborn about how much he thinks he's worth, do you see good players reaching free agency. Teams which can't afford to play their stars "decent" contracts trade them off to teams which can, since getting decent prospects who are close to the majors is more likely to pay off than letting players walk for the draft picks -- especially since the team has to risk offering arbitration to get those draft picks and might end up having to pay that player for a season when he wasn't in their plans -- a la the Phillies with Polanco a couple years ago or the Astros this year with Loretta.

How did that Polanco thing work out? Pretty good for Detroit. But you are right about free agency and the decline of the younger star players. The extensions have been the best battle against free agency for the owners. It is working.

[bigbird]

If Tillman is the second piece, I will be extremely disappointed. Bedard should be traded for quality - seems like we will trade Roberts more for quantity

Tillman is a very good young player. Probably has as much upside as any young pitcher in our system The 4th player is a key for me.

[Birds08]

Tillman is a very good young player. Probably has as much upside as any young pitcher in our system The 4th player is a key for me.

True, but don't the walks scare you? I'm sick of all the guys with great stuff and no control we've had in our system. Would much rather get another everyday player.

[ChaosLex]

Tillman is a very good young player. Probably has as much upside as any young pitcher in our system The 4th player is a key for me.

Who would you be happy with, bigbird? Butler, Chen, or Tui work for me.

[mikezpen]

If the Orioles want something better as a second player than Sherill or Tillman, they may have to offer something better than Payton. Anyway, I'm not down on him like most here. He could help the Orioles next yr. as the 4th outfielder. He hits lefties and he hits well w/MOB.

[furryburres]

I don't understand why people like Tui so much. He's never shown any sort of ability beyong 68 AB in '04. I'd just rather get Triunfel, cut out Tillman, and call it day.

[theobird]

If the Orioles want something better as a second player than Sherill or Tillman, they may have to offer something better than Payton. Anyway, I'm not down on him like most here. He could help the Orioles next yr. as the 4th outfielder. He hits lefties and he hits well w/MOB.

Interesting take. I am not down on Payton either. He is at the bottom of my list of veteran players to get rid of. Millar, Huff, Mora and Gibbons are way ahead of him on my list. I think hes expendable though, especially if we end up with Matt Murton. I really like Matt Murton, and I would not trade BRob to the Cubs without Murton as the centerpiece of the deal.

[Time2Win]

I think you value Murton more than AM does.

[shroombal]

It'd be good to get rid of Gibbons in this deal...but I'm not too interested in bringing in Sherill...Give us Morrow and Clement or Triunfel..

[Stotle]

Tillman is a very good young player. Probably has as much upside as any young pitcher in our system The 4th player is a key for me.

Based on what it looks like SEA is willing to offer, the idea trade (for me) would be

Jones/Tillman/Sherill/Martinez

This is conditioned on Sherill or Walker being flipped for Lillibridge (the only reason I believe the rumor is BAL has little use for another LH in the 'pen, and he's mentioned a lot as a piece).

If you have Jones/Tillman/Lillibridge/Martinez, I honestly believe you are getting more quantity and more quality than Jones/Triunfel/Tillman. Martinez can be every bit the player Triunfel can. Slightly less "flashy" defense, but great hands. A larger frame that projects to more power and an already fluid swing that is producing linedrives to all fields at the low levels.

Now you'd have a CF for the ML team, a SS for the ML team hopefully by the end of the season, a power arm to add to a sick staff at Bowie and a projectable 3b in your low minors to slot in behind Costanzo on the depth chart (Rowell is 1b bound, and it's debatable Snyder can stick at 3b).

[Boca Bird]

Whats up with Clement?

Is Sea refusing to include him or could it be that the AM isn't really interested in a power hitting positional prospect ?

I know his defense is suspect behind the plate,but I'd be happy seeing him get ab's backing up ramon, millar ,and dhing --as long as he gets a solid 500 ab's this yr somewhere for the O's.

I hope the assumption of Wieters being a sure thing or that Tex will be aquired via FA isn't the reason AM isn't interested in Clement

Whats the latest scuttlebut on CLement ?

[bigbird]

True, but don't the walks scare you? I'm sick of all the guys with great stuff and no control we've had in our system. Would much rather get another everyday player.

Not at his age....most kids his age were college freshman. I want the best talent no matter where they play.