Roberts Must Go

[Mackus]

You're a class act; really.

Are any of these players starting for you? Maybe Gallagher as your #5? That is my point. You are giving up very little for an upgrade, which is great because "this is the year Cubs fans!!"

Wow, I really do not miss Chicago....

You're missing his point completely.

Just because the Cubs have better players in front of these guys doesn't make them substantially less valuable. It hurts the Cubs negotiating standpoint a little bit, but not a lot.

How about this as an example:

When the Phillies had Thome at 1B and Howard killing it at AAA, do you think the Phillies would have traded Howard for less than they thought he was worth just because they didn't need him yet?

[davearm]

You're a class act; really.

Are any of these players starting for you? Maybe Gallagher as your #5? That is my point. You are giving up very little for an upgrade, which is great because "this is the year Cubs fans!!"

Wow, I really do not miss Chicago....

Whether or not any of these guys are starting for the Cubs is wholly irrelevant to their trade value. It's a common misperception.

[davearm]

You're missing his point completely.

Just because the Cubs have better players in front of these guys doesn't make them substantially less valuable. It hurts the Cubs negotiating standpoint a little bit, but not a lot.

How about this as an example:

When the Phillies had Thome at 1B and Howard killing it at AAA, do you think the Phillies would have traded Howard for less than they thought he was worth just because they didn't need him yet?

You might also point out that Mark Teixeira was recently traded for a non-starter -- Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

[Stotle]

Whether or not any of these guys are starting for the Cubs is wholly irrelevant to their trade value. It's a common misperception.

It's not my misperception. I think the trade for Roberts is fair from a value standpoint. I think you can get a very good player for that package. I don't think that package helps Baltimore.

[Stotle]

You might also point out that Mark Teixeira was recently traded for a non-starter -- Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

You guys are saying this to one of the only posters on here who is actually looking for blocked players to target in trades (like COL).

I get why the Cubs want to move these players. I get that they are valuable.

THEY DO NOT MAKE BALTIMORE A BETTER TEAM IN 2010. THE CUBS SHOULD TRADE THIS GOOD TO VERY GOOD PACKAGE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE THAT CAN HELP THEIR TEAM.

This is like playing cards with my brothers kids...

[davearm]

"Are any of these players starting for you?" was an extremely poor way of communicating that point.

In fact that conveys a wholly different message entirely.

[Stotle]

You might also point out that Mark Teixeira was recently traded for a non-starter -- Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

Yes, because Texas needed a 1b/C. Salty addressed a need. The Braves also traded Renteria, who was redundant, to the Tigers. Surprisingly, the Tigers asked for Renteria BECAUSE THEY NEEDED A SS.

Holy crap I feel like I'm taking crazy pills....

[Roll Tide]

THEY DO NOT MAKE BALTIMORE A BETTER TEAM IN 2010. THE CUBS SHOULD TRADE THIS GOOD TO VERY GOOD PACKAGE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE THAT CAN HELP THEIR TEAM.

I BELIEVE THEY DO!!!

[amateurfan]

It doesn't make any sense for Baltimore to trade Roberts for the guys like EPat and Cedeno. This isn't because they aren't good enough to start on Baltimore's roster now, but because they are not an upgrade over Roberts, and don't, in my view, project to ever be really successful in the bigs. The trade is then two years of Roberts for parts that never work. The alternative to that is keep Roberts and in two years you don't have a second baseman - no more detrimental than trading him for the Cubs' spare parts. In fact, it's a better alternative. You don't trade Roberts to the Cubs for Epat and Cedeno. It makes no sense from Baltimore's position. I don't care if Gallagher is included.

[Stotle]

"Are any of these players starting for you?" was an extremely poor way of communicating that point.

The Braves gave up a huge package primarily structured around twp pieces they were not using but were valuable -- Andrus and Saltalamacchia. (You are the Braves in this example).

The Rangers traded a valuable established commodity for a package of prospects that addressed various needs in their system (The Orioles would be Texas here).

THe problem is BAL does not need your parts. You love the deal, as you should, because you lose nothing of immediate value to you (no key parts for your competitive team). While the parts as stand-alones are quite valuable, they are lose value with BAL because they do not address needs (much like they have lost value in CHN).

Does that help clear it up?

[Stotle]

I BELIEVE THEY DO!!!

Respectfully, you are mistaken, sir...

[davearm]

The Braves gave up a huge package primarily structured around twp pieces they were not using but were valuable -- Andrus and Saltalamacchia. (You are the Braves in this example).

The Rangers traded a valuable established commodity for a package of prospects that addressed various needs in their system (The Orioles would be Texas here).

THe problem is BAL does not need your parts. You love the deal, as you should, because you lose nothing of immediate value to you (no key parts for your competitive team). While the parts as stand-alones are quite valuable, they are lose value with BAL because they do not address needs (much like they have lost value in CHN).

Does that help clear it up?

Several folks jumped on you for your snide "are any of these players starting for you" remark, because as has been pointed out, that is completely irrelevant to this entire discussion.

My advice to you would be to quit while you're behind on this one.

[Mackus]

Respectfully, you are mistaken, sir...

If Murton is out there putting up an .850 OPS with 20 HR (for about $3.5M) and Gallagher is throwing 210 IP at a 4.15 ERA (for about $500k), then they make us a much better team.

[amateurfan]

Several folks jumped on you for your snide "are any of these players starting for you" remark, because as has been pointed out, that is completely irrelevant to this entire discussion.

My advice to you would be to quit while you're behind on this one.

This doesn't respond adequately.

[Rob H]

It's not my misperception. I think the trade for Roberts is fair from a value standpoint. I think you can get a very good player for that package. I don't think that package helps Baltimore.

Respectfully, would you be more willing to entertain an offer of Colvin, Burke, Ceda, and Huseby? Four young guys (2 OF, 1 RP, 1 SP) with huge ceilings but question marks?

The way I see it, Roberts will likely get you players who are ML ready, or high ceiling... but not both. Guys who are ML ready and high ceiling are probably already starting for their respective teams. So if you aren't willing to take ML ready guys who are moderate upgrades over what you currently have, are you willing to take on high ceiling guys with big question marks, but who may be huge improvements over what you have in 3-4 years?