Rasmus for $1/8mm, or Snider for Tarpley & PTBNL?

[jamalshw]

Wouldn't they need to fit him on their 40 man? Maybe they don't have a spot. I also read that they are thick on catching prospects, so it may not be him anyway.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it may be Brian Gonzalez or Tanner Scott and it's a PTBL because you cannot deal either one yet. I would lean Scott and Gonzalez because Tarpley starts to feel like too much unless the second-half 2014 Travis Snider is the real Snider.

[duffaphonic]

Snider=the new McLouth. An ex Bucco who exceeds expectations on the Os.

[Tx Oriole]

Rasmus: 28 this season, .246/.313/.438 in 3039 PA (13.0 rWAR), .225/.287/.448 in 376 PA last year (0.7 rWAR). Can play CF if needed, under team control for only one year (assume $8 mm), some indications of personality/clubhouse issues. Wouldn't have cost us any MiL players.

Snider: 27 this season .246/.310/.406 in 1706 PA (4.2 rWAR), .264/.338/.438 in 359 PA last year (2.5 rWAR). Strictly a corner OF, under team control for two years ($2.1 mm this year), no known clubhouse issues. Cost us Tarpley and an unidentified PTBNL who presumably is of about the same quality as Tarpley.

Would you have rather have signed Rasmus, or done the Snider deal?

I will go with the Snider trade.

[Frobby]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

[TouchemAll]

I'll take Snider more team control I think Rasmus was a one and done.

[weams]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

Almost none.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

I was all for adding rasmus. I like this move better. Honestly had no idea about this possibility at the time of the rasmus move. Admittedly I was a bit affected by his billing coming up with STL as well

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MarylandAaron]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

I was too, but I prefer this move. Snider's cheaper and has about the same upside as Rasmus IMO.

[srock]

I would choose 'Toss up' if it were an option.

[weams]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

I have a question. If we had signed Colby Rasums, who would be designated as a "role player?"

[srock]

I have a question. If we had signed Colby Rasums, who he be designated as a "role player?"

de Aza and Lough.

[LookinUp]

I'm a fan of the organization flipping prospects for established ML guys because I generally think (hope) that we have a good idea of what prospects might have a better reputation in other orgs than in our own. Basically a sell high philosophy.

So, in a vacuum, I support this deal. However, this is the third young left handed pitcher that we've flipped in the last 18ish months. The odds of any individual succeeding aren't great, but the odds that we've given up some very valuable future production keep going up with each of these deals. Time will tell.

[Guest rochester]

I think more to the point, Buck preferred Snider to Rasmus. I'll go along with him.

I agree with this.

[Three Run Homer]

I never dreamed the results to my poll would be so lopsided. I guess not many people were on the Colby Rasmus train.

I think this is just the well-known "endowment effect" in action. If you give people a coffee mug and then ask them what it's worth, you will get a higher number than if you just ask them first.

If the O's had signed Rasmus instead of trading for Snider, a lot of us on the fence (including me, probably) would have voted for Rasmus. We like what we've got, and we want to feel good about the O's offseason and their chances in 2015.