Jump to content

Sun-Times says O's want Cedeno, Gallagher, and 2 more prospects

Bigbie03

By Bigbie03
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

fire83 AA

fire83

Posted
Posted

Not to add more fuel to the fire, but why do the Cubs need to have someone watching Roberts? Don't they know who he is and what he can do? Are we sure the deal might not be bigger then thought? Maybe he was scouting another player on the O's. IMO the deal will be made for Roberts, but I find it curious that the Cubs needed two scouts at the Orioles game just to look at Roberts.

FWIW, as a Cubs fan I would do either deal I have been hearing lately. Either Gallagher, Cedeno and Patterson for Roberts or Gallagher, Cedeno, Veal and Fontenot for Roberts would get the deal done, IMO. If the Orioles wanted to throw in Payton as well, I would take him. But I wouldn't give up another ballplayer. Taking on his salary is enough of an advantage to the O's. No need to add a player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 413
  • Created
  • Last Reply
AgentOrange Veteran All-Star

AgentOrange

Posted
Posted
It's not immediately clear what your point is, however what is certain is that Hendry has been prepared to trade for Roberts, sight unseen, since the first week of December in Nashville.

It's not as though the Cubs are playing some wait-and-see game here involving letting their scouts check out Brian Roberts in ST games to make sure he makes the grade. The Cubs never wanted things to drag out this long in the first place.

So your notion that Ken Kravec's whereabouts shed any sort of light on anything at all is pretty farfetched. As was said back in post #251, the Cubs have scouts here and there around Arizona and Florida, looking at any number of teams and players.

I don't think it is far fetched at all. They were there looking at Roberts. My point was that the trade was very much still alive. This proves my point. Every team has scouts that go around and look at talent. The Orioles are doing the same thing. It is not that the Cubs have this advanced idea to send their scouts all over to get info, everyone does it.

The poster I was talking to said that the trade was done, it wasn't going to happen. But I find it funny that you guys just happened to have scouts at our first game, as well as us throwing a bunch of scouts towards your minor league camp as well.

Seems like the trade is far from dead to me. And that was my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AgentOrange Veteran All-Star

AgentOrange

Posted
Posted
Not to add more fuel to the fire, but why do the Cubs need to have someone watching Roberts? Don't they know who he is and what he can do? Are we sure the deal might not be bigger then thought? Maybe he was scouting another player on the O's. IMO the deal will be made for Roberts, but I find it curious that the Cubs needed two scouts at the Orioles game just to look at Roberts.

FWIW, as a Cubs fan I would do either deal I have been hearing lately. Either Gallagher, Cedeno and Patterson for Roberts or Gallagher, Cedeno, Veal and Fontenot for Roberts would get the deal done, IMO. If the Orioles wanted to throw in Payton as well, I would take him. But I wouldn't give up another ballplayer. Taking on his salary is enough of an advantage to the O's. No need to add a player.

Why wouldn't they look at the guy they are looking to trade for if it is available to them?

Are you kidding? Do you think that the Cubs are sitting around saying "Nah, we don't have to go take a look at Roberts, we know what kinda shape he is in this year, and since we saw him last year, we know what we would be getting"... That is foolish.

I am not saying the Cubs are scouting him because they need to gather all of this information on him because this is a new development in the trade.

If you were buying a car and you knew which kinda car you were going to get, wouldn't you still want to test drive it? I know I would.

It is called doing your homework.

I don't think this scouting session would be some epiphany to your front office. They know what they would be getting with Roberts, but they want to make sure it is what they remembered from last year too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ruzious Hangout Grand Counsel

Ruzious

Posted
Posted
That's called trade negotiations and has nothing to do with "hating." Does Roberts have microscopic value since no one has accepted what you want for him?

Dude, they're trying to trade him for mediocre players, and they're getting turned down. Shine it up any way you want, but that's not exactly showing that major league teams have much respect for his ability, and it speaks volumes about his lack of trade value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davearm All-Star

davearm

Posted
Posted
Are you kidding? Do you think that the Cubs are sitting around saying "Nah, we don't have to go take a look at Roberts, we know what kinda shape he is in this year, and since we saw him last year, we know what we would be getting"... That is foolish.

That's exactly what I think.

Look everyone and their brother knows the Cubs wanted this thing done weeks ago, if not months ago, so obviously they were completely comfortable with the approach you just described. Thus scouting Roberts is a totally unnecessary part of the process.

You can go on thinking that having Cubs folks at your ballgame is significant, but that doesn't make it so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AgentOrange Veteran All-Star

AgentOrange

Posted
Posted
That's exactly what I think.

Look everyone and their brother knows the Cubs wanted this thing done weeks ago, if not months ago, so obviously they were completely comfortable with the approach you just described. Thus scouting Roberts is a totally unnecessary part of the process.

You can go on thinking that having Cubs folks at your ballgame is significant, but that doesn't make it so.

That doesn't make it so in your opinion. And I will hold mine.

It would be foolish for them to not show up. Before when they wanted it done they didn't have the opportunity.

Now that they do have the opportunity, why pass it up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
laxtonto Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

laxtonto

Posted
Posted

Besides, how does anyone know if the Cubs may be considering expanding the deal some for Relief Pitching or adding other parts. Why not scout all you can, espically in live action.

I still think this deal will get done, without Murton unless the O's are planning on flipping him elsewhere. The truel telling part will be when the o's scouts hit the Cubs MILB ST....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bloopandablast Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Bloopandablast

Posted
Posted
That doesn't make it so in your opinion. And I will hold mine.

It would be foolish for them to not show up. Before when they wanted it done they didn't have the opportunity.

Now that they do have the opportunity, why pass it up?

If you are looking now you are doing it to see if there is something to disuade you from continuing on. That would be the likeliest reason to look at him.

I am not saying that they found that, probably to the contrary.

But they are going there to look proactively at other players, whether it be the O's or the Marlins and then confirming that BRob is still the same player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AgentOrange Veteran All-Star

AgentOrange

Posted
Posted
If you are looking now you are doing it to see if there is something to disuade you from continuing on. That would be the likeliest reason to look at him.

I am not saying that they found that, probably to the contrary.

But they are going there to look proactively at other players, whether it be the O's or the Marlins and then confirming that BRob is still the same player.

But that is what I am saying. I am not saying they are scoping him out like he is some new player they have never heard about.

I was just saying that the opportunity is there to get a look at him first hand a the start of the year, why not do it?

I was just proving the point that the trade talks are still very much alive, despite what another poster said about them being all but dead.

My statement got nitpiked to no end and that is why we are still talking about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mackus Hangout Grand Counsel

Mackus

Posted
Posted
I unfortunately think the Cubs deal is going to get done. You guys speak of value, but I wouldn't take anything less than Gallagher, Murton (heart trouble and all Id take him over a healthy Cedeno), Veal, and Pie. I hope McPhail isn't looking to unload him for less.
I think they'd have to add in Rich Hill and Geovanny Soto or the deal wouldn't be fair.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • SouthRider
      Its always easier in hindsight, but letting Kyle Gibson go, could end up being a glaring error.

      By SouthRider · Posted

      Could be a trade target. 
    • RZNJ
      Its always easier in hindsight, but letting Kyle Gibson go, could end up being a glaring error.

      By RZNJ · Posted

      Hindsight. Roy Firestone Plus Member  35.4k Posted September 6, 2023 Gibson is brutal...  
    • Can_of_corn
      Its always easier in hindsight, but letting Kyle Gibson go, could end up being a glaring error.

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      Cool that he wanted to come back. Would the O's have paid that much for a long man and would Elias even want a long man?
    • Frobby
      Its always easier in hindsight, but letting Kyle Gibson go, could end up being a glaring error.

      By Frobby · Posted

      The O’s were never going to trade for a stud like Burnes and resign Gibson.  They went for an upgrade and got one.  
    • Roy Firestone
      Its always easier in hindsight, but letting Kyle Gibson go, could end up being a glaring error.

      By Roy Firestone · Posted

      I know for a fact he wanted to stay...12-13 million would have been a good 1. year protection plan..He was really respected and loved by his teammates...
    • CHIP
      AAA Catcher Comps - Hunt vs. Handley

      By CHIP · Posted

      Handley has been on IL since 6/8/24.  As of this morning, no idea if he will be returning to action after 1 week or if it is going to be time.  Only time will tell...  But the O's decided to give Banuelos a break from the taxi squad yesterday.  Am I reading into something?  Sure, but isn't that what we do here? However...  this week off of Handley vs. Hunt has given my son and I some more time to look at Hunt's 2024 history.  (I still think this is a SSS (small sample size) but since some on this board rejoice over 1 week of good performance  I'm going the other direction... bad performance.) As a precursor, I'm starting to think the O's fans need to brace for "something is better than nothing" when it comes to Hunt.  But what exactly is the "something" as it comes to Hunt for Baumann/Perez trade.  I believe it is also looking that we got "April Fooled" even acknowledging the SSS. Hunt's April stats with Tacoma (SEA): 12 games, 42 PA, 37 AB, 14 H, 2-2B, 1-3B, 2-HR, 2 HBP, 3 BB and only 4 K.   .378/.452/.649 for a 1.101 OPS   These stats would have OH screaming for Hunt over McCann.  This seems to have been the opinion when the trade first happened with Mariner fans as they were wanting hunt moved up to SEA. Since then...  well...  April shower's bring May flowers and maybe we got a carnation. 11 more games with Tacoma before the trade.  38 PA, 33 AB, 7H, 2-2B, 2 HR, 2 HBP, 2 BB, 4K.     .212/.308/.455 for a 0.763 now... the O's would have seen this as well... but the average over his 24 games before coming to the Tide wasn't bad.  .293/.372/.533 with .905 OPS.  This was still attention getting for sure.  But would the O's and OH posters have liked this trade based on just his May numbers? So... let's break down the 24 games with Tacoma vs. 12 games with Norfolk using some of Fangraphs stats/metrics: The 'highlight' and literally this is the ONLY highlight I can find.  (There is a 'candle' light as well) HIGHLIGHT:  In 12 games with Tides, Hunt has 3 HR (1:16 PA).  He only had 4 with Tacoma in 24 games (1:19 PA) CANDLELIGHT:  3 of 15 runners caught (20% for Norfolk) vs. 2 of 18 runners caught (11.1% for Tacoma).  But hey, this is an 80% increase! Here are some of the shadow numbers that 'fans' really don't want to look at because it flies into the face of 'HOPE'  Hunt's AAA wRC+ while with SEA in 2024 was 121.  Hunt's AAAA wRC+ while with BAL is.... 46.    Ooooffff. Hunt's BB & K rate while with SEA were 7.0% and 11.6%.  Hunt's BB/K rate with BAL are 0.0% and 36.7%.  Based on his walk rate... reminds me of a MLB O'S catcher.    Is the IL pitching that much better than the PCL?  Is Hunt trying to hard because of the H vs. H competition?  Hunt's SwStr% has gone from 7.7% to 16.1% between teams. Maybe this is a look into what other GM's saw and why Hunt is on/in his 4th MLB organization and still in MiLB. Last little nugget... like my dog kicking the grass after a piss... Since going to Tacoma from the Trade, Michael Perez has done almost the opposite!  His SwStr% has gone from 11.8% to 6.9%.  wRC+ had gone from 58 to 96.  His walk rate has tripled (5.7 to 17.9). His K rate has nearly halved (31 to 17.9). So... we aren't half way thru the AAA season and there is more time to compare our catchers coming up.  When and how Handley comes back from his IL stint is going to be interesting.
    • spleen1015
      What does the Bradish injury really mean?

      By spleen1015 · Posted

      If Bradish is out for TJ, then I'd trade anyone for the right SP with 2+ years of control. We're going to need to replace Bradish for the rest of this year and some of next. Chances are pretty high that Burnes hits FA. So, we need 2 TOR SP next year. I think a proven SP helps us more than waiting to see what type of MLBer any of the prospects will be.

  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...