For What it's worth.....

[Dr. FLK]

The problem is, nobody else is answering the phone (unless you believe these clandestine Indians talks are real).

The good thing is, you aren't required to answer the phone. AM doesn't need a "slump buster".

[brvn52]

I would take the Cubs deal. Dumping Payton would be nice as well. The hull for Roberts would be nice, two pitchers, a SS, and a 2B.

In the Cleveland deal, we would have to keep all three on the 25 man roster and that would lead to a serious roster crunch as well.

I tend to agree, just the one thing I really like about the CLE trade is that Barfield and Peralta > EPat and Cedeno and that is our biggest weakness in the whole system. Add to that that we get Marte who plays 3B where we have no other guarantees in the system (Rowell and Snyder could very well end up somewhere else).

That said, EPat and Cedeno could at least hold down the fort for a couple years and hopefully at least 1 could develop into a solid player for us. In addition to that we get 2 very good young pitchers in Veal and Gallagher. Also, if the team is dead-set on another veteran pitcher, I would rather it be Marquis at 2 years, $6 million than any of the FA pitchers out there right now.

Either way, they are both good offers.

[ChaosLex]

Ok. So say the final offers are in and these are the 2 offers, which do you take?

Roberts and Payton for Gallagher, Cedeno, Veal, EPat, Marquis and $10 million

Roberts and Olson for Barfield, Peralta, and Marte

The Indians deal and it's not even close.

[Crazysilver03]

I tend to agree, just the one thing I really like about the CLE trade is that Barfield and Peralta > EPat and Cedeno and that is our biggest weakness in the whole system. Add to that that we get Marte who plays 3B where we have no other guarantees in the system (Rowell and Snyder could very well end up somewhere else).

That said, EPat and Cedeno could at least hold down the fort for a couple years and hopefully at least 1 could develop into a solid player for us. In addition to that we get 2 very good young pitchers in Veal and Gallagher. Also, if the team is dead-set on another veteran pitcher, I would rather it be Marquis at 2 years, $6 million than any of the FA pitchers out there right now.

Ronny Cedeno and Eric Patterson vs. Jhonny Peralta and Josh Barfield

Cedeno and Patterson have been better in the minors, while Barfield and Peralta have been average to below average in the majors.

I like adding the extra pitching depth as well.

[ChaosLex]

If we're taking on Marquis and paying his contract, isn't it reasonable to expect both Pie and Gallagher to be coming back?

[Crazysilver03]

The Indians deal and it's not even close.

Have you looked at the stats of the players involved?

This was my first reaction but then I was like, maybe the Cubs deal isnt so bad after all.

Plus hearing about Patton's injury, it just makes me think that there is a small chance that Liz/Penn/Olson/Albers all struggle this year and we are really left sunk. Yes we have depth but a lot of it is still 1-2 years away. If we trade Olson, then we risk even more problems. It is nicer to keep Olson and add Gallagher.

[Crazysilver03]

If we're taking on Marquis and paying his contract, isn't it reasonable to expect both Pie and Gallagher to be coming back?

I doubt the Orioles would pay all of the contract, even if we were sending them Jay Payton as well.

I would ask for Pie and Gallagher to come back if we ate the entire contract. My second choice would be to send them Payton AND Baez.

[Harry Carry]

Money won't be a problem with the Cubs.The Cubs won't ask for any money they just want to win.Am might want Marquis so the Cubs would give him a better prospect.

[brvn52]

Ronny Cedeno and Eric Patterson vs. Jhonny Peralta and Josh Barfield

Cedeno and Patterson have been better in the minors, while Barfield and Peralta have been average to below average in the majors.

I like adding the extra pitching depth as well.

Key part there, however, is that Cedeno and Patterson have done it in the minors while Barfield and Peralta have done in it the majors. Cedeno and Patterson are essentially still prospects and haven't proven a thing at the ML level. Plus Barfield was a very good prospect 2 years ago, had a great rookie year, and just had a down year last year. He is a classic buy-low guy. Peralta is a league-average or so SS, maybe a little better.

I would take Barfield and Peralta over EPat and Cedeno, but like you said, it's the pitching in the Cubs package. That makes the deal it slightly better. You never know what will happen with young pitching and you can never have too much of it.

[davearm]

I could envision the Cubs taking Payton and Baez for Marquis.

Say what you will about Marquis, but that's still a much better way for the O's to spend that money, plus it frees up a roster spot.

[BedardisAce]

Ok. So say the final offers are in and these are the 2 offers, which do you take?

Roberts and Payton for Gallagher, Cedeno, Veal, EPat, Marquis and $10 million

Roberts and Olson for Barfield, Peralta, and Marte

I would take the Indians deal... I don't see the pitchers we'd be getting from the Cubs being any different in terms of upside than the pitchers we already have. So Gallagher could become a 3 or 4 starter. So could Penn, Olson, Patton if he's ever healthy, maybe Albers, and several lower minor league guys. What we need are young infielders and the Indians package comes with some intruiging ones.

EPat is gonna eventually be an outfielder, which we don't need considering we have Reimold in the wings and a cheap outfield under our control for many more years. If we want a below average 2nd baseman with good hitting, we always have Moore, and we could add Barfield. I am not a big Cedeno fan either. He's a nice complementary piece but certainly not a main guy in the deal.

Payton will be a free agent at the end of the year; it would be nice to get rid of him but its not a deal breaker. Marquis has 2 years left on his contract, I believe, and he is terrible and unnecessary - I would take Payton over him.

As for the 40 man roster issues - 60-DL Patton and I'm sure there are plenty of guys that can be taken off the roster - Deza, Torres, Leicester to name a few.

[BedardisAce]

I could envision the Cubs taking Payton and Baez for Marquis.

Say what you will about Marquis, but that's still a much better way for the O's to spend that money, plus it frees up a roster spot.

Marquis is overpaid, average at best, under contract for 2 more years, and would take the spot of a youngster. At least Payton will come off the bench most of the time, and he'll be gone by the offseason. Maybe Baez will turn it around next year when he will be healthy. And he isn't blocking anybody this year.

There is no way the O's should be taking back Marquis unless it allows us to pick up a premium prospect. His ERA would not be pretty in the AL East.

[Ruzious]

Key part there, however, is that Cedeno and Patterson have done it in the minors while Barfield and Peralta have done in it the majors. Cedeno and Patterson are essentially still prospects and haven't proven a thing at the ML level. Plus Barfield was a very good prospect 2 years ago, had a great rookie year, and just had a down year last year. He is a classic buy-low guy. Peralta is a league-average or so SS, maybe a little better.

I would take Barfield and Peralta over EPat and Cedeno, but like you said, it's the pitching in the Cubs package. That makes the deal it slightly better. You never know what will happen with young pitching and you can never have too much of it.

I wouldn't call a .594 OPS getting it done in the Majors.

[brvn52]

I would take the Indians deal... I don't see the pitchers we'd be getting from the Cubs being any different in terms of upside than the pitchers we already have. So Gallagher could become a 3 or 4 starter. So could Penn, Olson, Patton if he's ever healthy, maybe Albers, and several lower minor league guys. What we need are young infielders and the Indians package comes with some intruiging ones.

EPat is gonna eventually be an outfielder, which we don't need considering we have Reimold in the wings and a cheap outfield under our control for many more years. If we want a below average 2nd baseman with good hitting, we always have Moore, and we could add Barfield. I am not a big Cedeno fan either. He's a nice complementary piece but certainly not a main guy in the deal.

Payton will be a free agent at the end of the year; it would be nice to get rid of him but its not a deal breaker. Marquis has 2 years left on his contract, I believe, and he is terrible and unnecessary - I would take Payton over him.

As for the 40 man roster issues - 60-DL Patton and I'm sure there are plenty of guys that can be taken off the roster - Deza, Torres, Leicester to name a few.

I disagree that we don't need more pitching. You can never have too much. Say Patton is done, Penn continues to be oft-injured, Liz throws out his arm, and Albers just never really makes it. Thats not out of the question. It would be bad for us, but it's not impossible. It would be a good idea to have another guy like Gallager in case of this. Plus, the more pitchers you have that project like Gallagher/Olson/Patton/Albers/etc., the better chance you have of one emerging as a #1.

[dkdc]

I could envision the Cubs taking Payton and Baez for Marquis.

Say what you will about Marquis, but that's still a much better way for the O's to spend that money, plus it frees up a roster spot.

That's actually not a bad deal for the Orioles money-wise, assuming Baez's pro-rated bonus goes to Chicago along with him.

Baez/Payton: $11.65MM in 08, $7.10MM in 09

Marquis: $6.375MM in 08, $9.875 in 09

I'd be OK with that if they cut Trax and leave at least one rotation spot open for the O's.

Since Baez is out for the year and Payton is a free agent after this one, it's trading one year of each of those guys for two years of Marquis and $2.5MM.