Sun: Cubs Offer Ceden, Gallagher, Veal and maybe a 4th player - For Roberts

[Frobby]

I thought this quote from the article was interesting:

The Orioles have all the leverage in the talks because Roberts still has two seasons remaining on his deal, allowing the Orioles to hold out until they get the offer they want. The Orioles don't expect to win this season anyway, while the Cubs view Roberts as one of the final pieces to a potentially championship-caliber club.

I guess that's true - we can afford to wait, while the Cubs really need to fish or cut bait.

[davearm]

I've been fairly quiet as regards the 'Roberts to the Cubs' trade front...

However, I feel that the timing is right, as the deal actual should be consumated, if at all, within the next week. I like Cedeno, Gallagher and Veal as a '3 out of 4' offer for BRob, but naturally the 4th player must be one that makes sense, and in my view Patterson does not.

Eric Patterson may eventually be a solid CF option someday for another team, but we don't need that, we need EPat to be a good defensive 2B'man, and unfortunately he is not.

So... with EPat out of the equation as the 4th player (in my world at least), the question becomes> Who will the mysterious Player X be? Many names have been associated with this trade; Murton, Colvin, Marshall, EPat, Ceda, etc... but the player that makes the most sense to me is simply Matt Murton.

Murton should DH and find spot duty in LF on Luke Scott's off-days. Murton is a promising better-than-average hitter, with a right handed bat. He is a mid-twenties player with subpar defense, but he is blocked in Chicago, while offering us some experience and a career OPS over .800. Who couldn't use that? Murton should be penciled in to our lineup permanently at DH as soon as Huff and Millar get dealt.

Deal off Mora, Huff, Payton and Millar and bring in younger talent that have hope to be a part of the resurgence that is evident here in Baltimore. Murton can be a part of that, while Ceda shows tremendous upside as well. The others may be fine players in the bigs, but I just see Murton as a far more sure thing... and a solid one at that.

I've always been curious about this line of thinking.

We all know Patterson is viewed as a plus bat, and a minus defender.

Why is that not acceptable, but it's acceptable to have a plus defender and a minus bat?

And why does the contender/noncontender thing make any difference?

The game is all about producing runs on offense, and preventing runs on defense. I want the guy that gives me the best differential, regardless of how he gets there.

If Patterson produces, say, 100 runs with the bat, and prevents 50 with the glove, isn't that more valuable than a guy that produces 50 and prevents 70?*

Winning 7-6 still beats losing 2-1, right?

* All numbers are illustrative and hypothetical, not predictive.

[clapdiddy]

I thought this quote from the article was interesting:

I guess that's true - we can afford to wait, while the Cubs really need to fish or cut bait.

Yes. Unless we get an offer we find attractive enough, Roberts will remain an Oriole. We need to play this hand right. If he is still here come opening day, its certainly not the end of the world.

[dsr42887]

After months of reading the numerous Brian Roberts trade threads, I feel that the only way I could get excited about this deal is if Felix Pie were going to be included. However, I understand that's probably not going to happen.

It's tough to get excited about a middle-infield of Luis Hernandez and Ronny Cedeno. After reading all of your comments and opinions on Cedeno, it seems like a lot of you share the same opinion. Cedeno looks like nothing more than a solid backup in the majors and I think what we have with Luis Hernandez brings the same to the table.

[davearm]

Yes. Unless we get an offer we find attractive enough, Roberts will remain an Oriole. We need to play this hand right. If he is still here come opening day, its certainly not the end of the world.

Not the end of the world... but quite likely the end of the O's "sell high" opportunity. MacPhail is unlikely to be offered more at some time in the future.

[zff4]

Not the end of the world... but quite likely the end of the O's "sell high" opportunity. MacPhail is unlikely to be offered more at some time in the future.

You don't think there's a possibility that deadline pressures of perhaps other teams in contention might up the ante?

[davearm]

You don't think there's a possibility that deadline pressures of perhaps other teams in contention might up the ante?

It's possible. And unlikely.

[clapdiddy]

Not the end of the world... but quite likely the end of the O's "sell high" opportunity. MacPhail is unlikely to be offered more at some time in the future.

I can't disagree with you Dave. I like the idea of dealing him now because I think its our best chance to get a good return for him. I just don't know what I'd want for him at this point.

I'm truly not too thrilled with any of the names I'm hearing from the Cubs outside of Gallagher. I'm also not thrilled with the idea of getting draft picks for Roberts.

[Mike B]

I've been fairly quiet as regards the 'Roberts to the Cubs' trade front...

However, I feel that the timing is right, as the deal actual should be consumated, if at all, within the next week. I like Cedeno, Gallagher and Veal as a '3 out of 4' offer for BRob, but naturally the 4th player must be one that makes sense, and in my view Patterson does not.

Eric Patterson may eventually be a solid CF option someday for another team, but we don't need that, we need EPat to be a good defensive 2B'man, and unfortunately he is not.

So... with EPat out of the equation as the 4th player (in my world at least), the question becomes> Who will the mysterious Player X be? Many names have been associated with this trade; Murton, Colvin, Marshall, EPat, Ceda, etc... but the player that makes the most sense to me is simply Matt Murton.

Murton should DH and find spot duty in LF on Luke Scott's off-days. Murton is a promising better-than-average hitter, with a right handed bat. He is a mid-twenties player with subpar defense, but he is blocked in Chicago, while offering us some experience and a career OPS over .800. Who couldn't use that? Murton should be penciled in to our lineup permanently at DH as soon as Huff and Millar get dealt.

Deal off Mora, Huff, Payton and Millar and bring in younger talent that have hope to be a part of the resurgence that is evident here in Baltimore. Murton can be a part of that, while Ceda shows tremendous upside as well. The others may be fine players in the bigs, but I just see Murton as a far more sure thing... and a solid one at that.

I read your post with interest, but I still think the problem is that Murton is a younger version of the type of players we already have. The roadblock is finding a taker for Millar, Huff, Payton and Jay Gibbons. I think it would take a miracle to move 2 of those 4. All that said, I like Colvin as the 4th. He is a tools player, who would most likely start at Bowie or Norfolk. It allows us more time to break the log jam and when that is done, you have another young outfield to put in the mix. The Orioles outfield has been poor defensively and lacking in power for years. Markakis changed a third of that, Jones hopefully will get us 2/3rds of the way there. Colvin/Reimold and short term Scott should complete the puzzle. I like Scott but he is 29 and is average defensively. I think left field in Camden Yards calls for an excellent defensive player and I think Scott will fall short of that. Hopefully Reimold or a Colvin or Pie would complete that puzzle.

[Mike B]

After months of reading the numerous Brian Roberts trade threads, I feel that the only way I could get excited about this deal is if Felix Pie were going to be included. However, I understand that's probably not going to happen.

It's tough to get excited about a middle-infield of Luis Hernandez and Ronny Cedeno. After reading all of your comments and opinions on Cedeno, it seems like a lot of you share the same opinion. Cedeno looks like nothing more than a solid backup in the majors and I think what we have with Luis Hernandez brings the same to the table.

Agreed, basically said IMO a Brian Roberts should bring you at least one prospect back that makes you say "WOW", we got that guy??? I do not see it in the package the cubs have offered. Pie, or Colvin, or Ceda, have to be in the deal. 1 of 3, not all three.

[CrimsonTribe]

No offense to anyone, but it also seemed Harry was intentionally deceiving people. Turning "Heyman said not today or tomorrow and some possible names are __" into "Heyman said it will happen today or tomorrow and the deal is __," Andy MacPhail was the GM who let Furcal and Beltran get away, Veal told him he struggled last year because his parents died (mother was Nov 2004, father was Nov 2007), "3 players are done and the 4th player is ___," etc. etc. When you add in the "grammar," and his claim of sources, I was convinced for awhile that it was an Orioles fan trying to make Cubs fans look bad.

Not to mention that a real Cubs fan should know how to spell Harry Caray.

[rolliefingers]

I've always been curious about this line of thinking.

We all know Patterson is viewed as a plus bat, and a minus defender.

Why is that not acceptable, but it's acceptable to have a plus defender and a minus bat?

And why does the contender/noncontender thing make any difference?

The game is all about producing runs on offense, and preventing runs on defense. I want the guy that gives me the best differential, regardless of how he gets there.

If Patterson produces, say, 100 runs with the bat, and prevents 50 with the glove, isn't that more valuable than a guy that produces 50 and prevents 70?*

Winning 7-6 still beats losing 2-1, right?

* All numbers are illustrative and hypothetical, not predictive.

Answer: It's widely believed that Trembley and the rest of the organization is obsessed - some would say unhealthily so - with defense, especially up the middle. Patterson is alleged to be a butcher in the field, so that allegation is assumed to be correct and unchanging going forward. Therefore, we don't want Patterson. I think that about sums it up.

[davearm]

Answer: It's widely believed that Trembley and the rest of the organization is obsessed - some would say unhealthily so - with defense, especially up the middle. Patterson is alleged to be a butcher in the field, so that allegation is assumed to be correct and unchanging going forward. Therefore, we don't want Patterson. I think that about sums it up.

Actually you didn't answer the question at all.

Unless your answer is that the O's would, in fact, prefer to lose 2-1 than win 7-6.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Actually you didn't answer the question at all.

Unless your answer is that the O's would, in fact, prefer to lose 2-1 than win 7-6.

You asked why it would be acceptable to be plus-defense/minus-bat and not vice-versa.

And actually, it is easier to win a game when the opponent scores two then when they score five

[rolliefingers]

Actually you didn't answer the question at all.

Unless your answer is that the O's would, in fact, prefer to lose 2-1 than win 7-6.

My intent was sarcasm, not an actual response.

I was lampooning the knee-jerk, pro-defense slant of a decent part of this board. I'd be excited about giving Patterson a shot at 2B, but I think I'm in the minority.