Dan Duquette ON MLBNETWORK

[mdbdotcom]

You have Reimold and Alvarez....I was speaking to additions. I assume Reimold will still be around on the cheap and the 4Th OF

I was responding to Wildcard, who seemed to have missed something in your post (and thanked me for my correction).

[abbott]

You have Reimold and Alvarez....I was speaking to additions. I assume Reimold will still be around on the cheap and the 4Th OF

Lough, Lake, Alvarez and Urrutia are all 4th OF option on the roster. Can we leave the end of the bench alone until February?

How about RF, LF, 1B & DH? Wehere are the potential starters? Can you platoon 4 offensive positions?

Is Walker a viable option for 130 games and 450 plate appearances at 1B?

[Babypowder]

i like your post because it deals with fully holes and is rational about the payroll limitations. I don't think the O's will need to ask for an additional 5m because Dan will defer some money in large contracts like the Kazmir and Upton contracts. He could cover 5m in that way.

I currently have the O's with about 38m to spend because they spent 2.7m for Worley minus 500K for a player that was displaces.

If the O's sign an Upton and a Jaso I think they can go with some combination for Walker or Mancini at 1B.

I would argue that it actually isn't very realistic. It assumes a budget of 120M which is higher than they have ever actually gone. Then he's even requesting to go beyond that. This strategy leaves no wiggle room for further additions in the offseason or during the season and also is going to create quite a budget crisis in the following years as our currently cheap and controlled players get more expensive. This strategy assumes a significant jump in opening day payroll, and in turn suggests significant jumps in the following years. Spending all the way up to their payroll ceiling by opening day this year is not an advisable strategy unless they really intend to change the way they do business drastically in the coming years.

Of course, I'd also argue that Jaso isn't signing that deal and would likely prefer a shorter deal if he is only getting 5 million AAV and that Parra deal is a waste of money since he isn't good, and I don't think he signs that deal anyway. Guys signing for that little amount AAV don't sign 4 year deals. Kazmir will also get more than he is planning for as well.

[fastball]

Is it possible your friends could be Nationals or Phillie's something to ponder. All

the O's FA could be gone and DD wouldn't realize it.

[Ripken]

Deal with it? You have 40 M to fill 5 holes how would you plan to deal with it?

I'd have never let the team get into that position?

[El Gordo]

My use of the phrase "deal with it" was a more general reference to the fact that we seem to have an aversion to the FA market and instead prefer to wade into the trade realm, where we have been fairly woeful the last few years, I would argue. I don't think that last point is up for debate, but do advise if you think we've "won" our recent trades.

Regarding how we will plug some of the holes on our club, I assume you've seen the countless posts on this board over the last month or so detailing the various ways we can try to apply our 40-45 "marbles" into plugging our holes, so do I really need to go into all of that? There was even some type of worksheet that allowed posters to pick and choose from a menu of guys that are available at their projected going rates. I'm certainly not insinuating that we can just go buy the top level guys at each position. However, a combination of various guys (Kazmir, Leake, Happ) whose costs aren't exorbitant and wouldn't require us to forfeit a draft pick have been bantered about extensively on this board. There are plenty more guys for whom it may be worth it to forfeit a draft pick, though the reviews on this board are mixed about that approach. Whether we can effectively plug holes and become a playoff competitive team in 2016 via FA AND trade (or whether we should be more focused on a rebuild) I think is a valid question, but one for another thread.

I'd flip the question to you, friend - from what untapped well of talent/depth in this organization do you propose we trade from in order to acquire cost-controlled players that can effectively fill the gaps on our big league club? Perhaps there is some font of talent of which I'm unaware, but I'm not seeing a lot of depth with which I'm thrilled by the idea of parting. Do you think we're going to get a TOR starter in a trade, and for what? I'm all ears as to how folks on here foresee us getting value, saving some money, and not significantly degrading our big league club in a trade. I'm merely suggesting that the most significant of our gaps (such as starting pitcher) should be filled via the fairly deep free agent class of SP available, rather than gutting our already thin farm system to save some coin. However, it ain't my money.

I love it when people try to adopt a lofty pose but say things like "bantered about" when they mean bandied about. The gist of your post struck me as being about spending money" If you want to avoid spending a ton of money, get into Major League Lacrosse". There, is only so much we have to spend and a lot to spend it on, so a combination of trades and FA make s sense to me. There are a number of players who are up for trade or non tendering, Gardner of the MFY, Walker and Alvarez of PIT, off the to of my head. We could easily trade out of our MiL RP depth to pick up Alvarez to be a LH DH. Cisco, Mancini, Wilson, Wright, and Bundy have decent value depending on the return. We could offer Britton for AJ Reed or another promising MiL bat like him. Trading for Reed would fill the 1B hole while saving 5M you could use toward a SP e.g. I don't think trades are about winning or losing, they are about giving up something you don't need as much, for something you need more.

[DrungoHazewood]

Of course, I'd also argue that Jaso isn't signing that deal and would likely prefer a shorter deal if he is only getting 5 million AAV and that Parra deal is a waste of money since he isn't good, and I don't think he signs that deal anyway. Guys signing for that little amount AAV don't sign 4 year deals. Kazmir will also get more than he is planning for as well.

I think it's often hypothesized that players and teams will sign multi-year deals for very low AAVs. But in practice this rarely happens. You just don't see many 4/20 contracts because the player thinks he can do better on a series of shorter deals or a value-building one-year contract. And the teams don't have any reason to lock in <1 win a year for multiple years. They'll just go year to year, and if they have to turn over a roster spot from one role player to another, so be it. Occasionally you'll see a 4/20 kind of deal for a reliever, but that's a special case.

[DrungoHazewood]

I'd have never let the team get into that position?

Time Machine is always a great franchise-building strategy.

[El Gordo]

I'd have never let the team get into that position?

Suppose we had kept Markakis and Cruz, we'd have one OF hole filled and the DH hole nailed down. That would still leave spots at 1B, SP, set up man, C, and LF to fill, but only about 12-15 M to spend.

[Ripken]

Time Machine is always a great franchise-building strategy.

Suppose we had kept Markakis and Cruz, we'd have one OF hole filled and the DH hole nailed down. That would still leave spots at 1B, SP, set up man, C, and LF to fill, but only about 12-15 M to spend.

This isn't my revisionist history and it's not about Markakis or Cruz directly. I said last spring I thought this team had a dead man walking feel to it. Three big pieces gone, nothing added, and 11 pending FAs on the original 25. It was precarious at best, especially with a very thin farm system. I was adamant about being active during the season with forward looking trades and/or extensions, which didn't happen. So here we are. I think it was shortsighted and irresponsible. Now we have numerous holes, the majority of which are going to be filled in uninspiring ways and, I believe, very little hope for a contending team in 2016. If Wieters takes the QO it'll be even more damaging.

[mdbdotcom]

Time Machine is always a great franchise-building strategy.

Free beer tomorrow.

[waroriole]

I love it when people try to adopt a lofty pose but say things like "bantered about" when they mean bandied about. The gist of your post struck me as being about spending money" If you want to avoid spending a ton of money, get into Major League Lacrosse". There, is only so much we have to spend and a lot to spend it on, so a combination of trades and FA make s sense to me. There are a number of players who are up for trade or non tendering, Gardner of the MFY, Walker and Alvarez of PIT, off the to of my head. We could easily trade out of our MiL RP depth to pick up Alvarez to be a LH DH. Cisco, Mancini, Wilson, Wright, and Bundy have decent value depending on the return. We could offer Britton for AJ Reed or another promising MiL bat like him. Trading for Reed would fill the 1B hole while saving 5M you could use toward a SP e.g. I don't think trades are about winning or losing, they are about giving up something you don't need as much, for something you need more.

Is that like when someone wants to correct another person's writing, but says "pose" instead of "prose?"

[wildcard]

I would argue that it actually isn't very realistic. It assumes a budget of 120M which is higher than they have ever actually gone. Then he's even requesting to go beyond that. This strategy leaves no wiggle room for further additions in the offseason or during the season and also is going to create quite a budget crisis in the following years as our currently cheap and controlled players get more expensive. This strategy assumes a significant jump in opening day payroll, and in turn suggests significant jumps in the following years. Spending all the way up to their payroll budget by opening day this year is not an advisable strategy unless they really intend to change the way they do business drastically in the coming years.

Of course, I'd also argue that Jaso isn't signing that deal and would likely prefer a shorter deal if he is only getting 5 million AAV and that Parra deal is a waste of money since he isn't good, and I don't think he signs that deal anyway. Guys signing for that little amount AAV don't sign 4 year deals. Kazmir will also get more than he is planning for as well.

Holes can be argued with any scenario but I think JohnnyK27 made a good effort to deal with the task at hand. I think the budget is about 115m and there is about 38m to spend after claiming Worley. He may be a little high. Deferred money covers some of that. I actually think Parra get 8 to 9m/yr. But even that can be backloaded.

Your point about leaving some money to spend mid season is a good one but you really don't have to worry about mid season if the team is not good to start with. Dan has dug this hole by not signing some of the players last off season or during the season. I have to think O'Day could have been signed earlier for less.

As it stands Dan will be luck to field a contending team in 2016 and stay at a 115m budget. I am sure we will all watch with interest as he tries to pull it off.

[brianod]

Dan has lost every trade he's made. I say sign Davis and a SP and start building through the farm like DD promised when hired.

[Can_of_corn]

Dan has lost every trade he's made. I say sign Davis and a SP and start building through the farm like DD promised when hired.

Brach.