Os Sign O'Day for 4 Years - It's official

[Can_of_corn]

For Chris Davis and Tommy Hunter? Heck yes.

If we could trade O'Day for something equivalent (possible MVP candidate position player and replacement reliever) it'd be a no brainer.

And then the Rangers left him off the roster!

The Koji trade makes the Miller trade look better.

[Nevermore]

Walker, Baez, Gregg, Webb, O'Day, Bradford.

That is off the top of my head mind you.

Of those I would say that O'Day is the only deal that worked out well for the O's.

The failure of most of the team's multi-year contracts to work out well doesn't mean that the team shouldn't ever sign any relievers to multi-year contracts. It means that the GM needs to do a better job of evaluating which relievers would be worth multi-year contracts. Signing players to multi-year contracts is a crap shoot; the team takes a chance that the player won't get injured or turn out to be a bust. The advantage of multi-year contracts is that the team will get a better deal signing Player X for multiple years rather than signing him each year to a single year contract, which will cost more.

When considering which reliever would be worth a multi-year deal, the GM needs do a very careful evaluation of each reliever's talent, health, and potential. However, even if a GM does this, it's still no guarantee that the contract will work out.

I'm not a GM. But as a fan, I believe that a decent attempt to resign O'Day would be a good investment for the O's.

[weams]

Yeah -- we'll have to see what happens with this flexor situation. A big thing to me though is that there would be no loss of pick. His contract was ultimately too steep even for me at the time.

It confounds me why the team would move Webb with a pick, but it's not my budget, I just pay for a small fraction of revenue.

They got two good players back. One of them is injured now.

[Nevermore]

Michael Gonzalez? Was he multi year?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We were talking about relievers. To my knowledge, as much as some O's fans, during ST, have urged Buck to put Gonzo in the pen, that has not happened this year.

[Can_of_corn]

The failure of most of the team's multi-year contracts to work out well doesn't mean that the team shouldn't ever sign any relievers to multi-year contracts. It means that the GM needs to do a better job of evaluating which relievers would be worth multi-year contracts. Signing players to multi-year contracts is a crap shoot; the team takes a chance that the player won't get injured or turn out to be a bust. The advantage of multi-year contracts is that the team will get a better deal signing Player X for multiple years rather than signing him each year to a single year contract, which will cost more.

When considering which reliever would be worth a multi-year deal, the GM needs do a very careful evaluation of each reliever's talent, health, and potential. However, even if a GM does this, it's still no guarantee that the contract will work out.

I'm not a GM. But as a fan, I believe that a decent attempt to resign O'Day would be a good investment for the O's.

Who is saying that?

It's not me, I already said I was OK with the last O'Day extension.

So who is it?

I'm think I am at the extreme edge of this on the board, who is it you are talking about?

[Can_of_corn]

We were talking about relievers. To my knowledge, as much as some O's fans, during ST, have urged Buck to put Gonzo in the pen, that has not happened this year.

Michael Gonzalez

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gonzami02.shtml

Not Miguel Gonzalez

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gonzami03.shtml

[Nevermore]

Had forgotten about him, I don't recall, let me check...

Yep 2/12.

And a pick.

That worked well.

Good catch.

I have a truly dumb question: am I mixing our current Gonzo up with another pitcher named Michael Gonzalez?

[Nevermore]

Michael Gonzalez

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gonzami02.shtml

Not Miguel Gonzalez

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gonzami03.shtml

Ooops. You supplied the answer to my truly dumb question.

[weams]

We were talking about relievers. To my knowledge, as much as some O's fans, during ST, have urged Buck to put Gonzo in the pen, that has not happened this year.

Mike Gonzalez. Lefty. Good like Miller in 2007 and 2009.

[Nevermore]

I'm good up until about 1.5-2.0 million.

That's been my position this whole time.

Then trade 'em when they hit arb 2.

This is what you said in answer to my original question. Particularly, you said, "Then trade 'em when they hit arb 2. What did you actually mean by this statement, if you didn't really mean trade them when they hit their 2nd year of arbitration?

[weams]

This is what you said in answer to my original question. Particularly, you said, "Then trade 'em when they hit arb 2. What did you actually mean by this statement, if you didn't really mean trade them when they hit their 2nd year of arbitration?

He means that after then, they will make more than 2 million if they are any good at all.

[Can_of_corn]

This is what you said in answer to my original question. Particularly, you said, "Then trade 'em when they hit arb 2. What did you actually mean by this statement, if you didn't really mean trade them when they hit their 2nd year of arbitration?

And I also said I would look at each case as it appeared.

My guiding philosophy would be to trade them before they got expensive.

[Nevermore]

And I also said I would look at each case as it appeared.

My guiding philosophy would be to trade them before they got expensive.

I am confused. Do you look at each case as it appeared? Or do you trade them (relief pitchers) before they got expensive? These statements appear to be contradictory to me.

[weams]

I am confused. Do you look at each case as it appeared? Or do you trade them (relief pitchers) before they got expensive? These statements appear to be contradictory to me.

I've had this conversation with him. If Darren O'Day were 26 and he was second year arb, and he was projected to make 3.2. He would probably keep him. I think he is even ok with keeping Zach Britton this year. Though he may not admit it.

[weams]

And I also said I would look at each case as it appeared.

My guiding philosophy would be to trade them before they got expensive.

I think this is clear. And that you would be willing to make an exception. Is this correct? If so. No contradiction.