Bowden: Manny's agent proposed a long-term deal to the O's before the season started

[scOtt]

Rafael Palmeiro worked out pretty good . The first time.

Adam has been a good contract.

[Bahama O's Fan]

I firmly believe that the market is soaring and whatever is market value today will not be market value in five years and will look like a "deal". Look at Jones' contract; it now looks like a steal.

[Can_of_corn]

Jones' deal looked pretty good when he signed it.

[MikeAD]

If we or he refuses to sign a deal that is fair, as much as I hate to say it, we would have to trade Manny sooner rather than later.The question is..the definition of fair for both parties.He might be the most important player we have to sign since Cal Jr. And he's a better player.

The problem is, you just can't get away with trading what should be your franchise player and someone who is easily already a top 10 player in the MLB. There isn't a package we will find that will make the return "worth it." Because of that you end up keeping these sort of players until its way too late and they get moved during the final July/August they are under team control. There isn't really a player comparable to Machado in our past. You can point to Ripken but we were pretty awful in the early 90s when Ripken was extended.

[Redskins Rick]

The problem is, you just can't get away with trading what should be your franchise player and someone who is easily already a top 10 player in the MLB. There isn't a package we will find that will make the return "worth it." Because of that you end up keeping these sort of players until its way too late and they get moved during the final July/August they are under team control. There isn't really a player comparable to Machado in our past. You can point to Ripken but we were pretty awful in the early 90s when Ripken was extended.

And made 2 WS runs in 96 & 97, making it as far as the ALCS.

[weams]

Jones' deal looked pretty good when he signed it.

The Mega superstar deals all end up being awful. But then you are paying for more than what they do. For a little while they may be worth it.

[MikeAD]

And made 2 WS runs in 96 & 97, making it as far as the ALCS.

Yes but the two are not the same, is what i am saying. Yes Ripken was an anchor of our mid to late 90s success but we have been really good for awhile right now and Manny is a huge part of that success. Removing a top 5 player right now from this core is not like letting Ripken walk in 92.

[Redskins Rick]

Yes but the two are not the same, is what i am saying. Yes Ripken was an anchor of our mid to late 90s success but we have been really good for awhile right now and Manny is a huge part of that success. Removing a top 5 player right now from this core is not like letting Ripken walk in 92.

Ripken was the face of the franchise at the time and put the people in the seats.

He was also the best player on the team, and one of the best in the league at the time.

Some will argue and rightly so, Manny is the franchise of this team.

Manny is also the best player on the team and one of the best in the league right now.

So they are both darn similar.

[Phantom]

I am 100% fine with not signing Schoop if he won't go for a team friendly deal. Second basemen age roughly as well as catchers. Manny needs to happen though.

[Can_of_corn]

I am 100% fine with not signing Schoop if he won't go for a team friendly deal. Second basemen age roughly as well as catchers. Manny needs to happen though.

True, but Schoop is still young enough that a five or six year extension doesn't carry much of an age risk.

He isn't the caliber of player you would ink for more than six years.

[Frobby]

The problem is, you just can't get away with trading what should be your franchise player and someone who is easily already a top 10 player in the MLB. There isn't a package we will find that will make the return "worth it." Because of that you end up keeping these sort of players until its way too late and they get moved during the final July/August they are under team control. There isn't really a player comparable to Machado in our past. You can point to Ripken but we were pretty awful in the early 90s when Ripken was extended.

And made 2 WS runs in 96 & 97, making it as far as the ALCS.

Yes but the two are not the same, is what i am saying. Yes Ripken was an anchor of our mid to late 90s success but we have been really good for awhile right now and Manny is a huge part of that success. Removing a top 5 player right now from this core is not like letting Ripken walk in 92.

Maybe Eddie Murray is the better comp. He was really the centerpiece of the '79-'83 Orioles, at ages 23-27. He signed an extension at the end of the 1985 season that made him the highest paid player in MLB ($2.7 mm/yr, LOL). At that point, he was finishing his 8th season with the O's, and the team had a winning record every year he'd been there.

[Redskins Rick]

True, but Schoop is still young enough that a five or six year extension doesn't carry much of an age risk.

He isn't the caliber of player you would ink for more than six years.

If he maintains his current .305 and .OPS 847 that he has for this season and this is what he can do on the diamond.

Then, he is very much worth inking for 6 years. IMO

[Can_of_corn]

If he maintains his current .305 and .OPS 847 that he has for this season and this is what he can do on the diamond.

Then, he is very much worth inking for 6 years. IMO

If you go back and read what you bolded you will see that I put the upper limit at six years.

I would not go beyond six years.

[Redskins Rick]

Maybe Eddie Murray is the better comp. He was really the centerpiece of the '79-'83 Orioles, at ages 23-27. He signed an extension at the end of the 1985 season that made him the highest paid player in MLB ($2.7 mm/yr, LOL). At that point, he was finishing his 8th season with the O's, and the team had a winning record every year he'd been there.

Good point, and it broke my heart when he was traded, and for what?

Probably the 2nd worst trade after the Glenn Davis fiasco.

[Phantom]

True, but Schoop is still young enough that a five or six year extension doesn't carry much of an age risk.

He isn't the caliber of player you would ink for more than six years.

Well, we have him until 2020 if we don't sign him, so if we signed him to six years we are getting 2 extra for all the general risk of a player declining or getting injured. To me, that seems like a poor deal unless we A) can get him for a very, very good price and B) think he's going to be 2016 Schoop or better going forward.