Update: O's sign Trumbo to 3yr/$37 mil deal

[Dark Helmet]

12 minutes ago, weams said:

Roy and Palmer both think Trumbo is a must sign. 

I'm not against it if it's to solely DH and he gets a 3 year deal or less. I wonder if the Braves would do a Jimenez or Gallardo for Markakis? I'd like having Nick back in RF.

[weams]

3 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

I'm not against it if it's to solely DH and he gets a 3 year deal or less. I wonder if the Braves would do a Jimenez or Gallardo for Markakis? I'd like having Nick back in RF.

They already offered four. 

[MagicBird]

15 minutes ago, weams said:

Roy and Palmer both think Trumbo is a must sign. 

So do I

[Dark Helmet]

23 minutes ago, weams said:

They already offered four. 

They pulled that offer didn't they? Much like EE and Joey Bats, Trumbo had his bluff called and he may lose.

[ScGO's]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Who is the strong Defensive replacement? Other than Jason Heyward. Who would be available. 

I mean Bourne would be a strong defensive replacement, but is he the best overall option?  I'm interested in what Dan pulls off via trade or a FA deal closer to spring training.

I'm not completely opposed to bringing back Trumbo, but it has to be as a DH.  However, if I was in charge, I'd let him walk completely to get the draft pick and sign Davis and one of Pagan or Bourne, and, as we get closer to spring training, maybe take a flier on Rasmus if he's still out there and cheap.  Resign Alvarez and platoon him with Mancini at DH and hope some more of Trumbo's lost value is gained through advancements in Machado and Schoop's offense.  Maybe Rickard adds some hidden value as a platoon?

 

[waroriole]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Roy and Palmer both think Trumbo is a must sign. 

Everyone is wrong some times. 

[25 Nuggets]

3 hours ago, weams said:

Trumbo will sign quickly now. 

Good - then we can move on one way or the other.

[backwardsk]

38 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Colby Rasmus.   Strong defensive numbers in LF last year and good numbers in a very limited time in RF.    A natural CF who should be plus out in RF.  Also a buy low candidate coming off a down year.   Interestingly enough, Rasmus coming of an awful year was worth 2.2 WAR in 2016 verses Trumbo coming off a career year who was worth 1.8 WAR.    Oh, the power of defense in RF.    Rasmus probably settles for another 1 year, make good contract while Trumbo requires the risky 4 year deal.    Again, I say go with Mancini at DH and someone like Rasmus in RF.     Trumbo will not be 2016 Trumbo in 2017.

So I read something from Roch weeks ago saying the asking price was too high. It will come down, but the question is when does it become reasonable?

i like him as a buy low, but I'd like to pair him with an OBP guy.  

[El Gordo]

6 hours ago, Dark Helmet said:

For some reason, I think Trumbo ends up in Texas.

They like a Napoli reunion.

[weams]

5 hours ago, RZNJ said:

Colby Rasmus.   Strong defensive numbers in LF last year and good numbers in a very limited time in RF.    A natural CF who should be plus out in RF.  Also a buy low candidate coming off a down year.   Interestingly enough, Rasmus coming of an awful year was worth 2.2 WAR in 2016 verses Trumbo coming off a career year who was worth 1.8 WAR.    Oh, the power of defense in RF.    Rasmus probably settles for another 1 year, make good contract while Trumbo requires the risky 4 year deal.    Again, I say go with Mancini at DH and someone like Rasmus in RF.     Trumbo will not be 2016 Trumbo in 2017.

We can argue about the real value of that defensive component but it is evident that there is a large difference between the two.  All good points. Thanks. Jones' numbers might even improve. 

[wildcard]

I can think of three reasons:

1) Trumbo can thank Nelson Cruz for that.   In 2014 the O's won the Division with Cruz's bat in the lineup.  When Cruz was not re-signed in 2015 the O's fell to a .500 team.  This convinced Dan that its worth a long term contract to Trumbo to try to repeat and improve on the O's 2016 performance.

2) A four year contract scared other teams off from matching that offer.  Its a similar tactic as offering Davis 7 years an watching no one match that offer.

3) With several high profile players likely to be traded after the 2017 season, having Trumbo tied up in a long term contract will add stability to the team going forward.  

JMQ.  What do you think?

[Sanfran327]

The better question is, why didn't Trumbo jump on said four-year contract? I'll tell you why. As much as Duq learned his lesson from Cruz, Trumbo learned a lesson from CD last year. When you know there's really only one team in the race, holding out makes that team bid against themselves. Trumbo will be in Baltimore for the next few years in all likelihood, but he'll hold out for a few more bucks because he can. He knows that OPACY is where his bread gets buttered, and that this park was a HUGE factor for his career year (and maybe some lineup protection, if you buy into that sort of thing), so he'll want to keep socking dingers for as long as he can. 

My prediction is that he ends up signing here for about 4/72-76. 

[Aglets]

Basically what Sanfran said.

We will likely bid against ourselves now and overpay Trumbo even more than the original 4 year offer (which was already an overpay imo).    Angelos seems like a pretty big softy for guys that put on the orange and black.

[Babypowder]

Only thing I can think of is they really like handing out contracts likely to be bad to guys who hit homers.

As for your justifications:

1) Trumbo is no Nelson Cruz, not even close. Nelson Cruz is now coming off of 3 straight near 4 win seasons. Mark Trumbo hasn't been worth 4 wins combined the last 3 seasons. That said, I was against re-signing Cruz because I figured there was no way he would keep that up in his mid 30s. That's the other major difference. Even if Trumbo keeps doing what he did last year (which isn't likely), he's still not worth a lot.

2) If their contract offer "scares teams away", that's a bad thing. It means they're overpaying. Just like with Davis last year, when they continued to bid against themselves and ended up with a contract that probably won't turn out very well.

3) Having a guy who has averaged just over 1 win a year in his 20s locked in for 4 years at over 2 wins per season in salary in his 30s is not the kind of "stability" teams should be looking for.

[Frobby]

I don't think the Orioles really "bid against themselves" in the Davis situation.    The final deal had about the same economic value as the original deal, but with more deferred money so that the total looks a little higher.    Basically, they let Scott Boras save face.   I don't think Trumbo stands to gain much by waiting the Orioles out.   

I think the O's probably expected Trumbo's market to be a four-year deal.    At his age, it wasn't unreasonable to think that.