Poll: What should the Orioles do with Trumbo?

[Spy Fox]

Yes I know there is a lot of Trumbo talk in other threads but I thought a poll might be in order, and it seems a decision may be coming soon from DD on this front. 

Word is Trumbo's asking price is down to the 3 years and $40 to $50M range. But is it down enough? Or do you not want Trumbo back period? Hopefully these poll options encompass most of the opinions.

Vote for what you think they SHOULD do, not necessarily just what you'd be OK with. So for me, while I don't think signing Trumbo to a 3/40 or so deal would be too bad of a decision, I still think their best decision is to pursue other options that won't lose a pick and to not sign Trumbo at all. So I'm going to vote for the Not Sign Trumbo option. 

[Frobby]

I'd be fine signing him for 3/$40 mm, but I'd also be fine not signing him and taking the pick.   In either case, it kind of depends on what else we do.    My main reason not to sign him is to save money to retain higher priority players.    But if we're not going to be able to retain them anyway, then we may as well go with Trumbo if the price is OK.    

[Number5]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I'd be fine signing him for 3/$40 mm, but I'd also be fine not signing him and taking the pick.   In either case, it kind of depends on what else we do.    My main reason not to sign him is to save money to retain higher priority players.    But if we're not going to be able to retain them anyway, then we may as well go with Trumbo if the price is OK.    

I agree with you on this.  There really isn't an option on this poll that fits my view.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

Take the comp pick for Trumbo and use the money saved towards signing Chris Carter to DH full time and Jason Hammel to bump Ubaldo or Miley to the pen to start the year.

[oriole]

I think there are better ways to spend 13 million a year but if it's on Trumbo then so be it, it's not like he isn't going to hit a bunch of home runs. I think maybe signing Alvarez and Jennings might cost a similar amount but for a single year while also having a good defensive option and not blocking Mancini and taking a pick. 

[Spy Fox]

1 minute ago, Number5 said:

I agree with you on this.  There really isn't an option on this poll that fits my view.

I guess I should have included an Other option!

And of course, it always depends on alternatives which is a fluid situation. Depending on the demands of the other hitter options, or if some of those hitter options come off the board, there could come a time when I think Trumbo is the best choice. 

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Take the comp pick for Trumbo and use the money saved towards signing Chris Carter to DH full time and Jason Hammel to bump Ubaldo or Miley to the pen to start the year.

From an offensive standpoint, I can see that Carter and Trumbo are of similar value and that getting Carter for cheaper would make some sense.    But it would be hard to stomach replacing Trumbo with someone who strikes out even more often and hits for a substantially lower average.   In a vacuum it's fine, but for the Orioles it makes us even more one-dimensional than we already are.   

[stef]

I voted "don't sign" but would understand it if they got him on a 3-yr, good AAV contract. Wouldn't like it, but I'd understand it. As mentioned, depends on what else the Os do (or don't do).

[El Gordo]

Keep the pick. There are plenty of cheaper decent options for DH.

[esmd]

Let him go and take the comp pick.  As has been discussed, there are better options that are cheaper and won't cost the pick (Napoli, Carter, Alvarez/Mancini platoon, etc.).

[Moondoggie]

I voted don't sign him and keep the pick. Not that I wouldn't be alright with signing him as a DH for the right price, but I fear that if the Orioles throw money at him they may have paid for a career year. He could just as easily revert back to 25 to 30 home runs, which just doesn't make it worth the strikeouts and low OBP. If he had some defensive value, it would be different. I'd like to see them focus on improving the outfield defense and, if possible, getting more athletic. Although I'm not sure how they're going to do that.

[webbrick2010]

I'm curious for the people that say sign him, what is the minimum production from him would you want for say a 3/40 type investment

If he drops to say .250/.300/.450 with 30HRs, and 90 RBIs and provides his usual negative defensive value, is that good enough?

or does he need to have three more career years?

Orioles need to move on from Trumbo

[Number5]

18 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

I'm curious for the people that say sign him, what is the minimum production from him would you want for say a 3/40 type investment

If he drops to say .250/.300/.450 with 30HRs, and 90 RBIs and provides his usual negative defensive value, is that good enough?

or does he need to have three more career years?

Orioles need to move on from Trumbo

Well, considering that, by WAR, last season was his 4th best, it would be nice to get his first career year for us before worrying about getting more.  His "usual" negative defensive value would also be a great improvement on the single worst defensive value season he's ever had that we received last year.  Or are you, as usual, quite certain that he will combine his all-time worst offensive year with his all-time worst defensive year if we happen to sign him?  Trumbo has not been my top choice, but it is important that the Orioles look at all players we are considering objectively.

[wildbillhiccup]

I personally want a two year deal, which means I'm probably advocating not signing him (since someone else will give him three years). 

[wildbillhiccup]

43 minutes ago, Moondoggie said:

I voted don't sign him and keep the pick. Not that I wouldn't be alright with signing him as a DH for the right price, but I fear that if the Orioles throw money at him they may have paid for a career year. He could just as easily revert back to 25 to 30 home runs, which just doesn't make it worth the strikeouts and low OBP. If he had some defensive value, it would be different. I'd like to see them focus on improving the outfield defense and, if possible, getting more athletic. Although I'm not sure how they're going to do that.

Regress to 25 - 30? Really? That's quite a regression. He may not hit 47 again, but I'm fairly confident that Trumbo would be an absolute lock for 35 playing half of his games at Camden Yards.