Trading Bedard

[Leitch]

I would also analyze the ability to hit with RISP which with Roberts I believe is below par.

Lines with RISP are not consistent at all because hitting with RISP is no more a skill than hitting in general and also RISP splits are subject to small sample size issues

Also, Mike Schmidt was a notoriously streaky hitter, but that doesn't keep him from being like the best 3B like, ever

[Mark Carver]

Unlike you I don't place singular importance on OBP. I would also analyze the ability to hit with RISP which with Roberts I believe is below par. I know the excuse will be he's a leadoff batter, but you are only guaranteed to hit once per game without a RISP and I like a leadoff man who does both (gets on base and can hit with RISP.)

Futhermore, Roberts is a very streaky hitter. He seems to go through spurts when he gets three hits per game only to then got through a slew of 0 for 5's which is a killer from your lead off man. I would prefer a leadoff hitter with more day to day consistency than Roberts. Sorry, that is the way I see it. He's replaceable.

With who? Name the player you'd like to see replace Roberts....

[JTrea81]

With who? Name the player you'd like to see replace Roberts....

Marcus Giles... jk.

Roberts is awesome vs. RHP but absolutely is dreadful vs. lefties. If Roberts and Gomez would platoon, it would be the best thing for this club.

[Eli Eon]

With who? Name the player you'd like to see replace Roberts....

I don't have any one particular player but if we can get someone like Texeira for a Cabrera/Roberts/Mora package deal, I would consider letting Gomez finish the year at second, or maybe Texas has a minor league prospect who could be given a shot. I just don't think the Orioles need to be married to Brian Roberts. He's okay, but far from being untouchable.

[Eli Eon]

Lines with RISP are not consistent at all because hitting with RISP is no more a skill than hitting in general and also RISP splits are subject to small sample size issues

Also, Mike Schmidt was a notoriously streaky hitter, but that doesn't keep him from being like the best 3B like, ever

Schmidt to me was far from the best 3B ever. He hit a lot of home runs, but I recall 83 WS where he batted I believe below the Mendoza line. I just was never all that impressed with Schmidt. He deserves the HOF but the best ever? Not even close IMO. I would take Brooks and George Brett over Schmidt. It's not all about offensive numbers and power. Brooks was the best ever fielding third baseman and a hell of a clutch hitter. Brett was a tremendous average hitter but not much power and about the same as Schmidt with the glove, but also very clutch much like Brooksie.

[JTrea81]

Getting back to Bedard, you should absolutely listen to offers. The Dodgers or Mets would overpay for him right now I bet and you'd be able to get back a ML ready prospect that could be as good as he is in a few years like Kershaw or Pelfrey along with a stud such as Milledge or Loney and a guy like Kemp or LaRoche.

[Eli Eon]

Getting back to Bedard, you should absolutely listen to offers. The Dodgers or Mets would overpay for him right now I bet and you'd be able to get back a ML ready prospect that could be as good as he is in a few years like Kershaw or Pelfrey along with a stud such as Milledge or Loney and a guy like Kemp or LaRoche.

I think the key with the decision to consider dealing Bedard rests with how confident will McPhail be at keeping him. If there is any doubt that he is favoring Toronto or any AL League East team (heaven forbid pulling a Mussina, or going to the Red Sox) I say deal him to the NL without a second thought. At least that means we won't have to face him and he won't be helping our competition. This is where one can hope McPhail will be more proactive than the previous inept FO.

[Leitch]

Schmidt to me was far from the best 3B ever. He hit a lot of home runs, but I recall 83 WS where he batted I believe below the Mendoza line. I just was never all that impressed with Schmidt. He deserves the HOF but the best ever? Not even close IMO.

Your rating of Mike Schmidt among the canon of the greatest third basemen to ever play the game(there are 13 in the HOF) has no tangible effect on my point and Schmidt hit .381/.462/.714 in the 1980 World Series so

[baltfan]

As much as it hurts to hear- because the main source of hope and pride of the O's rightnow is our young, up and coming pitching staff, I can't say I m surprised to hear that Bedard is counting down the minutes till he becomes a free agent.

Have you ever seen a player more disinterested during his post game interviews. He is almost rude. I know that some players don't like the media, the interviews, the attention- especially when you're losing... but wow.. after a win yesterday- he could barely even give Amber Theoharris, one of the cutest reporters out there- a 2 word response.

In addition- it all adds up if you think about it. All of the talk about Sam Perlozzo "asking" the players how they felt- and they respond, "I'm beat," or whathaveyou- I always found that strange... regardless of adrenaline or the home crowd- don't winners want to empty the tank in effort to get a "W?"

I've always quietly pondered that idea, every time Bedard exits a game after 6 or 7 innings. I just think, these guys are paid millions of dollars to pitch once every five days- and after 90-100 pitches in some cases, you're beat???

If he wants out though- it all makes sense. He doesn't care about the wins for the Orioles. he knows his value once he reaahes free agency. The best thing for him is just to stay as fresh as possible- never overextending his arm in any game for the orioles, when it could cost him down the road...

I swear, I get more disheartened every day as an Orioles fan hearing stuff like that. I guess it's only a matter of time before Markakis is close to free agency and counting the minutes till he can play right field for the Red Sox!

Steve Carlton wasn't exactly the most pleasant guy in the world. Jim Rice was terrible to the media. We got rid of Eddie because the media didn't like him.

If Bedard is bad to the media who cares as long as he performs. I haven't heard that his teammates don't like him or that he is a clubhouse cancer.

[Optimum O]

With who? Name the player you'd like to see replace Roberts....

Mike Fontenot?! Tounge in cheek!

[Mackus]

I certainly wouldn't trade Bedard right now, and I would try my hardest to extend him. He'd make ~$12M over the next two years through arbitration, so I'd offer him about $18M over those two years and then ~$12M per year for a couple/three years after that. So something like a 4/$42M or 5/$55M deal is what I'd be offering him. I'd have no problem going as high as 4/$50M or 5/$65M to keep him here. I think he's going to be one of the best SP in baseball over the next 5 years. "Overpaying" is not a term I'd use to sign Bedard. I'd ask him what he would want to sign here for the next 4-5 years and then just give it to him.

If he won't sign an extension, I'd trade him before the deadline of 2008, as others have said. I'd be looking for 2 great prospects / young MLBers and 3rd good guy for him.

[Eli Eon]

You seem to placing emphasis on how players perform with RISP as a measure of clutch.

Brooks Robinson Career w/RISP - 268 / 345 / 403 / 748 (268/323/401/724 overall)

Mike Schmidt - 268 / 400 / 530 / 930 (267/380/527/907 overall)

First, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that each player's numbers with RISP are very similar to his overall numbers (which is one of the points being made by Leitch, I believe).

Brooks Robinson is my all time favorite player, but to say that he was a good hitter in the clutch and to dismiss Schmidt's "clutch abilities" when Schmidt's OPS with RISP is 182 points higher is just a little crazy.

You also seem to discount Schmidt's abilities with the glove. The Mike Schmidt I remember watching was one helluva a defensive 3B.

Again, I don't wish to offend anyone who believes stats are the end-all-be-all of the measure of a player, but having followed Brooks Robinson's career by watching many of his games from 1964 until he retired I know he was a great clutch hitter. It is a shame they did not keep "Close and Late" stats back then which is more defining than mere RISP stats but it doesn't matter because anyone who watched Brooks on a regular basis like I did and was an Orioles fan for the majority of his career knows how clutch he was. Other than Frank Robinson there was no other Oriole I wanted to see come up with the game on the line during the golden era of the Orioles than Brooks. I also watched Cal Ripken on as regular a basis his entire career and I know for a fact he was not nearly as good in the clutch as Brooks merely from watching them both in action.

I freely admit I did not follow Schmidt's career like I did Brooks so I don't know if he was as clutch as Brooks. I have never heard that he was but I also think he played his best years after Brooks in a slightly different era when the mound was lowered and the baseball not as lively. In any event, you may be a Phillies fan and watched him daily like I did Brooks so that may influence your opinion of him. I am not saying you are wrong that he was good, but nobody will convince me to rate him over Brooks Robinson. Brooks was the MVP of the 70 WS and also played pretty well in all of them I believe. I recall Schmidt playing like a bum in the 83 series letting his team down bigtime. (Just an example of why Schmidt pales in comparison to Brooks IMO). I also find it somewhat puzzling that any Oriole fan who saw Brooks in action as well as Schmidt would not prefer Brooks. I am betting you didn't see Brooks or if you did it was at the tail end of your career.

[Mackus]

I get so tired of seeing this lame argument. Johan Santana has failed to go 7 in 5 of 15 starts this year - does that mean he isn't an ace?

As for your second point, how exactly do you know that all he cares about is a strikeout. If I know that a strikeout is an out 99.9% of the time, whereas a ball in play is an out 70% of the time, you'd better believe that I'm going to go for the strikeout.

One indicator I might use to determine if a pitcher is going for the strikeout is the percentage of times he threw a strike on an 0-2 pitch (the thought being that he'll waste a pitch in an effort to get a cheap K). The ML average is 54%. This year, Bedard has thrown a strike on 0-2 60% of the time. Two years ago he was at 48%.

Bedard's "problem" (since it seems to be a problem that he strikes out so many people ) is that he is so hard to hit - batters swing and miss at 18% of all strikes he throws (compared to a league average of 14%).

I think I've just had an epiphany as to why people are constantly on Bedard's case:

He has no nickname. Unlike Miggy, or BRob, or Kakes (Kinkajou) or Big Loew, he's just Erik Bedard. Some people try to play around with the 'k' in his first name, but really, its just Erik Bedard. Nothing cool. We gotta come up with a badass nickname for Erik.

Now taking suggestions.

[Leitch]

I think I've just had an epiphany as to why people are constantly on Bedard's case:

He has no nickname. Unlike Miggy, or BRob, or Kakes (Kinkajou) or Big Loew, he's just Erik Bedard. Some people try to play around with the 'k' in his first name, but really, its just Erik Bedard. Nothing cool. We gotta come up with a badass nickname for Erik.

Now taking suggestions.

I.P. McNothingHeDoesIsEverGoodEnoughForTheFans?

What, too many syllables?

[Leitch]

I get so tired of seeing this lame argument. Johan Santana has failed to go 7 in 5 of 15 starts this year - does that mean he isn't an ace?

As for your second point, how exactly do you know that all he cares about is a strikeout.

If Bedard threw an easy 150 MPH and he just threw 81 fastballs down the middle, with 81 swings and misses and 27 strikeouts and no other outcomes to plate appearances every outing, some would likely complain that he doesn't use his changeup enough