No deals per Olney

[nadecir]

No one gives him the benefit of the doubt for everything he does. Many of us, however, hesitate to criticize him without either (i) full (or at least some) information; or (ii) the expiration of his window of opportunity.

Neither of these have occurred. I explained earlier why "peak" value for any Orioles player is meaningless IF a better return can be had even at off-peak value. This is a very real possibility.

Yes it is a real possibility that McPhail will be able to get a better return for these guys later. But it is also a very real possibility that the value for players like George Sherrill and Brian Roberts will never be higher than we have seen this year. I would go so far as to say that is more likely these two players' values will decline than their value will increase. Brian Roberts' pending free agency after next season is a real possible reason that his value will take a hit. And there is significant risk in waiting to trade both players.

I believe there were probably multiple teams in interested in both Sherrill and Roberts now. I know I will be in the minority here, but I would have supported McPhail if he had traded these two players for the best offers that he received at the trading deadline this year. I believe there is a significant risk that these two players in particular will lose value over the next 5 or 6 months. Multiple offers from teams give you a pretty good idea of a player's real worth.

Just think of the lose of value in Erik Bedard if we had just waited six months to trade him. Or what we could have received if we traded Melvin Mora at the all star break in 2004 when he had a .989 OPS. Trading a player at his peak value for the best offer means a pretty good return most times.

On the downside what would happen if, heaven forbid, George Sherrill has an arm injury late in the season? Or Aubrey Huff has a month long slump in September? The trade value in the offseason for these two guys would go down drastically. The age old axiom is true that it is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late.

Waiting to trade a player doesn't always work out for the better. Taking the best offer for a player is sometimes the best move to make. Holding out for a better offer doesn't always work to a team's advantage.

[Sports Guy]

Or the offseason?

I don't know. I guess we'll find out. Do I think it's possible if the right deal is there? Sure.

Yes, he could be dealt in the offseason...No one has ever denied any of that.

And it is amazing you think that but i think it is just because you want to argue.

[Lucky Jim]

Yes, he could be dealt in the offseason...No one has ever denied any of that.

And it is amazing you think that but i think it is just because you want to argue.

Well, then why the urgency to get rid of Ramon? (Trust me, I'd like to lose him, too.)

On the downside what would happen if, heaven forbid, George Sherrill has an arm injury late in the season? Or Aubrey Huff has a month long slump in September? The trade value in the offseason for these two guys would go down drastically. The age old axiom is true that it is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late.

As for peak value - this is all fine and good. And obvious. But that doesn't mean that you have to pull the trigger at some point you've defined as "peak value." The fact is, if I have an item at peak value but a market of buyers who aren't great fits for the item, I'm better off waiting for an off-peak moment with a better market that might offer better value for the property.

Huff could have huge value this offseason (and, in fact, his numbers are good enough that he can sustain a slump.) B-Rob will retain huge value - the only hit he takes right now is leverage - his ability to make a difference during the penant. I know that's not insubstantial, by the way.

Frankly, I see them keeping Roberts. And I can't blame them - good will is tough to put a price tag on, but this is a franchise that is gunshy about losing its (few) ambassadors. Some will judge that more harshly than me.

Sherrill? I'm not sure Sherrill's value was ever what we thought it would be - in fact, it may be far higher at the end of the year, when the smoke rising from his blown saves has dissipated and a hot month or two has re-elevated his value. In the end, I think WE imagined that "saves" would drive up his value due to GM idiocy. But the market never said that. Most who kicked his tires didn't kick them in search of a closer. Sherrill's contract status means that he's only a peak value if you think that a lot of saves and a 4.25+ ERA = inflation.

[Mackus]

On the downside what would happen if, heaven forbid, George Sherrill has an arm injury late in the season? Or Aubrey Huff has a month long slump in September? The trade value in the offseason for these two guys would go down drastically. The age old axiom is true that it is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late.

Certainly is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late. But the best option is to trade them at exactly the right time. MacPhail is searching for that.

There should be no debate about Huff. He shouldn't have been traded simply because there was no interest in him. His "value" could go down between now and January and we could still get more in return for him because getting 2-3 teams interested in a player will get you a bigger package than trying to trade someone that nobody is interested in.

Sherrill is the biggest risk, to me. But still, worst case I think (barring blowing his arm out, which is unlikely given that he's past the age where that usually happens) is him struggling a bit and we have to market him as a LOOGY, in which case we probably still get a package similar to what was probably offered for him now. My guess is Donald straight up was the best offer for Sherrill. I can see the pluses and minuses of that deal, but its hard to definitively say MacPhail was stupid for not taking it. Perhaps he and the scouts just don't like Donald that much.

Keeping Roberts doesn't bother me at all. Teams don't trade a lot for 2B, its just the nature of the position. He's worth more to us than he'll bring back in a trade. That's true now, it was true last offseason, and I think that will still likely be true in the offseason.

[Lucky Jim]

Certainly is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late. But the best option is to trade them at exactly the right time. MacPhail is searching for that.

There should be no debate about Huff. He shouldn't have been traded simply because there was no interest in him. His "value" could go down between now and January and we could still get more in return for him because getting 2-3 teams interested in a player will get you a bigger package than trying to trade someone that nobody is interested in.

Sherrill is the biggest risk, to me. But still, worst case I think (barring blowing his arm out, which is unlikely given that he's past the age where that usually happens) is him struggling a bit and we have to market him as a LOOGY, in which case we probably still get a package similar to what was probably offered for him now. My guess is Donald straight up was the best offer for Sherrill. I can see the pluses and minuses of that deal, but its hard to definitively say MacPhail was stupid for not taking it. Perhaps he and the scouts just don't like Donald that much.

Keeping Roberts doesn't bother me at all. Teams don't trade a lot for 2B, its just the nature of the position. He's worth more to us than he'll bring back in a trade. That's true now, it was true last offseason, and I think that will still likely be true in the offseason.

Just like to note my agreement. And point out the bolded part has been my thesis all along.

[mweb]

MacPhail had two pieces that were very time-sensitive to move, and he moved both without lowering his demands (maybe a little with Tejada, but thats debatable). The big chips he had this deadline, none of them are remotely time-sensitive in terms of trading. Some of which very clearly will have more value in the offseason (Huff, mostly due to the inexplicable lack of interest in him and Dunn).

This was an opportunity to move those guys. Not the only opportunity. And not necessarily the best opportunity to move them.

If Sherrill blows out his arm or has a terrible second half, then it'll be justified to criticize MacPhail for not taking Donald for him or whatever the best offer was. But until then, these guys still have a lot of value, and they shouldn't drop much, if at all, and possibly even increase in value, between now and the offseason trading window.

Yep, I agree.

Sherrill is really the only guy who I would guess would have brought back more now than in the offseason. With Brob, you can make the case either way, but it's close imo. I don't think there was much of a market for Huff, so can't be upset at all for keeping him. I think that AM can likely get at least as much back for these 3 guys in the offseason as he could have this week.

So not a big deal.

[mweb]

Yeah, I don't get why anyone would be complaing about not trading Huff. This coming from someone who really wants him to be traded. However, as I and others have been saying, there really wasn't much of a market for him. Other than the Angels, who was really willing to give up much for a 1B/DH?

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, I don't get why anyone would be complaing about not trading Huff. This coming from someone who really wants him to be traded. However, as I and others have been saying, there really wasn't much of a market for him. Other than the Angels, who was really willing to give up much for a 1B/DH?

Yea...The only real issues people could have, IMO, is BRob, Sherrill and perhaps Ramon..Bradford possibly as well but really, it comes back to BRob and Sherrill i think.

[Mackus]

Yea...The only real issues people could have, IMO, is BRob, Sherrill and perhaps Ramon..Bradford possibly as well but really, it comes back to BRob and Sherrill i think.

Agree with all of this. There is some debate when it comes to Bradford and Ramon, but really, those guys aren't worth much, so it just comes down to saving a few bucks and possibly getting another Bob McCrory in the system. The only real points of serious debate are Sherrill and Roberts, and theres valid points to be made on those two from both sides.

[Lucky Jim]

Agree with your post except that I don't think there's any question that Sherill's value will never be higher, unless he has an even better first half next year and more teams in the race need a LH reliever at next years trade deadline.

But if you are the Phillies or Angels why give up Aybar or Donald in the offseason when you can just sign a Fuentes or Marte? Can't sign those guys at the trade deadline.

Sherill's value may never be higher. It doesn't mean we won't get more for him during the offseason.

[mweb]

Agree with your post except that I don't think there's any question that Sherill's value will never be higher, unless he has an even better first half next year and more teams in the race need a LH reliever at next years trade deadline.

But if you are the Phillies or Angels why give up Aybar or Donald in the offseason when you can just sign a Fuentes or Marte? Can't sign those guys at the trade deadline.

I think it could easily be higher. If he were to pitch like he did in 2007, or close to that level, but while racking up saves, his value would increase quite a bit. Lets face it, despite the saves, he hasn't been anything special this year, I would say he hasn't been as good so far as I would have hoped for. That's why I think so many on here are overvaluing him when they say they don't want to trade him, or they'll only trade him for 2 really good prospects.

[Sports Guy]

After one season of full time closing, Mike Gonzalez netted LaRoche.

Here is hoping Sherrill finishes strong and can net a solid ML ready player like Gonzo.

[Mackus]

After one season of full time closing, Mike Gonzalez netted LaRoche.

Here is hoping Sherrill finishes strong and can net a solid ML ready player like Gonzo.

And remember (as I'm sure you do) LaRoche was a very valuable and promising player at that time, not the bum he's turned into since.

[Sports Guy]

And remember (as I'm sure you do) LaRoche was a very valuable and promising player at that time, not the bum he's turned into since.

No doubt...That is what I am hoping for although i have serious doubts that they will deal him.