Would this team get you excited heading into 2009?

[Satyr3206]

Ok, may have answered my own question.

Based on the 2006 payroll figure vs revenue the O's had total revenue of approx 145 million. I don't think that includes MASN revenue.

If revenue has increased to 155 milliom in the last 2 years and they go for the Greene, Garland, Teixeira route payroll would be approx 66% of revenue.

Have we ever gone that high before?

[bigbird]

Paying that kind of $$$ for Greene and the prospects we'll have to give to get him does not excite me much. The pen also does not make me feel too warm and fuzzy.

[The Rick]

I have to admit to being surprised at the amount of love being thrown at Jon Garland in this thread (even though I guess I shouldn't be surprised). I have little or no desire to have Jon Garland on my team if I'm a GM - at least not at the money he figures to command this offseason. If I can get him on a 1 or 2 year deal at a below market value, maybe I look at him. Problem is that I can't get him for that. Given a choice between Jon Garland and AJ Burnett at the same price, I take Burnett any day of the week.

As you may have guessed, I'm not much of a Garland fan.

By the way, I agree with the premise that Garland figures to be a primary MacPhail target this offseason, much to my chagrin.

I understand why you're not a Garland fan.

But I guess you're a fan of the "prospects" we've been throwing out there year in and year out?

[RHall31]

I like the everyday lineup. I think the pitching staff is suspect. That team

might be able to hit its way to .500, but that's about as high as they could go

with those pitchers.

[The Rick]

Where did I say I'm a fan of those guys. Problem is this team has essentially a large part of its future eggs in that basket. You have to use them eventually - either on your own team or in a trade for more established talent. I would not have been happy had they not given pitchers like Cabrera, Olson, and Liz a shot. Sure, add established pitchers, but do it sensibly. Giving Garland a 4/48 deal is not sensible in my opinion.

I don't have a problem adding a veteran pitcher, just don't want Garland. Never intended to imply otherwise.

I do understand where you're coming from, but with the salary we've shed the past couple years I think we can afford it. And Garland, sadly, would have and probably would be one of our best starters behind Guthrie obviously.

[Sports Guy]

Where did I say I'm a fan of those guys. Problem is this team has essentially a large part of its future eggs in that basket. You have to use them eventually - either on your own team or in a trade for more established talent. I would not have been happy had they not given pitchers like Cabrera, Olson, and Liz a shot. Sure, add established pitchers, but do it sensibly. Giving Garland a 4/48 deal is not sensible in my opinion.

I don't have a problem adding a veteran pitcher, just don't want Garland. Never intended to imply otherwise.

Yea, as I was looking at his declining peripherals, I knew you would be against it.

I am as well but I still could see AM targeting him.

[mweb]

Don't want Garland at all. Would prefer many guys to him, it all depends on what guys get, but I would likely prefer Burnett, Sheets, Perez, Dempster, or even Mussina for a short term deal.

But yeah, that team would be exciting. Obviously would have preferred a guy like LaRoche at 3rd, but not that big of a deal, would be interesting.

[The Rick]

It isn't about the team's payroll to me.

Truthfully, I don't give a hoot about what these players make. I only deal with salary issues because, sadly, we have to do so nowadays.

I don't like Garlandish pitchers.

Since we seemingly have to talk money, Garland simply isn't a pitcher who deserves a 4/48 deal.

Well, like I said... Garland would be one of our best starters. I don't have a man crush on Garland though. You don't want him, fine. But we clearly need a quality starter to put behind Guthrie. I don't think that can be debated.

Good post MWeb.

[mweb]

Now here is someone who knows what he's talking about, and obviously gets it.

Rick, don't take that as a slam at you - it truly isn't intended as such. I understand why you guys might want Garland. His ability to throw a lot of innings has definite value - just not 4/48 in my mind.

Most everyone knows I love Burnett. I've always been a fan of Sheets. I guess I have a thing for talented pitchers with injury issues.

Without looking at his numbers, Dempster strikes me as someone who could do a nice job for the Orioles. The problem is that he may be pricing himself out of their market with the season he seems to be having.

I'd also have to look at the numbers for Perez, but I've liked him in the past.

I'm a Mussina fan, but I'm not sure what to make of him. I can't help but get the feeling that this is his last big season, and that he'll make a precipitous drop next season. Or he could prove me absolutely wrong, as he's done this season.

Thank you, we've been agreeing a lot lately it seems, even though it's in large part just about two issues, Burnett and FCab, who we apparently like more than most. And no we have our dislike for Garland in common!:thumbsup1:

I'm interested in your analysis once you look more closely at the numbers of Perez and Dempster.

Dempster has better peripherals than I would have expected, and based on his FIP/xFIP, he hasn't been that lucky. Perez, however has been the second luckiest pitcher in the NL behind his teammate Santana according to FIP. He is appealing due to his age, k's, and potential though.

[Sports Guy]

Dempster shouldn't be on our radar unless he signs a 1 or 2 year deal.

Prior to this year, he hadn't thrown 200 innings since 2002...Will the innings he has thrown this year effect him next year and beyond?

And while his HR rate is very solid(as is his K/bb), his BB rate is high and bringing him to the AL is going to hurt those numbers. He also has a career BB rate of 4.5 and his K/BB rate is 1.66.

Plus, he is 31 and turns 32 early in the season next year, so he isn't real young in terms of giving him a 4 year deal.

As a reliever, he would be better IMO(i have advocated trading for him over the last year or 2) but as a starter, despite his solid year this year I wouldn't want him.

[LookinUp]

Thank you, we've been agreeing a lot lately it seems, even though it's in large part just about two issues, Burnett and FCab, who we apparently like more than most. And no we have our dislike for Garland in common!:thumbsup1:

I'm interested in your analysis once you look more closely at the numbers of Perez and Dempster.

Dempster has better peripherals than I would have expected, and based on his FIP/xFIP, he hasn't been that lucky. Perez, however has been the second luckiest pitcher in the NL behind his teammate Santana according to FIP. He is appealing due to his age, k's, and potential though.

Perez won't be cheap either. The Mets really like what he's done this second half.

[Sports Guy]

Perez is interesting because he just turned 27 and has always had good stuff.

But his FIP is very high....His BB rate is high, as is his HR rate and that is troublesome because of the park and league he plays in.

Perez is a perfect example of a guy who teams will pay for his potential but probably only get a small % of it.

I pass on him as well unless the contract is much more reasonable then I would expect.

[mweb]

Dempster shouldn't be on our radar unless he signs a 1 or 2 year deal.

Prior to this year, he hadn't thrown 200 innings since 2002...Will the innings he has thrown this year effect him next year and beyond?

And while his HR rate is very solid(as is his K/bb), his BB rate is high and bringing him to the AL is going to hurt those numbers. He also has a career BB rate of 4.5 and his K/BB rate is 1.66.

Plus, he is 31 and turns 32 early in the season next year, so he isn't real young in terms of giving him a 4 year deal.

As a reliever, he would be better IMO(i have advocated trading for him over the last year or 2) but as a starter, despite his solid year this year I wouldn't want him.

Well most of the guys we have talked about aren't young arms.

I think he's also showing that he's better suited for starting, his walks are down compared to his his time in the pen, and his k's are actually up. Plus, he doesn't give up many hr's.

I would much rather have Dempster than Garland.

[Sports Guy]

Perez is an interesting pitcher for sure, and he probably will get a good sized deal this winter. Looking closer at his numbers, I'm not so sure he's a guy I go after.

One thing this team seriously needs to do is to find pitchers who throw strikes - and Perez isn't that guy. We've talked about how they need to work with their minor leaguers on throwing strikes. What kind of message would they be sending if they give a big money deal to someone who consistently walks over 4 batters per 9? The other thing that would worry me is that if OP@CY plays next year as it has this year, then having a starting pitcher with a 45-50% FB% could get real ugly.

SG made some valid points on Dempster. I'd like to think that the increase in innings won't impact him next year, but is it worth finding out in the form of multi-year, big dollar contract? Also, just going from being a closer for 4 years to being a starter makes him difficult to project going forward. Just checked out his pitch data - going from a reliever to a starter doesn't seem to have had much of an impact there. I can see him ending up with the Yankees or even the Red Sox.

Let's say Dempster, Garland, and Perez all get similar contracts. Dempster would be my first choice.

And I would rather have Garland(god i can't believe I just said that).

I think Garland is more of a sure thing to give us the 4.50ish ERA and 200 IP(on average) over the period of their contracts.

The good thing about Garland is that you know what he will likely do in terms of being in the AL.

We don't know how it will effect the other guys.

[bluedog]

1st- Tex

2nd- BRob

SS- Greene

3rd- Mora

LF- Scott

CF- Jones

RF- Markakis

DH- Huff

C- Wieters

Guthrie

Garland

DCab

2 of Olson, Penn, Liz, Bergesen

Sherrill

Ray

JJ

Walker

Sarfate/FCab

2 of the guys who don't make the rotation(if Bergesen doesn't make it, he goes to AAA)

Reimold gets 400ish at bats off the bench as a DH/LFer

Be nice to trade Walker.

I assume Ramon is traded..Quiroz brought back as back up catcher.

Perhaps Constanzo on the bench and then a super UTI type guy that can play the MI positions and the OF...In other words, a better Bynum.

Like this team? What would you expect this to do, record wise?

I don't like the rotation. I think that we've proven this year that everyone but Guthrie is a wash. I'd rather spend the Tex money on CC / Sheets, the Greene money on Burnett and go with Huff at 1b and Montanez or Reimold at DH. I'm happy with Castro's glove and we're proven we don't need any offense from him if the rest of the team is hitting.

I also don't like Sherrill at closer any more. I'd like to see us use Ray or JJ there with Sherrill working the 7th / 8th with the whoever doesn't close.