Reliever market

[Guest rochester]

Because you have so many relievers, it is unlikely you "hit" on all of them. Sometimes you just need to add a decent guy to balance out the pen and sometimes your key guys are hurt or underperforming.

Because of that(and since you are contending and want to win), you need to add BP help.

A good BP is very important in the playoffs...That has been proven time after time.

So, while a lot of these guys are dime a dozen, most contending teams don't want to throw some Jim Hoey-esque prospect in the middle of a pennant race and rely on that pitcher to do what it is neccassary for his team to win.

They need/want proven, vet guys with playoff experience.

In the offseason, the demand is a little different...At the deadline, it changes completely.

Good point.....IF we can get something good in return i.e., a team that is fairly desperate....making a sideways move would not fit (a mid-level prospect at best). However, if they can be packaged (which could be a boon to a contending team) I would like to see a good prospect minimum.

Of course, all of this is conjecture....all depends on the big picture and what MacPhail has in mind... if it is youth no matter what - then what I said makes no sense. If it is combination of youth & experience and he believes he can get enough position players to potentially make a major impact next year then we are in a much better position to hold out.

[davearm]

SG that's all well and good in theory, but as I said, until a guy like this actually gets traded, and there's some empirical evidence to point to suggesting these guys have value, I'll continue to be skeptical, and believe that the countertheory has more merit.

[Sports Guy]

SG that's all well and good in theory, but as I said, until a guy like this actually gets traded, and there's some empirical evidence to point to suggesting these guys have value, I'll continue to be skeptical, and believe that the countertheory has more merit.

That is fine and i can actually agree with you on this.

However, i still feel they each would fetch a top 10 prospect and maybe even another guy in the 12-20 range.

I would think Boston would do a Bradford for Crisp deal right now as well.

[DrungoHazewood]

SG that's all well and good in theory, but as I said, until a guy like this actually gets traded, and there's some empirical evidence to point to suggesting these guys have value, I'll continue to be skeptical, and believe that the countertheory has more merit.

Have to agree. This is like the Millar trade idea. Sound ok for a minute, then you start thinking who's going to trade a real prospect with a real future for two months of Kevin Millar? I think the relievers are an even worse case. You're asking a team to take on millions of dollars and for the '07 pennant race they'll get something like 25 games/15 innings.

I think you'd be lucky to flip either of them for a decent AA arm even if the O's threw in some cash.

[Lowell]

Long time reader (not really), first time poster. But some kid I know keeps hassling me about his awesome site.

Here's the thing:

Bullpen pitchers are in the bullpen because they're bad. If they were good enough to start, they would.

No, really. All of them. That baseball GMs treat "bullpen pitchers" as a separate postion is one of the more bewildering aspects of the modern game. Think about it. It would be like treating Ray Lewis' backup as a separate position on the field. Call it, um, "Relief Linebacker." Wow, that guy is the best Relief Linebacker (RL) in the NFL! Let's give him max money!

Look, Bradford, Walker, or whoever else might be functional MLB pitchers, and may be better than OTHER teams' relievers (wopie!), but if either one could be a reliable 5th starter, they would be. There is no reason for a relief pitcher (save possibly the "sexy" but useless closer position) to ever make more money than a team's fifth starter. If they DO, then that team has managed their money inefficiently.

Thanks for reading. Here's a bonus theory for free:

If Chris Ray were not a white guy named "Chris Ray", but instead a black guy named "Armando Benitez", there is noooo way he would still be in the closer role right now...

Just sayin'

[DrungoHazewood]

However, i still feel they each would fetch a top 10 prospect and maybe even another guy in the 12-20 range.

I think that's at least a top 10 prospect too high.

[Sports Guy]

Have to agree. This is like the Millar trade idea. Sound ok for a minute, then you start thinking who's going to trade a real prospect with a real future for two months of Kevin Millar? I think the relievers are an even worse case. You're asking a team to take on millions of dollars and for the '07 pennant race they'll get something like 25 games/15 innings.

I think you'd be lucky to flip either of them for a decent AA arm even if the O's threw in some cash.

Totally disagree Drungo...You are thinking about this in terms of what YOU would do, not what actually happens.

[TGO]

SG that's all well and good in theory, but as I said, until a guy like this actually gets traded, and there's some empirical evidence to point to suggesting these guys have value, I'll continue to be skeptical, and believe that the countertheory has more merit.

I am with you on this one Dave, I'm highly skeptical that a team would trade for a reliever with 2.5 years remaining on his contract when there are guys out there with 0.5 and 1.5 years remaing. Two and a half years is just too long and too unpredictable. Yes, these guys got two year offers on the FA market, but there were no prospects being traded there. Walker did not cost a pick and the team after Bradford was the Mets, who were not risking a pick to sign him. I have no doubt that a team might take them at the right price but I don't know if that price will be right for the O's. We'll have to see.

[davearm]

This thinking is very short sighted.

There are always guys out there you can trade for or sign to a cheap 1-2 year deal who can do all of these things.(btw, i think it is a stretch to expect either of them to have a 2.50 ERA this year, much less both).

Guys like Aaron Fultz slip through the cracks every year while similar guys like Walker get long term, expensive contracts.

Building a BP should be very easy to do.

There is no way you should hang onto those guys if you can get good value for them.

Bradford is essentially a ROOGY, so he especially needs to go IMO.

Trying to construct a bullpen with bargain-basement vets like Aaron Fultz is a dicey proposition, at best. These guys flame out far more often than they excel.

Heck the O's have had more than their share of crappy thirtysomething relievers that were brought in because they were cheap and could possibly turn things around, so to say the O's aren't trying this approach is inaccurate.

The best way to build a great pen is to have more terrific homegrown arms than you can fit into your starting rotation.

[DrungoHazewood]

Long time reader (not really), first time poster. But some kid I know keeps hassling me about his awesome site.

Here's the thing:

Bullpen pitchers are in the bullpen because they're bad. If they were good enough to start, they would.

That was how baseball was run up to about 1940. In the 67 years since they've come up with this idea that some pitchers are better suited to throwing really hard for an inning or two than pacing themselves over nine, and that's lead to teams with good relievers winning more games than those who treat the pen as a dumping ground for broken old starters.

As much as I like innovation, I'm not sure returning to an era where all of your relievers are Steve Trachsel is a good idea.

[DrungoHazewood]

The best way to build a great pen is to have more terrific homegrown arms than you can fit into your starting rotation.

Best sentence in the thread.

[Guest rochester]

Totally disagree Drungo...You are thinking about this in terms of what YOU would do, not what actually happens.

I gotta agree with this...'tis amazing what "This is our Year" mentality can do to common sense. We just have to find them...

[soxhotcorner14]

You don't build off of mid 30ish relievers.

It all depends on what direction MacPhail decides to go. If he's going to blow everything up and start over, then yea you'll have to start selling those pitchers off.

I don't think he's going to go that direction. They have the starting pitching to compete in the AL East now. You add parts that you need (2 or 3 legit big league bats) and keep those two guys around as the foundation of your pen. Then you start sprinkling in the Doyne's and Hoey's of the world. You just don't blow an entire pen up just because Sports Guy wants to bring up all the young relievers or go out and keep replacing guys with younger guys for the sake of doing so.

The guy that needs to be replaced right now in the pen is Parrish. Finally the Orioles have a good problem to have on their hands. Do you send down Parrish and throw Burres out there? Or do you keep Burres in the rotation and replace Parrish with someone else on the farm? Or do you go out and trade for one?

I think Burres has earned his right to stay in the rotation as well as Olson. Talk about a pitcher that doesn't belong here is Trachsel at this point. He should be dealt for a bag of balls to allow the young pitchers get major league innings in for the remainder of the season.

[Sports Guy]

Trying to construct a bullpen with bargain-basement vets like Aaron Fultz is a dicey proposition, at best. These guys flame out far more often than they excel.

Heck the O's have had more than their share of crappy thirtysomething relievers that were brought in because they were cheap and could possibly turn things around, so to say the O's aren't trying this approach is inaccurate.

The best way to build a great pen is to have more terrific homegrown arms than you can fit into your starting rotation.

I agree and you will notice that i didn't say to build it with those guys.

But, if you have to sign 1-2 players, those are the guys i go after.

[DrungoHazewood]

Totally disagree Drungo...You are thinking about this in terms of what YOU would do, not what actually happens.

I just don't see many major league GMs dumb enough to trade two prospects and take on a bunch of salary for 15 innings of Chad Bradford. If I think that's a ridiculous trade I'd bet most GMs would rate it no worse than pretty bad.