Reliever market

[hoosiers]

Look, I'd absolutely love to trade Bradford, Walker, and Millar for top 10 prospects and get out from under their contracts. That would be spectacular. If McPhail, Flanny, and Duquette can pull it off, good for them. I don't see it happening, and am not going to rail against them if they can't get it done.

These three are all positive contributors to the team - and have been for several years. I have little interest in dumping their salaries for nothing.

How is it that statistical analysis can show these guys to be Type A free agents (not Walker) and half the board believes they are non-contributors?

[Frobby]

Urbina was a closer with 26 saves at the break. We all know teams have a blind spot for closers. When's the last time a highly-paid LOOGY was moved for a top 10 prospect? Or even better, a ROOGY?

Uh, Denny Bautista for Jason Grimsley?

[Sports Guy]

Would you deal Hoey for a Bradford or Walker type player?

Assuming we are a team that would need a reliever and were close to contending.

Sure would.

I think too often contenders hold onto prospects.

I know they are important, maybe moreso now than ever because of the salaries right now but still, teams like Anaheim may have cost themselves a chance at a WS because they don't want to trade these guys.

How many players have been talked about on here over the years as guys that are untouchable or guys that no way would a team trade and then, 2 years later, you see them dealt for next to nothing(or they just develop into nothing)?

[Sports Guy]

Uh, Denny Bautista for Jason Grimsley?

And in turn, DBat was acquired for Jeff Conine(or a similar but worse version of Millar)

[DrungoHazewood]

Uh, Denny Bautista for Jason Grimsley?

I meant by real, major league teams.

[DrungoHazewood]

How is it that statistical analysis can show these guys to be Type A free agents (not Walker) and half the board believes they are non-contributors?

Because the Elias free agent formulas are ham-fisted generalizations?

[PaulFolk]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up Mike Timlin yet. The O's traded him in 2000, when he still had 2 1/2 years and a bunch of money left on his deal. In return, they got Chris Richard (who had a good half-season or so but never developed into much of anything) and a minor-league pitcher (Mark Nussbeck) who never got to the bigs.

Hmm. Actually, I don't know which side of the argument this supports.

[Sports Guy]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up Mike Timlin yet. The O's traded him in 2000, when he still had 2 1/2 years and a bunch of money left on his deal. In return, they got Chris Richard (who had a good half-season or so but never developed into much of anything) and a minor-league pitcher (Mark Nussbeck) who never got to the bigs.

Hmm. Actually, I don't know which side of the argument this supports.

Yea and i am pretty sure he made more money than these 2 do...Also, he had an ERA of almost 5 that year.

[davearm]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up Mike Timlin yet. The O's traded him in 2000, when he still had 2 1/2 years and a bunch of money left on his deal. In return, they got Chris Richard (who had a good half-season or so but never developed into much of anything) and a minor-league pitcher (Mark Nussbeck) who never got to the bigs.

Hmm. Actually, I don't know which side of the argument this supports.

Back in those days Mike Timlin was still Mike Timlin: Closer.

[PaulFolk]

Back in those days Mike Timlin was still Mike Timlin: Closer.

No, he wasn't. He had only one save for the Cardinals after the trade-- their regular closer was Dave Veres. They never intended on using Timlin as a closer.

[DrungoHazewood]

No, he wasn't. He had only one save for the Cardinals after the trade-- their regular closer was Dave Veres. They never intended on using Timlin as a closer.

But the Orioles used him as a Closer™. So the Cards were paying so they could have a (Closer™)² situation.

[davearm]

No, he wasn't. He had only one save for the Cardinals after the trade-- their regular closer was Dave Veres. They never intended on using Timlin as a closer.

This is a semantic argument and probably a stupid one, but the contract he was playing under was "closer money", and IIRC he was being used as the O's closer when he was dealt. Therefore his trade value was commensurate with other similar closers.

Put it this way: I doubt the O's gave the Cards a discount on the deal because the Cards already had Veres.

[Frobby]

This is a semantic argument and probably a stupid one, but the contract he was playing under was "closer money", and IIRC he was being used as the O's closer when he was dealt. Therefore his trade value was commensurate with other similar closers.

Put it this way: I doubt the O's gave the Cards a discount on the deal because the Cards already had Veres.

Timlin was a horrible closer. Give me Chris Ray over him any day.

[phattybeers]

I would actually take a Jim Miller type (relief pitcher) for Walker (especially Walker) or Bradford. Someone who may be having a bad year, but has done well up until this year...Heck, we might even be able to pry two relief "prospects" for a Walker or Bradford...your thoughts?

This would be a complete opposite way of looking at how we spent in the offseason, as we could build an inexpensive bullpen for the future.

[Sports Guy]

I would actually take a Jim Miller type (relief pitcher) for Walker (especially Walker) or Bradford. Someone who may be having a bad year, but has done well up until this year...Heck, we might even be able to pry two relief "prospects" for a Walker or Bradford...your thoughts?

Not me...If all you can get is a dime a dozen arm like Miller, i keep Walker and Bradford for next year.