Tex or AJ

[Sports Guy]

I don't know if the return for Huff would be what AM would be looking for. With the year Huff had I think we would be looking for a Tejada return. I don't think that would happen. I would be alright with Huff especially if we are looking to win sooner rather than later.

Well, if that is what AM would expect, then he is crazy. A simple one for one for a ML ready talent should be fine.

BTW Donald is a Boras client, so I just thought I'd throw that out there...

Meaningless.(and I know you were just throwing it out there for some info)

[Frobby]

I'll defer to both your's and Frobby's knowledge over mine, but how do you think that those numbers will compare to the rest of FA starting pitching if his salary jumps to $14-15M per year.

No question that becomes a much more dicey situation.

If we go after Burnett, we need to do it with our eyes open. He's a solid no. 2 starter, not an ace, when healthy. And there are definitely health risks there. I'd peg his chances of throwing >520 innings over the next three years at less than 50/50. That's reality.

[waroriole]

No question that becomes a much more dicey situation.

If we go after Burnett, we need to do it with our eyes open. He's a solid no. 2 starter, not an ace, when healthy. And there are definitely health risks there. I'd peg his chances of throwing >520 innings over the next three years at less than 50/50. That's reality.

So, are you in favor of signing him, and if so at what price is your limit?

[bej6789]

Given that MASN is now fully established, along with a new HD channel... there's an even greater incentive to put a winning product on the field. Given the contracts that are coming off of the books within the next season or two, the payroll has room to expand at least 30 million and still be nowhere close to the upper levels of the majors.

[Sports Guy]

They might be successful early on but could it be sustainable? Say their budget is $100m... They would have more than 50% of their payroll tied up in 3 players (Hanley was signed to an extension). Does that leave enough resources left over to keep a portion of the players that are performing so well for cheap. I know there was some talk about ARod maybe going home at some point which would have provided a case study on whether that is a feasible way to compete over the long haul but unfortunately that never played out.

I don't see why it couldn't be kept up if you are smart about.

You keep drafting well(and drafting guys who have dropped because of signing bonus demands)...You trade guys at the right time and you scout and develop well.

Let's use the Orioles as an example...Right now, as I have said, at least one of Huff or Mora and Ramon should be dealt. I also feel BRob should be dealt.

And really, BRob is a good example of what I am saying here...To make plans like I am proposing to work, you have to sign your younger players to long term deals(ala Markakis, Wieters and Jones now) and you don't sign your vet, hometown heros to contracts they are unlikely to live up to.

For example, if you let BRob go as opposed to signing him to 4/40 type extension, you have 10 million a year that you can invest in other areas.

Meanwhile, you can find a second baseman to give you solid production and defense over at second...Probably not as good as BRob is now but that's ok because you are better in other areas.

[Frobby]

So, are you in favor of signing him, and if so at what price is your limit?

I am in favor of signing him, and I'd probably go to 4/$56 mm if I had to.

[DrungoHazewood]

So, are you in favor of signing him, and if so at what price is your limit?

I wouldn't be upset if they signed him. But if they go that route, they need to offer him a contract that'll be a realistic shot at getting him. None of this lowball stuff, none of this "oh, we offered him 4/50 but those crazy Dodgers offered him 5/75 and we didn't ever expect it." If they want him, they need to be prepared to go 5/75 or 5/85, because that's what it'll likely take.

[Frobby]

I wouldn't be upset if they signed him. But if they go that route, they need to offer him a contract that'll be a realistic shot at getting him. None of this lowball stuff, none of this "oh, we offered him 4/50 but those crazy Dodgers offered him 5/75 and we didn't ever expect it." If they want him, they need to be prepared to go 5/75 or 5/85, because that's what it'll likely take.

Really? Then I couldn't do it.

[waroriole]

I wouldn't be upset if they signed him. But if they go that route, they need to offer him a contract that'll be a realistic shot at getting him. None of this lowball stuff, none of this "oh, we offered him 4/50 but those crazy Dodgers offered him 5/75 and we didn't ever expect it." If they want him, they need to be prepared to go 5/75 or 5/85, because that's what it'll likely take.

I wouldn't expect "those crazy Dodgers" or any other team to offer him 5/75-85. I would expect him to get something like 4/52-60, but who knows it will just depend on who, and how many teams, gets involved.

[Sports Guy]

Really? Then I couldn't do it.

AJ is #2 on the pitching totem pole this offseason it seems...Maybe Lowe is ahead of him but its close.

So, i think Drungo could be right...I am not willing to go 5 years for any pitcher unless their salary per year is far lower.

I think your offer is about as high as I would go for him and even that could be real painful in the long run.

Really, Lowe is the better option but he is also far less likely.

[DrungoHazewood]

Really? Then I couldn't do it.

When's the last time a player who's arguably the best (or nearly best) free agent at his position was signed to a deal that was thought of as just a middle-of-the-road, reasonable contract? How many times have we said something like "We should be all over Soriano for 5/80" only to have Soriano sign for 8/136?

If the consensus at the Hangout is that Burnett is worth 4/56, I'd bet he signs for at least 5/70.

[mweb]

Teixiera, and its not close. Burnett will be paid like he's going to give you five years of 35 starts and 220 innings. His history suggests that he'll give you an average of 25 starts and 150 innings a year spread inconsistently over the next five years. Some years he might give you 220 innings of a 115 ERA+, some years he might give you 100 innings of an 90 or so.

Pretty much every year Teixiera gives you 140+ games of a 125-150 OPS+.

I agree that Teixeira is the choice here, but I have a problem with your comments on AJ.

Other than the two seasons affected by TJ surgery, he's averaged about 185 innings since 2001. 183 over the last 4.

And since the surgery, he has not had an ERA+ below 106. You have to go back to his age 23 season to find one like you describe.

So sure, what you say is obviously possible, but not sure how his history suggests those results.

[DrungoHazewood]

I agree that Teixeira is the choice here, but I have a problem with your comments on AJ.

Other than the two seasons affected by TJ surgery, he's averaged about 185 innings since 2001. 183 over the last 4.

And since the surgery, he has not had an ERA+ below 106. You have to go back to his age 23 season to find one like you describe.

So sure, what you say is obviously possible, but not sure how his history suggests those results.

Are pitchers who've had Tommy John surgery less likely to break down than other pitchers? If that's not true, then why omit the seasons he's been injured from a reckoning of how healthy he's been?

[JTrea81]

Every good FA pitcher is going to have a bad contract, that's just the way it goes. If you want quality pitching, then you are going to have to pay for it. You can either sign Burnett who is a high risk/high reward or you can sign some low risk guys like Pavano to some incentive laden deals and hope they can pitch 150 innings.

I'd rather spend 5/75 on Burnett than 6/150 on Sabathia or 5/90 on Sheets.

Out of those three, I'd say Burnett would be the best bet to pitch 200 innings three seasons from now. He's probably had all his arm problems already, Sheets will be coming back from his and Sabathia's are just waiting to happen.

15 million per season is about the going rate for a #2 starter nowadays...

[mweb]

Are pitchers who've had Tommy John surgery less likely to break down than other pitchers? If that's not true, then why omit the seasons he's been injured from a reckoning of how healthy he's been?

I believe some do say they are less likely to have TJ surgery again. But regadless, my point is he's had one major injury in his career, way back in 2003, since coming back from injury, and before the injury, he hasn't been the injury plagued pitcher that you and many make him out to be. Sure he's missed some time, but averaging 183 innings over 4 years is not bad. Your post suggested something much worse. Again, his history, especially recent history, does not support what you wrote. I don't even know where you got the 100 innings with a 90 ERA+ line from.

So yeah, using a TJ surgery from 2003 to show someone isn't likely to pitch much over the next few years is rather poor reasoning imo.