O's still in 3 way dance

[mikezpen]

The Orioles are looking beyond Reimold it seems.I'm not sure he's going to be where it's at.

[JTrea81]

Jon "Perez" Heyman quotes a source as the deal to the Cubs being "on life support." But the Orioles can actually scuttle the whole thing two ways.

Obviously the first thing would be not offering Olson.

But the second is a little more hidden. If the Orioles are to take Burnett off the market, that leaves the Braves searching for a #1 starter, which would probably have them open up Peavy talks again. And with Furcal still out there, the Braves can still deal Yunel Escobar in a package and sign Furcal. I honestly think that's why Furcal turned that A's package down, because he wants to play for the Braves again.

So if the Orioles sign Burnett like I think they will, in effect the Cubs will lose out on Peavy IMO...

[Sports Guy]

Jon "Perez" Heyman quotes a source as the deal to the Cubs being "on life support." But the Orioles can actually scuttle the whole thing two ways.

Obviously the first thing would be not offering Olson.

But the second is a little more hidden. If the Orioles are to take Burnett off the market, that leaves the Braves searching for a #1 starter, which would probably have them open up Peavy talks again. And with Furcal still out there, the Braves can still deal Yunel Escobar in a package and sign Furcal. I honestly think that's why Furcal turned that A's package down, because he wants to play for the Braves again.

So if the Orioles sign Burnett like I think they will, in effect the Cubs will lose out on Peavy IMO...

This is why you can't take too long doing things...Other options open up.

[bluedog]

What makes you think we were able to afford it? Why all the cost cutting measures now if we could?

Opening day payroll was a high $97M in 2007. We set that team loose onto the field and that team, no surprise, was also awful. By June of 2007 PGA had hired a real baseball mind in Andy MacPhail and said "Payroll is too high! Do something different than the current FO to cut costs or this ship is going under!"

As a result he traded Tejada and Bedard, infused the rotation, lineup and pen with cheaper options through those options and made small free agent signings to fill the gaps.

Andy MacPhail is still doing this. It's still happening. The writing is on the wall that the Orioles are seriously cutting costs ala Marlins/Rays/DBacks, and I think Furcal, Tex, Burnett and all the other free agents that we want are not coming here until we can turn around this franchise from existing internal options to put the people back in the seats to see a winning team. It isn't happening through major free agents.

This is why I see us signing Izturis, Uehara and Kawakami almost immediately following the winter meetings.

I don't think McPhail is this one dimensional. I don't believe he said "payroll is too high", I think he said "we're spending a ton of money on below average and injured players which could be better spent locking up our best young talent long term and signing star caliber talent."

Case and point:

1. The Bedard trade was not simply a cost cutting move - by any measurement, the O's got better as a team by moving Bedard. They improved in the short term, they improved in the long term and they reduced salary. Not only that, but AM significantly improved the O's risk profile with this move. Past regimes would have extended Bedard, ending up with a high priced, injured starter who was given a long term contract based on his performance over a single great season. This was simply a smart move all around.

2. The Tejada trade was motivated for a lot of reasons other than money. Tejada was clearly unhappy here and had become a distraction to the club on a number of levels. The steroid allegations, the questions about his actual age, his decline in performance - all things a club trying to "right the ship" and overcome a decade of losing can do without. This was less about reducing salary and more about lancing a huge puss filled boil before it burst. The fact that we got anything of value for Tejada is a bonus. I believe that AM still feels that Patton, Albers and Sarfate have signficant futures with this club. And not only did Luke Scott make up for a lot of the "lost" offense we gave up in the Miggy trade, but his clubhouse presence and professional attitude were a complete reversal from Miggy's steroid scandal. Again, this was a move that made the O's better as a team, now and in the future, while improving the club house atmosphere and saving salary to boot.

3. Before AM the O's offensive lineup was stacked with expensive, below average, aging players and you pretty much couldn't buy a ticket to the big club from the O's farm system if you were a young offensive player. The jury is still out on this, but it seems that Montanez and Salazar (and possibly Reimold) will be given opportunities to make the club this year in place of Payton and Millar and we all know that AM was willing to give everyone in the O's farm system who could even pronounce the words "shortstop" a shot at winning the job with the O's last year. This is a huge shift for the better in my opinion. Team's that jam up their roster with guys like Payton, Millar, Gibbons, Mora and Hernandez are committing to mediocrity - because it limits their ability to spend for truly fantastic players (like Tex) and it blocks young players with upside from getting the opportunity to break out with the big club.

Seriously for 2009 Opening Day, would you rather have Quiroz ©, Tex (1b), Salazar (3b), Scott (lf), Montanez (4th OF) or Henandez ©, Millar (1b), Mora (3b), Gibbons (lf), Payton (4th OF)? Even penciling Tex in at 20 M per season, the 2nd group COSTS MORE! And lets not even talk about roster flexibility.

So again, the moves that AM have made not only make the club better, they give the team more flexibility and they open up the way for bringing in top quality talent and young players who have earned a shot at the bigs from our minor league system. Reducing payroll is simply a by-product of making smart moves.

4. Finally - pitching. AM's strategy with pitching is clearly unpopular with many folks. Everyone wants to adopt the quick fix strategy of signing at least 2 (and preferably 3 or more) free agent pitchers so that we can "Fix" our rotation immediately. I admit that even I've been tempted to the dark side as I've written threads in the past about how cool it would be to sign Sheets and Burnett and be in a position to compete in 2009!

But history doesn't lie. Look no further than the Yankees to see how low the odds are of actually signing a free agent starter and getting anywhere near your money's worth. The last time the O's dipped into free agency in a significant way, they picked up Baez, Walker and Bradford - one ended up injured, one ended up declining to the point that he was useless in just his second year and one pitched to expectations. Odds are if we committed significant money to 3 FA starters, we'd see similar results, tying up 10s of millions of dollars in the process and still failing to be competitive.

The O's future is their young pitching - everyone agrees on that. We have plenty of short term options who can bridge the gap between where we are today and the time when our young pitchers will be ready - and we don't have to blow huge chunks of money to make that happen. We can conserve that money for true, impact offensive free agents and for signing cornerstone players long term.

I think the O's are exactly where AM wants them to be. Sure he'd love to have a winning team this year or next, but realistically, that simply isn't plausible without mortgaging the future. He's setting this team up to compete in 2011 / 2012 when the O's will quite possibly have 12 to 15 young pitchers from our minor league system on target to help this club. Sure all of them won't work out, but if even a third of them do, the O's will be in a far better position than they are now.

So, yes - we are cutting salary, but I don't believe that's the goal. The goal is to focus on creating a quality organization filled with young players who can help us compete for the next decade or more. Cutting payroll is just a byproduct of that plan. When the time comes to spend, the O's will open the checkbook, I'm certain of it.

[bluedog]

Or that he isn't able to retain Markakis and needs a leftfielder when they put Reimold in back in right.

I've been thinking a lot about this scenario as well. Markakis would seem to be the O's best trade chip, with the possible exception of Guthrie. Both of these guys could command massive packages of prospects and the O's could conceivably get back enough blue chip prospects to fill all of their infield needs.

An outfield of Pie, Jones, Reimold is an excellent young group of players under club control for a long long time. You could move Roberts, Scott, Sherrill, Markakis and Guthrie for multiple, exceptionally strong 1b, 2b, ss and 3b prospects plus additional young arms and aim to compete by 2012.

That's a very very aggressive plan, but one that I could get behind assuming the players we got back were top quality.

Of course I'd rather keep Roberts, Guthrie and Markakis and simply extend them.

[bluedog]

Can't really agree with that line of thinking.

3B, SS, 1B all are areas of need for 2011 or 2012. Leftfield has Reimold. If Pie played a position in need then your logic would be sounder.

MacPhail's interest in Pie appears to be that he thinks he ia a high ceiling guy and he rates him ahead of Reimold and more valuable then Olson.

AM has repeatedly said he prefers to sign Free Agent positional players over pitchers. If we shed all of the bad salaries we currently have, there is no reason why we can't fill the 1b, ss and 3b needs via free agency between now and then.

In fact, pursuing Tex given the kind of long term deal he'll command fits perfectly with this strategy. We'd have three or more off-seasons between now and 2011 / 2012 to fill just a few holes with premium players. With all the money we'll clear after 2009, there is absolutely no reason why we can't make this happen.

[orioole28]

He isn't overvaluing anything...He is saying that someone would have to totally blow him away for him to consider trading Markakis.

The Dodgers would laugh at that proposal!!!

[orioole28]

We do over evaluate our guys, however this is not one of those times. Kemp is a good player, but I do not consider Markakis his equal. I actually think Markakis and Penn/Olson for Kershaw and Kemp would be a fair trade. It's easy to find value in a guy who could easily win an MVP award or two in the next 7 years. He is likely the best right fielder in all of baseball. He is the best fielder and has stats that are similar to those big sluggers that they put in right.

If the Orioles were to let go of Markakis tomorrow he would have a 6 year $80 Million deal before the end of the winter meetings. We tend to want prospects that have high upside, Markakis is what happens when a prospect with high upside put it all together. Markakis is that good.

The Dodgers wouldn't even consider that trade offer. I believe that Kemp will have a better career then Markakis and Kershaw is consider a No.1 starter in the future. Penn/Olson still have a hill to climb and possibly won't make it!

[Frobby]

The Dodgers wouldn't even consider that trade offer. I believe that Kemp will have a better career then Markakis and Kershaw is consider a No.1 starter in the future. Penn/Olson still have a hill to climb and possibly won't make it!

I agree that Markakis for Kemp and Kershaw wouldn't happpen. But why do you say Kemp will have a better career than Markakis? He's a year younger and he's a bit behind where Markakis was statistically at the same age.

[mallison]

I don't think McPhail is this one dimensional. I don't believe he said "payroll is too high", I think he said "we're spending a ton of money on below average and injured players which could be better spent locking up our best young talent long term and signing star caliber talent."

Case and point:

1. The Bedard trade was not simply a cost cutting move - by any measurement, the O's got better as a team by moving Bedard. They improved in the short term, they improved in the long term and they reduced salary. Not only that, but AM significantly improved the O's risk profile with this move. Past regimes would have extended Bedard, ending up with a high priced, injured starter who was given a long term contract based on his performance over a single great season. This was simply a smart move all around.

2. The Tejada trade was motivated for a lot of reasons other than money. Tejada was clearly unhappy here and had become a distraction to the club on a number of levels. The steroid allegations, the questions about his actual age, his decline in performance - all things a club trying to "right the ship" and overcome a decade of losing can do without. This was less about reducing salary and more about lancing a huge puss filled boil before it burst. The fact that we got anything of value for Tejada is a bonus. I believe that AM still feels that Patton, Albers and Sarfate have signficant futures with this club. And not only did Luke Scott make up for a lot of the "lost" offense we gave up in the Miggy trade, but his clubhouse presence and professional attitude were a complete reversal from Miggy's steroid scandal. Again, this was a move that made the O's better as a team, now and in the future, while improving the club house atmosphere and saving salary to boot.

3. Before AM the O's offensive lineup was stacked with expensive, below average, aging players and you pretty much couldn't buy a ticket to the big club from the O's farm system if you were a young offensive player. The jury is still out on this, but it seems that Montanez and Salazar (and possibly Reimold) will be given opportunities to make the club this year in place of Payton and Millar and we all know that AM was willing to give everyone in the O's farm system who could even pronounce the words "shortstop" a shot at winning the job with the O's last year. This is a huge shift for the better in my opinion. Team's that jam up their roster with guys like Payton, Millar, Gibbons, Mora and Hernandez are committing to mediocrity - because it limits their ability to spend for truly fantastic players (like Tex) and it blocks young players with upside from getting the opportunity to break out with the big club.

Seriously for 2009 Opening Day, would you rather have Quiroz ©, Tex (1b), Salazar (3b), Scott (lf), Montanez (4th OF) or Henandez ©, Millar (1b), Mora (3b), Gibbons (lf), Payton (4th OF)? Even penciling Tex in at 20 M per season, the 2nd group COSTS MORE! And lets not even talk about roster flexibility.

So again, the moves that AM have made not only make the club better, they give the team more flexibility and they open up the way for bringing in top quality talent and young players who have earned a shot at the bigs from our minor league system. Reducing payroll is simply a by-product of making smart moves.

4. Finally - pitching. AM's strategy with pitching is clearly unpopular with many folks. Everyone wants to adopt the quick fix strategy of signing at least 2 (and preferably 3 or more) free agent pitchers so that we can "Fix" our rotation immediately. I admit that even I've been tempted to the dark side as I've written threads in the past about how cool it would be to sign Sheets and Burnett and be in a position to compete in 2009!

But history doesn't lie. Look no further than the Yankees to see how low the odds are of actually signing a free agent starter and getting anywhere near your money's worth. The last time the O's dipped into free agency in a significant way, they picked up Baez, Walker and Bradford - one ended up injured, one ended up declining to the point that he was useless in just his second year and one pitched to expectations. Odds are if we committed significant money to 3 FA starters, we'd see similar results, tying up 10s of millions of dollars in the process and still failing to be competitive.

The O's future is their young pitching - everyone agrees on that. We have plenty of short term options who can bridge the gap between where we are today and the time when our young pitchers will be ready - and we don't have to blow huge chunks of money to make that happen. We can conserve that money for true, impact offensive free agents and for signing cornerstone players long term.

I think the O's are exactly where AM wants them to be. Sure he'd love to have a winning team this year or next, but realistically, that simply isn't plausible without mortgaging the future. He's setting this team up to compete in 2011 / 2012 when the O's will quite possibly have 12 to 15 young pitchers from our minor league system on target to help this club. Sure all of them won't work out, but if even a third of them do, the O's will be in a far better position than they are now.

So, yes - we are cutting salary, but I don't believe that's the goal. The goal is to focus on creating a quality organization filled with young players who can help us compete for the next decade or more. Cutting payroll is just a byproduct of that plan. When the time comes to spend, the O's will open the checkbook, I'm certain of it.

Amen. Very well said. I agree with all of it 100%. Rep.

[Ven6]

I don't think McPhail is this one dimensional. I don't believe he said "payroll is too high", I think he said "we're spending a ton of money on below average and injured players which could be better spent locking up our best young talent long term and signing star caliber talent."

Case and point:

1. The Bedard trade was not simply a cost cutting move - by any measurement, the O's got better as a team by moving Bedard. They improved in the short term, they improved in the long term and they reduced salary. Not only that, but AM significantly improved the O's risk profile with this move. Past regimes would have extended Bedard, ending up with a high priced, injured starter who was given a long term contract based on his performance over a single great season. This was simply a smart move all around.

2. The Tejada trade was motivated for a lot of reasons other than money. Tejada was clearly unhappy here and had become a distraction to the club on a number of levels. The steroid allegations, the questions about his actual age, his decline in performance - all things a club trying to "right the ship" and overcome a decade of losing can do without. This was less about reducing salary and more about lancing a huge puss filled boil before it burst. The fact that we got anything of value for Tejada is a bonus. I believe that AM still feels that Patton, Albers and Sarfate have signficant futures with this club. And not only did Luke Scott make up for a lot of the "lost" offense we gave up in the Miggy trade, but his clubhouse presence and professional attitude were a complete reversal from Miggy's steroid scandal. Again, this was a move that made the O's better as a team, now and in the future, while improving the club house atmosphere and saving salary to boot.

3. Before AM the O's offensive lineup was stacked with expensive, below average, aging players and you pretty much couldn't buy a ticket to the big club from the O's farm system if you were a young offensive player. The jury is still out on this, but it seems that Montanez and Salazar (and possibly Reimold) will be given opportunities to make the club this year in place of Payton and Millar and we all know that AM was willing to give everyone in the O's farm system who could even pronounce the words "shortstop" a shot at winning the job with the O's last year. This is a huge shift for the better in my opinion. Team's that jam up their roster with guys like Payton, Millar, Gibbons, Mora and Hernandez are committing to mediocrity - because it limits their ability to spend for truly fantastic players (like Tex) and it blocks young players with upside from getting the opportunity to break out with the big club.

Seriously for 2009 Opening Day, would you rather have Quiroz ©, Tex (1b), Salazar (3b), Scott (lf), Montanez (4th OF) or Henandez ©, Millar (1b), Mora (3b), Gibbons (lf), Payton (4th OF)? Even penciling Tex in at 20 M per season, the 2nd group COSTS MORE! And lets not even talk about roster flexibility.

So again, the moves that AM have made not only make the club better, they give the team more flexibility and they open up the way for bringing in top quality talent and young players who have earned a shot at the bigs from our minor league system. Reducing payroll is simply a by-product of making smart moves.

4. Finally - pitching. AM's strategy with pitching is clearly unpopular with many folks. Everyone wants to adopt the quick fix strategy of signing at least 2 (and preferably 3 or more) free agent pitchers so that we can "Fix" our rotation immediately. I admit that even I've been tempted to the dark side as I've written threads in the past about how cool it would be to sign Sheets and Burnett and be in a position to compete in 2009!

But history doesn't lie. Look no further than the Yankees to see how low the odds are of actually signing a free agent starter and getting anywhere near your money's worth. The last time the O's dipped into free agency in a significant way, they picked up Baez, Walker and Bradford - one ended up injured, one ended up declining to the point that he was useless in just his second year and one pitched to expectations. Odds are if we committed significant money to 3 FA starters, we'd see similar results, tying up 10s of millions of dollars in the process and still failing to be competitive.

The O's future is their young pitching - everyone agrees on that. We have plenty of short term options who can bridge the gap between where we are today and the time when our young pitchers will be ready - and we don't have to blow huge chunks of money to make that happen. We can conserve that money for true, impact offensive free agents and for signing cornerstone players long term.

I think the O's are exactly where AM wants them to be. Sure he'd love to have a winning team this year or next, but realistically, that simply isn't plausible without mortgaging the future. He's setting this team up to compete in 2011 / 2012 when the O's will quite possibly have 12 to 15 young pitchers from our minor league system on target to help this club. Sure all of them won't work out, but if even a third of them do, the O's will be in a far better position than they are now.

So, yes - we are cutting salary, but I don't believe that's the goal. The goal is to focus on creating a quality organization filled with young players who can help us compete for the next decade or more. Cutting payroll is just a byproduct of that plan. When the time comes to spend, the O's will open the checkbook, I'm certain of it.

Great post. Dead on. And there is already proof of that checkbook opening: the draft (Matt W, Arrieta, Matsuz, going over slot for others, etc.)

[davearm]

Maybe the Orioles don't want to deal a productive outfielder under control for 4 years for any of the suspects or bad contracts the Cubs have left. I'd wager we coulf get Marguis and half of his remaining contract paid by the Cubs for a no name non roster suspect of our own.

Agree with this. Not impressed with the Cubs farm system to come up with enough to land Scott in a realistic scenario. Almost all Cub players we are talking about are past their prospect expiration date and have flaws that make a part-time major league role their most likely one and I would not give up Scott for that. There are scenarios where I could like Fontenot, Guzman and some others as part of deals, but there is no reason to move a solid major league ballplayer like Scott for the names we are talking about.

Some other "suspects" that were "past their prospect expiration date and (had) flaws":

Josh Hamilton

Carlos Pena

David Ortiz

Carlos Quentin

Dan Uggla

Brandon Phillips

Ryan Ludwick

Johan Santana

Brad Lidge

Cliff Lee

Will any of the Cub guys follow this path?

Who knows?

The only thing for certain is the O's will never write their own similar success story if they take the dismissive attitude you fellas have.

[UMDTerrapins]

Great post. There are certainly some free agents who you know will continue to produce. But for the most part, free agents should be looked at more as used cars.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Great post. There are certainly some free agents who you know will continue to produce. But for the most part, free agents should be looked at more as used cars.

I think Teixeira and Burnett would fit better in the "certified pre-owned" category...

[UMDTerrapins]

Teixeira is a young free agent, and has been durable. He has many productive years on this contract. Burnett, I think, would be like a high performance American model with 60k miles on it. Big risk for the money. I'd rather find pitchers to bridge the gap until the wave of young starters arrives from the minors. Sheets is the only big time starter I'd consider signing.